This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
It is not so complex for Maimonides, although interestingly, he considered Islam purely monotheistic. There may be other rabbis who have said differently, but what matters is what is being taught as authoritative to the community, not what a less-significant or insignificant rabbi has published.
What is “modern Judaism”? Reform Jews have reformed the tradition. Conservative Jews might have never studied these works. I’ve specified that I am talking about Orthodox Jews, the ones who take the Talmud seriously. There is no “modernization” of Orthodox Judaism. If you believe that it has been modernized since the time of Maimonides, you should be able to find a statement from an important council of Rabbis to that effect, or a book that they consider to be more authoritative than Maimonides. In fact, the most important Rabbi of orthodoxy of our age, Schneerson, who some even believe to be the messiah (really), held up the work I quoted as required reading for all Jews. Did his work have a commentary attached, which described how these rules are no longer in effect? No.
One of the issues here is that Jews aren’t supposed to teach gentiles the Talmud. As, per Maimonides again, if they study the Talmud they deserve to die (Melachim uMilchamot - 10:9) by the hand of God. So the Orthodox are probably not going to share with you everything in their books. But as an experiment, you can write a convincing email to an orthodox authority about these questions, writing in Yiddish as if a yeshiva student, and then see what they reply with, as then they would reply honestly.
I doubt an Orthodox authority would tell you that you’re allowed to attend Torah study unless you are maternally Jewish.
Declaring Maimonides the only Jewish authority who counts is no less arbitrary than the rest of this cherry-picking. Maimonides is a very influential figure historically, yes, but this is the rough equivalent of pointing out that Thomas Aquinas is a Doctor of the Church and therefore declaring that the only thing you need to read to understand Catholicism is the Summa Theologiae. Much of what Maimonides taught was disputed even in his own time - for instance, his thirteen principles were immediately contested by other rabbis and do not enjoy consensus support today.
Moreover, to what extent are Maimonides' teachings even active, living forces in the lives of contemporary Jews? Even a very strict Orthodox Jew does not apply everything ever penned by Maimonides, no less than the most devout tradcath applies everything in Aquinas. Insofar as you are trying to make generalisations about Orthodox Jews today, I think it is necessary to look at what Orthodox Jews actually believe, and how Orthodox Jews actually behave.
Looking at actual behaviour is where I come to when it comes to study. Do Orthodox Jews actually try to prevent non-Jews from studying the Talmud? Really? That does not seem to actually be the case in practice, and I think it is telling that your case otherwise is conspiratorial - you assert that Orthodox Jews are just lying to people all the time. What's more likely? That the entire tradition is engaged in a universal deceit that you've seen through just by reading a book that your own argument would imply should be concealed from you? Or that you're talking nonsense?
Last of all, I am deeply skeptical of you drawing a distinction that excludes Conservative and Reform Jews here, for two reasons. Firstly, in my experience Conservative and to an extent Reform Jews absolutely study Torah, Talmud, and the entirety of their tradition. Secondly, I think that in actual practice yourself and the Motte's other anti-semites (pardon my language, but I do believe it's accurate) do not restrict your criticism of Jews to Orthodox Jews. I think Orthodox Jews are the motte, and you're probably going to go back to the bailey of opposing all Jews.
I never said that Maimonides was the only authority. I said that he is a foremost authority. Not everyone who has obtained the rabbinical title is an authority, or even has his works read in the community. It’s like how not every priest is an authority. But the Rambam (his affectionate title) is read widely and reverently throughout the whole Orthodox community. I have supplied evidence of this in my comments ITT: that when Maimonides conflicts with everyone else in the discussion of idolatry, the Israeli Orthodox student is likely to side with Maimonides; that Rav Schneerson told everyone to read his work; that the relevant quote is taught on the Chabad website. I will add, that in agreement with Maimonides on the question of whether Christians are Avodah Zarah (inexcusably idolatrous, to the effect that punishments may apply barring greater concerns) are the rulings of Joseph B. Soloveitchik (an authority in modern orthodoxy) and Moshe Feinstein (“called the most famous Orthodox Jewish legal authority of the 20th century […] served as president of the Union of Orthodox Rabbis”). If you want a more Motte-like way of ascertaining the ambient view of this issue among the Orthodox, you can search [ christians Avodah Zarah site:judaism.stackexchange.com ] and read the top threads, where the view of Maimonides will be pit or paired with other views.
It’s important to understand why this comparison doesn’t hold. To the Orthodox (I am not 100% certain what the others do), Maimonides is more like their gospel than their Thomas Aquinas. They often skip or minimize the study of the Tanakh (Old Testament) altogether to focus on the Talmud (which they call the Torah) and their primary entry to the Talmud is Maimonides. See 1 and 2. The Talmud isn’t some reference book laying dusty on the shelf, but actually the mainstay of study (and effectively, worship) for the Orthodox. You should peruse the introduction and the influence section of its Wikipedia entry, where you will read (among other things) that Adam Schiff made his congressional oath on a volume of the work I quoted from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mishneh_Torah . The Summa is read in full by maybe .1% of Catholics, but the Mishneh Torah is probably read by a good 80% of Orthodox in full, and 100% who attend a yeshiva.
There’s a difference between actively seeking to prevent, and believing it is punished by death from God and discouraging it. Here’s an example of discouragement: https://www.chabad.org/therebbe/letters/default_cdo/aid/5181010/jewish/Non-Jews-and-Torah-Study.htm
Do you think they are the Parsis of India, or Druze or the Alawites? Are they a cult hosting the Eleusinian Mysteries? We’re talking about the most legalistic religion of all time. Their beliefs are neatly codified and redacted. You can just read them. There is literally no possible mechanism by which a former ruling can be abrogated except by a greater ruling, one by a greater expert or a more recent council, which would be put into writing and read in the yeshivas.
I’m just not familiar with what they do. So I’m abstaining from commenting. But reform has a very easy mechanism for disagreeing with Maimonides, which is the belief in conscience and a greater principle of goodwill. So there’s nothing to criticize wrt reform. I doubt they would agree with Rambam.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link