Talk:Relationships between Jewish religious movements/Archive 2

message: Rabbi David Saperstein wrote the following in The Jewish News of Greater Phoenix, Nov. 16, 2001.
:A remarkable apology by the newspaper that inadvertently began an international attack on a distinguished rabbi should lead to some serious soul-searching among the rabbi's critics. The newspaper acknowledged that it misquoted and mischaracterized the remarks of Israel Religious Action Center Director Rabbi Uri Regev. Those misquotes have been used to suggest that Regev equated the Haredim and the Orthodox to the terrorists responsible for the Sept. 11 attacks on the United States. Since these critics harshly attacked Regev for what were misquotes, hopefully the critics will now offer a good faith apology to Regev, one of the heroes of the struggle for religious liberty and religious pluralism in contemporary Israel...
:...Out of fairness to these Orthodox leaders, their original assertions were based on two erroneous quotations published in the Cleveland Jewish News (CJN). The newspaper, to its credit, apologized this week for misquoting, with the result of mischaracterizing Regev's speech.
:In its attack ads, however, Am Echad (which describes itself as a "coalition of Jews across the Orthodox spectrum committed to genuine Jewish unity") went far, far beyond the error in the Cleveland newspaper. Their ads suggested, astonishingly, that in these manufactured quotes Regev "equated the Orthodox with Bin Laden's cohorts" and "lump(ed) Orthodox Jews who express their commitment to tradition... with terrorists who fly passenger jets into buildings." Similar accusations were made by Jerusalem Post columnist and Am Echad Israel Director Rabbi Jonathan Rosenblum (who subsequently denied that anyone had accused Regev of exactly what his own ad accuses him of).
:But even if uttered as originally reported, to suggest that such assertions would be the same as equating all Orthodox, or all Haredim, or even the Haredi desecrators of non-Orthodox shuls, with the terrorists of Sept. 11 is absurd. If you give a speech about the dangers of botulism in all food, including non-kosher and kosher food, it is intellectual nonsense to condemn you for having given a speech "equating" kosher and non-kosher food.
:Regev asked: What are the potential results of verbal vitriol - rising in degree and in frequency - directed against non-Orthodox Jews by some ultra-Orthodox leaders? What is being done by responsible Haredi leaders to deny the religious legitimacy of the views that spurred Baruch Goldstein and Yigal Amir? How should we understand Chief Rabbi Bakshi Doron's equation of Reform Jewry with the Jew Zimri, whom the Bible suggests was legitimately killed by the zealot priest Pinchas?
:We have heard none of this addressed by Regev's critics. All Regev wants is the vast majority of Israelis who support recognition of Reform and Conservative rights in Israel to have a democratic voice in addressing these issues. Passionate argument is a defining characteristic of the Jewish tradition. From the time of the prophets to the age of the Talmud, from early Zionism to today's Knesset, vigorous debate has always exemplified our community's intellectual vitality. As Regev argued in Cleveland, the events of Sept. 11 brought our common humanity into sharper relief and cast a harsh spotlight on the potential effects of unchecked fundamentalism mutating malignantly in the minds of a few. Let us all in the Jewish community agree to redouble our efforts, to address our differences with civility, and to preach and practice tolerance. And let those who tarnished Regev's reputation begin by joining the CJN in correcting the record and affirming his good name.
::RK, the article I quoted from responded directly to Saperstein's demand for an apology. Please review it in light of that. Thanks. Jayjg 19:17, 4 August 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Reform rabbis ask for apology

message: The same goes for your libel about the leadership of Reform Judaism; the hatespeech you attribute to them never existed; it has been proven that you were quoting from Rabbi Avi Shafran, an ulktra-Orthodox opponent of Reform, and not from the actual Reform leadership. In fact, the quotes that Rabbi Avi Shafran refers to never were spoken; the entire incident was a fraud. RK 16:37, 5 August 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, as I've pointed out above, I didn't quote anyone.  In any event, if you read through the documentation given earlier, you will note that the specific statements were made at different times and in different venues, and sometimes conflated by the reporter, but that the basic premise was never denied; specifically, that Regev compared Haredim to the 9/11 terrorists. Jayjg 17:14, 5 August 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: You relied on Rabbi Avi Shafran's deceitful slander of reform rabbis, and refused to use the actual quotes from Reform rabbis. There is no reason for your action, unless you want to simply insult reform rabbis. RK 02:44, 9 August 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I relied on a number of articles on the topic.  The actual quotes themselves are no longer retreivable, as the reporter says they were conflated from various venues, and the venue itself refuses to provide tapes; for this reason I never quoted him.  However, the substance of the claim is not in question, that Haredi Jews were compared to 9/11 bombers. Jayjg 05:05, 9 August 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Shafran is lying. Rabbu Uri Regev did not say that Haredim are like 9/11 bombers. You are not referring to Rabbi Regev's point of view; rather, you are only quoting from Shafran's now-exposed lies about Rabbi Regev. Why can't you get this through your head? RK 18:13, 9 August 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: You seem quite fixated on Shafran; I am not.  But to get resolution here, which specific statements of Shafran's do you think are "lies", and why?  Please be explicit. Jayjg 19:37, 9 August 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Regev's statements

