Pseudo-Kabbalists try to justify their ways
Kabbalah: The Newest Denomination?

While some consider it a split from Judaism, advocates view growing mystical movement as akin to Conservative and Reform.

Ira Rifkin - Special to the Jewish Week
http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/newscontent.php3?artid=13479
Sunday, December 31, 2006 / 10 Tevet 5767

San Diego

Google “Kabbalah” – the preferred English spelling for Judaism’s mystical tradition – and nearly four million Web pages pop up. But that’s just one way to spell it. Drop one “b” and you get another 1.25 million pages. Spell it “Qabalah” and there’s an additional quarter million. Over at Amazon.com, nearly 6,000 books on the subject are available.

Clearly, Madonna’s not the only one hoping to master Kabbalah’s once-closely guarded esoteric wisdom. She’s just the most famous of the countless individuals, Jews and many more non-Jews, delving into various interpretations of a spiritual path that promises nothing less than full knowledge of divine laws said to underpin the universe, plus techniques for achieving mystical union with the Creator.

Some 100 scholars, teachers, students and practitioners of Kabbalah gathered at a seaside hotel here in an attempt to make sense of Kabbalah’s explosion in popularity. Their only clear agreements were that the phenomenon is incontrollable, that it will continue to grow at breakneck speed, and that it will always be controversial. “We live in the recommendation age,” said Rabbi Yakov Travis, whose Cleveland-based Tiferet Institute sponsored the day-and-a-half conference last week. “There’s so much Kabbalah information out there. There’s more than you can imagine. All we can do is provide guidance.”

To varying degrees, most at the “Kabbalah for the Masses” conference favored Kabbalah’s wide dissemination, although they disagreed over the manner in which it is occurring and the degree to which it should be tied to mainstream rabbinic Judaism. Among those on hand was Rabbi Michael Berg, heir-apparent to the global empire that is the Kabbalah Centre, the non-Jewish Madonna’s spiritual home and the best-known and most controversial of Kabbalah’s non-traditional purveyors.

It was a rare public appearance for Rabbi Berg before a crowd that contained sharp critics of the Los Angeles-based Centre’s methods, in particular its contention that Kabbalah is meant for everyone, Jewish or not. The Centre’s aggressive marketing and pricey courses, products and amulets – including its famous (some would say infamous) red-string bracelets priced online at $26 for a package of seven – also came in for criticism.

Through it all, Rabbi Berg – the son of Rabbi Philip Berg and his wife, Karen, who together grew the Centre to what it is today – stood his ground and maintained his calm. Like it or not, he insisted, the Centre’s approach has antecedents within the broad kabbalistic tradition that give it historical validity equal to that claimed by other approaches. He cited Rav Yehuda Ashlag, a Polish-born Hasid who in 1922 opened in Jerusalem what would evolve into the Berg-run Centre. His untraditional desire to spread kabbalistic knowledge beyond an elite circle was endorsed at the time by important elements of Palestine’s Orthodox establishment.

(In its literature, the Centre also claims connections to kabbalistic writings dating to Adam and the Garden of Eden. Scholars generally agree that the Zohar, Kabbalah’s originating text, dates from 13th century Spain.)

In a brief interview after his presentation, the younger Rabbi Berg said: “We have a lineage like Reform or Conservative or any other stream of Jewish thought.” Kabbalah’s origin within Jewish culture was a divinely planned stepping stone toward its universal dissemination, he argued.

“We don’t want people to become Jewish. We want people to become better people,” he said. “You can’t say God wants his best stuff saved for the Jews.”

In defense of the Centre’s high-priced approach and flashy marketing, Rabbi Berg allowed, “there are times that we might go too far, possibly. But the intention is always good.” Besides, he added, “everybody markets.”

Hava Tirosh-Samuelson, an Arizona State University Jewish history professor, is a harsh critic of the Centre. She followed Rabbi Berg at the conference and rejected his claim of historical validity. She said the Centre does nothing to enhance Judaism and argued that its universalist approach reduces Kabbalah to “a commodity like many other New Age spiritualities” that offer a “plastic reality” in “our age of despair.”

Tirosh-Samuelson acknowledged that non-Jews from at least the Middle Ages on have appropriated kabbalistic teachings for their own spiritual advancement. However, she noted that Christian interest was often a ploy to convert Jews. She worried that Kabbalah’s contemporary spread could lead inadvertently to a similar situation today – although she was quick to add that this was “obviously not Berg’s intention.”

In an interview, Rabbi Travis, a professor at Cleveland’s Siegal College of Judaic Studies, cautioned that if the mainstream Jewish community continues to reject the Kabbalah Centre outright – even as many Jews in the United States, Israel and elsewhere continue to takes its classes and read its books – there is a risk of spawning “another offshoot of Judaism, like Christianity.”

“We must find a way to keep the Kabbalah Centre -- and Jews into Kabbalah in New Age and other settings -- within the community. This can’t be ignored,” he said.

Rabbi Berg’s appearance was the conference’s dramatic highpoint. A distant second was the joint appearance via computer hookups of Rabbi Zalman Schachter-Shalomi, Jewish Renewal’s unofficial spiritual leader, and Rabbi Arthur Green, the former Reconstructionist Rabbinical College dean who now heads the “transdenominational” Hebrew College Rabbinical School in Newton Centre, Mass.

Rabbi Schachter-Shalomi noted that Jewish Renewal has always borrowed “spiritual technologies from other traditions” so why shouldn’t non-Jews borrow from Judaism? “HaShem speaks through other people and to other people also,” he said.

Neither rabbi addressed questions about the Kabbalah Centre directly. However, Rabbi Green appeared to indirectly address the concern raised by others that the Centre and similar approaches trivialize Kabbalah’s many-layered complexities.

Kabbalah, he said, is Judaism’s version of what is commonly referred to as the perennial philosophy that crosses religious boundaries. “Kabbalah is a Jewish way into the deeper level of reality,” he said. But not everything about the tradition is worthwhile, he continued. Historically, some kabbalists expressed “great anger toward the gentile world.” Dubious amulets purporting to provide physical protection have always been a part of Kabbalah, he said.

The primary question, he added, is not who is studying Kabbalah but what they are learning. “What’s happening now is the Jewish people are deciding 200 years [after rationalist movements within Judaism] swept Kabbalah aside and created the notion of mainstream Judaism ... to reclaim Kabbalah for the mainstream ... as an essential part of post-modernity.

“The question is, what are we rediscovering and reclaiming?...I’m all for non-Jews opening to Kabbalah as long as they take the best of Kabbalah and not the worst.”

Rabbi Green was one of many emphasizing that Kabbalah is best studied by non-Jews – or by Jews, for that matter – in a serious manner and with qualified teachers. However, Rabbi Moshe Genuth alone among the two-dozen or so speakers argued flat out that non-Jews should not be taught Kabbalah.

Rabbi Genuth, director of Toronto’s Ba’al Shem Tov Center, came as a disciple of Rabbi Yitzchak Ginsburgh, a Lubavitcher-Chabad Hasid who has aroused controversy within that movement – not least of all because his Website calls him “the world’s foremost authority on Kabbalah.”

Kabbalah, said Rabbi Genuth, is for Jews alone. “The Jewish people are the bride of the Almighty...and in the end you don’t let anyone into your bedroom.” Teaching gentiles Kabbalah “is like a couple exposing their most intimate secrets to the world.”

God’s intention, he went on, is that non-Jews abide by the Noahide covenant, whose seven principles include prohibitions against idolatry, blasphemy, murder, adultery, theft, eating parts of a live animal or its blood, and the directive to establish a legal code. “The Torah was betrothed to the Jewish people [and] the Noahide covenant is a basis for teaching Torah to non-Jews,” he said.

Rabbi Genuth wore the only black hat at the conference. But Rabbi Travis did try to get other fervently Orthodox voices to attend. He particularly wanted more Hasidic participants, for whom traditional kabbalistic thinking is key to their understanding of Judaism and way of life.

However, he said he encountered resistance to sharing a platform with Rabbi Berg from some who feared appearing would lend credence to his position. Others declined to appear publicly with non-Orthodox speakers or women. Rabbi Travis said he is planning private discussions more agreeable to some of those who spurned the public dialogue.

