From: dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: more of ...can of worms....
Date: 17 Aug 92 19:29:46 GMT
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.

In article <56951@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes:
>In article <1992Aug11.200659.7029@njitgw.njit.edu> dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap) writes:
>>In article <56211@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes:
>
>>>I agree that Orthodoxy is the carrier of a tradition.  But tradition
>>>is not religion, and religion is not tradition.
>
>>Yes, but you really can't separate the two.  They're like two cords
>>woven together into a rope.  You can't separate them without
>>destroying the whole.  Judaism is a closely-networked mix of
>>tradition, philosophy, religion, art, music, etc.  Each facet that is
>>removed brings the rope that much closer to breaking.
>
>>The Rabbis realized this when they said that a tradition which is
>>accepted by Israel for long enough becomes like a law.  This is why
>>some "traditions" like wearing Yarmulkae are treated like commandments
>>these days - the tradition was widely accepted for a long enough time
>>that it should now be treated as a law.
>
>This is what stultifies anything.  Not only can one separate the two,
>one must.  As I stated in an earlier post, one can take the Jew from
>the stetl, but can one take the stetl from the Jew?  Ashkenazi Orthodoxy
>is based on the stetl.

And in doing so, you make it nothing more than any other religion.
Why not just become a Protestant Christian or a Buddhist, if you want
to separate traditions from the beliefs?  It's the strong traditions
that bind the Jewish nation together.  Have you noticed that it's only
been in this century that assimilation has been a problem?  Ever
wonder why?

>As for traditions becoming laws, the advancement of science is due to 
>nothing short of mathematical proof becoming established so that it 
>cannot be overturned, and often without too much difficulty.  Knowledge
>is always incomplete, and even the greatest are necessarily ignorant.
>Newtonian optics was completely abandoned, not because those arguing
>against it were greater, but because they showed it was wrong.  Newtonian
>gravity actually was disproved where Newton suggested that one should look
>for the disproof.  

Why do you try to apply science to religion?  And what's your point?
Nobody has even attempted to "disprove" Jewish tradition, and yet you
claim that people should be doing so.

>For Judaism to get out of the Middle Ages, it must take the point that
>not only is tradition not law, but tradition cannot even be used as an
>argument for law.  Science got out of its rut by overthrowing the 
>"scholarly tradition," whereby the great philosophers of the past 
>were considered unshakable.  This is exactly what has been posted
>as a basis for the hierarchy of our sages; the earlier cannot be
>overruled by the later, except by referring to early ones.

So what is the Law to be based on?  The whims of the current
generation?  The USA is based on this, and it's crumbling after only
200 years.  The Jewish people have survived without a kingdom, without
a land, and wihout a ruler for thousands of years thanks to this
tradition which you consider useless in interpreting the Law.

Do you really believe that the Jewish people could survive another
3000+ years with your "enlightened scholorly" way of interpreting
religion?
-- 
   |)  David Charlap           "I don't even represent myself
  /|_  dic5340@hertz.njit.edu   sometimes so NJIT is right out!.
 ((|,)
  ~|~  Hi! I am a .signature virus, copy me into your .signature file.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish