How the Psyscho-Halachic Process is Like Halachah

[dauer]

First a definition of terms for those not familliar.

Halachah: Related to the verb "to walk", refers to the entire corpus of Jewish law as it exists now and continues to develop in response to new situations. Not a biblical, but a rabbinic term. Development follows specific rules of logic, some of which have been shown to parallel the ways the Greeks approached their texts.

Psycho-halachic process: A modern approach that developed within Jewish Renewal which applies halachah in a more personalized manner, also taking more into account than just the rules traditional halachah looks at.

Jewish Renewal: A post or trans-denominational mystical movement that formed out of the 60s counterculture, influenced (with degree of influence varying greatly from place to place) by hasidism, feminism, shamanism, and process theology as well as to some degree Eastern religions, sufism, Jung, Wilber and various other sources, known for its radical theology, innovation and liberalism.


So why did I make this thread? The other day I was with some people at a virtual shul in the virtual world of Second Life. One person remarked that it would be interesting to do torah readings and such. It's not a direction the shul is going. Mostly it serves as a gathering place, virtual candle lighting for worldwide timezones, maybe some classes in the future, but I've digressed. The conversation continued until the question was raised about participation, who can participate in the service and how do you regulate that in a virtual world. My response was that it's virtual so it's not as much of an issue. The response I got back was that if it feels real to us, then it's real, that it's more a matter of what we believe than anything else.

The issue I had with this, which I raised, is that it's not a matter of what feels real and what we believe. It's a matter of halachah. My issue with the type of approach I was confronted with is that it is essentially wishy washy. Going by whatever you feel like moment to moment, in the clouds with no roots in the ground. I knew that because of the way I was responding I was probably coming off sounding more traditional, and I never corrected that view. But this is also not the way psycho-halachah operates. Psycho-halachah certainly does go beyond what has been done before (as I will get into in a moment) but this other approach simply tosses it all to the wayside.

What is a psycho-halachic approach to the question of spiritual practices within a virtual world? It begins just like halachah. You look at whatever you have already that might relate to the issue. One of the things that came to mind for me is the ruling about the Tetragrammaton on a computer. It's okay to delete it. Writing on a computer isn't the same as writing on a paper because the computer writing is really lots of flashes imperceptible to the eye. Now to be sure, this is not liscense to be disrespectful, but I think it's something that may have some bearing on this issue. It is here however that psycho-halachah departs. Because after the sources have been considered, it wants to consider those contemporary issues that might have bearing, and it also wants to consider the feelings of the individual. It'll also suggest some sort of spiritual practice to connect with something higher about the issue. But in all of this, there is no split second decision, no sudden pivot, and no single voice. There is a process. And the traditional sources are not ignored. They are taken into account. This does not mean theirs is the final say because there are other factors involved that are equally important, but part of the process is consulting them, learning from them. Even if diverging from them it is possible to still be influenced by these very sources.

How are the psycho-halachic process and halachah similar? They are involved approaches that lead to a systematic Jewish practice.

For a long time now kashrut has been an issue for me. I do not find meaning or relevance in it. But I see the importance of a dietary practice as part of Judaism. It's a piece of the puzzle. If kashrut isn't working, or any practice, better to have something in its place. So lately I have been more and more considering veganism, and this decision was influenced by Jewish sources, by the way man originally lived in the Torah, by the emphasis in Judaism on reducing the suffering of animals. I know that there was a time when animals were treated differently before they were slaughtered, when it was more localized and there was less demand. But today the way they live, as a Jew the situation has changed, and as is oft quoted: "if not now, when?"


Dauer

[Prober]

Originally Posted by dauer

For a long time now kashrut has been an issue for me. I do not find meaning or relevance in it. But I see the importance of a dietary practice as part of Judaism. It's a piece of the puzzle. If kashrut isn't working, or any practice, better to have something in its place. So lately I have been more and more considering veganism, and this decision was influenced by Jewish sources, by the way man originally lived in the Torah, by the emphasis in Judaism on reducing the suffering of animals. I know that there was a time when animals were treated differently before they were slaughtered, when it was more localized and there was less demand. But today the way they live, as a Jew the situation has changed, and as is oft quoted: "if not now, when?"

Dauer

Like maybe vegetarians could make tefillin out of carved wood?

Enjoyed the first part of your post and this vegan part even more. I'm already a vegetarian, which for me means no flesh at all. This means I'm not mixing flesh and dairy because there is no flesh.

I'm considering vegan (as well) for a couple of reasons.