“We’ve planted a seed. Hopefully we can make it grow in many ways,” he said. “We have all these people talking about Kabbalah. Getting them to talk to each other can only be for the good, especially when it comes to the Jewish world...We need to progress from Kabbalah 101 to Kabbalah 501.
- posted by Izak @ 10:04 AM (0) comments

 
Conservatives aligning with Reform yet again, want children of non-Jewish mothers to become Jews, (as they welcome gay rabbis).
Epstein: ‘Rethink’ Ban On ‘Patrilineal’ Kids

Stewart Ain
http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/newscontent.php3?artid=13423
Thursday, December 14, 2006 / 23 Kislev 5767

Saying that children of non-Jewish mothers would benefit from a Jewish day school education, a Conservative leader has proposed that such children be admitted to the movement’s Solomon Schechter Day Schools with the understanding that they are expected to eventually convert to Judaism.

“We do not now accept non-Jews, but the practice has been that they are taken in as long as they are converted by the end of the first year,” said Rabbi Jerome Epstein, executive vice president of the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism. “I think we need to rethink that. If we want to encourage people to raise a Jewish child, the child has to be exposed to Judaism. If we say beforehand the child has to be converted in a year,” it is too restrictive.

“It may take 18 months or two years [for the child to convert],” Rabbi Epstein argued, “and if we set an arbitrary deadline it might be unproductive.

Rabbi Epstein made his proposal at a meeting of the Solomon Schechter Day School Association’s convention in Boca Raton, Fla. It is seen as part of the movement’s increased effort to reach out to the growing number of intermarried families.

“The whole family will benefit from the child’s education and in most cases it will inspire the children to identify with Jews,” Rabbi Epstein said in a phone interview. “If they have a close relationship with Jewish friends, it would be helpful and their families would benefit too.”

“We need affirmative action to reach out to these children,” he continued. “We don’t want our schools populated by children who are not halachically Jewish [according to Jewish law], but if we say this is the goal and if it takes longer than a year, that should not be the issue. The issue is how you make the school welcoming to them so that they are not pressed the first week to talk about [conversion].”

Asked how the subject should be addressed, Rabbi Epstein said that during a meeting with the child’s parents they should be told that “our school is for Jewish children and this is a conversation we are going to have” until the child is converted. He said that although no time limit should be set, he believed the conversion must take place before the child’s bar or bat mitzvah.

Rabbi Epstein said he hoped this proposal would be positively considered and eventually adopted by the association.

“What we are trying to do is open it more so that we can get people into Jewish life differently than we did in the past,” he said.

----

San Francisco Schecter Schools To Admit 'Patrilineals'?

Sue Fishkoff
JTA Wire Service
http://www.jewishtimes.com/News/6143.stm

DECEMBER 13, 2006
San Francisco

The Conservative movement's Solomon Schechter day schools are considering changing their bylaws to admit the children of non-Jewish mothers, JTA has learned. The 76 Schechter schools in the United States and Canada officially only admit children who are Jewish according to the Conservative movement's interpretation of Jewish law, which means children born to a Jewish mother or those who have converted.

Most schools do admit children who are in the process of converting, but they do so quietly, on a case-by-case basis.

The proposed change, which will be circulated in draft format Sunday at the Solomon Schechter Day School Association's convention in Boca Raton, Fla., would permit, but not require, schools to admit such children openly.

The new policy would require that the child convert before bar or bat mitzvah age, but it would be up to individual schools to determine how long that process should take.

The move is part of the Conservative movement's increased efforts to reach out to its growing number of intermarried families.

After years of resisting more inclusive outreach policies urged by its liberal wing, the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism -- the movement's congregational arm -- seems to have taken the reins of a movement in flux and is steering it in the direction of greater openness.

The discussion also comes as the Conservative movement's highest legal authority paved the way for same-sex commitment ceremonies and the ordination of gay and lesbian rabbis.

Movement leaders said the day-school proposal should not be seen as a first step toward accepting patrilineal Jews, which is the term for children of Jewish fathers and non-Jewish mothers.

The Reform movement's acceptance of such children, as long as they were being raised Jewish, set off a furor among non-Reform Jews. Conservative authorities said the decision would lead to further schisms among the movements.

One expert in Jewish education said the proposed change for the Schechter schools would "end the "culture of dishonesty" of the current admissions practice, which "makes the patrilineals into closeted Jews."

The intensified outreach efforts date back to the United Synagogue's Boston biennial in December when Rabbi Jerome Epstein, the group's executive vice president, announced a movement-wide kiruv, or "ingathering" initiative, to make intermarried families more welcome in Conservative institutional life. The ultimate goal is still for the non-Jews in those families to convert, but the initiative signaled the leadership's awareness, in their view, that a welcoming attitude toward such families is needed and proper. "It's part of the broader pattern of nurturing whatever Jewish spark there is rather than inadvertently dampening that spark," said Rabbi Avis Miller of Congregation Adas Israel in Washington, who chaired the Conservative rabbinical association's outreach committee in the 1990s.

Early this year, Epstein began urging Schechter schools to relax their admissions policy. He plans to address the convention day school delegates in Florida, "passionately urging" them to accept the proposed bylaw change. A final decision will be made after the convention by the association's board of directors.

"Some people say it's a weakening of standards. Absolutely not," Epstein said. "It's counterproductive to say to people who want to raise their children as Jews that they can't come to receive a Jewish education. Studies indicate that people choose Judaism in part because of knowledge and in part because of relationships. What better place to form a strong Jewish relationship than day school?"

Elaine Cohen, United Synagogue's consultant to the Schechter schools, said it's about "reframing current policy in more inclusive language." She said the most substantive change being proposed is an extension of the time a family has to convert the child.

"We think it has to be before bar or bat mitzvah, preferably by age 10, but we're not going to say it has to be done within two or three years," Cohen said. "We'll leave it to the discretion of the school."

Miller questioned whether the lack of a unified national policy would work. She noted a hypothetical case: What if the child of a non-Jewish mother transfers from one Schechter school to another and faces a different conversion deadline?

She also foresees conflicts between day schools and other Conservative institutions that might not accept patrilineal Jews.

"A synagogue might say to participate in our programs the child has to be Jewish," Miller said. Still, she added, "I wish them luck."

Last week, Rabbi Ismar Schorsch, the outgoing Jewish Theological Seminary chancellor, made a similar appeal to the movement's Ramah summer camps, which also do not openly admit children of non-Jewish mothers. Rabbi Mitchell Cohen, director of the National Ramah Commission, said the camps have not yet decided whether to change their admissions policy since Schorsch's appeal, although like Schechter schools, they "work closely with individual families if the children are under bar and bat mitzvah age, and if they agree that camp will be an important part" of their conversion process.

Cohen said the proposed changes to the Schechter admissions policy should not be seen as steps toward recognizing patrilineal descent, although he acknowledged that "some people might see it that way."

The end goal is quite clear, he said -- the child must formally convert to Judaism. It's just the warmth of the initial embrace that is changing. Some Conservative rabbis and Schechter school directors around the country say it's about time for change.

"It's long overdue," said Rabbi Lavey Derby of Congregation Kol Shofar in Tiburon, Calif. "There are a great many religiously committed Jews who marry non-Jews for a variety of reasons and want to raise Jewish children." At least one Jewish education expert outside the Conservative movement warned darkly about "a big backlash" from the movement's conservative wing when the proposed change is announced.

But even those Conservative leaders who are more circumspect note that leaving the decision up to individual schools means no change is required, and certainly not right away.

"I don't see it as changing our admissions policy very much," said Marci Dickman, head of school for the three campuses of the Solomon Schechter Day School of Metropolitan Chicago. Like other Schechter schools, the Chicago school works with children who are "on their way to conversion," but she noted that such cases "don't come up that often, and when they do, we and the family want the child to convert."

Some schools, on the other hand, are going beyond the proposed changes. In St. Louis, the city's 12 Conservative rabbis have been working since September to create a unified policy for their Schechter school "that would be acceptable to us as rabbis and livable for our school," said Rabbi Carnie Rose of B'nai Amoona.

