   |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
|
|
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
In my opinion, the central dividing point
between Reform and Orthodox Judaism is over the question of halacha,
that is, Jewish law. The Reform position is much more complicated. First, how do we know what God wants? Reform asserts that every knowledgeable Jew has an equal claim to a personal understanding of what God wants. Therefore, movement-wide agreement is, in principle, not necessary nor desirable, nor probably even possible. We each (if we are knowledgeable about the tradition, if we confront it seriously and take its claims and its wisdom seriously) have the ability, the freedom, indeed the responsibility to come to a [potentially differing] personal understanding of what God wants us to do. But if we are free to choose, what, then, is the point of Torah (and halacha)? For me, and I think for many other Reform Jews as well (though in principle it doesn't matter), it is a record of how our people, in widely differing times, places and societal circumstances, experienced God's presence in their lives, and responded. Each aspect of halacha is a possible gateway to experience of the holy, the spiritual. Each aspect worked for some Jews, once upon a time, somewhere in our history. Each, therefore, has the potential to open up holiness for people in our time as well, and for me personally. However, each does not have equal claim on us, on me. Some (the agricultural laws, for instance) are no longer possible to observe. Others (the sacrificial laws, for instance) come from a social context so foreign to our own that it would be impossible to conceive modern people finding holiness in their revival. Much of the halacha arose in societal settings where distance from the peoples in whose midst we lived was desirable. The "outside" world was dark, dangerous and threatening. That is no longer our situation. We welcome, applaud and are uplifted by much of Western culture. Portions of the halacha whose main purpose seems to be to distance us from our surroundings no longer seem functional. Yet some parts of the halachic tradition seem perfect correctives to the imbalances of life in modernity. Shabbat, for example, reminds us of the importance of balance as we struggle with time. The various ethical imperatives remind us not to make idols of the self. And so on. In those parts of tradition, we are sometimes blessed to experience a sense of God's closeness. In my personal life, I emphasize those areas. And other areas of halacha, I de-emphasize, or sometimes abandon. Reform Judaism affirms my right, our right,
to make those kinds of choices. Written by Rabbi Ramie Arian,
Wexner Heritage Foundation, New York, NY.
Jewish interpretation, and not only the interpretation, but the very agenda of what is of to be interpreted, requires interaction with the real world. Otherwise, we run the risk of creating interpretations that are book-wise but counterproductive in practice. Judaism's interpretive tradition is profoundly conservative by definition. No teacher is permitted, traditionally, to overturn a ruling by a previous sage, unless he is greater in learning. And that is presumed (by definition) to be nearly impossible, since the earlier teacher was nearer (chronologically) to Sinai, and hence presumed to have a more authoritative tradition. Narrow interpretation in that way is profoundly maladaptive in eras of radical social and historical change in the world. Great turning points in history have required courageous, mold-breaking leadership, which was not afraid to interpret the tradition in radically new ways. Such was the generation, for example, of Yohanan ben Zakkai at Yavneh (who enabled Judaism to survive the destruction of the Temple). The 20th century has brought multiple prescedent-shattering crises to the Jewish world. Political emancipation, large-scale confrontation with modernity, the Holocaust, the establishment of Israel: any one of these alone would have been an earth-shaking crisis for world Jewry. To claim, as some of my ultra-Orthodox colleagues do, that the Holocaust happened because Reform Jews in Germany in the 1930's were not sufficiently punctilious in repairing their mezuzot, is insulting, obviously inadequate as an explanation for the historical reality of the Holocaust, and patently a mis-interpretation of the situation. Yet this interpretation comes out of halachically observant, learned sages, and is taught in the name of Torah and truth to thousands of disciples in the Yeshiva world. Is this a more reasonable, more reliable
method of interpretation than what I claim? I aver that interpretation requires knowledge, learning. I aver that no one has the right blindly to "do whatever they want" Jewishly without a solid basis in understanding the tradition. I acknowledge the value of Torah, as it has traditionally been interpreted, as a guiding voice in determining a correct interpretation for today. Yet Torah (as traditionally interpreted)
needs to be in dialogue with modernity (that is, with the modernity
of whatever age it is), in order to make sense of "what
God wants us to do". Written by Rabbi Ramie Arian,
Wexner Heritage Foundation, New York, NY.
Today, Reform exists in Great Britain where it is organized in two movements, the Reform Movement which is slightly more traditional, which arose out of the British Sefardi community in 1840, and the Liberal movement which is more like American Reform, which arose out the the Ashkenazi community in 1905. Almost the opposite development from the the US, interestingly enough. Further there are Reform communities in Holland, France, Switzerland, Belgium, Spain, Austria, Hungary, Czechia, and strong movements are now growing all over the Former Soviet Union and in Germany. You also find Reform in all centers in South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, and in South America like Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Curaçao, Aruba. These communities are joined together in ARZA/World Union for Progressive Judaism with its headquarters in Jerusalem, and in Arzenu (ARZA International), which is the Zionist political arm of the movement, representing it in the World Zionist Organization and the Jewish Agency. You can find all the countries listed on the WUPJ Website, with links to many of the communities' own homepages. Reform also has a number of communities
in Israel, where the growth of the movement is made very difficult
by the political system, where by it is hampered in most ways
of performing the functions of most congregations and excluded
from all government funding which in Israel normally pays for
all rabbis and buildings and other expenses. Any ARZA
representative in your neighbourhood can tell you more, or look
at the IRAC Website. Written by Rabbi David Lilienthal, Amsterdam, Holland.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Have your own question? Ask us!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
What is the "platform" of Reform Judaism,
and specifically what is it about Reform that makes some other
Jews so angry?
There
have, in fact, been three occasions on which major "platforms"
have been published in the name of Reform Judaism: the Pittsburgh
Platform, in 1885; the Columbus Platform, in 1937; and most recently,
a statement (more descriptive than prescriptive) called Reform
Judaism: A Centenary Perspective, promulgated in 1976. The three
make a fascinating study. If you are interested in pursuing this
topic in depth, I suggest you read a book called Reform Judaism
Today, by Eugene Borowitz. The author was the chair of the committee
that developed the Centenary Perspective, and the book is, in
essence, an extended commentary on that 2-page platform.