01. Because it more healthful.
02. Because, as you mentioned, modern processes put stress on the animals. Now days, you don't just go to the barn and get a glass of milk and two eggs for breakfast.

I'm having a hard time facing giving up butter, cheese and sour cream (mmm...) or else it would be no problem.

[dauer]

Prober,

Like maybe vegetarians could make tefillin out of carved wood?

There are in fact vegetarian tefillin although afaik it's more do-it-yourself and not commercialized, although for myself, when it comes to ritual items, I don't think I'd be comfortable doing away with the original materials of the Torah, tefillin, shofar. There seems to be something very powerful in my experience about those types of ritual items whose origins go back through the ages, and owning a pair of tefillin doesn't seem like much to me. But I am also aware that it's possible embracing veganism that I could become more sensitive to this issue, and in the future perhaps seek alternatives when possible. I'll have to see what happens in the future.

I'm having a hard time facing giving up butter, cheese and sour cream (mmm...) or else it would be no problem.

I'm a big fan of cheese too. There actually may be more to the love of dairy than you may be aware, or you may also already be aware of this. This article goes a little into the chemical addiction to dairy, due to the opiates in milk and those that are created as the milk is broken down:

VegSource.com

Dauer

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, dauer and prober!

Last things first:

Originally Posted by dauer

I'm a big fan of cheese too. There actually may be more to the love of dairy than you may be aware, or you may also already be aware of this. This article goes a little into the chemical addiction to dairy, due to the opiates in milk and those that are created as the milk is broken down

Did ya'll catch the article I presented some time back about the (same?) opioids in grain? Which contributes to chemical addiction and allergies (grain and dairy). It was the "applied anthropology" thread in the ancient lore and mythology board: Applied Anthropology

Originally Posted by dauer

There are in fact vegetarian tefillin although afaik it's more do-it-yourself and not commercialized, although for myself, when it comes to ritual items, I don't think I'd be comfortable doing away with the original materials of the Torah, tefillin, shofar. There seems to be something very powerful in my experience about those types of ritual items whose origins go back through the ages, and owning a pair of tefillin doesn't seem like much to me. But I am also aware that it's possible embracing veganism that I could become more sensitive to this issue, and in the future perhaps seek alternatives when possible. I'll have to see what happens in the future.

OK, some of this (like tefillin) is outside my understanding. In some sense I can relate to Dauer's overall dilemma, I do feel there is a certain continuity that demands maintenance regardless of opinions and feelings. I can't speak with certain authority as one who knows precisely what that continuity fully consists of...but I don't think we would see Moses or Elijah running around changing up their ritual habits as the mood and whim suited them.

This is the Judaism board, and I certainly cannot speak as one to tell a Jew what is the correct way and what is not.

Regarding the '60's though, speaking as one who survived it as a child in a house that was removed from the liberal turbulence, I think there was a lot of emphasis that shifted to the individual at the time. The "me" generation. An ego trip of colossal proportions that assuaged its conscience by talking about doing away with ego. Which I find incredibly ironic. Anyway, I still see fallout from that era and that philosophical shift, I think in part because it became so entrenched in the educational establishments. A lot of the older professors today were merely hippies back then...

Anyway, I think a lot of the dilemma can be sorted out looking through that lens. Contemporary as opposed to traditional. Merely my two cents.

Good Luck resolving the issue, Dauer!

[dauer]

Juantoo,

but I don't think we would see Moses or Elijah running around changing up their ritual habits as the mood and whim suited them.

Yeah, definitely changing on a whim I think is not quite the way to go, especially with the type of work that's happening today. Interesting thing though, even traditionally within Judaism there's an acknowledgement that different generations get a different Torah. You get a story about Moses meeting R. Akiva, and Moses isn't familiar with what he's talking about. But the rabbis of the mishna were iconoclasts to begin with in creating rabbinic Judaism out of biblical Judaism, maintaining a continuity while diverging vastly and sometimes acting completely contrary to biblical Judaism. That's much the process I see happening today as Judaism enters a new phase of its existence, one that focuses much more on the individual and on the gray, instead of trying to fit everyone into black and white cookie cutter shapes.

Dauer

[Prober]

Originally Posted by dauer

I'm a big fan of cheese too. There actually may be more to the love of dairy than you may be aware, or you may also already be aware of this. This article goes a little into the chemical addiction to dairy, due to the opiates in milk and those that are created as the milk is broken down:

VegSource.com

Dauer

WOW! I had no idea! Based on that, I'm a big morphine addict.

And I agree with your ritual items sentiment. I'm very conservative myself.

[Prober]

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Did ya'll catch the article I presented some time back about the (same?) opioids in grain? Which contributes to chemical addiction and allergies (grain and dairy). It was the "applied anthropology" thread in the ancient lore and mythology board: Applied Anthropology

No, Juan, I'm sorry I didn't. 'Twas before my time.

That's fascinating! I've got a lot of thinking to do on that subject.

Hmm............

[dauer]

This thread has been dead but I thought I'd revive it because Reb Zalman just released a new book: Amazon.com: Integral Halachah: Transcending and Including: Books: Rabbi Zalman Schachter-Shalomi,Rabbi Daniel Siegel

And I saw an entry on the Reb Zalman Legacy Project blog that had an excerpt here:

Reb Zalman Legacy Project » Blog Archive » Chovot Ha-l’vavot / Obligations of the Heart

I'm going to get the book next week because I think it's really addressing some of the issues I have with a lack of a fleshed-out structure, albeit a flexible one. I think the whole idea of keeping Reb Arele's 32 affirmations in mind is a way of making more structured and clear something that previously wasn't, and that is not leaving G!d out of anything, including halachic decisions. If Reb Arele's affirmations are kept in mind then I don't think it can be at the same time a matter of what one feels like doing alone, because if it's not helping to foster the mindset of the affirmations then it's not going in the right direction. I think there's also a danger in such an approach of heading toward some degree of asceticism, but I'm hoping the book will address that.

[rebzgabbai]

Dear Dauer:
It sounds like you will enjoy Reb Zalman's book on Psycho-Halachah. Please read my recent post on the Reb Zalman WebSite which addresses some of your points in this thread.

Gabbai Seth Fishman,
BLOG Editor, Reb Zalman Legacy Project

[rebzgabbai]

Here's a summary of the post I alluded to, just to keep the content here as noted above.

1) I want to debunk the notion that Psycho-halachah and Jewish Renewal are exclusively on the liberal side. I believe that Reb Zalman's vision includes an update to traditional Judaism and that includes all kinds of Jews.
2) When you get the book, you will see that the very first update Reb Zalman gives as an example of the Psycho-halachic process is tefillin made out of wood. So I think you are right-on in terms of the direction you are heading with this.
3) I'm not sure it's right to say that Psycho-Halachah is "a modern approach developed within Jewish Renewal." I see Reb Zalman more as someone making us aware of the process by which halachah has always evolved and so Psycho-halachah is just an overview for us of an ancient process explained to us through modern language and concepts.
4) The key new concept, however, is the impact of Paradigm Shift on the ancient process. Identifying us as being in a new paradigm is one of Reb Zalman's major contributions; and then, of course, helping us assess what that statement means vis-a-vis our practice.

I add content from time to time to the Legacy project site, so just for the sake of clarity, the specific article I am referencing here is called "On Halachah and Jewish Renewal."

Blessings,
Seth

[dauer]

Thanks Seth.

The book is due to arrive from amazon on Monday and I'm very much looking forward to it.

To 1: In regard to Orthodoxy (as a more specific example), do you mean as an addition to traditional halachah that makes it a little less sterile or as something that reshapes the established principles by which it's applied? If it is the latter I think many Orthodox Jews would disagree.

I think re: 3 I tend to be skeptical of claims to legitimacy based on appeals to the past so for me it makes more sense, when something appears that is different from the way things are currently done, to say that yes, some of the content may have its roots in the past, but it's something new just the same, something that's building off of the past. It may well be that psycho-halachah is getting to the root of what's been happening, but I think even Reb Zalman suggested once before that in the past it wasn't necessarily such a conscious or self-aware process. His statement may have, however, been in reference to something else.


To say, for example, that hazal were breaking old ground (iconoclasm) and breaking new ground by reshaping the clay they'd dug up in light of their current situation, to me the historical record pretty much establishes that. But that type of iconoclasm is still a very vague enterprise and some might suggest that Judaism comes as the tradition that follows that break from the past, not from the break itself, so if someone took that and said "We have a history of iconoclasm so let's destroy everything held sacred and make it into something different" I think that would be taking things too far and lead potentially into antinomianism or a new religion entirely. I don't see renewal doing that. I see it trying to work with both the past and the present while following a teleological tug. That's just an example of why I avoid such appeals. If something is of value I think it should prove itself so based on its own merit which, from what I have seen of it, the psycho-halachic process does for me.

Thank you for taking the time to get back to the site and respond to some of the specific points I made. A lot of webmasters/bloggers etc would have been more inclined to do a promote-and-run.

Dauer

[rebzgabbai]

Dauer:
I hope and pray that my words are helpful to you and are in line with Reb Zalman's vision.

I read what you wrote and it is a pleasure to meet you in this forum. It is my pleasure to have this conversation and I certainly do not believe that the material in this book is something you read and then go about your business. To quote Reb Zalman from another lecture, "It is not in-formation; it is soul-formation."

Let me see if I can answer your questions:
1) I have perhaps made the wrong impression when I use the phrase, "an update to traditional Judaism." But I don't think it is one of your choices either.
It is not an addition to traditional halachah. No. He definitely calls it a new chessboard and he quotes the most modern, up-to-date Orthodox halachists and he clearly says in the book, "No, this is different. This one's vision was different." He is making a more fundamental shift. It's not little tweaking and adjusting going on here.
But I also wouldn't agree about the notion of "reshaping the established principles."
I'd suggest a third option: It's more pragmatic. We all are given a choice to be observant or not and the goal, from his perspective, is to bring God into our lives. So then he asks, "Are you getting close to God with your practice? How is it working for you?" Perhaps some things work well. Some other things need dusting and tweaking. And other things are problems because they go against a belief or an idea that hazal didn't have but which we do. So I'd say he is showing us in practical terms how to take back the process of owning this and shaping this and letting us know how to do that without changing it into something that isn't Judaism. But traditional Judaism is the foundation from whence he comes.

Regarding your second point, I'd say that from working on the material of this book, I got, what I feel is a really good understanding of the old and current halachah process. I mean he gave me an understanding about how hazal thought and even beyond hazal, where hazal itself came from. The beautiful illustration is his explanation of how candle lighting became practice in the face of an injunction against lighting fires.

Regarding your last point, I'd say that Zalman is very much into continuity. He has been an advocate for the role of Renewalist but he is adding that role to the role of Restorationist. They are both part of a healthy Judaism. He doesn't ask Restorationists to stop doing what they are doing and become Renewalists. In a sense, all of us are both. The question he asks is how's the God-connection working for you? If it's strong then geh gesunderhei. If it's weak then there are some things we might not have given ourselves permission to explore before that we should reconsider.

Seth

[dauer]

Seth,

I'm aware of the chessboard analogy, but how is that not adding? If the vision is different, how is it not changing? It sounds to me like the major difference is semantics. I do agree with the statements you're making about how and why one would apply psycho-halachah and as I said in my previous post, I think it may well be getting to the root, but that doesn't mean it's not new. I think most of your reply that attempts to address the issue of where psycho-halachah comes from boils down to ambiguous wordplay that obfuscates meaning in a way that might lend an additional feeling of authenticity to psycho-halachic process. For me, on a mythical level that's okay and probably somewhat vital, but on a more rational level I don't think it really works as well.

Regarding your second point, I'd say that from working on the material of this book, I got, what I feel is a really good understanding of the old and current halachah process. I mean he gave me an understanding about how hazal thought and even beyond hazal, where hazal itself came from. The beautiful illustration is his explanation of how candle lighting became practice in the face of an injunction against lighting fires.

Then maybe the book will be able to put it together for me better. From everything I've read so far on the psycho-halachic process I see it as innovation, regardless of whether or not some of its roots are in tradition. Rambam's understanding of G!d was also rooted in tradition and in that case was clearly taking an idea that already existed further, but even for Rambam I would consider it innovation, something new.

He has been an advocate for the role of Renewalist but he is adding that role to the role of Restorationist. They are both part of a healthy Judaism.

Then how does the psycho-halachic process, which according to what you have said previously is also for traditional Judaism, work for restorationists?If they say, "What we are doing works with us and G!d" is that as far as they need to take it for it to be psycho-halachic and if so, how is that different than what some of them are doing now? In the case of orthopractic restorationists who may not have that spiritual connection, there are seforim that address that already. How is psycho-halachic process helping them rather than being an umbrella which is inclusive of them? How is it an update for an existing OS rather than a new OS that contains a degree of backwards compatibility with people running an older OS without them having to switch over in order to network properly? And in such a situation, won't there be an issue of some software not being compatible with the older system? What if there's someone running psycho-halachah with some new software and then someone else is running halachah? The person running psycho-halachah, if they want to communicate, may have to change some of the file-types, translating the code into something more compatible, and in other cases may not be able to share files at all.

