Jewish: October 2007 Archives

The big Jewish story of Summer 2007 was Professor Noah Feldman's now infamous New York Times Magazine article "Orthodox Paradox" (July 22, 2007) in which Feldman critiques Modern Orthodoxy as being inherently and irrevocably inconsistent. The specific "paradox" to which Feldman points is that on one hand Modern Orthodoxy claims to embrace the secular world, yet simultaneously maintains a religious prejudice against it. Feldman cites examples of Jewish particularism in the Talmudic law that Jews do not desecrate the Shabbat to save the life of a non-Jew and through the personal ignominy he faced at his high school reunion having been ostracized due to his intermarriage.

Feldman's article generated some of the most vociferous discussion among the Jewish intelligentsia and throughout the J-Blogosphere, with Feldman being vilified for betraying the Jewish people either for intermarrying or through voicing his critiques in a public forum.¹ While the frenzy has died down since the summer, Feldman exposed a nerve in the Jewish community which still rightfully still agitates many. To address some of those issues and the subsequent reaction, on Thursday October 18th NYU hosted a symposium entitled, "Orthodox Paradox: A Debate on Jewish Values" featuring the eclectic trio of Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, philanthropist Michael Steinhart, and the aforementioned Professor Noah Feldman.

Despite the event's classification as a "debate", there was little collective coherency among the three panelists. Instead of addressing one area of "Jewish values" each panelist discussed his own approach to the question based on his own individual set of values.

One of the most important business commodities, intellectual or material, is the brand name. More than just a logo, a brand name is the symbolic representation of the entire company, implicitly defining the quality and integrity of its products. Building widespread brand name recognition can take several years, let alone correcting a negative impression, but acquiring an established reputable brand name quickly improves a company's legitimacy in the eyes of the public. For instance, Rupert Murdoch's purchasing of the Wall Street Journal gives his new business channel instant credibility (at least in theory).

On a smaller scale, brands can be leased to individuals in the form of franchising. In this system, a small business can leverage an existing brand name and benefit from it's reputation and advertising. However, the corporate office usually dictates uniform policies from products, pricing, and interior design in order to protect its brand and ensure a consistent experience for the consumer.

Religion follows a similar pattern in terms of connecting name recognition to external expectations. We expect Orthodox Jews to keep kosher, observe Shabbat, and follow the laws and ethics defined by Jewish law. The difference is that Orthodox Judaism has no authoritative "home office" to enforce uniform regulations. As such, the religious "franchisees" are left to argue over who has the most authentic characteristics, and in turn discredit and delegitimize their competitors.

Let's look at three recent examples from the world of Jewish news:

I was registered and supposed to attend YU's medical ethics conference on Fertility, Modern Medicine, and Jewish Law this past Sunday but instead paid a shiva call to R. Moshe Tendler, my teacher of two and a half years, and pioneer in the field of Jewish medical ethics. Thankfully, CuriousJew has her typically thorough writeup of the event.

Some quick-hit second-hand thoughts and observations:

• If you ever have the opportunity to hear R. Johnathan Sacks, do so. An exemplar of the "integration" model of Torah U'Madda if there ever was one (and a captivating speaker no less).


• Regarding various fertilization methods, I must cite the classic R. Tendler quote: "You cannot commit adultery with a hypodermic syringe."


• One of the "misconceptions" of infertility attributed to Dr. Richard Grazi is that a pelvic exam creates a niddah. I do not have access to the sources presently, but my father agrees saying that it's really a dispute between R. Yohanan (lenient) and Reish Lakish (strict) in which case we usually follow the teacher. However, he does point out that in a YU shiur he attended, the Rabbi paskened l'humra, apparently buying into the "misconception."


• There was some discussion related to multiple births and viability. This discussion is predicated on the Jewish perception of abortion, a topic into which I will not get. However, I do recall R. Tendler discussing the McCaughey septuplets and praising the family for adhering to their beliefs by not aborting any fetuses.


• The halakhot of shichvat zera levatala are more complicated than simply assur. The Conservative Teshuva on Homosexuality covered many of the nuances despite ultimately punting on the pesak.

Not having been there or having a better command of the subjects, I can't comment further. Hopefully I will not have such a reason to miss it next year.