Editing Halakha (section)

== Views today ==
{{See also|Talmud#Present day}}
{{multiple image
| align = right
| image1 = Midrash22.jpg
| width1 = 150
| alt1 = 
| caption1 = 
| image2 = Aaron22.jpg
| width2 = 141
| alt2 = 
| caption2 = 
| footer = The artistic freedom spirit of ''[[Aggadah]]'' (left, represented by [[Solomon]]) and the legal divine judgment rulings of ''[[Halakhah]]'' (right, represented by [[Aaron]] and his sons) on the [[Knesset Menorah]]
}}
[[Orthodox Judaism]] holds that ''halakha'' is [[divine law]] laid down in the Torah, rabbinical laws, rabbinical decrees, and customs combined. The rabbis, who made many additions and interpretations of Jewish law, did so only in accordance with regulations they believed, as Orthodox Jews still [[Orthodox Judaism#Beliefs|believe]], were given for this purpose to [[Moses]] on [[Mount Sinai (Bible)|Mount Sinai]].<ref>{{bibleverse|Deuteronomy|17:11}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Vail course explores origins of Judaism |url=https://www.vaildaily.com/news/announcements/vail-course-explores-origins-of-judaism/ |agency=Vail Daily |date=13 July 2015 |quote=“Just as science follows the scientific method, Judaism has its own system to ensure authenticity remains intact,” said Rabbi Zalman Abraham of JLI’s New York headquarters. |access-date=10 October 2018}}</ref>

[[Conservative Judaism]] holds that ''halakha'' is normative and binding and is developed as a partnership between people and God based on the Sinaitic Torah. While there is a wide variety of Conservative views, a common [[Conservative Judaism#Beliefs|belief]] is that ''halakha'' is, and has always been, an evolving process subject to interpretation by rabbis in every time period.

[[Reconstructionist Judaism]] asserts that ''halakha'' is normative and binding; however, it also views ''halakha'' as an evolving concept. The traditional halakhic system, according to this perspective, cannot produce a code of conduct that is meaningful and acceptable to the majority of contemporary Jews. Reconstructionism's founder, Rabbi [[Mordecai Kaplan]], believed that "Jewish life [is] meaningless without Jewish law." One of the planks of the Society for the Jewish Renascence, of which Kaplan was a founder, stated: "We accept the halakha, which is rooted in the Talmud, as the norm of Jewish life, availing ourselves, at the same time, of the method implicit therein to interpret and develop the body of Jewish Law in accordance with the actual conditions and spiritual needs of modern life."<ref>{{cite web |title=Reconstructing Halakha |url=https://www.reconstructingjudaism.org/article/reconstructing-halakha |last=Cedarbaum |first=Daniel |agency=Reconstructing Judaism |date=6 May 2016 |access-date=30 January 2020}}</ref>

[[Reform Judaism]] holds that modern views of how the Torah and rabbinic law developed imply that the body of rabbinic Jewish law is no longer normative (seen as binding) on Jews today. Those in the "traditionalist" wing believe that the ''halakha'' represents a personal starting point, holding that each Jew is obligated to interpret the Torah, Talmud, and other Jewish works for themselves, and this interpretation will create separate commandments for each person. Those in the liberal and classical wings of Reform believe that in this day and era, most Jewish religious rituals are no longer necessary, and many hold that following most Jewish laws is actually counter-productive. They propose that Judaism has entered a phase of ethical monotheism and that the laws of Judaism are only remnants of an earlier stage of religious evolution and need not be followed. This is considered wrong, and even [[heresy|heretical]], by Orthodox and Conservative Judaism.

Humanistic Jews value the Torah as a historical, political, and sociological text written by their ancestors. They do not believe "that every word of the Torah is true, or even morally correct, just because the Torah is old". The Torah is both disagreed with and questioned. Humanistic Jews believe that the entire Jewish experience, and not only the Torah, should be studied as a source for Jewish behavior and ethical values.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://oradam.org/OAC/FAQ/ |title=FAQ for Humanistic Judaism, Reform Judaism, Humanists, Humanistic Jews, Congregation, Arizona, AZ |publisher=Oradam.org |access-date=10 October 2018}}</ref>

Some Jews believe that [[gentiles]] are bound by a subset of ''halakha'' called the [[Seven Laws of Noah]], also referred to as the Noahide Laws. According to the Talmud, they are a set of imperatives given by God to the "children of Noah" – that is, all of humanity.<ref>[https://www.britannica.com/topic/Noahide-Laws "Noahide Laws."] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160121153759/https://www.britannica.com/topic/Noahide-Laws |date=2016-01-21 }} ''Encyclopedia Britannica''. 3 July 2019.</ref>

