Doesn’t the rabbi fear that his path will lead to reform and serious disrespect for the divinity of the Torah among those who take his words one step further?
I know that the Rabbi does not attach importance to slippery slope considerations,
But I think that we should still be a little aware of what this can lead to. I thought a little about the rabbi’s innovative ideas and the coordination between them and the first opinions among the educated that ultimately led to the reform. They are surprisingly similar. Doubt in exactly the same places, prayer, mixing in the synagogue, a historically positive view of Chazal and so on, a significant reduction of what was given at Sinai. The ancient sages have no authority to determine anything, and it is clear to me that the ideas are found among the sages of Israel, but Rabbi Aharon Horin also permitted a Jew to play the organ in a synagogue on Shabbat based on the Tosafot on musical instruments. Judaism is not just formalism. It is first and foremost a covenant between a people and God. And if we shatter trust in this covenant, we are severing what “dry halakhah” is based on. We should attach importance to what these ideas do. I would be happy if the rabbi did not ignore the response. All the best.
I am not talking about phenomena but about people. I am not changing a generation but at most a partial cause of change in individuals. Individuals are affected by my words in all sorts of ways. For some it drags them down and for others it strengthens them greatly, and it is precisely the conventional positions that drag many of them down. Therefore, it is impossible to set limits here.
And hence my approach is that I do not address such considerations. I say what seems right to me, and whatever happens will happen. Some boycott my words, and perhaps that is good because it is not necessary or appropriate for them. But there are those who need them and use them, and for them I write. The consideration of a slippery slope is, as far as I am concerned, something that can only be activated in extreme situations: when the danger is clear and immediate, great and widespread, and when there is no counter-consideration (meaning that not publishing does not also lead to a reverse slippery slope). What is more, the very publication is a benefit in getting closer to the truth, and if I do not publish then by definition a slippery slope towards falsehood will be created.
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