My apologies if I seem combative. I'm not intending to be. I'm just by nature skeptical, analytical and detail-oriented. And thank you very much for your time. It's much appreciated.

Have a good shabbos.

--dauer

[rebzgabbai]

The first question you are asking is if Jewish Renewal is a change of Judaism or adding to Judaism. For me, when Reb Zalman says we are on a different chessboard, I am thinking of radical change. But the difference is that the change doesn't come from Reb Zalman and Renewalists. It is something objective, something out there in the cosmology that comes down to us, to all of us. So the Renewalist isn't changing Judaism based on something the Renewalist is espousing. The change is simply beyond the Renewalist. Perhaps the Renewalist listens harder to the changes and feels a tension more keenly in the fact that the institutions have lagged behind the changes that have come down.

To give a basic example, the fact that the earth revolves around the sun was a basic paradigm shift for science but Rabbinic Judaism pre-dated that shift. So the Copernican Revolution had an impact on Christianity, perhaps even led to the Protestant Reformation. How did it impact Judaism?

There's lots of things that go into the Paradigm Shift. Another one that Reb Zalman talks about in this book and one that is right there in the term Psycho-Halachah is the contributions of psychologists, Freud and Jung and others, which also came after Rabbinic Judaism. Think of the amazing ways that psychology has changed the way we look at ourselves and the world. So our consciousness has shifted with the advent of the psychological way of understanding ourselves and along with this fundamental shift (which as I am saying doesn't come from Renewalists; it just comes from where it comes), the way of understanding is also part of a new God-connection for us post-psychology creatures. And the God-connection is deeper because now we have a different way of understanding ourselves which also affects our experiences as living creatures and consequently our way of connecting to God.

But at the same time, if you are going to talk about changing something as old and rich as the Jewish heritage, then you are probably going to be a blip in its history and the change isn't going to look like much especially in the context of a single generation. The paradigm shift and its impact on Judaism will probably play out over the next two thousand years and Reb Zalman is just simply asking us whether we are listening to what's coming down and he's also giving us permission to begin the process of reprogramming what came down two thousand years ago because the Judaism of the next two thousand years will be reshaped over time.

The amazing thing about the Jewish heritage is that a lot of the resiliency and adaptability is already built in. I mean take hashem, the Eternal, YKVK. So a Christian might say that YKVK became somehow less important two thousand years ago and Jesus had an important contribution to make because the world was moving from Deism to Theism. But we Jews recognized that YKVK was still God even in light of the paradigm shift. So now, YKVK became the Theistic part too. So by having the same God throughout all eternity doesn't mean that God isn't understood differently at different times. It is. The way we understand God changes. This was an amazing learning I got from Reb Zalman. That Avraham understood God in one way and Yishmayahu another, and so on.

So here we are again with a new epoch we are entering into, and things are different and changed. And God-willing we will have another two thousand years to work on this without being annihilated by our insensitivity to the planet and the delicate balance of nature.

So Psycho-halachah doesn't stand counter to halachah. It is a recognition that halachah needs to be understood in the context of some new cosmologies, specifically psychology.

With regard to restorationists, the point is that all us jews are collaborating. The process will work if we report back to one another and we are talking and listening to one another.

So here's an illustration. I have a conversation with my restorationist friend about wearing wooden tefillin. I explain why I do it, because I am against slaughtering an animal, and I also like the connection I have when I wear it to forests and ecology. My friend says it's halachah limoshe misinai that it has to be leather. I suggest the halachah needs to change that he shouldn't insist that I am not yotzi tefillin if I wear my wooden ones.

This is a collaborative process. Somehow it's now come to where you see rainbow tallitot in Orthodox gatherings. This is because Reb Zalman recognized that changes in halachah come from beyond the specific administrators, the ones in charge.

This book is about changing halachah and it is empowering to the Jew on the street. It turns out that the way we practice in our lives is relevant even if we're not sitting on a beis din somewhere, and even if we don't have smicha from Reb Moshe Feinstein a'h. It is practice that has led to something getting stamped as kosher, provided that the practice is Jewish and that it is in line with the intent of the original mitzvah. Reb Zalman goes into this in some detail in the book, what he calls the deconstruction of the mitzvah.

It's not so much about people who are advocating for change who are standing in opposition to other people. It is about how Judaism works and how it can work in the advent of changes in cosmology that haven't come from Renewalists; they've just come from wherever.

I don't think I'm obfuscating or playing with words. Please let me know if any of this is making sense.

Blessings,
Seth

[rebzgabbai]

Correction: I meant Yishayahu (Isaiah).