=== Flexibility ===
Despite its internal rigidity, ''halakha'' has a degree of flexibility in finding solutions to modern problems not explicitly mentioned in the Torah. From the very beginnings of Rabbinic Judaism, halakhic inquiry allowed for a "sense of continuity between past and present, a self-evident trust that their pattern of life and belief now conformed to the sacred patterns and beliefs presented by scripture and tradition".<ref>{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=VahYCwAAQBAJ |title=Jews, Christians, Muslims: A Comparative Introduction to Monotheistic Religions |date=2016 |publisher=Routledge |first1=John |last1=Corrigan |first2=Frederick |last2=Denny |first3=Martin S. |last3=Jaffee |first4=Carlos |last4=Eire |isbn=9780205018253 |edition= 2 |access-date=10 October 2018}}</ref> According to an analysis by Jewish scholar Jeffrey Rubenstein of Michael Berger's book ''Rabbinic Authority'', the authority that rabbis hold "derives not from the institutional or personal authority of the sages but from a ''communal'' decision to recognize that authority, much as a community recognizes a certain judicial system to resolve its disputes and interpret its laws."<ref>{{cite journal |last= Rubenstein |first= Jeffrey L. |title= Michael Berger. ''Rabbinic Authority.'' Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998. xii, 226 pp. |journal= AJS Review |volume= 26 |issue= 2 |edition= 2 |year= 2002 |pages= 356–359 |doi= 10.1017/S0364009402250114|s2cid= 161130964 }}</ref> Given this covenantal relationship, rabbis are charged with connecting their contemporary community with the traditions and precedents of the past.

When presented with contemporary issues, rabbis go through a halakhic process to find an answer. The classical approach has permitted new rulings regarding modern technology. For example, some of these rulings guide Jewish observers about the proper use of [[electricity]] on the Sabbath and holidays. Often, as to the applicability of the law in any given situation, the proviso is to "consult your local rabbi or [[posek]]". This notion lends rabbis a certain degree of local authority; however, for more complex questions, the issue is passed on to higher rabbis, who will then issue a ''teshuva'', which is a ''responsum'' that is binding.<ref>Satlow, Michael, and Daniel Picus. “Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.” Lecture. Providence, Brown University.</ref> Indeed, rabbis will continuously issue different opinions and will constantly review each other's work so as to maintain the truest sense of ''halakha''. This process allows rabbis to maintain a connection of traditional Jewish law to modern life. Of course, the degree of flexibility depends on the sect of Judaism, with Reform being the most flexible, Conservative somewhat in the middle, and Orthodox being much more stringent and rigid. Modern critics, however, have charged that with the rise of movements that challenge the "divine" authority of ''halakha'', traditional Jews have greater reluctance to change not only the laws themselves but also other customs and habits than traditional Rabbinical Judaism did before the advent of Reform in the 19th century.

=== Denominational approaches ===
==== Orthodox Judaism ====
{{also|Semikhah#Concept|Yeshiva#Jewish law}}
[[File:Haredim allant a la synagogue.jpg|thumb|Hasidim walk to the synagogue, [[Rehovot]], Israel.]]
Orthodox Jews believe that ''halakha'' is a religious system whose core represents the [[Revelation|revealed]] will of God. Although Orthodox Judaism acknowledges that rabbis have made many decisions and decrees regarding Jewish Law where the written Torah itself is nonspecific, they did so only in accordance with regulations received by [[Moses]] on [[Mount Sinai, Egypt|Mount Sinai]] (see {{bibleverse|Deuteronomy|5:8–13}}). These regulations were transmitted orally until shortly after the destruction of the [[Second Temple]]. They were then recorded in the Mishnah, and explained in the Talmud and commentaries throughout history up until the present day. Orthodox Judaism believes that subsequent interpretations have been derived with the utmost accuracy and care. The most widely accepted codes of Jewish law are known as [[Mishneh Torah]] and the ''[[Shulchan Aruch]]''.<ref name="JillJacobs">Jacobs, Jill. "[https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/the-shulhan-arukh/ The Shulchan Aruch] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181225195931/https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/the-shulhan-arukh/ |date=2018-12-25 }}." ''My Jewish Learning''. 8 April 2019.</ref>