The policy, sent to the school board this week, specifies that the school will accept a child of a non-Jewish mother up to the age of bar or bat mitzvah. The child will be assigned a rabbinic mentor who will work closely with the family, "so it will not come as a surprise" that the child will be asked to convert by age 12 or 13, or else leave the school.

"There's a difference between pre-bar mitzvah, when it's 'all for the sake of hinuch,' " or education, "and post-bar mitzvah, when you take on the yoke of the commandments," Rose said.

The school would also admit children of non-Jewish mothers after bar mitzvah age, with the stipulation that they must convert within a year.

Ultimately, although the focus of this weekend's debate in Florida will be narrow, the conversation goes beyond how many years to allow a non-halachically Jewish child to remain in a Conservative school before conversion, and addresses how the Conservative movement looks at the role of a day school education.

How much, asks the Ramah Commission's Cohen, should a Schechter school be seen "as a subtle inducement to the child and the family" to consider formal conversion, in which case a more open admissions policy is appropriate? Or is it more important to safeguard movement standards unapologetically?

The debate goes to the heart of a Conservative day school's identity, said Arnold Zar-Kessler, head of the Schechter day school in Newton, Mass. While he personally "looks favorably" upon the proposed change to the bylaws, he said that making such a change to the school's admissions policy "might be inconsistent with how we see ourselves within the tradition" of Conservative Judaism.

But pointing to last month's study of Boston's Jewish community, which showed that 60 percent of the children of itermarried families were being raised as Jews, he said, "It may be that we have to reflect a different reality as time goes on.''

This article appears courtesy of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, at www.jta.org

----

Background: Interesting times ahead for the Conservatives

Matthew Wagner,
THE JERUSALEM POST
Dec. 7, 2006
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1164881836637&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Doomsayers will argue that Wednesday's Committee of Jewish Law and Standard's decision is the beginning of the end for the Conservative Movement.

They predict that the Dorff, Nevins Reisner decision, a legal motion which gave full normalization of the status of gay and lesbian Jews - which means they can be ordained as clergy and their committed relationships may be recognized, although not as sanctified marriage - will split the movement into two distinct groups consisting of liberals and conservatives.

The liberals will eventually join the Reform Movement, while the conservative arm will band together with modern Orthodoxy.

However, this pessimistic prediction ignores basic theological differences among the three streams of Judaism. Fundamental issues such as patrilineal descent (accepted by Reform Judaism) and a radically different understanding of the role of halacha (Jewish law) in Jewish life create distance between the Reform and Conservative movements.

A great divide also separates modern Orthodoxy from Conservative Judaism. Except for Orthodox thinkers such as Rabbi David Hartman, the vast majority of Orthodox rabbis view halacha in a radically different way than do their Conservative counterparts.

In fact, the same sort of doomsday conjecturing, which never materialized, went on during the debate over the ordination of women two decades ago. Then too conservative elements argued that the ordination of women would be the demise of the Conservative movement.

In contrast, more liberal elements within Conservative Judaism argue the exact opposite. They say the CJLS decision to recognize the Dorff, Nevins Reisner opinion is Conservative Judaism's saving grace. It brings the movement up to date with developments in the secular world.

Over the past several years, there has been - as a recent Los Angeles Times op-ed put it - a "global warming" to gay commitment ceremonies. South Africa recently joined the Netherlands, Belgium, Canada and Spain in opening civil marriage to same-sex couples, allowing them equal economic benefits, legal rights and social status as families. In Israel, the Supreme Court recently recognized same-sex civil marriages performed abroad.

Within the Conservative movement, there are strong forces advocating change. Large numbers of Conservative Jews, especially among the younger generations, want a more progressive approach to homosexuality. The popularity of Keshet, a pro-gay rights movement within Conservative Judaism, is a sign of this sea change in the movement.

Wednesday's verdict will have ramifications on different levels. The decision regarding ordination relates to the institutional level.

Each of the Conservative movement's rabbinical schools will have to decide admission policy. Will "out" gays and lesbians be accepted to their schools? These institutions have the option, in accordance with Conservative practice, of choosing one of the two more conservative opinions that reject the ordination of homosexuals or opting for the more liberal opinion.

One of these rabbinical schools, the University of Judaism in Los Angeles, has already announced that if the CJLS approves the Dorff, Nevins, Reisner opinion, it would immediately open its doors to homosexuals. In contrast, the Jewish Theological Seminary will take a more cautious approach. It said it would begin a decision-making process to determine admission policy.

Meanwhile, on the community level, each Conservative rabbi will have the freedom to decide whether or not to conduct same-sex commitment ceremonies.

For Israel, the CJLS's decision has set the ball rolling. Leading members of the Masorti Movement have already announced that they would not be bound by the CJLS's decision.

"The US has completed a process and we are just beginning ours," said Rabbi Barry Schlesinger, president of the Masorti (Conservative) Movement's Rabbinic Assembly Wednesday evening.

"We cannot simply accept the US decision. Everybody here wants a separate, transparent and serious halachic effort here in Israel. We have to be honest with our constituency."

Nevertheless, the fact that the CJLS approved a more progressive opinion has put more pressure on Israel. If the CJLS had simply upheld the status-quo, Israel, which is perceived as more conservative than the US, would probably not have been expected to be on the cutting edge of change. But now Israel will be forced to formulate an opinion.

Most of the leading figures in the Masorti movement oppose change. People like Rabbi David Golinkin, president of the Schechter Institute, and Rabbi Einat Ramon, dean of the Schechter Rabbinical School, are strongly opposed to change. Schlesinger is also for maintaining the status-quo, as is Moshe Cohen, head of the Masorti movement.

In theory, Israel could decide to reject the normalization of homosexuality like it rejected the US Conservative practice of driving on Shabbat.

But no one knows yet how many of the members of the Israeli Rabbinical Assembly are for change. Only a few, like Rabbi Andy Sachs, director of the Rabbinical Assembly and Rabbi David Lazar, who heads the Tiferet Shalom congregation in Ramat Aviv, Tel Aviv, are outspokenly in favor of change. Lazar has been conducting same-sex commitment ceremonies for over six years.

In the coming months, both the Rabbinical Assembly and Schechter are planning conferences that will focus on the issue of homosexuality as preparation for a final decision-making process. In the meantime, a heated debate will be launched in Israel the outcome of which is still unknown. But it is safe to say that interesting times await the Masorti Movement.
- posted by Izak @ 5:56 PM (0) comments

 
Conservative Judaism welcomes homosexuality into its ranks
Conservative Jews to vote on whether to ordain gays as rabbis
By Shmuel Rosner, Haaretz Correspondent
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/797390.html
Wed., December 06, 2006 Kislev 15, 5767

Twenty-five Conservative rabbis began a thorny debate on Tuesday on the
place of homosexuals in their movement. The debate will continue on Wednesday, in the hopes of reaching a decision, but regardless, a press conference has been called for noon. Rabbi Joel Meyers, executive vice president of the Rabbinical Assembly, said he finds it hard to believe that a decision will once again be postponed, as it was when the assembly first discussed the issue several months ago. The rabbis must decide: Can homosexuals become Conservative rabbis and cantors? Can Conservative rabbis cbonduct same-sex commitment ceremonies?

The Conservative Movement -once the largest Jewish movement in America, but now steadily shrinking- has been debating the issue for some time. In 1992, it rejected proposals for homosexual equality, but since then, the pressure has intensified. The problem, explained one Rabbinical Assembly member, is how to explain rabbinic decisions to Conservative laymen, many of whom "don't understand the halakhic issues involved. They live in a liberal society, and they simply want us to change the laws, just as America changed its laws to give homosexuals equal rights."

Anne Kaiser is one of those who favor such a change. Not that she wants to be a rabbi she likes her job as a Maryland state legislator, to which she was reelected last month as an avowed lesbian. And she said that her rabbi gave her to understand that she and her partner could hold a commitment ceremony in the synagogue, regardless. Nevertheless, she would like to see it official.

For opponents, however, such a radical break with tradition is not only
unacceptable, it could also even be grounds for leaving the movement. This is the most divisive debate the movement has experienced since its debate 30 years ago over equality for women.

Rabbi Joel Roth, who formulated the movement's 1992 opinion against any change in the status of homosexuals, said at the time he simply could not identify any halakhic loophole that would permit such a change and because the Conservative Movement defines itself as a halakhic movement, such a decision would require some basis in the religious sources.

