Jew arrested for wearing tallit
Jay L
Oops, sorry -- it was just a Jewish woman. Rabbi Ovadia said such
women are stupid. So I
guess that's OK.
Headline:
Police arrest woman for wearing prayer shawl at Western Wall
Rest of story:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1129040.html
Wanna protest, or do you protest only when it happens in anti-Semitic
countries?
Jay
Abe Kohen
with my tfilin bag. The wonderful police insisted that a Xian could go up
with prayer book, but a Jew could not take prayer book, tallit, nor tfilin.
Were you ready to protest?
Frankly I think the police were just as wrong in arresting the woman.
Best,
Abe
"Jay L" <levi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:963554f0-3cd6-42d6...@x16g2000vbk.googlegroups.com...
Joe Bruno
Never have I ever seen a woman wearing Tallit.
The custom in Conservative shuls is for men only.
I suppose you want to have women Bar Mitzvah, too?????
They get a Bat Mitzvah.
If you don't like Jewish custom, go pray with another religion.
lee
I want to protest....However she was breaking the sites code, so I
suspect she wanted to get arrested to emphasise her point. not that,
that distracts from my agreement with her right.
cindys
> On Nov 19, 3:03 pm, Jay L <levin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > In Israel. At the Wall.
>
> > Oops, sorry -- it was just a Jewish woman. Rabbi Ovadia said such
> > women are stupid. So I
> > guess that's OK.
>
> > Headline:
> > Police arrest woman for wearing prayer shawl at Western Wall
>
> > Rest of story:http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1129040.html
>
> > Wanna protest, or do you protest only when it happens in anti-Semitic
> > countries?
>
> > Jay
>
> Never have I ever seen a woman wearing Tallit.
> The custom in Conservative shuls is for men only.
No, it's not. Not only is it commonplace for women in C synagogues to
wear a tallit, it is often mandatory for any woman who wants to ascend
the bimah. I would be willing to bet than any C Jew who reads and
posts to this forum will agree with me.
Many years ago, part of the reason we left one C synagogue was because
the usher would not allow me to accompany my then-two-year-old son
onto the bimah (to get a piece of candy and sing Adon Olam with a
group of children) without my first putting on a tallit.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
sheldonlg
<sarc> Maybe the reason Joe has NEVER seen it is because he goes so
frequently to his "C" synagogue. </sarc>
Adelle
"cindys" <cst...@rochester.rr.com> wrote in message
news:38031198-ca52-4004...@s15g2000yqs.googlegroups.com...
Adelle Adds:
About 1/3 of the women who are Shabbat regulars wear a talit at our shul.
Plus others who come more sporadically. Bruno's experience must be with C
synagogues which are not egalitarian. And the USCJ is thinking about taking
a stand about that (not holding my breath).
BTW, Cindy - that wouldn't have happened at our synagogue. In fact, I am
uncomfortable with our more liberal policy of not requiring talit or kippah
for women on the bimah, even if they are layning or getting an aliyah. But
the ritual committee doesn't want to place barriers to participation. We
have women who went their whole lives with the notion that they couldn't
wear them and now are uncomfortable with the idea of wearing them and
teenagers who are just being stubborn and picking odd battles. So we remove
the 'battle' part and they participate somewhat willingly.
Adelle
Herman Rubin
Joe Bruno <joeb...@usa.com> wrote:
>> Oops, sorry -- it was just a Jewish woman. =A0Rabbi Ovadia said such
>> women are stupid. So I
>> guess that's OK.
>> Headline:
>> Police arrest woman for wearing prayer shawl at Western Wall
>> Rest of story:http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1129040.html
>> Wanna protest, or do you protest only when it happens in anti-Semitic
>> countries?
>Never have I ever seen a woman wearing Tallit.
>The custom in Conservative shuls is for men only.
>I suppose you want to have women Bar Mitzvah, too?????
>They get a Bat Mitzvah.
>If you don't like Jewish custom, go pray with another religion.
In Reform Judaism, there is little distinction, and
women can wear a tallis.
Have you attended a Conservative service with a woman
rabbi or cantor? I would be surprised if they did not
wear them.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hru...@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
cindys
wrote:
snip
> We
> have women who went their whole lives with the notion that they couldn't
> wear them and now are uncomfortable with the idea of wearing them and
> teenagers who are just being stubborn and picking odd battles. So we remove
> the 'battle' part and they participate somewhat willingly.
>
> Adelle
------------
I have a friend who at one point stopped going to the C synagogue
because she felt that she was constantly being pressured to go up on
the bimah, open the ark, have an aliyah, do a reading, and she really
just didn't feel comfortable doing any of that, and the issue wasn't
about wearing a tallit, the issue was about going up on the bimah and
doing those things. It didn't bother her that other women were doing
it, and she liked the congregation otherwise, but she really didn't
want to do that herself.
The only reason I am mentioning this is because from what you wrote
above, it sounds like some women in your congregation apparently don't
want to go on the bimah (for whatever reason), but if you tell them
they don't have to wear the tallit, they will "somewhat
willingly" [i.e., begrudgingly] go up on the bimah. It's just like
when the guy was pressuring my son to have an aliyah at the Ashkenazic
congregation on Simchas Torah. He really didn't want to do it. If
somebody doesn't want to do something, why push? (This would apply to
anyone, not just women).
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Don Levey
In the congregations I've seen, if someone doesn't want to do something
all they need to say is that they're not comfortable doing it. They
might get a question about it, but their wish is respected.
I hope I've not just been lucky.
--
Don Levey, Framingam MA If knowledge is power,
(email address in header works) and power corrupts, then...
NOTE: Don't send mail to to sal...@the-leveys.us
GnuPG public key: http://www.the-leveys.us:6080/keys/don-dsakey.asc
Jay L
Indeed. They should not push it, but you know that some people believe
that an aliyah is a great honor (and to many, it is) and that the
person offered an aliyah would jump at the chance if he/she were not
shy, or embarrassed of a public appearance, or maybe hesitant about
knowing the brachot. And sometimes women decline because they were
brought up that way.
When my daughter had her bat mitzvah (Reform, where a girl is
absolutely equal to a boy, so she had the haftarah, sermon, etc.) we
wanted to honor a distant relative and I called him a few days before
the bat mitzvah and offered him an aliyah. He immediately accepted and
was very, very grateful. I then told him that we are Reform and asked
him if his wife would want to join him on the bimah and perhaps have
her own aliyah, or they could share one (he says the pasuk before the
reading, and she says the pasuk afterwards, or they both say or chant
both parts together). There was silence, and then he said, "She will
go up on the bimah with me, but she would never say anything. That's
how we were brought up." This lovely woman had been brought up O, and
then they joined C (this was many years ago) and a woman's place at
the time was NOT on the bimah, and certainly not in a speaking role.
That's the way we did it. They both went up to the bimah, he said the
bracha before and after the reading, and they both felt happy and
honored.
Jay
cindys
I'm sure it varies by congregation, and it just opened up the general
question. The issue of women in some congregations being pressured to
go up on the bimah is only one example, (when I was a member of a
small C congregation, there was an older lady who was being pressured
all the time about this, and she explained it was because she was
traditional, but everybody kept pressuring her week after week, and so
finally, she begrudgingly agreed to open the ark). OTOH, my son was
also pressured on Simchas Torah at the O congregation, so it's not
just about women or about any one specific congregation.
In my son's case, he had already had an aliyah at the Sephardic shul,
and that was part of the reason he was saying "no," but also, he's
quite shy, and there were hundreds of congregants at the Ashkenazic
shul. Sometimes, he doesn't want to daven at Chabad because there is
generally a small crowd, and just by the law of averages, he will
often be called for an aliyah, and he would prefer not to have the
aliyah because he's shy. Or, he'll ask if we can go to shul REALLY
LATE (as in after the torah reading). It's not a huge problem, and he
always accepts the aliyah at Chabad, if asked, but it does cause him
some discomfort.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
cindys
snip
>
> Indeed. They should not push it, but you know that some people believe
> that an aliyah is a great honor (and to many, it is)
It is a great honor. Nobody is denying that.
> and that the
> person offered an aliyah would jump at the chance if he/she were not
> shy, or embarrassed of a public appearance, or maybe hesitant about
> knowing the brachot. And sometimes women decline because they were
> brought up that way.
Right. So why pressure them?
>
> When my daughter had her bat mitzvah (Reform, where a girl is
> absolutely equal to a boy, so she had the haftarah, sermon, etc.) we
> wanted to honor a distant relative and I called him a few days before
> the bat mitzvah and offered him an aliyah. He immediately accepted and
> was very, very grateful. I then told him that we are Reform and asked
> him if his wife would want to join him on the bimah and perhaps have
> her own aliyah, or they could share one (he says the pasuk before the
> reading, and she says the pasuk afterwards, or they both say or chant
> both parts together). There was silence, and then he said, "She will
> go up on the bimah with me, but she would never say anything. That's
> how we were brought up." This lovely woman had been brought up O, and
> then they joined C (this was many years ago) and a woman's place at
> the time was NOT on the bimah, and certainly not in a speaking role.
> That's the way we did it. They both went up to the bimah, he said the
> bracha before and after the reading, and they both felt happy and
> honored.
>
Which is great because they did it the way they felt comfortable.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
cindys
>
> In the congregations I've seen, if someone doesn't want to do something
> all they need to say is that they're not comfortable doing it. They
> might get a question about it, but their wish is respected.
>
> I hope I've not just been lucky.
Here is a really creative solution that a small C congregation used:
The congregation was sufficiently small that sometimes they didn't
have enough for a minyan if women weren't counted, but some of the
women were traditional and didn't want to be counted for the minyan
(even though they didn't object to other women being counted). So,
this was how the congregation handled the problem:
They put 10 siddurim on a table by the entry door. As people came into
the sanctuary, if they wanted to be counted for the minyan, they would
take one of the siddurim off the table. Anyone who didn't want to be
counted would get a siddur from off the shelf. When all 10 siddurim
were gone from the table, the congregation considered that it had a
minyan. Genius! (IMO)
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Don Levey
fla...@verizon.net
On 20-Nov-2009, cindys <cst...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
> > Never have I ever seen a woman wearing Tallit.
