By Ariel Goldberg
NOTE: This post was written as a response to Rabbi Cardozo’s argument that in order to rediscover the authentic melody in Halacha that has been drowned out over the past few centuries in the process of Halachic psak (legal ruling), the process needs to be consider giving more weight to minority opinions, and more possibility of individual autonomy vis a vis Halacha. Ariel’s suggestion (see below) was adopted by the Think Tank and an experimental model named the “Halacha lab” was initiated in July 2011. Watch this space!
One issue that I have with Rabbi Cardozo’s approach towards Halacha is that I think that few observant Jews are expert enough in Halacha to be able to locate a da’at yahid (minority position) on a Halachic issue and properly learn out its Halachic implications before deciding whether to adapt it in the interest of facilitating an encounter with God. (Incidentally, I include myself in this category, for now, though I hope to get semicha {rabbinic ordination}, eventually).
Be that as it is, Rabbi Cardozo’s approach to autonomy in Halachic decision making resonates for me. I do not want to be confined by the Halachic codes, when there are better Halachic options available for facilitating my relationship with God. The question is how to go about doing it.
I wonder if the solution could lie in a new model of Rabbinics. Let’s imagine someone comes to a rabbi for a psaq (Halachic ruling) and that rabbi has a good general understanding of Halacha although not the expertise necessary to seek out nonstandard Halachic approaches on his own. The rabbi could do the research, prepare sources and then sit down with the questioner to learn them. This would empower the questioner in making his own informed decision.
Now it’s arguable that few rabbis have the time to do that kind of in depth study with someone who comes to them for a ruling. Perhaps this could open the way for new field of Halachic advising to open up. (It could provide much needed work opportunities for underemployed rabbis.)
One other thought, before I go. The Kotzker Rebbe liked to say to his Hasidim, ‘Always ensure that your Shem Shamayim (intention) is really L’shem shamayim (sincere).’ A difficulty I foresee in people making autonomous Halachic decisions is that the danger of them having subconscious, ulterior motives for their Halachic decisions that have nothing to do with serving God Lishma (sincerely) even as they appear to be Lishma (sincere). (This is not to say that these are bad people, only that they are human.) I think it’s vital that one always act in consultation with someone else (male or female) who is learned in Halacha and who has sound judgement. This can act as a double-check on their decision making EVEN if the questioner has the expertise to do it on his own. That said, the final decision should rest with the questioner, as Rabbi Cardozo has outlined.
About Nathan Lopes Cardozo
Rabbi Dr. Nathan Lopes Cardozo is the Founder and Dean of the David Cardozo Academy and the Bet Midrash of Avraham Avinu in Jerusalem. A sought-after lecturer on the international stage for both Jewish and non-Jewish audiences, Rabbi Cardozo is the author of 13 books and numerous articles in both English and Hebrew. He heads a Think Tank focused on finding new Halachic and philosophical approaches to dealing with the crisis of religion and identity amongst Jews and the Jewish State of Israel. Hailing from the Netherlands, Rabbi Cardozo is known for his original and often fearlessly controversial insights into Judaism. His ideas are widely debated on an international level on social media, blogs, books and other forums.
As a Rabbi I have no problem with learning through issues. When approached for a psaq I discuss the ins and outs of the issue with the sho’el (questioner) and give my reasons for leaning one way or another. I have a precedent for teaching through an issue with a sho’el and letting them make up their own mind – in the late Dayan Kaplan of London. He was asked about sunglasses on Shabbat at the end of a shi’ur. He asked the questioner to learn through the passage in Sh’mirat Shabbat K’Hilchata and to look at the citations in the notes (the English version wasn’t up to this part of the process but they were there in the Hebrew version). Then the sho’el asked “So can I wear them?” To which the Dayan replied, “What do you think?” Since the sho’el was in the s’micha (ordination) class this was relevant but I would try to ask it of any Jew with knowledge and ability to make autonomous decisions. The response was clearly – you are allowed to wear them (but must be careful in r’shut ha-rabbim). This was a very strong lesson in providing autonomy to a talmid.
Second example – I was davening in a kollel with my son in my arms – he was a very small baby and it calmed him down. The only other place he could have been was outside screaming. Moreover when he was very small holding him made me feel very close to the almighty. The Rav of the Kollel came running up to me to tell me not to do this – during the amidah. I asked him what his source was and he brought me the de’ah cited in the Mishneh Berurah that you should not hold a jewel during prayer – this being extended to the child. I asked whose p’sak this was and it turns out to be a da’at yachid just like in this case. So I explained that this was not the da’at yachid I was following – and that although one could keep that opinion l’chumrah there was no need to prohibit holding a child during prayer, particularly since it was beneficial to the kavannah of the person holding the child and to the kavannah of those who would be disturbed by the noise if the child were put down.
In short – we have a tendency to hold by what is written down in books without inquiring as to whether the opinion is actually universal or specific. We need to be more discriminating in our application of halacha and to recognize that there are many different approaches, and that this is good for Judaism as Orthodoxy should be about providing an environment where every Jew feels that they have a place within Judaism.