"An inability to legitimate homosexuality halakhically makes no negative claim whatsoever about the humanity, sanctity, worth and dignity of homosexuals," he stressed in a lecture on the subject. But the Torah's blunt statement on homosexual relations that a man lying with another man as he would lie with a woman is an "abomination" (Leviticus 18:22) leaves no wriggle room, say Roth's adherents.

The Rabbinical Assembly's Committee on Jewish Laws and Standards that will vote Wednesday in New York, however, is not that of 1992: Only nine of its 25 members are the same. Meyers said the current committee maintains a balance between "liberals" and "conservatives," but acknowledged that the generational change might also have changed the meaning of these terms, which in turn could result in a different outcome at Wednesday's vote.

Opponents of Roth's view argue that the Torah prohibition, as well as subsequent rulings by the rabbis, related to a different time and a different type of homosexuality. The Torah, they say, banned what existed then, but could not have banned today's homosexuality, because the current incarnation of same-sex relations is an invention of the modern world.

"Sex, in antiquity, was an activity, not an orientation," explained Rabbi Bradley Hartson, one of the advocates of this view. "The meaning of the activity was determined by its context. In the case of same gender sex, that context was always one that treated a human being as an object, or [one] of oppression." And that, he argues, differs from today's model of consensual, caring, same-sex relationships.

"The rabbis were never at a loss for ways to transform or circumvent a biblical institution when later on it came to be viewed as ethically unjustifiable," added Rabbi Howard Handler.

Five different rabbinical opinions have been submitted to the committee for consideration, ranging from no change through limited rights to complete equality for homosexuals. This gives the panel some room to maneuver, and the prevailing view is that it will opt for a compromise: It will adopt one opinion that forbids homosexual ordination and same-sex commitment ceremonies, and another that permits them.

The rules make such an outcome possible: The committee requires a majority of 13 to adopt a binding ruling, but only six votes in favor are needed to adopt a "responsum" defined as one possible interpretation of a halakhic issue, but not the only one. Thus the committee is widely expected to adopt two contradictory responsa but no binding ruling. That way, each Conservative congregation could decide for itself.

"Talkback" :

Simshalom:

Conservatives go the way of Reform and the middle ground caves in

As Conservatives are determined to keep up with Reform, lady rabbis & acceptance of gays, the day will surely come when the Reform and Conservative movements will merge because there will be nothing separating them.

But where will many tradionalist Conservative rabbis & Jews caught in this frenzy of the "urge to merge" go? They`ll be stranded and it won`t be easy for them to fit in with Orthodoxy, even with Modern Orthodoxy, because all the brands of Orthodoxy place the Shulkhan Arukh, Halakha and the 613 Mitzvot at the center of their lives avoiding the mass confusion that results in the constant watering-down and alteration of Judaism as it has been practiced for hundreds (actually thousands) of years.

To the Conservative rabbis who claim that "times have changed" so that gays can now be accepted: What about Maimonides who said that the Torah will never change? What`ll you sanction next? Interfaith unions since the gentiles are "nicer" in America today? Eating pork as in Reform?...

----

Testing The Waters On Gay Ordination.

Before JTS’ Eisen makes final decision, thousands of Conservative Jewish leaders to be polled on views of controversial issue.

Stewart Ain - Staff Writer
http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/newscontent.php3?artid=13421
Thursday, December 14, 2006 / 23 Kislev 5767

As the Conservative movement began grappling this week with the implications of the landmark Law Committee ruling paving the way for gay ordination, thousands of Conservative Jewish leaders are to shortly be polled for their opinion on the issue.

Steven M. Cohen, a sociologist commissioned by the Jewish Theological Seminary to conduct the survey, said several thousand Conservative Jews — synagogue presidents, their rabbis and other Conservative Jewish leaders — would be invited to complete a 60- to 70-question online survey “revolving around this one matter.” But he said there would also be questions about the person’s views of Conservative Judaism “to understand their answers to the central questions.”

“Their age, gender, region [of the country in which they live] and theological stance will also be important variables that will help us understand the results,” Cohen said.

He said he hoped to have the survey results by the end of January.

Arnold Eisen, the seminary’s chancellor-elect who will ultimately make the decision about whether to admit gays and lesbians to the rabbinical school, was unavailable for comment. But he said in a message posted on the seminary’s Web site that the results of the Cohen survey would be “in hand” before the decision is made. He said he also planned to meet with the heads of the Conservative movement’s four other rabbinical schools — in California, Argentina, Jerusalem and Budapest — “for a frank airing of the matter.”

In addition, Eisen said the deans of student life and the seminary’s five schools “will continue to consult and plan for both possible outcomes of this process.” And he noted that the seminary’s students and faculty would also have a chance to weigh in “over the next month or so.”

Benjamin Gampel, chair of the faculty’s executive committee, said the 55 full-time faculty members have met on this issue since November and expect to meet again in mid-January.

“We’re here to tease out the educational implications of the legal decision,” he said, adding that the January meeting would be a chance for the faculty to voice “reflected thought and opinion.”

Gampel said that after all views are aired, the matter might come to a vote or there might be an attempt to achieve a consensus. “We’re going to see,” he said. “We’re bringing the ball up slowly. We want to bring everybody on board. American society is split [on this issue]; we might be able to achieve a consensus.”

Asked how important the faculty’s opinion would be, Gampel said that although “ultimately it is the chancellor’s decision, if the faculty’s consensus was strong in one direction ... it would be advisory with heft.”

Burton Visotsky, a professor of Talmud and rabbinics at the seminary, said he believed a “good majority of the faculty ... would think for educational and administrative purposes that we should be admitting gays and lesbians.”

Among those anxiously awaiting Eisen’s decision is Aaron Weininger, 21, of Scarsdale, who said he is an openly gay student who will be graduating in June from Washington University in St. Louis and would like the option of applying to the rabbinical school at either the seminary or the University of Judaism in California, the other Conservative rabbinical school in the United States.

“I grew up in the Conservative movement and went through the Solomon Schechter school ... and to Camp Ramah in Wisconsin last summer,” he said. “I was president of my USY chapter at Beth El Synagogue in New Rochelle and I’m the High Holy Day cantor for the Conservative minyan on campus. So I’m pretty involved; the Conservative movement is my home.”

Rabbi Joel Meyers, executive vice president of the movement’s Rabbinical Assembly, met in Berlin this week with Conservative rabbis who serve congregations or other institutions in England and Europe. He said those from England said their congregants were like those in America — very interested in the issue and holding mixed views.

Rabbi Meyers said the rabbis working in Europe told him that their communities are conservative and would not support a change.

“It sounds to me like their view parallels [those] in the Toronto area of Canada,” he said.

Paul Kochberg, chairman of the regional presidents of United Synagogue and president of its Canadian region, said he was “aware there is discontent among synagogue leaders in the Toronto area over the general direction of the movement, and this decision would exacerbate that concern. ... I’ve heard talk in the abstract about a split [from the Conservative movement]. There is talk about it.”

But he pointed out that there are liberal, egalitarian Conservative congregations in some other areas of Canada, including eastern Canada. There will be a meeting in Toronto on Jan. 8 of local Jewish leaders to “talk about the direction of the movement and where we are going,” Kochberg said.

In its decision, the 25-member Law Committee on Jewish Law and Standards voted last week to approve two legal opinions — one that upholds the current ban on gay ordination and same-sex unions and the other permitting both. Members voted on each opinion separately, and each opinion received 13 votes.

Rabbi Adam Kligfeld of Congregation Eitz Chaim in Monroe, N.Y., said he voted for both opinions because “it was important for me that change happen as a result of a majority of the committee.”
“I had not decided anything with certainty until a half-hour before we voted, and I had been thinking about this issue nonstop for years,” he said. “I could not have been more pleased with the result — with the deliciously paradoxical vote and that each passed by a majority. I’m glad it turned out that way.”

Rabbi Ira Stone, spiritual leader of Temple Beth Zion-Beth Israel in Philadelphia, said he would have preferred adoption of the most liberal opinion, which would have approved of homosexual behavior without any caveats. The opinion approved sanctions gay ordination and same-sex unions but still retains the biblical prohibition against anal sex. Rabbi Stone questioned why it was necessary to retain that biblical prohibition since, he said, he believed that all members of the Law Committee believed the Torah was revealed by God to Moses and not dictated to him.