> > The custom in Conservative shuls is for men only.
> --------------
> No, it's not. Not only is it commonplace for women in C synagogues to
> wear a tallit, it is often mandatory for any woman who wants to ascend
> the bimah. I would be willing to bet than any C Jew who reads and
> posts to this forum will agree with me.
I'vre seen them wear kippahs, too.
> Many years ago, part of the reason we left one C synagogue was because
> the usher would not allow me to accompany my then-two-year-old son
> onto the bimah (to get a piece of candy and sing Adon Olam with a
> group of children) without my first putting on a tallit.
That's really obnoxious.
Susan
fla...@verizon.net
On 20-Nov-2009, cindys <cst...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
> Here is a really creative solution that a small C congregation used:
>
> The congregation was sufficiently small that sometimes they didn't
> have enough for a minyan if women weren't counted, but some of the
> women were traditional and didn't want to be counted for the minyan
> (even though they didn't object to other women being counted). So,
> this was how the congregation handled the problem:
>
> They put 10 siddurim on a table by the entry door. As people came into
> the sanctuary, if they wanted to be counted for the minyan, they would
> take one of the siddurim off the table. Anyone who didn't want to be
> counted would get a siddur from off the shelf. When all 10 siddurim
> were gone from the table, the congregation considered that it had a
> minyan. Genius! (IMO)
Oh, that's brilliant.
Susan
fla...@verizon.net
On 20-Nov-2009, Jay L <levi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> (Reform, where a girl is
> absolutely equal to a boy,
Gee, must make the boys feel better.
Susan
Don Levey
Yes, and no. In the Reform movement, there have been serious concerns
that women are supplanting men in religious life. Fewer men attending
services, being active in the synagogue, and (for that matter) applying
for membership in the seminaries.
sheldonlg
I didn't get the same impression as you did. The impression I got was
that Adelle said that they removed the impediment of _requiring_ a
tallit and the _result_ was that more women took the aliyah -- not that
they forced them by removing an objection.
Jay L
> On 20-Nov-2009, Jay L <levin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > (Reform, where a girl is
> > absolutely equal to a boy,
>
> Gee, must make the boys feel better.
>
> Susan
Maybe boys need to feel superior in your stream of Judaism. Not in
Reform.
In my experience, the full gender equality does not make the boys feel
better or worse. They grow up knowing that there is full gender
equality. Later, in conventions and on committees, men and women also
serve equally. My congregation has had about the same number of male
and female presidents. Neither men nor women were judged by their
gender, but rather by what they did for the community.
Women also serve as rabbis. One of the first women rabbis in Reform
served in our region (NJ). She was rabbi of her congregation for quite
a few years, and her congregation was the envy of many of us -- not
because their rabbi was a woman, but because their rabbi was superior
to many male and other female rabbis in the region.
Jay
Jay L
Genius it is. Original, accomodating, and non-threatening.
Thanks for sharing.
Jay
> Best regards,
> ---Cindy S.
cindys
snip
>
> I didn't get the same impression as you did. The impression I got was
> that Adelle said that they removed the impediment of _requiring_ a
> tallit and the _result_ was that more women took the aliyah -- not that
> they forced them by removing an objection.
What she said was that when they removed the the impediment of
requiring a tallit, the women participated "somewhat willing," which I
understood to mean that the women would still have preferred not to
participate but agreed to do so in light of the compromise.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
cindys
wrote:
snip
>
>
> About 1/3 of the women who are Shabbat regulars wear a talit at our shul.
> Plus others who come more sporadically. Bruno's experience must be with C
> synagogues which are not egalitarian. And the USCJ is thinking about taking
> a stand about that (not holding my breath).
The USCJ is thinking about taking a stand about what? That some C
synagogues don't want to be egalitarian, and they're thinking about
forcing the issue? But if they're not egalitarian, that must mean that
the majority of the congregation (or a significant minority anyway)
doesn't want to be egalitarian, and if the USCJ were to force the
issue, one of two things would in all likelihood happen.
1. The congregation would become egalitarian and a certain number of
members would leave the congregation. The congregation would need to
gauge for itself how significant this loss would be. Would it be one
family? Ten families? The family that is almost single-handedly
supporting the congregation? In all likelihood, if the vast majority
of the congregation is strongly in favor of becoming egalitarian and
only a tiny minority of members objects, then, the congregation will
become egalitarian without the USCJ forcing the issue.
2. The other possibility is that the congregation would remain
traditional and simply disassociate from the USCJ.
So, neither is a really good outcome.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Susan S
<cst...@rochester.rr.com>:
>On Nov 20, 2:28 am, Joe Bruno <joebr...@usa.com> wrote:
>> On Nov 19, 3:03 pm, Jay L <levin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > In Israel. At the Wall.
>>
>> > Oops, sorry -- it was just a Jewish woman. Rabbi Ovadia said such
>> > women are stupid. So I
>> > guess that's OK.
>>
>> > Headline:
>> > Police arrest woman for wearing prayer shawl at Western Wall
>>
>> > Rest of story:http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1129040.html
>>
>> > Wanna protest, or do you protest only when it happens in anti-Semitic
>> > countries?
>>
>> > Jay
>>
>> Never have I ever seen a woman wearing Tallit.
>> The custom in Conservative shuls is for men only.
>--------------
>No, it's not. Not only is it commonplace for women in C synagogues to
>wear a tallit, it is often mandatory for any woman who wants to ascend
>the bimah. I would be willing to bet than any C Jew who reads and
>posts to this forum will agree with me.
>
I have seen it many times.
[snip]
Susan Silberstein
Joe Bruno
I've been a Conservative Jew for over 60 years and never seen it.
>
>
>
> > I suppose you want to have women Bar Mitzvah, too?????
> > They get a Bat Mitzvah.
> > If you don't like Jewish custom, go pray with another religion.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Joe Bruno
wrote:
> "cindys" <cste...@rochester.rr.com> wrote in message
Joe Bruno
> In article <ada0132f-abdd-4bf6-9ee0-fd3a19932...@z41g2000yqz.googlegroups.com>,
> Joe Bruno <joebr...@usa.com> wrote:
>
> >On Nov 19, 3:03=A0pm, Jay L <levin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> In Israel. At the Wall.
> >> Oops, sorry -- it was just a Jewish woman. =A0Rabbi Ovadia said such
> >> women are stupid. So I
> >> guess that's OK.
> >> Headline:
> >> Police arrest woman for wearing prayer shawl at Western Wall
> >> Rest of story:http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1129040.html
> >> Wanna protest, or do you protest only when it happens in anti-Semitic
> >> countries?
> >Never have I ever seen a woman wearing Tallit.
> >The custom in Conservative shuls is for men only.
> >I suppose you want to have women Bar Mitzvah, too?????
> >They get a Bat Mitzvah.
> >If you don't like Jewish custom, go pray with another religion.
>
> In Reform Judaism, there is little distinction, and
> women can wear a tallis.
>
> Have you attended a Conservative service with a woman
> rabbi or cantor?
Yes.
I would be surprised if they did not
> wear them.
She did not wear one.
Henry Goodman
news:38031198-ca52-4004...@s15g2000yqs.googlegroups.com...
_______________________________________________________________________________________
The vast majority of shuls in Britain will not allow women to ascend the
bimah without a tallit.
They also will not allow them to ascend the bimah with a tallit.
--
Henry Goodman
henry dot goodman at virgin dot net
mm
When I went to a C shul, from grade 6 to 12**, I was annoyed when they
didn't let women on the bimah, and almost outraged when they did.
It was one thing to think about it, and another to see it.
Actually, for the most part then, the only times were at the end of
services, to give a bar mitzvah boy a present (a C siddur on Friday
night from the Sisterhood. Hertz's Chumahs, in two volumes, on
Shabbes morning, from Hadassah.) But they also had a small number of
bas mitzvahs, maybe only one or two in those 7 years, which were the
same as bar mitzvahs. In fact Judy G, whose father was the late
cantor, got better instruction than did I or any of the boys afaik.
She was taught the taamim and to work from there, and afaik the rest
of us were given a record and taught to memorize it. Also on the
record at the start were the taamim, but the single teacher for
everyone didn't explain how they fit in.
**And also after I left town for college, and until I was about 34.
--
Meir
"The baby's name is Shlomo. He's named after his grandfather, Scott."
mm
Power corrupts. Any in the Uscj who want to force the issue are like
the people on the city council of baltimore, who voted to ban transfat
in restaurants here.
People with power like to tell other people what to do. For many
that's the reason they sought power, and for most of the others, they
get that way when they have it.
>2. The other possibility is that the congregation would remain
>traditional and simply disassociate from the USCJ.
>
>So, neither is a really good outcome.
That's so far down in their list of concerns. They want to remake
the world, or whatever little part of it that have power in, in their
image. If they do think about number 2, "Hey, if you're going to make
an omelette, you have to break a few eggs."
>Best regards,
>---Cindy S.
lee
Is it wise to use the term egalitatian in this instance, cos that
implies inequality, rather than different roles. surely it would be
better to say traditional. Or is that the point? Sorry I'm not quite
thinking straight at the moment as I'm suffering from the non kosher
flu.
cindys
Just the opposite.
>rather than different roles. surely it would be
> better to say traditional. Or is that the point? Sorry I'm not quite
> thinking straight at the moment as I'm suffering from the non kosher
> flu.