message: I protected this page to head off any further reverts and sparring, and force disagreements to the talk, after a complaint on the list. -SV 18:10, 5 August 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Gotcha; RK, would you like mediation? Jayjg 18:55, 5 August 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Protected

message: Your text states:
:According to Norman Lamm, some prominent Hasidic rabbis believe that modern Orthodox Jews like him are no longer part of the Jewish people. See "Integrity or Unity: Which?", excerpts of an address at The Orthodox Union National Rabbinic Centennial Medallion Awards Dinner)
My version is:
:According to Rabbi Norman Lamm, Dean of Yeshiva University and a leader in Modern Orthodox Judaism, at least one prominent Hasidic rabbi is unsure whether modern Orthodox Jews like him are still part of the Jewish people. 
Aside from the fact that my version gives the actual link, the actual quote in the article is:
:A few years ago I met with one of the most prominent Hasidic rabbis. In the course of a pleasant conversation, I complained about an article by the editor of a newspaper published by this group, in which he wrote that he is doesn’t understand why there is such a tumult about Kelal Yisrael (a term denoting the totality of the Jewish people), when after all, "according to our calculation there are no more than about a million people who belong in this group." I asked the Rebbe if I and my parents and wife and children and grandchildren are considered part of Kelal Yisrael. His painfully ambiguous and evasive answer was, "Rav Lamm, ihr fregt tzu harb a kashe" (Yiddish for: "Rabbi Lamm, you are posing too difficult a question.")
As is clear from the quote, Rabbi Lamm met with one Hasidic Rabbi, not some, and the Rabbi did not give a definitive answer about his beliefs, but stated that the question was too difficult for him to answer.  Given the above, how can you justify your version? Jayjg 02:00, 9 August 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Norman Lamm and "some prominent Hasidic rabbis" 

message: *1) Haredim -RK's edit was "Thus Haredi rabbis and rabbinical organizations grant no legitimacy whatsoever to any form of Judaism other than their own." - I prefer this edit to the other one. It gives it simple and plainly.--Josiah 03:10, 15 August 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Simpler but less accurate. Jayjg 05:00, 15 August 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: How so?--Josiah 06:51, 15 August 2004 (UTC)

text: Regarding the quote about Rabbi Lamm, it is a personal disagreement between two men, not a statement about the legitimacy of Modern Orthodoxy.  Please read the relevant Talk: discussions.  Regarding not having met a single "Ultra-Orthodox" Jew, etc., I have. Jayjg 05:00, 15 August 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright. It does make sense that it was talking about a person, not a school of thought.--Josiah 06:51, 15 August 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Jay is still sugar-coating the issue. I have never found statements from Haredi Judaism that explicitly state respect for Modern Orthodox Judaism, but I have found many that express anger at it and disdain for it. I don't know where Jay is getting his info from, but in the real world Haredi Judaism views Modern Orthodoxy as non-Orthodox and invalid. I will be presenting even more sources and quotes in the next day or so. Jay is incorrect when he claims that this is about on person! RK 17:32, 15 August 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: What we're discussing here is not "the issue" of Haredi views of Modern Orthodoxy, but rather whether or not this quote is relevant to that.  As the discussion in earlier sections shows, Rabbi Svei was speaking specifically about Rabbi Lamm; he said so.  If you can find other quotes that are relevant, that's wonderful, but this particular one is not. Jayjg 17:45, 15 August 2004 (UTC)

text: Which 5th paragraph?  Why do you agree with RK's edit? Jayjg 05:00, 15 August 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  The one that says "Advertisements by Orthodox rabbis have been taken out in newspapers stating that it is better for Jews to stay home on Rosh Hashanah than to attend non-Orthodox services. As such, many Conservative Jews have become disenchanted with Orthodoxy, and view it as domineering and hostile." I think it should be kept in their because it is correct, American Rabbis have made similar decisions, and it gives some background on the clashes.--Josiah 06:51, 15 August 2004 (UTC)