“My complaint is that there is no theological clarity,” he explained. “If we have a theology that does not support the idea that we are in possession of God’s exact words, then by implication we are in possession of human responses to God’s presence, which by virtue of being human is flawed.” But he said he believed the decision permitting Conservative rabbis to perform commitment ceremonies clears the way for him to perform actual weddings of gay and lesbian couples.

“The language of the [opinion] indicated some kind of celebration, and I am interested in doing some kind of sanctification,” he said. “I’m not adverse to calling that marriage.”

Asked the difference between a commitment ceremony and marriage, Rabbi Stone said they are different in terms of ritual.

“I would want to use a chupah and an act of what we call kidushin [holiness] on some level,” he said. “I don’t want to end up being marrying Sam, but I’d be open to any couple [wishing to marry] whether or not they are members of this congregation.”

Rabbi Meyers said he did not know of any Conservative rabbi who has married a gay couple.

“Whenever I tracked down rumors, it turned out not to be the case,” he said. Rabbi Jerome Epstein, executive vice president of the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, said that in light of last week’s ruling, he would be discussing with his lay leadership the possibility of changing the organization’s policy regarding the hiring of staff.

“We require people who are role models to be shomer mitzvoth [in compliance with Jewish laws], and until now we said that a person who is gay or lesbian would not qualify to fill those positions because they did not behave in a way that conformed to halacha [Jewish law],” he said. “We are talking about regional youth directors and regional directors and staff for summer educational programs and directors of our youth and social action department.”

----

Masortis Ponder Gay Ruling’s Impact.

Conservative sister movement says it is not bound by U.S. rabbis’ ruling.

Michele Chabin - Israel Correspondent
http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/newscontent.php3?artid=13399
Thursday, December 14, 2006 / 23 Kislev 5767

Jerusalem — As the small but growing Masorti movement in Israel digests the landmark ruling by its sister movement in the United States to ordain openly gay and lesbian rabbis, Masorti officials are suggesting this week that the decision could pave the way for a new way to think about Jewish marriage.

And that could put the movement here in a bind.

“This is a huge issue,” Rabbi Einat Ramon, dean of the Schechter Rabbinical School in Jerusalem, said of the Conservative movement’s Committee on Law and Standards vote in New York last week. “Ultimately, this is leading to the redefinition of Jewish marriage.”

Exactly what comprises a Jewish marriage is a highly charged subject in Israel, Rabbi Ramon says, because many people who define themselves as Jews are not considered Jewish under Orthodox Jewish law, and consequently cannot be married by an Orthodox rabbi – the only kind of rabbi officially recognized in Israel.

“There are many people whose fathers are Jewish and who came under the Law of Return and serve in the army,” Rabbi Ramon notes. “They consider themselves Jews but halacha does not. The Masorti movement cannot marry them because of a 1986 decision by the Conservative movement’s International Rabbinical Body” rejecting patrilineal descent as the criteria for Jewishness.

If the Masorti Law Committee decides to follow the Conservative committee’s lead on the gay issue, “they will ask why our rabbis will marry two men or two women but will not marry people of patrilineal descent who are de facto Jews. Israelis would ask how a movement like this could be halachic. In Israel, ideology is very important,” Rabbi Ramon says.

Given Israeli society’s generally conservative bent (Tel Aviv and its suburbs being the exception), the Jerusalem-based Masorti movement is expected to take its time in adopting a position on gays and lesbians.

Much is at stake, not the least of which is the Masorti movement’s image in Israel, where it considers itself a homegrown institution. Despite its meager budget and the fact that its rabbis have no legal standing in Israel, the Israeli movement’s synagogues are vibrant and its rabbis sought out by people, including engaged couples and new parents, seeking a non-Orthodox alternative.

In a press announcement released during the Conservative movement’s deliberations, the Masorti movement in Israel said it “sees itself as a sister movement of the Conservative movement” and also “a movement that stands independently.”

“Officially, we’re independent of them, though we rely on their donations,” said Rabbi Ramon of the American Conservative movement. “There was a Zionist decision from the beginning that our Israeli Law Committee would make its own decisions and that the American Law Committee would make its decisions.”

Early next month, the Schechter Rabbinical School and the Masorti Rabbinical Assembly will each hold a study day devoted to their sister movement’s decision.

“This is not a decision that should be taken solely by me or Rabbi David Galinkin,” Rabbi Ramon says, referring to the president of the Schechter Institute of Jewish Studies and chairperson of the Masorti Law Committee. “It needs to be referred to a larger rabbinic body of Israeli Masorti rabbis, either to the Law Committee or the entire rabbinic membership of the Israel Rabbinical Assembly.”

Alice Shalvi, a leading Israeli feminist and former rector and president of the Schechter Institute of Jewish Studies, lauded the “serious thought and deliberation” Conservative decision-makers in the U.S. gave to the gay issue.

“The ambiguity of the decision shows a greater openness than a simple favorable, pro stance. I hope the Israeli Law Committee will follow suit because it’s just as big an issue here as it is there,” Shalvi says.

While the decision by the Conservative movement’s Committee on Law and Standards has sparked a great deal of heated debate within the Masorti/Conservative establishment in Israel, and garnered kudos from the gay and lesbian community, it appears to be of limited interest to most heterosexual Israelis.

“I certainly haven’t been hearing about it in the cafes and taxis,” says Jerusalem Report columnist Stuart Schoffman, a close observer of religious-secular relations. “It’s not on most people’s radar.”

Schoffman attributes this apathy to the fact that the Masorti movement is relatively unknown to many mainstream Israelis, who tend to view Conservative and Reform Judaism (which they often lump together under the term “Reformim”) as American imports.

“In general, I think Israelis perceive non-Orthodox Judaism as an American eccentricity they don’t have much to do with,” Schoffman says. “When someone in Israel refers to themselves as ‘Masorti,’ they mean that they are traditional Jews, someone with a slightly mellower approach to Judaism. Someone who might go to shul in the morning and a football game in the afternoon.”

Though this description would apply to many Conservative Jews, Israeli Masorti Jews, many of them Sephardim, generally reject the notion that a woman, never mind a gay or lesbian, can serve as a rabbi.

Members of Israel’s gay/lesbian/bi-/transsexual community are heartened by the American movement’s decision, but doubt whether Israeli society is ready for a similar revolution.

In a Haaretz opinion piece, Yoav Sivan, a gay activist, wrote that the Conservative movement’s position provides “another example of the widening gap between the world’s two biggest Jewish communities, and showed the American Jewish establishment is way ahead of the Jewish State in seriously addressing the status of homosexuals in Jewish life.”

Sivan placed much of the blame on the “Orthodox monopoly” that “competes with itself in raising the bar of ignorance and extremism in Israeli circles,” and cited November’s gay pride march in Jerusalem as a prime example.

Just prior to the controversial parade, which prompted weeks of rioting by fervently Orthodox Jews, the Jerusalem police told organizers they would have to hold the event in a stadium. Between 3,000 and 8,000 people attended the gathering, according to various sources.

Their hopes for visibility dashed, gays and their supporters accused the police of caving in to religious hooligans.

Schoffman, who personally believes the gay marchers had every right to walk collectively in the streets of Jerusalem, says he knows “a lot of Jerusalemites, including a lot of secular, who on a cost-benefit basis felt the parade was gratuitously inflammatory.”

Although Shalvi regards Israel society as “much less tolerant” than American society, “I’m hoping the Israeli movement will have the courage to address the issue without worrying about how the ultra-Orthodox will respond.

“I hope we will lead the way and not bow to pressure,” she says.

----

A tragic & telling decision.

To Those Halachic Conservatives: Go Orthodox!

Rabbi Avi Shafran

December 14, 2006
http://www.jewishexponent.com/article/11592/
and
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1164881880663&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Jewish clouds, like others, sometimes have silver linings. And so, some of us hope that a glimmer may surround the Conservative movement's recent endorsement of a position permitting commitment ceremonies between people of the same gender and the ordination as Conservative rabbis of people living openly homosexual lives.