"Egalitarian" is the opposite of traditional. "Egalitarian" means
women are counted for the minyan, have aliyos, etc.; there is no
difference between men's and women's roles. "Traditional" means that
only men are counted for the minyan, have aliyos, etc.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
cindys
To clarify: The USCJ is the umbrella organization for C synagogues in
the USA. AIUI, when egalitarianism (same roles for men and women) was
first accepted within the movement, the USCJ left it up to each
individual synagogue to decide for itself if it wanted to remain
traditional (only men are counted for the minyan, have an aliyah etc)
or switch to egalitarianism. In the beginning, most C synagogues
remained traditional, but over the course of the past couple of
decades, the majority of them have switched to egalitarianism.
Apparently, the USCJ has been discussing making egalitarianism
mandatory for all its member synagogues. If this were to happen, and a
synagogue wanted to remain traditional, they could no longer be part
of the USCJ. The disadvantage for the synagogue is that it would no
longer have access to USCJ resources when searching for a new rabbi.
The disadvantage for the USCJ is that it would lose out on the annual
dues it receives from each member synagogue (they get X amount of
dollars per member). So, basically, it would be a very divisive action
all the way around.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
fla...@verizon.net
On 20-Nov-2009, Don Levey <Don_...@the-leveys.us> wrote:
> fla...@verizon.net wrote:
> > On 20-Nov-2009, Jay L <levi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> (Reform, where a girl is
> >> absolutely equal to a boy,
> >
> > Gee, must make the boys feel better.
> >
>
> Yes, and no. In the Reform movement, there have been serious concerns
> that women are supplanting men in religious life. Fewer men attending
> services, being active in the synagogue, and (for that matter) applying
> for membership in the seminaries.
Ok, ok - SDNWOTN!
Susan
fla...@verizon.net
On 20-Nov-2009, Jay L <levi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 20, 3:17�pm, flav...@verizon.net wrote:
> > On 20-Nov-2009, Jay L <levin...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > (Reform, where a girl is
> > > absolutely equal to a boy,
> >
> > Gee, must make the boys feel better.
> >
> > Susan
>
>
> Maybe boys need to feel superior in your stream of Judaism.
I haven;t seen any evidence of that: they know women
are exempt from certain duties, and they accept it.
> Not in
> Reform.
Then why are they trying to take away women's staus?
Susan
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
>
> About 1/3 of the women who are Shabbat regulars wear a talit at our shul.
> Plus others who come more sporadically. Bruno's experience must be with C
> synagogues which are not egalitarian. And the USCJ is thinking about taking
> a stand about that (not holding my breath).
>
> uncomfortable with our more liberal policy of not requiring talit or kippah
> for women on the bimah, even if they are layning or getting an aliyah. But
> the ritual committee doesn't want to place barriers to participation. We
> wear them and now are uncomfortable with the idea of wearing them and
> teenagers who are just being stubborn and picking odd battles. So we remove
> the 'battle' part and they participate somewhat willingly.
THE HOME AND FAMILY ARE THE CENTER OF JUDAISM, *NOT* THE SYNAGOGUE.
--
Moshe Schorr
It is a tremendous Mitzvah to always be happy! - Reb Nachman of Breslov
The home and family are the center of Judaism, *not* the synagogue.
May Eliezer Mordichai b. Chaya Sheina Rochel have a refuah shlaimah
btoch sha'ar cholei Yisroel.
Disclaimer: Nothing here necessarily reflects the opinion of Hebrew University
fla...@verizon.net
On 22-Nov-2009, mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
> THE HOME AND FAMILY ARE THE CENTER OF JUDAISM, *NOT* THE SYNAGOGUE.
> --
AND WOMEN TRADITIONALLY ARE IN CHARGE OF ALL AREAS THAT MAKE ONE RELIGIOUS
Susan
Adelle
<mos...@mm.huji.ac.il> wrote in message
news:2009Nov2...@mm.huji.ac.il...
> "Adelle" <adstavisa...@invalid.invalid> writes:
>>
>> About 1/3 of the women who are Shabbat regulars wear a talit at our shul.
>> Plus others who come more sporadically. Bruno's experience must be with
>> C
>> synagogues which are not egalitarian. And the USCJ is thinking about
>> taking
>> a stand about that (not holding my breath).
>>
>> BTW, Cindy - that wouldn't have happened at our synagogue. In fact, I am
>> uncomfortable with our more liberal policy of not requiring talit or
>> kippah
>> for women on the bimah, even if they are layning or getting an aliyah.
>> But
>> the ritual committee doesn't want to place barriers to participation. We
>> have women who went their whole lives with the notion that they couldn't
>> wear them and now are uncomfortable with the idea of wearing them and
>> teenagers who are just being stubborn and picking odd battles. So we
>> remove
>> the 'battle' part and they participate somewhat willingly.
>
> THE HOME AND FAMILY ARE THE CENTER OF JUDAISM, *NOT* THE SYNAGOGUE.
And no one said otherwise, Moshe.
The topic is synagogue practice, and we are sticking to that.
Adelle
Adelle
And Adelle Responds -
Not necessarily. It's a matter of defining the movement. Everyone's biggest
complaint about C is that it is often defined by what it isn't, as opposed
to what it is. So if the RA and USCJ defines itself as a movement which
recognizes women as equal within the community, count toward minyanim, and
may serve in all functions, how then do you characterize a community which
does not want to follow that definition?
It would seem the community then is making a bigger statement than the
organization, and is separating itself from the greater whole. If the
congregation does not agree with the USCJ and RA, perhaps then the
congregation needs to examine itself and decide if they really fit under the
C umbrella?
The USCJ is going through a re-examining of itself, what it does and what it
provides (courtesy of some nudging). Growing pains are going to affect most
congregations in some way or another - hopefully in more positive ways than
negative. As I said, they are thinking about what they wish to do, just how
big is the C umbrella, and what it means to be C.
Adelle
cindys
wrote:
> "cindys" <cste...@rochester.rr.com> wrote in message
Okay. But at the end of the day, you are basically saying the same
thing I said. C is grappling with the issue of whether or not to
mandate egalitarianism in its member synagogues (okay, I didn't say
"as a defining of part of C").
In the beginning, traditionalism prevailed. Then, beginning in roughly
the 1980s (?) egalitarianism became more widespread. But in the
beginning, C was not about egalitarianism at all. I don't think (facts
on the ground) it was really even about torah m'Sinai or the
legitimacy for reinterpretating halacha. Rather, in the beginning, I
think the main thing that distinguished C from O was that there was no
mechitza, and husbands and wives could sit together during the
service.
From where I sit, and you may get angry with me for saying this,
(although I think you have essentially said the same thing yourself
above), currently, the number one defining aspect of C is
egalitarianism. I felt that back in 1995 which was one of the reasons,
(as I have mentioned on a number of occasions on this forum), I left
C, i.e., because it seemed to me that it was only about feminism and
nothing else. The C synagogue where I was a member was interviewing
prospective rabbis, and the only thing anybody seemed to care about
was getting assurances from the various candidates that women would be
given equal time on the bimah.
So, what you are saying now, is that C is defined (in large part,
anyway) by egalitarianism, and that if a congregation doesn't see it
that way, then perhaps they don't have any business calling themselves
"C," and you (or the USCJ) would like to show them the door.
Objectively speaking, this seems completely counterproductive. The C
movement is already hurting, and the focus should be on means to
attract new members. I can't see how this move would attract new
members. All it will do is disenfranchise some of the members you
already have.
And one of the big ramifications would be that the USJC would have
less funding. Member congregations would definitely bail rather than
acquiescing to something they don't want. And I know they don't want
it because currently nothing is standing in the way of any C synagogue
that wants to become egalitarian. In this day and age, the only reason
a C congregation has for remaining traditional is that its members
want it that way. And that's not going to change because the USJC says
so. A lot of smaller C congregations, which are always hurting for
money, consider the USCJ dues to be a huge financial burden as it is.
It wouldn't take much for them to walk away.
In short, the USCJ's thinking about insisting that member
congregations either accept egalitariaism (or by extension leave the
fold) is completely illogical. They would be biting off their noses to
spite their faces. But, as a good friend of mine (a"h) always used to
say, "Logic flies out the window when there is an emotional agenda."
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
mm
<cst...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>------------
>Okay. But at the end of the day, you are basically saying the same
>thing I said. C is grappling with the issue of whether or not to
>mandate egalitarianism in its member synagogues (okay, I didn't say
>"as a defining of part of C").
>
>In the beginning, traditionalism prevailed. Then, beginning in roughly
>the 1980s (?) egalitarianism became more widespread. But in the
>beginning, C was not about egalitarianism at all. I don't think (facts
>on the ground) it was really even about torah m'Sinai or the
>legitimacy for reinterpretating halacha. Rather, in the beginning, I
>think the main thing that distinguished C from O was that there was no
>mechitza, and husbands and wives could sit together during the
>service.
Isn't that Egg Lite?
>From where I sit, and you may get angry with me for saying this,
>(although I think you have essentially said the same thing yourself
>above), currently, the number one defining aspect of C is
>egalitarianism. I felt that back in 1995 which was one of the reasons,
>(as I have mentioned on a number of occasions on this forum), I left
>C, i.e., because it seemed to me that it was only about feminism and
>nothing else. The C synagogue where I was a member was interviewing
>prospective rabbis, and the only thing anybody seemed to care about
>was getting assurances from the various candidates that women would be
>given equal time on the bimah.
>
>So, what you are saying now, is that C is defined (in large part,
>anyway) by egalitarianism, and that if a congregation doesn't see it
>that way, then perhaps they don't have any business calling themselves
>"C," and you (or the USCJ) would like to show them the door.
>
>Objectively speaking, this seems completely counterproductive. The C
>movement is already hurting, and the focus should be on means to
>attract new members. I can't see how this move would attract new
>members. All it will do is disenfranchise some of the members you
>already have.