text: Because archeologists aren't a "segment of Judaism".  Again, please read relevant Talk: discussions. In fact, it would be better if you actually read them, then weighed in there.  Jayjg 05:00, 15 August 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright. Makes sense to me. The question is whether or not the archeologists represented a paticular sect of Judaism, but I doubt that could be proven. I didn't read all of the discussions, cuase well it's a bit overwhelming coming in the end of it all. --Josiah 06:51, 15 August 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  My views on it all 

message: Here is the current text:
:Reform Judaism currently espouses the notion of religious pluralism; it believes that most Jewish denominations (including Orthodox groups and the Conservative movement) are valid expressions of Judaism. Historically the Reform view of Orthodox Judaism has been highly negative. Reform began as a rejection of Orthodox Judaism, and early battles between Reform and Orthodox groups in Germany for control of communal leadership were fierce. Reform viewed Orthodoxy as a backward movement, attempted to do away with most traditional practices, and in the 20th century often predicted its demise.  While the rhetoric generally cooled, Israeli Reform leader Rabbi Uri Regev recently compared Haredi Jews to the terrorists who destroyed the World Trade Center and damaged the Pentagon.  Rabbi Eric H. Yoffie, head of the American Reform movement, has called the Israeli Chief Rabbinate "[e]xtremist and radical and fanatic...a medieval chief rabbinate that is a disgrace to the Jewish people and its religion", described Haredi Judaism as "ghetto Judaism", referred to "utterly fanatic ultra-Orthodox Jews in Israel who are becoming more extreme every day" and has accused "the ultra-Orthodox" of having "abused Torah for their own selfish purposes and brought it into disrepute."
:Relations with the Conservative movement are much more cordial, and Conservative and Reform leaders co-operate on many areas of mutual concern.  However, some of Reform's leaders have also predicted the demise of Conservative Judaism, a prediction which Conservative leaders have called called the argument "delusional" and the product of "immature" analysis.
As RK currently seems to object only to the sentence on Regev, and as the facts of that incident are not entirely clear, I propose eliminating Regev's statements altogether, and using this alternative text:
:Reform Judaism currently espouses the notion of religious pluralism; it believes that most Jewish denominations (including Orthodox groups and the Conservative movement) are valid expressions of Judaism. Historically the Reform view of Orthodox Judaism has been highly negative. Reform began as a rejection of Orthodox Judaism, and early battles between Reform and Orthodox groups in Germany for control of communal leadership were fierce. Reform viewed Orthodoxy as a backward movement, attempted to do away with most traditional practices, and in the 20th century often predicted its demise.  While the rhetoric generally cooled, Rabbi Eric H. Yoffie, head of the American Reform movement, has called the Israeli Chief Rabbinate "[e]xtremist and radical and fanatic...a medieval chief rabbinate that is a disgrace to the Jewish people and its religion", described Haredi Judaism as "ghetto Judaism", referred to "utterly fanatic ultra-Orthodox Jews in Israel who are becoming more extreme every day" and has accused "the ultra-Orthodox" of having "abused Torah for their own selfish purposes and brought it into disrepute," and in a 1998 article for New York’s Jewish Week, described haredi insularity as "nothing less than a betrayal of America."  Simeon Maslin, past president of the Central Conference of American Rabbbis (Reform), has stated that Haredi Jews (who in his words "pray rapidly in sing-song Hebrew, pore over the Talmud in segregated yeshivot, and buy from glatt kosher butchers") have forfeited the right to be called "authentic Jews."
:Relations with the Conservative movement are much more cordial, and Conservative and Reform leaders co-operate on many areas of mutual concern.  However, some of Reform's leaders have also predicted the demise of Conservative Judaism, a prediction which Conservative leaders have called "delusional" and the product of "immature" analysis.
Thoughts?  Comments? Jayjg 15:15, 12 August 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Um, ok, silence is consent. Jayjg 19:36, 13 August 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds fine to me. RK 21:56, 15 August 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Compromise proposal on Reform views 

message: I'd like to see the relationships with Rabbinical and Non-Rabbinical Jews covered as well. I'll have something about relationships between Karaites & Rabbanites, and of the "Am HaAretz" of the 2nd temple period within a week, but there are others that I'm not knowledgeable enough to cover. Could some hit Beta Israel (The Ethopian Jews)?--Josiah 16:22, 16 August 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-Rabbinical Jews 