To be sure, the decision is tragic and telling. Tragic because it turns halachah, or Jewish religious law, on its head -- and does so, moreover, in the name of a "halachic" process.

While some Conservative rabbis have labored mightily to present the issue in a positive light, the attempts are risible. Conservative Rabbi Judith Hauptman asserted "precedent" for sanctioning same-sex unions in the talmudic sage Hillel's construction of an entirely legal means to maintain loans through a sabbatical year. But equating employment of an entirely legal economic means with the abolishment of a moral law is like claiming that legitimate allowances in American tax law are grounds for permitting espionage.

And while the Conservative decision may technically claim to preserve the biblical prohibition on sodomy, it flouts clear halachic prohibitions on other forms of homosexual activity and de facto condones a homosexual lifestyle -- imagine limiting a heterosexual couple to only certain expressions of affection.

In the words of Conservative Rabbi Joel Roth -- who, to his credit, resigned in protest from the rabbinic committee that reached the decision -- it was "outside the pale of halachic reasoning."

None of which, of course, is to belittle the plight of those predisposed, or even bound, to same-sex attractions. Every Jew, whatever his or her life challenges, is precious in the eyes of God. But no matter how difficult the struggle to live by the Torah's prescriptions, that struggle is part of the very essence of what it means to be Jewishly observant. And so the Conservative abandonment of the unified response "We will do" that has echoed since Sinai is indeed a tragedy.

What's telling is that it conclusively gives the lie to the movement's claim of fealty to the halachic process.

More than five years ago, I made the case in Moment magazine that the Conservative movement's claim of halachic integrity was belied by earlier decisions it had embraced.

Unlike true halachic process, which entails the objective examination of verses mediated through the Talmud -- leavened with societal concerns at times, to be sure, but always within the letter of the law -- the Conservative process often has involved first deciding on a desired result, then manipulating the sources to yield that outcome.

In light of society's shifting mores, I predicted that it was just a matter of time before Conservative decisors would come to embrace same-sex relationships, too, despite thousands of years of halachic literature and explicit verses in the Torah.

My article was greeted with loud, angry protest.

But -- and herein lies the silver lining of hope -- there was much positive response, too, both from erstwhile Conservative Jews who had left the movement for Orthodoxy, and from members of Conservative synagogues who had come to suspect that things were as I described them and were grateful for the confirmation.

One Conservative correspondent wrote that while he couldn't imagine that his movement would abandon Judaism's forbiddance of homosexual conduct, he'd consider it impossible to maintain his affiliation if it did.

I don't know how many Conservative Jews truly respect the concept of halachah, but simply have accepted as fact the idea that their movement was committed to the traditional halachic process. However many there may be, they now have the benefit of a clear picture. It might not be pleasant to behold, but painful realizations often lead to spiritual growth.

Although Moment ran my piece with its own incendiary headline, the article I submitted carried the headline "Time to Come Home." It was, in the end, a plea to Conservative Jews committed to halachah to realize that their rightful place is really in the broad, variegated but halachah-respecting Orthodox world.

Many once-Conservative Jews already have blazed a trail of return to a halachic lifestyle. In the wake of this latest Conservative decision, I hope others will follow.

And what I hope no less fervently is that the Orthodox world will demonstrate its own self-improvement and commitment -- to other Jews, warmly welcoming all who wish to join us, into our shuls and our lives.

Rabbi Avi Shafran is director of public affairs for Agudath Israel of America.

----

NY Jewish seminary to accept gay students

By Shlomo Shamir , Haaretz Correspondent, and Reuters
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/842238.html
Wed., March 28, 2007 Nisan 9, 5767

A Conservative Jewish seminary in New York has agreed to admit gays and lesbians who want to become rabbis and cantors, but declined to take a stand on whether rabbis should officiate at same-sex unions.

The Jewish Theological Seminary announced its decision yesterday, more than three months after the Rabbinical Assembly's Committee on Jewish Law and Standards authorized the ordination of gays and lesbians.

While most Orthodox Jews ban same-sex unions or gay rabbis, and Reform Jews have accepted them for years, Conservative Jews have been split with sentiment growing for acceptance.

A survey commissioned by the seminary and released in January showed 65 percent of Conservative rabbis in favor of allowing gay and lesbian rabbis and cantors compared to 28 percent who were opposed.

"This is really historic. It took a lot of leadership," said Jake Goodman, a member of Keshet, a group at the seminary that has advocated gay rights within the Conservative movement.

The chancellor of the New York seminary, Arnold Eisen, told Haaretz that he made the decision after a long and tedious process of consulting with hundreds of Conservative Jews, rabbis, cantors, educators, students and lay leaders from the United States and abroad. He found there was widespread support for admitting gays to the seminar, he said.

"The immediate issue for congregations and rabbis is whether they are going to do commitment ceremonies. Each congregation will have to decide whether it hires gay and lesbian clergy," Eisen said.

The wider problem is how to remain faithful to tradition and halakha while being part of our society, he said.

----

Labels: Conservative Judaism, Gay clergy, Homosexuality

- posted by Izak @ 11:43 PM (0) comments

 
El Al desecrates the Jewish Sabbath and the Orthodox fight back with a boycott.
Potential ultra-Orthodox boycott threatens to cripple El Al airlines
By Yair Ettinger, Haaretz Correspondent
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/796900.html
December 5, 2006, Kislev, 5767

Monday morning the storm around El Al's desecration of the Sabbath on Friday was transformed from a consumer uproar and struggle to preserve "the sanctity of the Sabbath," into a saga in which the "finger of God" was visible to many.

El Al flight LY007 had taken off from Tel Aviv for New York a little after 11:30 A.M., when a problem was discovered in the rudder system. As the captain jettisoned fuel over the sea in preparation for an emergency landing back at Ben-Gurion International Airport, panic broke out among the passengers. "People thought it was the end; everyone was shaking," a passenger, Eliezer Karlibach, said. "Even a secular person seated next to me totally panicked and said it was all happening because of the desecration of the Sabbath."

The plane landed safely and repairs were made. Before the plane took off again, Karlibach told Haaretz, "It was a miracle, no doubt about it, it was from Heaven."

Even before Friday's drama, a number of ultra-Orthodox passengers canceled their El Al tickets at the last moment and decided to fly another company. Many are said to believe that the plane's mechanical fault was a sign of divine confirmation of a statement Sunday by Rabbi Haim Kanievsky, an influential figure of the Lithuanian stream, broadcast on the community's Kol Hai radio station, that flying El Al endangered life. The trickle of a cancellation has turned into a stream, with ultra-Orthodox travel agents reporting hundreds of cancellations.

These statements followed Lithuanian sector leader Rabbi Yosef Sholom Elyashiv's consternation regarding El Al's failure to "fear desecration of Shabbat," despite the fact that it is the most terror-threatened airline in the world.

The storm began over the fact that despite the efforts of ultra-Orthodox MKs, on Thursday and Friday, El Al decided to permit flights to leave Israel shortly before the onset of Shabbat to make up for flights delayed during a nationwide strike last week. The flights took off on Friday afternoon and continued operating into the Sabbath, in defiance of the national carrier's traditional Shabbat observance.

Another traveler, Nahum Karlinsky, who was on the plane to New York, told Haaretz that about 150 ultra-Orthodox passengers were on the flight to New York. Like him, many had received permission from their rabbis to fly El Al, in spite of the Sabbath desecration. "Many rabbis, including the Gerer Rebbe, said it was alright to fly this time because canceling the tickets would cause financial loss," Karlinsky, a well-known public figure in Bratslav Hasidic circles, said. "My rabbi knows I fly El Al all the time -I'm even a member of the frequent flier club. But he told me 'this is your last fight on El Al.'"

Also in the wake of the strike, on Thursday El Al served non-kosher food to its passengers, adding another infraction of Jewish law to the grievance against them. On the airline's flight from Moscow, non-kosher sandwiches purchased locally were served in lieu of the meals that had spoiled after a 24-hour delay had kept the plane from taking off.

In an El Al official response they said the passengers had been notified ahead of time that the food served would not be kosher, and also fruit was offered as a substitute.