This sort of reminds me of the current Republican Party. Maybe they
don't believe that only 20% of the country self-identifies as
Republican, but they know the number has gone down. Still, more than
half of those who talk publicly think the secret to wining elections
in the future is to be more Replublican, more conservative on specific
issues, and more liberal on no issues. People like two or three
candiates for pres or veep from last year basically read Scallafoppa
(sp?) out of the Republican party, endorsed a Conservative party
member, Hoffman, and caused the Democrat to win the district for the
first time since 1880, or earlier. But there is no sign that loss
caused them to change their mind.
INstead they trumpet that for governor, Corzine lost, a man with only
38% popularity and who was once chairman of Goldman Sachs. That job
wasn't a millstone in 2005 when he won the first time, but I'll bet it
was now. Still, the Reps think the Rep one becuase he was a Rep.
>
>And one of the big ramifications would be that the USJC would have
>less funding. Member congregations would definitely bail rather than
>acquiescing to something they don't want. And I know they don't want
>it because currently nothing is standing in the way of any C synagogue
>that wants to become egalitarian. In this day and age, the only reason
>a C congregation has for remaining traditional is that its members
>want it that way. And that's not going to change because the USJC says
>so. A lot of smaller C congregations, which are always hurting for
>money, consider the USCJ dues to be a huge financial burden as it is.
>It wouldn't take much for them to walk away.
>
>In short, the USCJ's thinking about insisting that member
>congregations either accept egalitariaism (or by extension leave the
>fold) is completely illogical. They would be biting off their noses to
>spite their faces. But, as a good friend of mine (a"h) always used to
>say, "Logic flies out the window when there is an emotional agenda."
>Best regards,
>---Cindy S.
I hope, whichever way this discussion goes, when we resolve it here,
someone lets the uscj know what the decision is.
Adelle
On Nov 20, 10:56 am, "Adelle" <adstavisatgmail....@invalid.invalid>
wrote:
snip
> We
> have women who went their whole lives with the notion that they couldn't
> wear them and now are uncomfortable with the idea of wearing them and
> teenagers who are just being stubborn and picking odd battles. So we
> remove
> the 'battle' part and they participate somewhat willingly.
>
> Adelle
------------
I have a friend who at one point stopped going to the C synagogue
because she felt that she was constantly being pressured to go up on
the bimah, open the ark, have an aliyah, do a reading, and she really
just didn't feel comfortable doing any of that, and the issue wasn't
about wearing a tallit, the issue was about going up on the bimah and
doing those things. It didn't bother her that other women were doing
it, and she liked the congregation otherwise, but she really didn't
want to do that herself.
The only reason I am mentioning this is because from what you wrote
above, it sounds like some women in your congregation apparently don't
want to go on the bimah (for whatever reason), but if you tell them
they don't have to wear the tallit, they will "somewhat
willingly" [i.e., begrudgingly] go up on the bimah. It's just like
when the guy was pressuring my son to have an aliyah at the Ashkenazic
congregation on Simchas Torah. He really didn't want to do it. If
somebody doesn't want to do something, why push? (This would apply to
anyone, not just women).
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Adelle responds -
No. That's a mischaracterization. In almost all cases, the women react
favorably to being given an honor. And the fact that they don't have to take
on a practice that they aren't sure they want or are ready for removes a
barrier for them. Its often that they hadn't considered it a possibility for
themselves because it never was while they were younger. Often, its more a
"wow! I can do that? Really? Yes, thank you!" response.
Actually, the only person we have who prefers to not get aliyot is younger
than we are. She will do it for special times (Simchat Torah, a yarzeit,
etc) but declines it others. She will take galilah.
We are a fairly small congregation. The Shabbat crowd usually numbers about
40, but sometimes is as small as 12 to 15. Even with 40, between readers and
all the usual honors, almost everyone gets something at least twice a month.
We try to spread it around and make sure no one is left out. And- no - we
don't have the minhag where one must make a donation after taking an honor.
Most of our congregation couldn't do that financially.
Adelle
cindys
wrote:
> "cindys" <cste...@rochester.rr.com> wrote in message
I have never seen that minhag at any C synagogue. I have seen that in
the O synagogue but only on certain holidays (Rosh Hashanah/Yom
Kippur, Simchas Torah where certain aliyos are publicly auctioned
off). Of course, some people may send in donations after having an
aliyah.
What I have seen much more frequently (that makes me sort of
uncomfortable, although I know it raises valuable funds is the "Yizkor
plea.") Right before Yizkor (four times per year), the synagogue will
fundraise for itself or for some other worthy cause (the local Jewish
school, the local mikveh, Mogen Dovid Adom in Israel, it varies).
Designated people walk around, and other people whisper pledges to
them, and then they are announced from the bimah..."Mr. and Mrs
Goldblatt pledge $25" or "Mr. and Mrs. Bernstein pledge four times
chai" (4 x $18 = $72) or for people who don't want their names
announced "Anonymous pledges $50." I think the reason behind doing
this publicly (although someone can correct me if I'm wrong) is that
when people hear their neighbors are being generous, it encourages
them to be generous as well. I believe there is actually a halachic
precedent for this. Obviously, nobody (other than HaShem) keeps track
of these pledges because writing them down is forbidden on yom tov, so
people are on their honor to mail the check.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
fla...@verizon.net
On 22-Nov-2009, cindys <cst...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
> I think the reason behind doing
> this publicly (although someone can correct me if I'm wrong) is that
> when people hear their neighbors are being generous, it encourages
> them to be generous as well.
And now I am ashamed.
I always thought that the people involved neded the ego boost.
And I always thought that because I knew that they could donate
anonymously if they wanted.
But I honestly couldn't think of a *good* reason for doing it.
Until now.
Susan
Henry Goodman
________________________________________________________________________
There are ways round the problem of writing on Yom Tov. In our shul (and
many other British shuls) there is an appeal on Kol Nidrei night. Seats have
been sold in advance and on each set a card is placed with amounts varying
from (I think) �5 to �1000 printed with a hole opposite each amount. The
congregant is expected to thread a string through the hole of his pledge.
After the Rabbi's appeal speech the cards are collected and bills are sent
out after YomTov. The amounts are not made public in our shul but I think
they are in others
fla...@verizon.net
On 22-Nov-2009, "Henry Goodman" <henry....@virgin.net> wrote:
> There are ways round the problem of writing on Yom Tov. In our shul (and
> many other British shuls) there is an appeal on Kol Nidrei night. Seats
> have
> been sold in advance and on each set a card is placed with amounts varying
> from (I think) �5 to �1000 printed with a hole opposite each amount. The
> congregant is expected to thread a string through the hole of his pledge.
> After the Rabbi's appeal speech the cards are collected and bills are sent
> out after YomTov. The amounts are not made public in our shul but I think
> they are in others
I have also seen the "folded tab" cards.
Susan
cindys
snip_____________________
>
> There are ways round the problem of writing on Yom Tov. In our shul (and
> many other British shuls) there is an appeal on Kol Nidrei night. Seats have
> been sold in advance and on each set a card is placed with amounts varying
> from (I think) £5 to £1000 printed with a hole opposite each amount. The
> congregant is expected to thread a string through the hole of his pledge.
> After the Rabbi's appeal speech the cards are collected and bills are sent
> out after YomTov. The amounts are not made public in our shul but I think
> they are in others
----------------
I have seen cards used but only for the Kol Nidre appeal (not for the
Yizkor appeals). There is a dollar amount written on each of the four
corners of an index card, and the person can fold down the amount he
wants to donate. Since people have prepaid assigned seats for Yom
Kippur, the cards corresponding to the appropriate seat-holder's name
is put at the appropriate seat. If a person wants to donate a
different amount than what is written on one of the four corners, he
obviously always has the option of taking the card home with him and
writing down the amount he wants to donate after yom tov. Or he can
just mail a check in any amount he wants. I don't recall that these
amounts are made public.
At the Sephardic shul, they just send the card in advance, and you can
mail a check before the yom tov. Alternately, when a man goes up for
his aliyah, he whispers to the ba'al k'riah (torah reader) the amount
he intends to donate. These amounts are never announced. I think the
reason it's done this way (and again, someone can correct me if I'm
wrong) is because someone who makes a pledge verbally (even if it is
whispered) while standing in front of an open torah will hopefully be
very diligent about sending the check.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Patty
> flav...@verizon.net wrote:
> > On 20-Nov-2009, Jay L <levin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> (Reform, where a girl is
> >> absolutely equal to a boy,
>
> > Gee, must make the boys feel better.
>
> that women are supplanting men in religious life. Fewer men attending
> services, being active in the synagogue, and (for that matter) applying
> for membership in the seminaries.
>
> Don Levey, Framingam MA If knowledge is power,
> (email address in header works) and power corrupts, then...
> NOTE: Don't send mail to to sale...@the-leveys.us
> GnuPG public key: http://www.the-leveys.us:6080/keys/don-dsakey.asc
Why do they do that -- back off on activity? Do you know anybody that
does that and did you ever ask them? I have a hypothesis but I've
never asked so if you did the answer would be interesting. Cheers
sheldonlg
> On Nov 20, 4:29 pm, sheldonlg <sheldo...@giganews.com> wrote:
> snip
>> I didn't get the same impression as you did. The impression I got was
>> that Adelle said that they removed the impediment of _requiring_ a
>> tallit and the _result_ was that more women took the aliyah -- not that
>> they forced them by removing an objection.
> -------
> What she said was that when they removed the the impediment of
> requiring a tallit, the women participated "somewhat willing," which I
> understood to mean that the women would still have preferred not to
> participate but agreed to do so in light of the compromise.
> Best regards,
> ---Cindy S.
I read that as "they even were willing" -- and that it was the fact of
being forced to that was the objection, not the wearing of the tallis.
YMMV.
sheldonlg
We have elevated women's status to one of equality.
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
> mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
>
>> THE HOME AND FAMILY ARE THE CENTER OF JUDAISM, *NOT* THE SYNAGOGUE.