message: I think all quotes should be removed from the article, they should be paraphrased instead. If a quotes with strong biases are included, then it is just bringing the war into wikipedia. Most articles do not quote extensively. Wikipedia articles are not academic papers, they are summaries of the facts. Any quoting that is felt necessary should be done in talk. --Ezra Wax 19:45, 31 August 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that all lengthy quotes should be removed, though brief ones are fine.  I keep hoping to get back to this article, and still plan to.  By the wya, lengthy quotes are a problem found in many Jewish-related articles. Jayjg 21:26, 31 August 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Remove Quotes

message: During the Dark ages, relationships between Karaite & Rabbinical Jews were more or less fair with each other, because although they had differences in beliefs, their communities were intertwined. This changed with the coming of Sa'adia Gaon, who declared that Rabbinical Jews should seperate themselves from Karaite Jews and began a series of Refutations of Karaite views which sparked a bitter theological war between the two.
Conflicts between the two died down until the time of the Czars, when Russian Karaites circulated myths that they were not Jews, or that they were Jews who hadn't lived in Israel while Jesus lived, and even banned marriages with Rabbinical Jews (though the rule was not enforced), in order to escape the anti-semetic laws that the Russian Czars had passed.
It is said that in World War 2, the Nazis consulted 3 Orthodox Rabbis to determine whether or not Karaite Jews were, in fact, Jews. In order to save their lives, the Rabbis ruled that they were not.
Today Karaites live side by side with Rabbinical Communities, with their own synagogues and religous courts. While some Askenazi Rabbis do not believe that Karaites are Jews, recent Rabbinical Rulings have declared that Karaism is closer to Orthodoxy than Conservative and Reform Judaism. Sephardic Cheif Rabbinate Ovadiah Yossef ruled that Orthodox Jews should intermarry with Karaites in order to assimilate them into Orthodox Judaism.--Josiah 16:40, 16 August 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I would recommend providing sources for most of what you have entered above, as I consider much of it POV, especially the first paragraph. Jayjg 16:46, 16 August 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: In what way would you change it?--Josiah 09:30, 17 August 2004 (UTC)

text: And it ignores something very important. WHY where the Russian Karaim denying that they were Jews? Did they actually view themselves as not being Jews? The answer to the first one is simple - for the same reason that Jews during the Inquisition denied that they were Jews - to avoid persecution. Rabbanites and Karaites still occured in Russia at that time. Which reminds me, I need to put in information about what could be called "The Holocaust of the Karaites", which happened in 12th century Spain. On Saadia Gaon, I would compare the situation between Rabbinical and Karaitic Jews to today's relationship between Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform Jews. The Haredim would be today's Sa'adia Goan's. Before Gaon came around, the communities existed together. Afterwards, they were seperated.--Josiah 06:10, 18 August 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: The motivations of these Russian Karaites may be interesting, but neither you nor I can decide today what they really are.  Fortunately, we do not have to, as we merely need to present the facts, not what we presume are the motivations of the various groups involved.  Regarding your use of the term Holocaust, this kind of hyperbole is highly POV, as well as anachronistic.  As for your claims regarding Sa'adiah Gaon, I understand your perspective; your original material made it quite clear.  However, as before, what is required is evidence that your perspective is accurate. Jayjg 14:45, 18 August 2004 (UTC)

text: Jews denied they were Jews during the Inquisition?  Or did they deny they were practising Rabbinic Judaism?  The Russian Karaite claims were effectively racial in nature, no one doubted that their faith differed, and these claims long pre-dated the Nazis.  In any event, we still do not need to speculate on their motivations, we merely need to present the known facts; ideally this should be an encyclopedia article, not an apologia. Jayjg 18:45, 10 September 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course there were Jews who denied they were such during the inquisition (both religiously and ethnically). This is common knowledge. There is no speculation as to the motivations of the Russian Karaites, Jayig, any more than saying Jews denied they denied they practiced Judaism because the inquisition is speculation. Ask them for yourself. They'll tell you the same thing.--Josiah 22:58, 13 September 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Rather than "common knowledge" and "ask them for yourself" types of proofs, I would prefer some sort of tangible references. Jayjg 00:20, 14 September 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Would email contacts with 3 Karaite Hakhams be sufficient? I could email the 3 in question and ask if they would mind, one in paticular grew up in Russia. I may try to find a verifying source on the web, but considering until a year or two ago a search of the word 'karaite' yielded only 5 results, I'm not crossing my fingers for that one.--Josiah 01:51, 15 September 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't understand why an e-mail correspondence with any individual would reflect any more than that individual's personal opinion. BTW, a Google search of Karaite produces around 16,000 hits, and Karaism produces another 3,500 or so. Jayjg 02:34, 15 September 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I know that *today* there are quite a few results on a google search. The reason I recommended a Karaite Hakham, paticuarly one who grew up in Russia, was for the same reasons that I would recommend a Rabbi who lived during the holocaust for info about it. FYI, marriages between Rabbinical and Karaite Jews occured during the period of time in question in Russia. I also recommended this because I don't keep up with any religious journals (and thus do not know of a specific source to refer you to, other than the descendants of those who lived in russia and/or leaders who have access to the documentation from that time period of the karaites who lived there.)--Josiah 06:53, 17 September 2004 (UTC)

