iBelieve: Thoughts on Jewish Topics II

magnifying-glass
Where do I fit? (Peggy Marco – Pixabay)

*Long post….
I am writing an update to my original post iBelieve: Thoughts of Jewish Topics after doing a lot of soul-searching and searching the Torah and Tanakh. Again, this is not meant to be a definitive statement on my beliefs/thoughts about these topics. This is simply meant to be a very shallow look into my ongoing religious-belief process.

Torah

I believe that the Torah was given to Moses. I believe part of the Torah was given on Mount Sinai and the remainder was given from God to Moses during the time in the desert. I am still ambivalent about whether the Torah is the literal word of God or if it is God’s words filtered through man (Moses). While I would very much like to believe that the Torah is the literal word of God I have a difficult time believing that God would simply put Moses in a trance-like state and guide his hand to write the Torah. If Moses did speak “face-to-face” with God and not in a trance-like state (like all the other prophets) then why would this time be any different?

I believe that the Torah was “filtered” through Moses even though God would not permit Moses to completely change God’s words. Moses may not have written exactly what God said to him but he did get the essence of the wording correct. If God spoke of a certain mitzvot (commandments) then Moses wrote them down in an understandable way. If Moses had made any mistake (such as declaring something unclean that is clean) God would not have permitted Moses to write the mistaken mitzvot – thus, the Torah is true to God’s words and not a man-made invention.

With all this being said, I am uncertain as to whether the Torah we have today is the exact same one given to Moses. While it is true that the oldest manuscripts – the Dead Sea Scrolls – agree with the Masoretic text for the most part, they do not agree one-hundred percent. In addition, we do not have a complete text of Torah from the Dead Sea Scrolls to compare to the Masoretic text. I believe that the Masoretes did the absolute best with what they had and I believe the overwhelming majority of the Masoretic text is true and complete but it is not the exact same Torah given to Moses.

The great scholar Ibn Ezra agrees (at least partially) with this theory. He believes that there were six additions to the Torah after Moses wrote the Torah given to him and the Israelites by God. “In some of his comments, he references a secret that he wishes to hint at but not disclose. Ibn Ezra’s never states his meaning explicitly, but his point and his reasoning were later explained clearly by R. Joseph ben Eliezer (Tuv Elem) Bonfils (late 14th cent.), in his commentary on ibn Ezra titled Tzafnat Pa’aneach.

In short, Bonfils explains, ibn Ezra believes that certain biblical passages were not written by Moses. In these terse comments, Ibn Ezra refers to six passages of various lengths.”

1. Genesis 12:6
2. Genesis 22:14
3. Deuteronomy  1:1-5
4. Deuteronomy 3:11
5. Deuteronomy 31:9
6. Deuteronomy 34:1-121

I in no way believe that the Torah was purposefully corrupted – all ancient texts have been changed, not just the Torah. I believe that we must use the Masoretic text as the “official” text of Judaism but we must also realize that there are some holes and some differences with the original Torah given to Moses.

Halakhah

I believe that the mitzvot of the Torah are indeed binding but I also believe that the interpretation of these mitzvot do (and must) change. God gave us all brains and common sense so as our understanding of the Torah and the world in which it was written grows, we must readjust our interpretations. We also must understand that nobody reads and understands Biblical Hebrew fluently.

Halakhah (rabbinic law) is not binding upon any Jew. Halakhah is the human interpretation of Torah mitzvot. I do not believe that an “Oral Law” was given to Moses at Mount Sinai. Yes, there were oral instructions that were later written down but these are not an “Oral Law.” Also, there were oral instructions – such as how to make the Tabernacle – that were not written down. These oral instructions were for a specific task at a specific time and are therefore also not part of an “Oral Law.” The Mishnah – which is really what the term “Oral Law” refers to – is the human interpretation of the Torah mitzvot.

The Mishnah may or may not be the rulings of the Sanhedrin (the court that developed out of the elders from Moses’ time) and therefore may or may not be binding. Since we cannot be sure what is and what is not from the Sanhedrin the Mishnah is not binding upon any Jew. The Gemara (commentaries on the Mishnah) is absolutely not binding upon any Jew. These commentaries are simply human interpretations from men who were not part of the Sanhedrin and, for the most part, did not even live in the Land of Israel.

I believe that the oral arguments and decisions of the Sanhedrin and the latter Rabbis are a form of reformation within Judaism. The decisions and answers were made as a response to specific issues that needed a Torah-based answer while not necessarily directly answered within Torah. These were wise men and men of God but they were not infallible. I believe that modern-day rabbis have the obligation and right to continue in the reformation of halakhah as long as the decisions are based upon Torah and do not deviate from the basis of Torah. I believe that halakhah can be followed as one chooses but it is not binding upon any Jew. I believe that the commentaries from the rabbinic sources are important for background and historical information. They can be valuable when determining how to follow a Torah mitzvah but they are only commentaries and nothing more.