However, it is doubtful that these events will give rise to an organized ultra-Orthodox boycott of El Al. The rabbinic committee on matters pertaining to Shabbat, a forum that includes all central streams of ultra-Orthodox Judaism, met again, Monday, to consider its response to El Al's actions.

Some time this week, they are expected to formulate an announcement to be signed by rabbis of all ultra-Orthodox sectors.

Ultra-Orthodox powerbrokers, who met Monday with Israir representatives, said that the domestic carrier is prepared to cease flying on the Sabbath if the community makes increased use of its services.

In regard to negotiations with Israir, Shabbat committee chairman Rabbi Yitzhak Goldknopf, told Haaretz, "We were in contact with them in the past, but we didn't take it seriously because we were committed to El Al. After El Al breached our trust, we consider ourselves free of any obligation."

The non-organized boycott began to expand even before leading rabbis came out with statements against the airline. The committee announced it was preparing to announce "harsh steps." An official boycott could deal a fatal blow to El Al as it would obligate not only ultra-Orthodox travelers from Israel, but also tens of thousands of ultra-Orthodox travelers from abroad. The rabbis of the national religious stream would also be expected to join the decision.

El Al CEO Haim Romano called the committee of rabbis for a meeting but was rebuffed Monday night.

Romano told Haaretz Monday he did not believe a decision to boycott El Al would pass. "El Al is sensitive to the needs of the ultra-Orthodox public and will, therefore, avoid changing its policy by flying on Shabbat, except in extraordinary cases, like those which took place last weekend. We are convinced that the entire public understands the circumstances and respects El Al's loyalty to its clientele."

El Al CEO Haim Romano however said Monday that he does not rule out the option of conducting flights on the Sabbath under specific circumstances. "One must remember that the airport operates seven days a week," he said, "and I expect the religious community to accommodate us as we have accommodated them over the years."

Ultra-Orthodox passengers represent 20-30 percent of the clientele on El Al flights. Ultra-Orthodox passengers typically fly during certain seasons of the year, and to certain destinations. They represent a larger percentage of passengers on flights to New York and London, than they do on flights to the Far East. The great majority of ultra-Orthodox passengers do not fly throughout the year, like business passengers. They tend to fly during Jewish holiday seasons and in summer, following the three-week mourning period that precedes Tisha B'Av.

"Talkback":

Simshalom:

Who are El Al`s customers? The customer is always right!

All the shouting and insults back and forth are missing the point.
El Al is a Jewish owned business and it needs to decide who its cutomer base is. If Haredim and all manner of Orthodox Jews make up a huge percentage of its passengers then it has no choice but to satisfy their needs.

Just as the Jewish owner of a HOTEL or a STORE would try to please his Shommer Shabbat clients, so too El Al is obliged to respect and cater to its Jewish religious patrons as a professional courtesy and reflecting good business sense.

If it can`t figure out such a simple things, out of self-respect and as part of customer satisfaction, then the religious Jews and their rabbis have every right to take their business elsewhere.
This is not rocket science, it`s basic business 101. And in business you need to know on which side the bread is buttered and that "The customer is always right!" - even if the customer is a Orthodox and Haredi Jew.

"SJ" replies:

no to the Ultra Orthadox

Actaully Orthadox passengers at the most are between 20 and 30 %. So they boycot EL Al and ... so what is their alternative, they have none. In order for EL Al to survive as a competitive airline they must be convenient for the majority of passengers thats the other 70-80%. Here in Israel we are constantly threatend by these religious fantics that are trying to force and threaten us in every aspect of life, with their curses and threats.
Freedom and democracy must always come first.

Simshalom says:

No business can afford to lose 20-30% of its customers.

Hi SJ: Again, one needs to cut out the emotionalism and prejudice against any group. If it is because of the personal hate that secular Israelis feel for Haredim and the Orthodox that El Al is willing to fly on Shabbat and therefore shoot itself in the foot by alienating about a third of its customers then so be it. Haredim pay good money for their seats that fill up the planes. Don`t fool yourself, there are plenty of ways to fly, planes are chartered all the time and any savvy business person could fill up charter flights for Haredim or anyone - but that won`t be necessary at this time in any case since there are enough other international carriers that fly to and from Israel.

It`s not as if all this is something new to El Al, they just can`t seem to keep a steady focus on the BOTTOM LINE: of both the importance of Shabbat for ALL Jews (not just the Orthodox) and not losing ANY customers so that they can make a profit from their company, which can be switched to many other airlines.

"SJ" responds:

Ok so they boycott EL Al so who are they going to fly with ? Lets not forget the good old days of Tower Air which because of the cheaper tickets used to have maninly Orthadox passengers.
You also say the importance of Shabbat for all jews well exscuse me i think we still have freedom of choice as this issue is concerned, what gives one group the right to impose that on the rest of us. bottom line is if you want to be religious thats your choice but dont force it on ohter people.

Simshalom:

You can`t offend your customer base and stay in business.

El Al had the prestige a the national carrier of Israel, even tho now it`s private. It cannot ignore Shabbat as the official Jewish "day of rest" just as Sunday is to Christians and Friday to Muslims. Shabbat is observed in specific ways, something that the Orthodox did not "invent." Imagine if Saudi Air or Egypt Air did things on Ramadan or served pork that went against Islam, or if Alitalia or Iberia did things to offend Catholics, they`s lose business and would have to reconsider and not offend their religiously devout passengers.

Don`t kid yourself, there is no shortage of spare planes sitting on the salt plains of Utah and Arizona waiting to be chartered and plenty of airlines that fly in and out of Israel everyday would be more than happy to have as many paying customers they can get, Orthodox Jews included.

Your example of Tower Air is missing the point, plenty of major carriers have gone bankrup too, and it could happen to El Al if it ticks off enough paying customers.

John Krew asks "SJ":

How precisely are you being "forced" to be religious. A religious Jew does not fly with a Jewish airline desecrating the Jewish Sabbath because for him there is a palpable danger in doing so. So have decreed the rabbinical sages who are authoritative for him. How is that forcing *you* to be religious?

Simshalom:

Shabbat@Israel =day of rest =Judaism =Good business policy!

SJ: Why do you keep on mentioning Tower Air? Who cares, it`s like talking about PanAm or Eastern Arlines or any defunct carrier. At the present time the reality is that the Haredim and Orthodox passengers make up about 30% of El Al`s passengers (probably higher on many routes when Haredim are the vast majority of passengers on many flights) and if El Al can`t figure out a way to make these customers happy then, like any other unhappy customers, they will take their business to other airlines that are not run by Jews so the factor of if they work on Shabbat or not does not enter the picture and the Haredim and Orthodox will give their business to British Airways or KLM or any other gentile-run carrier. Or to the other Israeli carrier IsrAir. Or they will simply CHARTER planes and fill them up. This is about business and anti-religious hysteria and prejudice should be avoided.
It`s all about "the bottom line" and El Al needs to wake up and smell the coffee!

----

El Al says it will not fly on Sabbath, amid threats of ultra-Orthodox boycott
By Reuters
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/799618.html
Tue., December 12, 2006 Kislev 21, 5767

Israel's national carrier El Al Israel Airlines said on Monday it had no intention of flying on the Sabbath and was still trying to defuse a crisis with ultra-Orthodox customers over the issue.

El Al has drawn the ire of Israel's ultra-Orthodox community, an important source of revenue, after recently flying several flights on Saturday - the Jewish holy day of rest - to clear a backlog.
This has resulted in growing calls by ultra-Orthodox Jewish leaders to boycott the airline.

The ultra-Orthodox community accounts for between 20 and 30 percent of El Al's passengers, and Israeli media have estimated potential loss of revenue of $300 million from a full boycott.

The firm's chief executive officer, Haim Romano, said talks were continuing with rabbinical leaders to resolve the issue.

"There is no boycott," he told reporters on the sidelines of Israeli business conference in Tel Aviv. "El Al has no intention to fly on the Sabbath."

"We have decided this issue is not on the agenda," he added.

Romano declined to comment on potential losses. "The ultra-Orthodox are our clients, and we intend to serve them," he said.

While El Al was a state-owned company it abided by demands from observant Jews not to fly on the Sabbath, which runs from sunset on Friday to sunset on Saturday.