Orthodox Judaism has a range of opinions on the circumstances and extent to which change is permissible. [[Haredi Judaism|Haredi]] Jews generally hold that even ''minhagim'' (customs) must be retained, and existing precedents cannot be reconsidered. [[Modern Orthodox]] authorities are more inclined to permit limited changes in customs and some reconsideration of precedent.<ref>Sokol, Sam. [https://www.jta.org/2019/02/07/culture/can-a-journals-new-editor-keep-orthodox-debate-relevant-in-the-21st-century "A journal’s new editor wants to steer the Modern Orthodox debate into the 21st century."] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190331231728/https://www.jta.org/2019/02/07/culture/can-a-journals-new-editor-keep-orthodox-debate-relevant-in-the-21st-century |date=2019-03-31 }} ''Jewish Telegraphic Agency''. 7 February 2019. 8 April 2019.</ref>

Despite the Orthodox views that ''halakha'' was given at Sinai, Orthodox thought (and especially modern Orthodox thought) encourages debate, allows for disagreement, and encourages rabbis to enact decisions based on contemporary needs. [[Rabbi Moshe Feinstein]] says in his introduction to his collection of [[responsa]] that a rabbi who studies the texts carefully is required to provide a halakhic decision. That decision is considered to be a true teaching, even if it is not the true teaching in according to the heavens.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Feinstein |first1=Rabbi Moshe |title=Iggrot Moshe |chapter=Introduction to Orach Chayim Chelek Aleph |url=https://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=916&st=&pgnum=3|language=he|quote={{Rtl-para|he| [...] אבל האמת להוראה כבר נאמר לא בשמים היא אלא כפי שנראה להחכם אחרי שעיין כראוי לברר ההלכה בש"ס ובפוסקים כפי כחו בכובד ראש וביראה מהשי"ת ונראה לו שכן הוא פסק הדין הוא האמת להוראה ומחוייב להורות כן אף אם בעצם גליא כלפי שמיא שאינו כן הפירוש, ועל כזה נאמר שגם דבריו דברי אלקים חיים מאחר שלו נראה הפירוש כמו שפסק ולא היה סתירה לדבריו. ויקבל שכר על הוראתו אף שהאמת אינו כפירוש.}}}}</ref> For instance, [[Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik]] believes that the job of a halakhic [[wikt:decisor#English|decisor]] is to apply ''halakha'' − which exists in an ideal realm−to people's lived experiences.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Kaplan |first1=Lawrence |title=The Religious Philosophy of Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik |journal=Tradition: A Journal of Orthodox Jewish Thought |date=1973 |volume=14 |issue=2 |pages=43–64 |jstor=23257361 |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/23257361}}</ref> [[Moshe Shmuel Glasner]], the chief rabbi of [[Cluj]] (''Klausenberg'' in German or ''קלויזנבורג'' in Yiddish) stated that the Oral Torah was an oral tradition by design, to allow for the creative application of halakha to each time period, and even enabling halakha to evolve. He writes:

{{blockquote | Thus, whoever has due regard for the truth will conclude that the reason the [proper] interpretation of the Torah was transmitted orally and forbidden to be written down was not to make [the Torah] unchanging and not to tie the hands of the sages of every generation from interpreting Scripture according to their understanding. Only in this way can the eternity of Torah be understood [properly], for the changes in the generations and their opinions, situation and material and moral condition requires changes in their laws, decrees and improvements.<ref>{{citation |last1=Glasner |first1=Moshe Shmuel |title=Introduction to the דור רביעי |translator=Yaakov Elman |url=http://wwwarchive.math.psu.edu/glasner/Dor4/elman.html |orig-date=Spring 1991 |access-date=2023-05-09 |archive-date=2023-04-17 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230417142026/http://wwwarchive.math.psu.edu/glasner/Dor4/elman.html |url-status=dead }}</ref>}}

==== Conservative Judaism ====
{{Further|Conservative halakha}}
[[File:Kotel masorti.JPG|thumb|upright=1.2|A mixed-gender, egalitarian [[Conservative Judaism|Conservative]] service at [[Robinson's Arch]], [[Western Wall]]]]
The view held by [[Conservative Judaism]] is that the Torah is not the word of God in a literal sense. However, the Torah is still held as mankind's record of its understanding of God's revelation, and thus still has divine authority. Therefore, ''halakha'' is still seen as binding. Conservative Jews use modern methods of historical study to learn how Jewish law has changed over time, and are, in some cases, willing to change Jewish law in the present.<ref>[https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/halakhah-in-conservative-judaism/ "Halakhah in Conservative Judaism."] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191224105534/https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/halakhah-in-conservative-judaism/ |date=2019-12-24 }} ''My Jewish Learning''. 8 April 2019.</ref>