Divorce

A man takes a wife and possesses her. She fails to please him because he finds something obnoxious about her, and he writes her a bill of divorcement, hands it to her, and sends her away from his house… (Deuteronomy 24:1)2

If a man for whatever reason he chooses decides to divorce his wife he must give her a divorce document (get). The Talmud and other rabbinic writings have written extensive halakhah regarding how the get must be written and how it must be given to the wife. If the man refuses to give his wife a get the wife becomes an agunah – a chained woman.

According to Karaites either the man or woman can go to the beit din (Jewish court) and request a divorce. Also, if a man refuses to give a woman a get the beit din can give the woman the get and release her from the marriage.

The Reform Movement does not believe that a get is required – a legally-binding civil divorce document is acceptable. However, in the Rabbi’s Manual there is an option for a “Document of Separation.”3 Reconstrucionist Judaism follows the belief that some sort of Jewish Divorce Document should be used in addition to the civil divorce decree.4 Conservative Judaism, like Orthodox Judaism, requires a traditional get in order for a divorce to be recognized. However, in the Conservative-styled ketubah (marriage document) there is generally a clause – known as the “Liberman Clause” – where the beit din can intervene and give a get to a woman whose husband is refusing to give her a get.5

I believe that according to the Torah, a civil divorce document is completely acceptable and should be considered a fulfillment of the Torah mitzvah. However, I also believe that as a Jew I must also be sensitive to the Jewish community. Even though a civil divorce is completely acceptable according to Torah I also believe that, for the sake of peace within the Jewish world, a get should also be obtained.

Conversion

While conversion is not spoken of – at least not directly – in the Torah or Tanakh it was always an option for the non-Jew. I have already written about the conversion process in an article on my site so I will not go into this extensively.

I believe just as some within the Karaite world believe, based on Exodus 12:48-49, that all one needs to do to convert to Judaism is:6,7

  1. Believe in the Eternal One as the only God and renounce all others.
  2. Believe in the Tanakh as the words of the Eternal One and the only religious authority – renounce all other writings, doctrines, and creeds as words of men.
  3. Study and keep the Tanakh while striving to interpret the Tanakh according to its peshat (plain) meaning.
  4. All males must be circumcised.
  5. All converts must purify themselves and their homes.
  6. A period of learning must take place.
  7. Conversion candidates must refrain from celebrating Passover until their conversion is complete.
  8. Upon finalizing the conversion the candidate must make a public declaration of his/her intent to convert and leave all other faith systems.

However, since I am also part of the wider Jewish community I think that there, out of necessity, must be a longer and more formal process of conversion. I do not believe that one must take a year in order to convert but I also think this should be up to the rabbi and the individual.

According to Rabbinic Judaism conversion includes three things:

  1. Circumcision for the male.
  2. Ablution (immersion) for both male and female.
  3. Proper witnesses as to the conversion.8

Rambam (Maimonides) also speak of these requirements and adds more specifics to them in his Mishneh Torah (M.T. Issurei Biah 14:1-6):

  1. Make sure the person has no ulterior motives.
  2. Remind the person that the Jews are persecuted.
  3. Tell the person the fundamentals of the faith.
  4. Teach the person some of the easy mitzvot and some of the more difficult mitzvot.
  5. Teach the person the curses and blessings of following the mitzvot.
  6. The male must be circumcised.
  7. The male and female must immerse before a Beit Din.9

I see absolutely no problem with either the view of the Talmud or Rambam. This doesn’t mean that the process needs to take an excessive amount of time or money. I also believe that we as Jews must be very open to potential converts and not push non-Jews into the man-made “Noahide Laws.”

We as Jews are commanded to be a “light unto the Nations” and as such we must be actively teaching Torah. We as Jews must be open and welcoming toward those interested in Judaism. We as Jews must actively seek out those who are interested in conversion. I believe that we as Jews should not be shy about spreading Torah to the Nations. I am absolutely for spreading the knowledge of Torah and the beauty and truth of Judaism. I am pro-proselytizing just as our forefathers were in times past. We need to welcome non-Jews into the fold and making sure that those interested in conversion are given the option without undue burdens of time and/or money.

Non-Jews

I reject the idea of the man-made “Noahide Laws.” However, I do completely accept the idea of the Ger. Ger is often translated as “convert” but the vast majority of the term Ger (according to the peshat meaning) in the Torah and Tanakh point not to a convert but to a non-Jew. Most of these passages refer to non-Jews who cling to the Israelites and follow the God of Israel. The term Ger really means stranger or sojourner. Remember that once a person converts, he or she is fully a Jew with all the rights and responsibilities of a Jew.

I realize that in reality this is a matter of semantics but I prefer to use the Torah/Tanakh term “Ger” rather than the man-made term of “Noahide.” The ideas behind Ger and Noahide and all the rules surrounding these statuses are in flux at this point in history. The reasons for this are varied but it is mostly due to the fact that non-Jews and Jews were separated physically and culturally until very recently. The idea of a non-Jew who doesn’t convert yet clings to God, Torah, and the Jewish people was an ancient idea before Israel was destroyed. However, once Rome destroyed Israel and expelled the Jews this interaction was also destroyed. After the Enlightenment, there was an opening for non-Jews and Jews to come together to learn and worship together.

