In the discussion at the bottom of the amud about when it is or isn't appropriate to eulogize, the point about eulogizing on Rosh Hodesh is explained by "torah ain tzirhin hizuk" -- if something is from the Torah, then it is assumed to be binding, and therefore does not need a rabbinic rationale. How times have changed. Much of what we do as rabbis is crafting and presenting rationale for observing Torah. In fact, our movement is in the midst of a mitzva project that addresses exactly this issue.
If you didn't read Elliot Cosgrove's article in the latest CJ, it is worth the read. There is an article about it in this week's Jewish week that summarizes it if you want to take a shortcut. It essentially frames the debate that all of us on this blog have begun and clamored for to be talked about more. Simply stated -- how do we synthesize the approaches of Roth and Tucker to create a compelling theology to revitalize the movement.
Is it possible in our world that Divrei Torah will ever not need hizuk? Probably not. In that case, we are the rabbis who have to figure out how to put some hizuk back in them.
Monday, November 5, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
That's all well and good, Micah, and I admire your interest in all the serious stuff, but here's my question: how could you pass up a chance to comment on the Rabbis' hangover dicussion? I mean really, your Michigan diploma is going to get revoked in a moment. A mile walk...a little sleep...that's called sobering up!
Walking a mile? Trust me, that one doesn't work.
Post a Comment