El Al was privatized in 2004, and there had been some speculation that the airline would start flying on Saturday owing to competitive pressures from European and U.S. carriers, as well as smaller Israeli rival Israir.

But the carrier kept a taboo on Sabbath flights owing to a fear of losing religious clients.

The latest religious fall-out for El Al began in late November when, struggling to catch up with lost flights after a strike by Israeli airport staff, the airline flew several times late on Friday.

Israeli media reported that ultra-Orthodox leaders had demanded a written commitment from El Al that it would never fly on the Sabbath again.

Such a commitment would effectively make the airline beholden to Halakha, the strict body of Jewish law, but it remains unclear if the airline would be willing to sign a legally binding religious document.

Asher Sapir, an ultra-Orthodox client of El Al who was attending the business conference, said he would not fly with the airline at the moment.

"The rabbis decided that the national carrier needs to show
that it is a Jewish carrier of the Jewish state," said Sapir, who heads a pension fund. "The rabbis have not signed any boycott of El Al."

"I hope the current situation will be resolved. Some rabbis have requested us not to fly El Al for now."

El Al has said it would post a yearly net loss. In November it reported a sharp decline in third-quarter net profit after a month-long war with Lebanese Hezbollah guerrillas in the period pushed tourism down by 31 percent.

El Al posted a quarterly net profit of $1.8 million compared with $52.2 million a year earlier. Revenue in the quarter fell to $447 million from $485.2 million.

"Talkback":

Simshalom:

Hysteria? Honoring Shabbat isn`t new. El Al can`t change Judaism.

Hello? Is Shabbat a "new invention" of Haredim? Anybody heard of the Ten Commandments? It`s right up there with instructions about belief in God, not murdering, and honoring your parents. So to those who suddenly break out in a sweat of hysteria and vent blindly against Haredi "extremism" - you are missing the point. Big time.

Shabbat observance has been with us since the start of the Israelites and Judaism, and thank God, there are many hundreds of thousands of Shabbat-observant Jews today and they have ALWAYS been El Al`s most loyal customers. El Al had traditionally respected Shabbat because as Israel`s premier carrier it too honored Israel`s national day of rest which was also a mark of respect to all Jews, particularly all Orthodox Jews and not just Haredim.

El Al is waking up and smelling the coffee, that you cannot brush off a third of your most reliable customers and think that you are getting away with "economic murder" when in reality it`s committing "economic suicide."

----

El Al losing NIS 1 million daily to unofficial ultra-Orthodox boycott

By Zohar Blumenkrantz,
Haaretz Correspondent
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/801392.html
15/12/2006

The crisis that broke out between the ultra-Orthodox and El Al two weeks ago is beginning to affect the company. An El Al source said Thursday that the company estimates it is losing NIS 1 million per day, which may worsen if the ultra-Orthodox community declares an official boycott of the carrier.

Meanwhile, the company is trying to minimize its losses with a more energetic marketing campaign among the secular public, with emphasis on weekend packages for couples. Haaretz has learned that the airline allotted 3,500 tickets for the special offers aimed at secular couples interested in a weekend vacation abroad.

A Wednesday meeting between El Al CEO Haim Romano and the rabbinic committee on safeguarding Shabbat did not bring a solution any closer.

The crisis erupted two weeks ago, following an El Al decision to allow a number of its flights to take off after the beginning of Shabbat. The flight schedule had been disrupted when airport workers participated in a nationwide strike two days earlier.

The rabbinic committee on Shabbat represents all ultra-Orthodox groups, and would like El Al to appoint a rabbi to decide whether the carrier may schedule flights in exceptional circumstances on Shabbat.

Both sides reported that the meeting Wednesday was held in a "very positive atmosphere" following instructions by leading rabbinic leaders to "do everything possible" to reach an agreement.

At the meeting, Romano said El Al considers its Haredi customers important clients, and vowed to "do everything so that they would continue to fly" with the carrier.

The ultra-Orthodox community has imposed a de facto boycott on El Al, even though one has not been officially declared by community leaders.

Nonetheless, when the Haredi public seeks the advice of rabbis on the matter, their view is unequivocal: stay off El Al. The Haredi press is also stating that leading rabbis, both in Israel and abroad, have chosen to use other airlines.

Other carriers appear to have taken advantage of the opportunity to tap into the Haredi market. Air Canada advertised Wednesday in a Haredi newspaper, promising benefits to passengers and Glatt Kosher meals.

In its efforts to counter its losses, El Al is offering packages of $399 per couple for flights to Athens and Istanbul, while similar packages to Western Europe are on offer for $599.

According to company sources, the package is tailored to suit the Israeli public, which likes taking short winter vacations.

"Talkback":

Secular fly by nights cannot make up for Orthodox customer base.

Hopefully El Al is learning it`s lesson that it cannot take it`s Orthodox customer base for granted.

American Haredim in particular are reliable in their commitments to flying back and forth from Israel to destinations in North America. Tens of thousands of Haredi young men and women study in yeshivas and seminaries in Israel and they fill hundreds of regular El Al flights.

Haredim fly for family reasons, to visit their children and relatives and they are NOT taking joy rides like secular Israelis who like to travel to Cyprus, "Athens and Istanbul" places which Haredim avoid.

Haredim fly long distances by the tens of thousands from cities like New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Miami, Detroit, Toronto, Montreal, London, and as far afield as Johannesburg and Sydney, putting big bucks into El Al`s coffers. El Al cannot hide the truth, that one cannot trample on Haredi sensiblities and expect them to be silent and accept abuse. The Haredim are getting smart, El Al should get the message.

----

El Al, rabbis reach deal after 5 weeks

By Yair Ettinger
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/810093.html
Sun., January 07, 2007 Tevet 17, 5767

Representatives for El Al and the rabbinical committee for shabbat preservation signed an agreement on Friday that regulates the relationship between the national air carrier and the ultra-Orthodox community, bringing to an end a five-week crisis.

"This is a very important achievement for the Haredi community," said the committee's secretary, Yitzhak Goldknopf, yesterday. "A large company accepted in full the demands of the rabbinical leaders," he added.

In the agreement, signed in the offices of attorney Ya'akov Weinrot, who represents the rabbis, El Al promises to keep the sabbath, as it has since 1982. In addition, if the carrier has to operate flights on Shabbat, like it did five weeks ago because of a strike at the airport, it would first have to consult with Chief Rabbi Shlomo Amar. If the rabbi is not convinced there is an emergency situation that justifies the violation of Shabbat, and the airline chooses to proceed with the flights, this action will be perceived as a violation of the agreement.

If such a violation should occur, the airline will not reimburse ticket holders who choose to cancel their travel plans with El Al (as the committee first demanded), but the money will be transferred to the state medical basket, a compromise proposal put forth by the representative of the Admor of Gur on the committee.

During the crisis, the leading rabbis did not order their followers to boycott El Al, but in practice an unofficial boycott by Haredi customers took place.

Ultra-Orthodox in Israel and abroad transferred their patronage from El Al to other airlines, and those who had booked flights with the national carrier canceled them.

The unofficial boycott, which caused El Al significant losses, was led primarily by the Haredi press and in questions sent to rabbis by the faithful.

Many rabbis told the community that "under the present circumstances" they should not fly with El Al.

Chief Rabbi Yona Metzger said the agreement was a welcome development and called on other commercial airlines to "follow in El Al's footsteps."

MK Yakov Cohen (United Torah Judaism) said, "The major beneficiary from this agreement is the company, which will once more enjoy the trust of hundreds of thousands of its customers who observe the Shabbat."

Goldknopf refused to reveal the details of the agreement, arguing that he would like to preserve the "dignity of those involved in the negotiations." He also refused to discuss the disagreements that had kept the issue unresolved these past weeks.

However, El Al said some of the rabbinical committee's main demands were not accepted. Among them were the demand for a veto-wielding rabbi who would rule on company decisions, as well as specifying sanctions against the airline in case the agreement was violated.

Criticism was voiced regarding some of the ultra-Orthodox interlocutors, and El Al said the crisis could have been resolved three weeks ago.

MK Avraham Ravitz (UTJ) concurred, saying the negotiations involved persons who were not familiar with the "nature of negotiations."
- posted by Izak @ 11:16 PM (0) comments