text: Most American Karaim are of Egyptian Descent. Sephardic Authorities have ruled that have also ruled that Karaites are also Jews. A sephardic friend gave me a list with those who had, and it included: Rabbi David ben Zimra of Egypt, Maimonides' son - the Nagid Abraham, Rabbi Elijah of Negropont, Dayan Dr. Pinchas Toledano, Av Beit Din of the Sephardic Community in Great Britain, Chief Rabbi of Israel Ovadia Yosef, The Committee on Jewish Law and Standards "Accepting Egyptian karaites into our Communities", by Rabbi David H. Lincoln, adopted March 28, 1984. Published in "Proceedings of the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards 1980-1985".--Josiah 06:10, 18 August 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Draft of Karaite portion 

message: I'll be working some of this material into the article as well, just letting you have a look at it first:
In a 1998 article for New York’s Jewish Week, American Reform leader Eric Yoffie described haredi insularity as "nothing less than a betrayal of America." And Simeon Maslin, past president of the Central Conference of American Rabbbis (Reform), accuses ultra-Orthodox Jews "who pray rapidly in sing-song Hebrew, pore over the Talmud in segregated yeshivot, and buy from glatt kosher butchers" of having forfeited the right to be called "authentic Jews." Jayjg 05:52, 9 August 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Please research the edit history before accusing anyone of "intolerance". Indeed, there can be no petty vilifications at all in an  encyclopedia. That is why if you look at the history of the edits it was me who also erased many of the the above-mentioned petty statements in the reform section. Shykee 11:55, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I believe you are confusing me with the original user who posted those comments. I, as I stated, erased much of the inflammatory material from the reform section. If you have a personal grievance with that user, please take it to their talk page. This is not the forum for accusations of intolerance. Shykee 18:47, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other negative Reform views of Haredim 

message: Shouldn't this be "Relationships between Ashkenazi religious movements"?  Tomertalk 23:47, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent point!  --Metzenberg 07:53, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  name 

message: I was surprised to find this page. Why does this page exist? Very few pages seem to be linked to this page?  It seems to me like this page is a debating forum, not an encyclopedia page. There is some interesting material here that could be incorporated into the page Jewish denominations, which I have been working on. But basically, this page is all POV. --Metzenberg 08:11, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not sure how I feel about this page but I will suggest a rationale.  Judaism is not a dogmatic religion, so what people mean by "Judaism" is contentions and different Jewish movements have different views of Judaism.  Yet, each major movement of Judaism accepts that members of the other movements are Jews.  This means that each movement's view of "What is Judaism" involves their views of the other movements.  So this material belongs in the article on Judaism.  I think it may have started out there, and as the article became too long this was made its own article as a content fork. Now, either this rationale makes no sense to you, or it does make sense but you think this article can be improved.  If the latter is the case by all means - improve it! Slrubenstein   |  Talk 11:26, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why does this page even exist? 

message: Any chance of getting some info on Reconstructionism in the context of this page? 89.138.19.34 11:16, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reconstructionism 

message: I propose renaming this article Relationships among Jewish denominations for the following reasons:
* There is an article named Jewish denominations
* Judaism and Template:Judaism refer to the movements as "denominations"
* Nitpick: "Between" refers to two parties; "among" refers to three or more
I'd appreciate other editors' views on the subject. — Malik Shabazz | Talk 17:40, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Propose renaming this article 

message: Because this article addresses controversies that can sometimes involve animosities, suggest using footnote-style sourcing to source each claim individually, so that the quality of sourcing for each major point can be assessed. Best,  --Shirahadasha 20:48, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Footnote style sourcing