I believe in the Ger but not the term – or restrictions applied to – Noahide. Yes, there must be restrictions in order to keep the Ger from becoming too strict and potentially falling away from God, Torah, and the Jewish people. There are also certain mitzvot that are strictly for the Jewish people (such as Tefillin). However, I believe that the Ger can follow the Torah and perform most of the mitzvot contained therein. I believe that we Jews have a command (a mitzvah) to spread the light of Torah to the world which also includes bringing more non-Jews under the umbrella of the Ger.

What does it all mean?

I started my process toward becoming a Jew in the Reform Movement. I ended up converting under the Masorti (Conservative) Movement after two years of study. After a few years I came to realize that the “Oral Law” was in fact not divine. It was not given to Moses at Sinai alongside the Written Torah. In all honesty, this broke my heart and my will to follow Rabbinic law. Thus, I began my search anew within Judaism.

I spent the last two years loosely attached to the Karaite Movement. While I have learned a tremendous amount from the Karaite Movement I just do not see the reformation that I believe must be a part of the Jewish world. I do not want to just attach myself to the Karaite Movement simply because the Karaites reject the idea of an “Oral Law.” This is not right or fair to me or the Karaites. So my journey continues.

I have approached the idea of returning to Reform Judaism. The Reform Movement is the largest sect of Judaism and offers many great things to Jews and non-Jews. The Reform Movement is part of the Rabbinate world as opposed to the Karaite world. However, this sect also rejects the idea of a divine “Oral Law.” But, this sect also rejects the idea of a divine Written Torah as well. I am also frustrated with the idea that Tikkun Olam/Social Justice seems to have taken over the Movement to the detriment of the Torah. So my journey continues.

I have also thought about becoming affiliated with the Reconstructionist Movement. The Reconstructionist Movement is part of the Rabbinate world as opposed to the Karaite world. However, this sect like the Reform Movement also rejects the idea of a divine “Oral Law.” But, this sect also rejects the idea of a divine Written Torah. While I find a lot of commonality in my own beliefs and this Movement I also have a problem with the Tikkun Olam/Social Justice emphasis and the lack of a personal relationship with God. So my journey continues.

I have also thought of returning to Masorti/Conservative Judaism. Most of my beliefs and actions would still fit in with the Masorti Movement but there is still the issue of the “Oral Law.” Masorti teaches that the halakhah of the Rabbis is binding but this is something I completely reject. On the other hand though, Masorti does teach the divinity of the Written Torah. So will I be satisfied with the Masorti Movement? I am not sure so my journey continues.

I reject Orthodoxy for a multitude of reasons but the beliefs I would accept in Orthodox Judaism are beliefs that I can find across all the non-Orthodox Movements. So, where does this leave me? I am a Jew without a home. The only thing I can absolutely decide is that I do not follow Orthodox Judaism and I am a mix of all of non-Orthodox Judaism. I find myself in need of a community but I do not know where to start looking for my community. Do I go to the Reform shul and make that my community? Do I go back to my Masorti/Conservative shul and once again become a member of that community? I am not sure where I belong – or if I belong – at this point. All I know is that I want to follow Torah and live as God wants me to live.

——————–

1Zev Farber. Seven Torah Passages of Non-Mosaic Origin According to Ibn Ezra and
R. Joseph Bonfils. The Torah, n.d. [http://thetorah.com/non-mosaic-torah-passages-ibn-ezra-and-bonfils/]
2David Stein (ed.). JPS Hebrew-English Tanakh. Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 1999.
3Central Conference of American Rabbis. A Reform Get. CCAR, 1988. [http://ccarnet.org/responsa/narr-369-374/]
4Richard Hirsh. Progressive Approaches to Jewish Divorce: A Reconstructionist Perspective. Ritualwell, n.d. [http://www.ritualwell.org/ritual/progressive-approaches-jewish-divorce-reconstructionist-perspective]
5Sanford Seltzer. The Jewish Way of Divorce. Reform Judaism. n.d. [http://www.reformjudaism.org/jewish-way-divorce]
6Nehemia Gordon. Conversion FAQ. Karaite Korner, n.d.  [http://www.karaite-korner.org/conversion_faq.htm]
7al-Qirqisani Center. An Introduction to Karaite Judaism: History, Theology, Practice, and Custom. Troy, NY: al-Qirqisani Center for the Promotion of Karaite Studies, 2003.
8Halakhah.Com. Yevamoth. Halakhah.Com, n.d. [http://halakhah.com/pdf/nashim/Yevamoth.pdf]
9Eliyahu Touger. Mishneh Torah: Issurei Biah. Chabad, n.d. [http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/960662/jewish/Issurei-Biah-Chapter-Fourteen.htm]