>> --
> AND WOMEN TRADITIONALLY ARE IN CHARGE OF ALL AREAS THAT MAKE ONE RELIGIOUS
Absolutely. That "division of labor" is enshrined in the begining
of Mishle - Proverbs (1:8) "Hear, my son, the instruction of thy
father, and forsake not the teaching of thy mother".
--
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
> <mos...@mm.huji.ac.il> wrote in message
>>>
>>>
>>> BTW, Cindy - that wouldn't have happened at our synagogue. In
>>> fact, I am uncomfortable with our more liberal policy of not
>>> requiring talit or kippah for women on the bimah, even if they
>>> are layning or getting an aliyah. But the ritual committee doesn't
>>> want to place barriers to participation. We have women who went
>>> their whole lives with the notion that they couldn't wear them
>>> and now are uncomfortable with the idea of wearing them and
>>> teenagers who are just being stubborn and picking odd battles.
>>> So we remove the 'battle' part and they participate somewhat
>>> willingly.
>>
>> THE HOME AND FAMILY ARE THE CENTER OF JUDAISM, *NOT* THE SYNAGOGUE.
>
> And no one said otherwise, Moshe.
>
> The topic is synagogue practice, and we are sticking to that.
My question is wheher the synagogue practice comes _after_ the home
and family are living a full Jewish life, or _instead_.
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
I recall learning on SCJM that it was based on a Medrash. The Medrash
says "We publicize those who do a mitzvah" based on the story of
Reuven saving Joseph from the pit. The Torah makes it a _point_ to
tell us that Reuven did the mitzvah.
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
>
>>> We try to spread it around and make sure no one is left out. And
>>> - no - we don't have the minhag where one must make a donation
>>> after taking an honor. Most of our congregation couldn't do that
>>> financially.
>> I have never seen that minhag at any C synagogue. I have seen that in
>> the O synagogue but only on certain holidays (Rosh Hashanah/Yom
>> Kippur, Simchas Torah where certain aliyos are publicly auctioned
>> off). Of course, some people may send in donations after having an
>> aliyah.
>>
>> What I have seen much more frequently (that makes me sort of
>> uncomfortable, although I know it raises valuable funds is the "Yizkor
>> plea.") Right before Yizkor (four times per year), the synagogue will
>> fundraise for itself or for some other worthy cause (the local Jewish
>> school, the local mikveh, Mogen Dovid Adom in Israel, it varies).
>>
>> Designated people walk around, and other people whisper pledges to
>> them, and then they are announced from the bimah..."Mr. and Mrs
>> Goldblatt pledge $25" or "Mr. and Mrs. Bernstein pledge four times
>> chai" (4 x $18 = $72) or for people who don't want their names
>> announced "Anonymous pledges $50." I think the reason behind doing
>> this publicly (although someone can correct me if I'm wrong) is that
>> when people hear their neighbors are being generous, it encourages
>> them to be generous as well. I believe there is actually a halachic
>> precedent for this. Obviously, nobody (other than HaShem) keeps track
>> of these pledges because writing them down is forbidden on yom tov, so
>> people are on their honor to mail the check.
> There are ways round the problem of writing on Yom Tov. In our shul (and
> many other British shuls) there is an appeal on Kol Nidrei night. Seats have
> been sold in advance and on each set a card is placed with amounts varying
> from (I think) �5 to �1000 printed with a hole opposite each amount. The
> congregant is expected to thread a string through the hole of his pledge.
Where did they get the string? Or was that provided as well?
> After the Rabbi's appeal speech the cards are collected and bills
> are sent out after YomTov. The amounts are not made public in our
> shul but I think they are in others
In my shul in America they had a card with tabs witht he various
amounts. You would bend the tab with the amount you wanted to donate.
Henry Goodman
>> congregant is expected to thread a string through the hole of his pledge.
>
> Where did they get the string? Or was that provided as well?
>
threaded through the centre of the card and the user threads the other end
through one of the various marked holes round the edge.
There is a similar system for aliyot on Shabbat.
Don Levey
> On Nov 20, 3:48 pm, Don Levey <Don_S...@the-leveys.us> wrote:
>> flav...@verizon.net wrote:
>>> On 20-Nov-2009, Jay L <levin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> (Reform, where a girl is
>>>> absolutely equal to a boy,
>>> Gee, must make the boys feel better.
>> Yes, and no. In the Reform movement, there have been serious concerns
>> that women are supplanting men in religious life. Fewer men attending
>> services, being active in the synagogue, and (for that matter) applying
>> for membership in the seminaries.
>>
> does that and did you ever ask them? I have a hypothesis but I've
> never asked so if you did the answer would be interesting. Cheers
What I've heard is a resentment against what is being called
"gynocentrism". That is, significant efforts are made to bring women to
the fore, which will of course move men to the rear. Even in areas
where those efforts aren't being made, their effects are being felt.
It's not that the men I've spoken to want some sort of "old boy's club,"
but they're feeling that those significant efforts are leaving them with
no particular place in the movement.
One example, which is taken from the particular way in which we do
things: on Shabbat, we can't count on any family lighting candles or
making kiddush at home. Therefore, those elements are incorporated into
our services. Those tasks are, traditionally, performed by women and
men, respectively. However, in many congregations women are often asked
to recite the kiddush, since this ends up breaking down a traditionally
male role and opening it to women. OK, as far as it goes - but I can't
recall a time when a man was asked to light the candles.
On weekends where there is a Bar or Bat Mitzvah, usually the child
recites the kiddush - or one of the parents. And yet it's always their
mother and grandmother who lights the candles - never the father, that
I've seen. If the mother isn't Jewish, they get the father's mother,
sister, or some other woman to do it. In the congregations where the
child accompanies the parent, the only things I've seen are when a
daughter accompanies mom to light candles - seldom does the boy do so.
Other attendees at Reform services may have had different experiences,
and I would hope someone could contradict me here.
This is simply one example, but it is very symbolic.
--
Don Levey, Framingam MA If knowledge is power,
(email address in header works) and power corrupts, then...
NOTE: Don't send mail to to sal...@the-leveys.us
Don Levey
> On Nov 20, 3:17 pm, flav...@verizon.net wrote:
>> On 20-Nov-2009, Jay L <levin...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> (Reform, where a girl is
>>> absolutely equal to a boy,
>> Gee, must make the boys feel better.
>>
>
>
> Maybe boys need to feel superior in your stream of Judaism. Not in
> Reform.
>
> In my experience, the full gender equality does not make the boys feel
> better or worse. They grow up knowing that there is full gender
> equality. Later, in conventions and on committees, men and women also
> serve equally. My congregation has had about the same number of male
> and female presidents. Neither men nor women were judged by their
> gender, but rather by what they did for the community.
>
You may have missed the article in Reform Judaism magazine a few years
ago entitled "Where have all the men gone?"
Don Levey
> "Adelle" <adstavisa...@invalid.invalid> writes:
>> <mos...@mm.huji.ac.il> wrote in message
>>> "Adelle" <adstavisa...@invalid.invalid> writes:
>>>>
>>>> BTW, Cindy - that wouldn't have happened at our synagogue. In
>>>> fact, I am uncomfortable with our more liberal policy of not
>>>> requiring talit or kippah for women on the bimah, even if they
>>>> are layning or getting an aliyah. But the ritual committee doesn't
>>>> want to place barriers to participation. We have women who went
>>>> their whole lives with the notion that they couldn't wear them
>>>> and now are uncomfortable with the idea of wearing them and
>>>> teenagers who are just being stubborn and picking odd battles.
>>>> So we remove the 'battle' part and they participate somewhat
>>>> willingly.
>>> THE HOME AND FAMILY ARE THE CENTER OF JUDAISM, *NOT* THE SYNAGOGUE.
>> And no one said otherwise, Moshe.
>>
>> The topic is synagogue practice, and we are sticking to that.
>
> My question is wheher the synagogue practice comes _after_ the home
> and family are living a full Jewish life, or _instead_.
>
in the synagogue presents both the knowledge and the opportunity to do
more at home.
fla...@verizon.net
On 23-Nov-2009, mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
> >> THE HOME AND FAMILY ARE THE CENTER OF JUDAISM, *NOT* THE SYNAGOGUE.
> >
> > And no one said otherwise, Moshe.
> >
> > The topic is synagogue practice, and we are sticking to that.
>
> My question is wheher the synagogue practice comes _after_ the home
> and family are living a full Jewish life, or _instead_.
You can, technically, lead a Jewish life without the synagogue.
Can you have it the other way around? Should you?
Susan
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
> mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
>> "Adelle" <adstavisa...@invalid.invalid> writes:
>>> <mos...@mm.huji.ac.il> wrote in message
>>>> "Adelle" <adstavisa...@invalid.invalid> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>> BTW, Cindy - that wouldn't have happened at our synagogue. In
>>>>> fact, I am uncomfortable with our more liberal policy of not
>>>>> requiring talit or kippah for women on the bimah, even if they
>>>>> are layning or getting an aliyah. But the ritual committee doesn't
>>>>> want to place barriers to participation. We have women who went
>>>>> their whole lives with the notion that they couldn't wear them
>>>>> and now are uncomfortable with the idea of wearing them and
>>>>> teenagers who are just being stubborn and picking odd battles.
>>>>> So we remove the 'battle' part and they participate somewhat
>>>>> willingly.
>>>> THE HOME AND FAMILY ARE THE CENTER OF JUDAISM, *NOT* THE SYNAGOGUE.
>>> And no one said otherwise, Moshe.
>>>
>>> The topic is synagogue practice, and we are sticking to that.
>>
>> My question is wheher the synagogue practice comes _after_ the home
>> and family are living a full Jewish life, or _instead_.
>>
> For many Jews, it's what they know, and what they do. Participating
> more in the synagogue presents both the knowledge and the
> opportunity to do more at home.