A key practical difference between Conservative and Orthodox approaches is that Conservative Judaism holds that its rabbinical body's powers are not limited to reconsidering later precedents based on earlier sources, but the [[Committee on Jewish Law and Standards]] (CJLS) is empowered to override Biblical and Taanitic prohibitions by ''takkanah'' (decree) when perceived to be inconsistent with modern requirements or views of ethics. The CJLS has used this power on a number of occasions, most famously in the "driving teshuva", which says that if someone is unable to walk to any synagogue on the Sabbath, and their commitment to observance is so loose that not attending synagogue may lead them to drop it altogether, their rabbi may give them a dispensation to drive there and back; and more recently in its decision prohibiting the taking of evidence on ''[[mamzer]]'' status on the grounds that implementing such a status is immoral. The CJLS has also held that the Talmudic concept of ''[[Kavod HaBriyot]]'' permits lifting rabbinic decrees (as distinct from carving narrow exceptions) on grounds of human dignity, and used this principle in a December 2006 opinion lifting all rabbinic prohibitions on [[Homosexuality|homosexual]] conduct (the opinion held that only male-male anal sex was forbidden by the [[the Bible and homosexuality|Bible]] and that this remained prohibited). Conservative Judaism also made a number of changes to the [[role of women in Judaism]] including counting women in a [[minyan]],<ref>Fine, David J. [https://www.rabbinicalassembly.org/sites/default/files/public/halakhah/teshuvot/19912000/oh_55_1_2002.pdf "Women and the Minyan."] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200617191359/http://www.rabbinicalassembly.org/sites/default/files/public/halakhah/teshuvot/19912000/oh_55_1_2002.pdf |date=2020-06-17 }} ''Committee on Jewish Law and Standards of the Rabbinical Assembly''. OH 55:1.2002. p. 23.</ref> permitting women to chant from the Torah,<ref>[https://masortiolami.org/frequently-asked-questions-masorti/ "Frequently Asked Questions about Masorti."] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190619004724/http://masortiolami.org/frequently-asked-questions-masorti/ |date=2019-06-19 }} ''Masorti Olami''. 25 March 2014. 8 April 2019.</ref> and ordaining women as [[rabbi]]s.<ref>Goldman, Ari. [https://www.nytimes.com/1985/02/14/nyregion/conservative-assembly-votes-to-admit-women-as-rabbis.html "Conservative Assembly ...."] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191231121949/https://www.nytimes.com/1985/02/14/nyregion/conservative-assembly-votes-to-admit-women-as-rabbis.html |date=2019-12-31 }} ''New York Times''. 14 February 1985. 8 April 2019.</ref>

The Conservative approach to halakhic interpretation can be seen in the CJLS's acceptance of Rabbi Elie Kaplan Spitz's responsum decreeing the biblical category of ''[[mamzer]]'' as "inoperative."<ref name="KaplanSpitz">Kaplan Spitz, Elie. [http://www.cwj.org.il/sites/default/files/Mamzerut%20-%20Spitz.pdf "Mamzerut."] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191227104443/http://www.cwj.org.il/sites/default/files/Mamzerut%20-%20Spitz.pdf |date=2019-12-27 }} ''Committee on Jewish Law and Standards of the Rabbinical Assembly''. EH 4.2000a. p. 586.</ref> The CJLS adopted the responsum's view that the "morality which we learn through the larger, unfolding narrative of our tradition" informs the application of Mosaic law.<ref name="KaplanSpitz" /> The responsum cited several examples of how the rabbinic sages declined to enforce punishments explicitly mandated by Torah law. The examples include the trial of the accused adulteress (''sotah''), the "law of breaking the neck of the heifer," and the application of the death penalty for the "rebellious child."<ref>Kaplan Spitz, p. 577-584.</ref> Kaplan Spitz argues that the punishment of the ''mamzer'' has been effectively inoperative for nearly two thousand years due to deliberate rabbinic inaction. Further he suggested that the rabbis have long regarded the punishment declared by the Torah as immoral, and came to the conclusion that no court should agree to hear testimony on ''mamzerut''.