Sea of Torah

While Rabbi Alan Haber rightly points out that egalitarian minyanim may sometimes circumvent the halakhic process, I think his criticism steps over the line. Jewish legal authorities are certainly "duty-bound to objectively and honestly assess the sources," but halakhic literature (shutim) never analyzes sources in a vacuum. From a woman trying to establish her husband's death, to medieval merchants with warehouses full of beer as Passover approaches, to modern farmers confronted by the sabbatical year, rendering a halakhic ruling requires taking into account the emotional, economic, and political situation of the petitioner.

Moreover, Rabbi Haber questions rulings that have no precedent or rely on a minority opinion. That being the case, how does he justify teaching Talmud to young women at his seminary? Does that ruling emerge from an impassive evaluation of the relevant sources in Tractates Sota and Kiddushin, following precedent and majority view, or does it factor in the mores of modern society?

Unfortunately, contemporary Orthodoxy has become preoccupied with excluding those with slightly more permissive or restrictive views. If an admittedly flawed halakhic process produces a ruling which ultimately draws on genuine sources, should those who follow that ruling be effectively excommunicated?

Leave a Reply