Is it presented like that? "Here, see what we do in the synagogue,
now go home and do it there as well, if not more".
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
I don't understand your question. What do you mean "the other way
around"?
Steve Goldfarb
>On 22-Nov-2009, mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
>> THE HOME AND FAMILY ARE THE CENTER OF JUDAISM, *NOT* THE SYNAGOGUE.
>> --
>AND WOMEN TRADITIONALLY ARE IN CHARGE OF ALL AREAS THAT MAKE ONE RELIGIOUS
Which is why the holiest physical location in Judaism is Moshe's house.
No, maybe it's David's house. Oh, wait, what's that whole "Temple" thing
about then? Where a female high priest goes to everyone's house to make a
sacrifice?
Look, there's no question that the home plays a key role in Judaism, and
that women have a key role in maintaining the religious traditions within
the home. But I think you two are overstating the case. You make it sound
like the synagogue has NO role in Judaism - that's certainly not true.
Community is a key element of Judaism, and that community tends to revolve
around a rebbe and/or some synagogue or synagogue-like structure.
--s
--
cindys
snip
>
> What I've heard is a resentment against what is being called
> "gynocentrism". That is, significant efforts are made to bring women to
> the fore, which will of course move men to the rear. Even in areas
> where those efforts aren't being made, their effects are being felt.
> It's not that the men I've spoken to want some sort of "old boy's club,"
> but they're feeling that those significant efforts are leaving them with
> no particular place in the movement.
>
> One example, which is taken from the particular way in which we do
> things: on Shabbat, we can't count on any family lighting candles or
> making kiddush at home.
So let them do it individually at the synagogue. If everybody in the
congregation feels comfortable doing this, they will be much more
likely to do it at home in the future.
>Therefore, those elements are incorporated into
> our services. Those tasks are, traditionally, performed by women and
> men, respectively. However, in many congregations women are often asked
> to recite the kiddush, since this ends up breaking down a traditionally
> male role and opening it to women. OK, as far as it goes - but I can't
> recall a time when a man was asked to light the candles.
I know what I am about to say is tangential, but I think it might be
worthwhile information for somebody:
WRT candlelighting, there is never a group candlelighting at a shabbos
event at an O shul. There are enough little candles or little
containers of oil set out so that every woman has the opportunity to
fulfill the mitzvah of candlelighting. (They do this routinely at
Chabad). If we go to someone else's house for shabbos dinner, the
hostess will give me the opportunity to light my own candles, if
appropriate, or if we have someone stay with us over shabbos, I always
provide candles for the other women to light.
Whenever we have gone to a shabbos dinner (for example) at an O
synagogue, the rabbi will first say a group kiddush for anyone who
wants to be motzei (fulfill the obligation) for hearing kiddush from
him. But there are a number of families who make a conscious mental
effort not to fulfill their obligation for hearing kiddush by
accepting the rabbi's recitation. Right after the rabbi is finished,
the men at all the individual tables recite kiddush for their own
families. That way, EVERY MAN (or a woman if she wants) has the
opportunity to recite kiddush for himself or his own family.
Ditto with hamotzi (blessing on the bread). Everybody washes and then
each man (or any individual person who wants to) takes two rolls on
the table and goes through the ritual for blessing the bread. There is
no such thing as "group hamotzi." Recitation of hamotzi is not
supposed to be an "honor" reserved for only one person. (Nor is
candlelighting nor is reciting kiddush).
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
cindys
> flav...@verizon.net writes:
> > On 23-Nov-2009, mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
>
> >> >> THE HOME AND FAMILY ARE THE CENTER OF JUDAISM, *NOT* THE SYNAGOGUE.
>
> >> > And no one said otherwise, Moshe.
>
> >> > The topic is synagogue practice, and we are sticking to that.
>
> >> My question is wheher the synagogue practice comes _after_ the home
> >> and family are living a full Jewish life, or _instead_.
>
> > You can, technically, lead a Jewish life without the synagogue.
> > Can you have it the other way around? Should you?
>
> I don't understand your question. What do you mean "the other way
> around"?
She means "can you lead a Jewish life without a Jewish home?"
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Don Levey
> On Nov 23, 8:31 am, Don Levey <Don_S...@the-leveys.us> wrote:
> snip
>> What I've heard is a resentment against what is being called
>> "gynocentrism". That is, significant efforts are made to bring women to
>> the fore, which will of course move men to the rear. Even in areas
>> where those efforts aren't being made, their effects are being felt.
>> It's not that the men I've spoken to want some sort of "old boy's club,"
>> but they're feeling that those significant efforts are leaving them with
>> no particular place in the movement.
>>
>> One example, which is taken from the particular way in which we do
>> things: on Shabbat, we can't count on any family lighting candles or
>> making kiddush at home.
>
> So let them do it individually at the synagogue. If everybody in the
> congregation feels comfortable doing this, they will be much more
> likely to do it at home in the future.
>
"Women's Auxiliary" - and often the main group in the synagogue for
fundraising and service *to* the synagogue's many efforts) services. I
don't know that there are men clamoring to do this, mind you, but simply
*asking* men who are inclined would go a long way toward demonstrating
true egalitarianism.
>> Therefore, those elements are incorporated into
>> our services. Those tasks are, traditionally, performed by women and
>> men, respectively. However, in many congregations women are often asked
>> to recite the kiddush, since this ends up breaking down a traditionally
>> male role and opening it to women. OK, as far as it goes - but I can't
>> recall a time when a man was asked to light the candles.
>
> I know what I am about to say is tangential, but I think it might be
> worthwhile information for somebody:
>
> WRT candlelighting, there is never a group candlelighting at a shabbos
> event at an O shul. There are enough little candles or little
> containers of oil set out so that every woman has the opportunity to
> fulfill the mitzvah of candlelighting. (They do this routinely at
> Chabad). If we go to someone else's house for shabbos dinner, the
> hostess will give me the opportunity to light my own candles, if
> appropriate, or if we have someone stay with us over shabbos, I always
> provide candles for the other women to light.
>
This is similar to our experiences; when we dine elsewhere my wife is
generally given the opportunity to light.
> Whenever we have gone to a shabbos dinner (for example) at an O
> synagogue, the rabbi will first say a group kiddush for anyone who
> wants to be motzei (fulfill the obligation) for hearing kiddush from
> him. But there are a number of families who make a conscious mental
> effort not to fulfill their obligation for hearing kiddush by
> accepting the rabbi's recitation. Right after the rabbi is finished,
> the men at all the individual tables recite kiddush for their own
> families. That way, EVERY MAN (or a woman if she wants) has the
> opportunity to recite kiddush for himself or his own family.
>
That I've not seen before; interesting.
> Ditto with hamotzi (blessing on the bread). Everybody washes and then
> each man (or any individual person who wants to) takes two rolls on
> the table and goes through the ritual for blessing the bread. There is
> no such thing as "group hamotzi." Recitation of hamotzi is not
> supposed to be an "honor" reserved for only one person. (Nor is
> candlelighting nor is reciting kiddush).
This is consistent with my experiences with more traditional families.
In our synagogue, the children are normally called to do this. I think
the premise is that the parents have already made blessings upon the
candles and wine, so the kids get to participate here.
Don Levey
kids in class, too.
Don Levey
> fla...@verizon.net writes:
>> On 23-Nov-2009, mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
>>
>>>>> THE HOME AND FAMILY ARE THE CENTER OF JUDAISM, *NOT* THE SYNAGOGUE.
>>>> And no one said otherwise, Moshe.
>>>>
>>>> The topic is synagogue practice, and we are sticking to that.
>>> My question is wheher the synagogue practice comes _after_ the home
>>> and family are living a full Jewish life, or _instead_.
>> You can, technically, lead a Jewish life without the synagogue.
>> Can you have it the other way around? Should you?
>
> I don't understand your question. What do you mean "the other way
> around"?
>
cindys
Agreed. That's precisely the reason why (in O), wannabe converts are
often mandated to move to a place where there is an O community before
the beis din is willing to perform the conversion. We (Jews) cannot
live a full Jewish life in isolation from fellow Jews no matter how
strictly we observe halacha at home. Jewish communities provide
synagogues, mikvaos, schools, access to kosher food, etc. all of which
are fundamental parts of Jewish life.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Henry Goodman
I know what I am about to say is tangential, but I think it might be
worthwhile information for somebody:
WRT candlelighting, there is never a group candlelighting at a shabbos
event at an O shul. There are enough little candles or little
containers of oil set out so that every woman has the opportunity to
fulfill the mitzvah of candlelighting. (They do this routinely at
Chabad). If we go to someone else's house for shabbos dinner, the
hostess will give me the opportunity to light my own candles, if
appropriate, or if we have someone stay with us over shabbos, I always
provide candles for the other women to light.
______________________________________________________________________________
At O shuls in Britain there is no candle lighting in shul. Married women
don't go to shul on Friday night (a few young girls do); they light candles
at home. Some shuls, but not all, have the sheliach tzibbur make kiddush.
cindys
> "cindys" <cste...@rochester.rr.com> wrote in message
Married women don't go to shul if there's a shabbos dinner at shul? Do
they stay at home and eat dinner by themselves? That was the situation
I was describing above, "a shabbos event." You snipped the rest of my
post, which is okay, but it was clear from what I wrote in the
subsequent paragraphs that I was describing what happens at a shul
dinner.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Micha Berger
the Shabbos meal. In distinction to the Sadducees, who not only didn't
kindle a flame on Shabbos, they didn't allow any to burn. There is more
peace in the home and the food simply tastes better when you don't sit
in the dark. About the former point, there is an oft-repeated idea that
G-d rewards care in Shabbos lights by bringing peace to the home.
Lighting candles after Shabbos began is a contradiction to the original
intent of the enactment.
Lighting candles other than at the dinner table is relying on a minority
opinion. So, only if necessary, you can light Shabbos candles where
you'll be sleeping.
There is a question whether an electric light would be included in the
original legislation. Someone who is spending Shabbos in the hospital,
though, can rely on that opinion rather than skip lights altogether.
(Lighting a flame in a building that has pressurized O2 and flammables
is prohibited.)
R' Herschel Schachter ruled that today, since we eat by the light of our
dining room fixtures they should be turned on at the same time as the
candles and the blessing made on both.
All this talk about candles aside, my wife lights olive oil each week.
And the chandalier.
Tir'u baTov!
-Micha
--
Micha Berger You will never "find" time for anything.
mi...@aishdas.org If you want time, you must make it.
http://www.aishdas.org - Charles Buxton
Fax: (270) 514-1507
Henry Goodman
____________________________________________________________
Shabbos dinner at shul Friday night? That must be an American minhag, I've
never heard of it. Some shuls here occasionally do a Shabbos lunch.
fla...@verizon.net
Yes, exactly.
Susan
fla...@verizon.net
On 23-Nov-2009, Don Levey <Don_...@the-leveys.us> wrote:
> mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
> > fla...@verizon.net writes:
> >> On 23-Nov-2009, mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
> >>
> >>>>> THE HOME AND FAMILY ARE THE CENTER OF JUDAISM, *NOT* THE SYNAGOGUE.
> >>>> And no one said otherwise, Moshe.
> >>>>
> >>>> The topic is synagogue practice, and we are sticking to that.
> >>> My question is wheher the synagogue practice comes _after_ the home
> >>> and family are living a full Jewish life, or _instead_.
>
> >> You can, technically, lead a Jewish life without the synagogue.
> >> Can you have it the other way around? Should you?
> >
> > I don't understand your question. What do you mean "the other way
> > around"?
> >
> Can you have a synagogue without a Jewish life?
Yes, this is actually closer to what I meant,
even tho' what Cindy said also fit.
Susan
fla...@verizon.net
On 23-Nov-2009, cindys <cst...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
> On Nov 23, 9:29�am, "Steve Goldfarb" <s...@panix.com> wrote:
> > In <hebmo0$1t...@news.eternal-september.org> flav...@verizon.net writes:
> > >On 22-Nov-2009, mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
> > >> THE HOME AND FAMILY ARE THE CENTER OF JUDAISM, *NOT* THE SYNAGOGUE.
> > >> --
> > >AND WOMEN TRADITIONALLY ARE IN CHARGE OF ALL AREAS THAT MAKE ONE
> > >RELIGIOUS
> >
> > Which is why the holiest physical location in Judaism is Moshe's house.
The ley word here being "physical".
> > No, maybe it's David's house. Oh, wait, what's that whole "Temple" thing
> > about then? Where a female high priest goes to everyone's house to make
> > a sacrifice?
> >
And what use is any of that if you don't have women doing
what they do, all year long?
> > Look, there's no question that the home plays a key role in Judaism, and
> > that women have a key role in maintaining the religious traditions
> > within
> > the home.
The egalitarian movement is obviously ignoring this fact,
because it focuses on telling women that they are
marginalized and "2nd class citizens" in a traditional
setting.
> > But I think you two are overstating the case.
No one is overstating the case.
We are pointing out that "egalitarian movements" miss the point
& ignore the fact that women's contributions are *already
greater* than men's.
> > You make it
> > sound
> > like the synagogue has NO role in Judaism - that's certainly not true.
And it's not true that anyone said anything like this.
> > Community is a key element of Judaism, and that community tends to
> > revolve
> > around a rebbe and/or some synagogue or synagogue-like structure.
> --------------
> Agreed. That's precisely the reason why (in O), wannabe converts are
> often mandated to move to a place where there is an O community before
> the beis din is willing to perform the conversion. We (Jews) cannot
> live a full Jewish life in isolation from fellow Jews no matter how
> strictly we observe halacha at home. Jewish communities provide
> synagogues, mikvaos, schools, access to kosher food, etc. all of which
> are fundamental parts of Jewish life.
I tried explaining this to a non-Jew who insisted that my religion
was "weighing me down" - that it was like lead blocks instead of
baloons. I replied that I wanted my feet anchored on the ground,
& not my head in the clouds. He didn't appreciate that, & then
I pointed out that my remark was merely the mirror image of his.
Susan
cindys
snip
>
> I tried explaining this to a non-Jew who insisted that my religion
> was "weighing me down" - that it was like lead blocks instead of
> baloons. I replied that I wanted my feet anchored on the ground,
> & not my head in the clouds. He didn't appreciate that, & then
> I pointed out that my remark was merely the mirror image of his.
And I'll bet his solution for how you could free yourself from this
"lead block" Jewish religion was to accept Jesus as your personal
savior...
Best regards,
---Cindy S.
Steve Goldfarb
>On 23-Nov-2009, cindys <cst...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>No one is overstating the case.
>We are pointing out that "egalitarian movements" miss the point
>& ignore the fact that women's contributions are *already
>greater* than men's.
Y'know, I just realized I don't actually have any idea of your own level
of observance. What do you consider yourself, Susan? e.g., MO, O,
"ultra-O" or whatever term you prefer, etc.?
--s
--
W. Baker
At my shul in NYC at a shul Shbabat dinner event(like Shabbat Channuka)
candles are lit at home and , aside form this, the proceedure is much as
Cindy describes it. On regular weeks there isno candle lighting in the
shul although some married women come to shul because they enjo the
service. There is always a Havdalah at shul and then everyone goes home
and does his/her own.
Wendy Baker
mm
<cst...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>
>What I have seen much more frequently (that makes me sort of
>uncomfortable, although I know it raises valuable funds is the "Yizkor
>plea.") Right before Yizkor (four times per year), the synagogue will
>fundraise for itself or for some other worthy cause (the local Jewish
>school, the local mikveh, Mogen Dovid Adom in Israel, it varies
When I was a second year student at the U of Chicago, it was early in
the school year, which at U or C starts about Ocober 1, but I had
already had a date with a Jewish girl, a first year student. She had
almost never been to shul. I invited her to Kol Nidrei at the local C
congregation.
The rabbi started off, I can remember it clearly, almost but not quite
word-for-word: "When I came to this congregation, they used to ask for
money at Kol Nidrei, but I told them before I was hired that no
congregation where I was rabbi would there be a Yom Kippur plea for
funds, and I kept that pledge, and I have kept that pledge, and I'm
going to continue to keep it tonight, but..." and then he went on and
on about all the things the congregation and the buiding needed that
cost money, and how little money they had, and how much money they
needed. I was so embarrassed in front of her, and so angry and
disgusted with him that he made his words look stupid and phoney, in
front of her.
I don't think they asked for money on YK in Indianapolis, but I might
have forgotten. If they did, I would have warned the girl, so they
didn't or I had already forgotten. So I was surprised too and though
I don't and probably never did much object to asking, it was his
nonsense claim that he wasn't asking that really burned me.
She didn't say anything abou that part. I didn't say anything about
that part. If we said anything at all about shul, I can't remember.
We lasted a few more weeks. She probably never went to shul again.
She was indirect but I think she had cancer.
--
Meir
"The baby's name is Shlomo. He's named after his grandfather, Scott."
mm
What about Kol Nidrei?
fla...@verizon.net
On 23-Nov-2009, cindys <cst...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
Oh, no - not that. I forget if he
was an atheist, or just irrelgious.
He just didn't get it was all.
Susan
mm
<henry....@virgin.net> wrote:
The Joseph and Rebecca Peltz Center for Jewish Life
Serving the Mequon area with every aspect of Jewish Life.
2233 West Mequon Road, Mequon, WI 53092
www.chabadmequon.org So it's Chabad.
yom KiPPur
Sunday, September 27
(day before Yom Kippur)
Shacharis - 6:45 am
mincha - 3:00 pm
Light Candles at Shul - 6:22 pm
Fast begins - 6:35 pm
Kol Nidrei - 6:40 pm
Monday, September 28
(Yom Kippur day)
Shacharis (Yizkor) - 9:30 am
mincha - 4:45 pm
Neilah - 6:15 pm
Fast ends - 7:22 pm
maariv & Havdalah - 7:25 pm
It's a pdf file unless you click on this link:
http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:v7P6t51VCCEJ:www.chabadmequon.org/Article.asp%3FAID%3D984142+%22yom+kippur%22+%22light+candles+at+shul%22&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a
Could that have anything to do with why the capitalization is so
weird. yom KiPPur is one of many many examples.
mm
Why does that matter? Her posts should stand or fall on their own
merits. You'll be better off if you have to evaluate what she and all
of us say without knowing such things.
>--s
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
Another important point. The whole idea of lighting candles is to
have light at the Shabbos table. Since it is forbidden to light
candles _on_ Shabbos, their is a mitzvah to light them _before_
Shabbos begins. That is the way the Shabbos is ushered into the home.
If you light candles _after_ Shabbos has started, it is the exact
OPPOSITE of what the act is supposed to symbolize. <GREAT BIG SIGH>
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
> mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
>> Don Levey <Don_...@the-leveys.us> writes:
>>> mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
>>>> "Adelle" <adstavisa...@invalid.invalid> writes:
>>>>> <mos...@mm.huji.ac.il> wrote in message
snip
>>>>>> THE HOME AND FAMILY ARE THE CENTER OF JUDAISM, *NOT* THE SYNAGOGUE.
>
>>>>> And no one said otherwise, Moshe.
>>>>>
>>>>> The topic is synagogue practice, and we are sticking to that.
>
>>>> My question is wheher the synagogue practice comes _after_ the
>>>> home and family are living a full Jewish life, or _instead_.
>>>>
>>> For many Jews, it's what they know, and what they do.
>>> Participating more in the synagogue presents both the knowledge
>>> and the opportunity to do more at home.
>>
>> Is it presented like that? "Here, see what we do in the synagogue,
>> now go home and do it there as well, if not more".
>>
> In at least some congregations, yes, I've seen it. It's what I
> teach my kids in class, too.
Don, I've asked you so many times and I have to ask you yet again:
"Are you _sure_ you're Reform?" :-)
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
> The point of candle-lighting before Shabbos begins is to have light at
> the Shabbos meal. In distinction to the Sadducees, who not only didn't
> kindle a flame on Shabbos, they didn't allow any to burn. There is more
> peace in the home and the food simply tastes better when you don't sit
> in the dark. About the former point, there is an oft-repeated idea that
> G-d rewards care in Shabbos lights by bringing peace to the home.
>
> Lighting candles after Shabbos began is a contradiction to the original
> intent of the enactment.
I would have written CONTRADICTION.
> Lighting candles other than at the dinner table is relying on a minority
> opinion. So, only if necessary, you can light Shabbos candles where
> you'll be sleeping.
>
> There is a question whether an electric light would be included in the
> original legislation. Someone who is spending Shabbos in the hospital,
> though, can rely on that opinion rather than skip lights altogether.
> (Lighting a flame in a building that has pressurized O2 and flammables
> is prohibited.)
>
> R' Herschel Schachter ruled that today, since we eat by the light of our
> dining room fixtures they should be turned on at the same time as the
> candles and the blessing made on both.
Thanks, for all these details.
> All this talk about candles aside, my wife lights olive oil each week.
I _add_ olive oil to the cup that holds the candle.
> And the chandalier.
I usually light that, but way before candle lighting time.
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
That's what I would have thought should be the question. But that's
not what the words say. FTR, Don also read it as "can you have a
synagogue without leading a Jewish life?"
> Yes, exactly.
And the answer is...?
mos...@mm.huji.ac.il
> On 23-Nov-2009, Don Levey <Don_...@the-leveys.us> wrote:
>> mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
>> >> On 23-Nov-2009, mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> My question is wheher the synagogue practice comes _after_ the home
>> >>> and family are living a full Jewish life, or _instead_.
>>
>> >> You can, technically, lead a Jewish life without the synagogue.
>> >> Can you have it the other way around? Should you?
>> >
>> > I don't understand your question. What do you mean "the other way
>> > around"?
>> >
>
> Yes, this is actually closer to what I meant,
> even tho' what Cindy said also fit.
Umm Susan, you said "Yes exactly" to what Cindy said. I think your
ambiguity has managed to confuse you as well as me. :-)
Susan S
<NOPSAM...@bigfoot.com>:
There are a number of us who have not made that declaration for that
very reason. Thanks for the support.
Susan Silberstein
Henry Goodman
news:06lmg5lo4mfnifdpb...@4ax.com...
they are going to drive to shul they should make a tanai when they light
that they are not yet mekabel Yom Tov and they should say shahechiyanu in
shul.
Henry Goodman
news:2009Nov2...@mm.huji.ac.il...
> Don Levey <Don_...@the-leveys.us> writes:
>> mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
>>> Don Levey <Don_...@the-leveys.us> writes:
>>>> mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
>>>>> "Adelle" <adstavisa...@invalid.invalid> writes:
>>>>>> <mos...@mm.huji.ac.il> wrote in message
>
> snip
>
>>>>>>> THE HOME AND FAMILY ARE THE CENTER OF JUDAISM, *NOT* THE SYNAGOGUE.
>>
>>>>>> And no one said otherwise, Moshe.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The topic is synagogue practice, and we are sticking to that.
>>
>>>>> My question is wheher the synagogue practice comes _after_ the
>>>>> home and family are living a full Jewish life, or _instead_.
>>>>>
>>>> For many Jews, it's what they know, and what they do.
>>>> Participating more in the synagogue presents both the knowledge
>>>> and the opportunity to do more at home.
>>>
>>> Is it presented like that? "Here, see what we do in the synagogue,
>>> now go home and do it there as well, if not more".
>>>
>> In at least some congregations, yes, I've seen it. It's what I
>> teach my kids in class, too.
>
> Don, I've asked you so many times and I have to ask you yet again:
> "Are you _sure_ you're Reform?" :-)
>
It looks as though he is moving in the right direction.
fla...@verizon.net
Exactly.
Susan
fla...@verizon.net
(Oh, yes - thanks, too!)
Susan
fla...@verizon.net
On 24-Nov-2009, mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
> >> Is it presented like that? "Here, see what we do in the synagogue,
> >> now go home and do it there as well, if not more".
> >>
> > In at least some congregations, yes, I've seen it. It's what I
> > teach my kids in class, too.
>
> Don, I've asked you so many times and I have to ask you yet again:
> "Are you _sure_ you're Reform?" :-)
FWIU, the idea of reform is that everyone is supposed
to be able to function oas his/her own rabbi - *&* make
his/her *own* decisions about his/her level of observance.
This makes Don the Poster Child for Reform.
:-)
Susan
fla...@verizon.net
On 24-Nov-2009, mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
> fla...@verizon.net writes:
> > On 23-Nov-2009, cindys <cst...@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
> >> On Nov 23, 9:22�am, mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
> >>> flav...@verizon.net writes:
> >>> > On 23-Nov-2009, mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>> My question is wheher the synagogue practice comes _after_ the
> >>>>> home and family are living a full Jewish life, or _instead_.
> >>>
> >>>> You can, technically, lead a Jewish life without the synagogue.
> >>>> Can you have it the other way around? Should you?
> >>>
> >>> I don't understand your question. What do you mean "the other way
> >>> around"?
> >> ----------
> >> She means "can you lead a Jewish life without a Jewish home?"
>
> That's what I would have thought should be the question. But that's
> not what the words say. FTR, Don also read it as "can you have a
> synagogue without leading a Jewish life?"
>
> > Yes, exactly.
>
> And the answer is...?
A bit of both, actually. Strictly reading it, it should be
"Have a synagogue without a Jewish home",
but the way Cindy read it makes as much sense.
Susan
fla...@verizon.net
On 24-Nov-2009, mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
> fla...@verizon.net writes:
> > On 23-Nov-2009, Don Levey <Don_...@the-leveys.us> wrote:
> >> mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
> >> > fla...@verizon.net writes:
> >> >> On 23-Nov-2009, mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> My question is wheher the synagogue practice comes _after_ the home
> >> >>> and family are living a full Jewish life, or _instead_.
> >>
> >> >> You can, technically, lead a Jewish life without the synagogue.
> >> >> Can you have it the other way around? Should you?
> >> >
> >> > I don't understand your question. What do you mean "the other way
> >> > around"?
> >> >
> >> Can you have a synagogue without a Jewish life?
> >
> > Yes, this is actually closer to what I meant,
> > even tho' what Cindy said also fit.
>
> Umm Susan, you said "Yes exactly" to what Cindy said. I think your
> ambiguity has managed to confuse you as well as me. :-)
(I think I misread what Cindy said at the time, too {-:
Luckily, she's not *wrong*!)
Susan
Don Levey
>
>
> Another important point. The whole idea of lighting candles is to
> have light at the Shabbos table. Since it is forbidden to light
> candles _on_ Shabbos, their is a mitzvah to light them _before_
> Shabbos begins. That is the way the Shabbos is ushered into the home.
>
> If you light candles _after_ Shabbos has started, it is the exact
> OPPOSITE of what the act is supposed to symbolize. <GREAT BIG SIGH>
>
doesn't necessarily correspond to sundown. Therefore, throughout the
year there will be some services (and thus candle-lightings) which will
happen late, and some which will happen early.
My family lights candles at the table on Friday evening, before dinner.
While I do leave early from work on Friday afternoons, there's still a
period of time during the year when I can't leave early enough and still
maintain my job.
--
Don Levey, Framingam MA If knowledge is power,
(email address in header works) and power corrupts, then...
NOTE: Don't send mail to to sal...@the-leveys.us
GnuPG public key: http://www.the-leveys.us:6080/keys/don-dsakey.asc
Don Levey
> On 24-Nov-2009, mos...@mm.huji.ac.il wrote:
>
>>>> Is it presented like that? "Here, see what we do in the synagogue,
>>>> now go home and do it there as well, if not more".
>>>>
>>> In at least some congregations, yes, I've seen it. It's what I
>>> teach my kids in class, too.
>> Don, I've asked you so many times and I have to ask you yet again:
>> "Are you _sure_ you're Reform?" :-)
>
> FWIU, the idea of reform is that everyone is supposed
> his/her *own* decisions about his/her level of observance.
> This makes Don the Poster Child for Reform.
>
> :-)
>
> Susan
Thank you, Susan! How else are my kids going to be able to make that
decision if they don't even know there's a decision to be made?
Steve Goldfarb
>>Y'know, I just realized I don't actually have any idea of your own level
>>of observance. What do you consider yourself, Susan? e.g., MO, O,
>>"ultra-O" or whatever term you prefer, etc.?
>Why does that matter? Her posts should stand or fall on their own
>merits. You'll be better off if you have to evaluate what she and all
>of us say without knowing such things.
They should, but they don't - given the way she posts, I need a better
understanding of her own observance level.
I was thinking about it, and realized that for years to my mind Susan and
Cindy were almost interchangable, I didn't really know who either one was
as a person, and I'd frequently confuse their posts. That's certainly
changed over time, and I have to say that Cindy's recent postings about
her own life and religious philosophy, etc., have been some of the most
touching and significant posts in this NG ever. I really appreciate what
she's shared with us.
Now I'm not saying that it's necessary for each of us to share to that
level. However, regarding observance level specifically, I think many of
us used to react similarly to Cindy's posts (highlighting what we
incorrectly saw as contradictions or whatever) because we didn't really
understand her position. Once she clarified her position, it changed the
way we each can understand her other statements.
That's why I want to know where Susan stands on those issues. I don't need
to know anything about her personal life. However, given her style of
posting, I think it's relevant.
--s
--