The Experts below are selected from a list of 318 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Amir Mashiach - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
A critical investigation into Rabbi Shaul Yisraeli’s views on the phenomenon of labour
Hts Teologiese Studies-theological Studies, 2019Co-Authors: Amir MashiachAbstract:Rabbi Shaul Yisraeli (1909–1995) was one of religious Zionism’s greatest Rabbis and adjudicators. He served for many years as the Rabbi of Moshav Kfar Haroeh, sat as a judge in the supreme Rabbinical Court and was head of the Merkaz Harav yeshiva. The purpose of this study is to shed light on Yisraeli’s attitude towards work. Did he see work as a basic human obligation spelled out by the physical need for survival? Did he associate an ideological value with work, as part of a worldview integrating religious values with extra-religious ones, similar to socialism? Or did he see work as a religious value, one that stemmed from his theology?
-
War and the Military in Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Auerbach’s Halakhic Decisions
Review of Rabbinic Judaism, 2018Co-Authors: Amir MashiachAbstract:Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (1910–1995) was one of the most influential Halakhic authorities of the twentieth century. Although he was an ultra-Orthodox Rabbi, Rabbi Auerbach dealt with the complexity of army and military life. This article shows that he possessed of a clear “operational way of thinking,” reflecting deeply on the unique needs of the military of the Jewish State. Additionally, the article examines various approaches of filling the normative gap in issues of war and the military. Rabbi Auerbach based his specification of the Halakhah on his personal understanding and his own S’vara , that is, Halakhic logic.
-
The Individual vs. Society in Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Auerbach’s Halakhic Rulings
Review of Rabbinic Judaism, 2017Co-Authors: Amir MashiachAbstract:Rosh Yeshivat Kol Torah in Jerusalem for more than forty years, Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Auerbach was one of the most influential Halakhic decisors of the twentieth century. Rabbi Auerbach was a major figure in Haredi society which makes his Halakhic involvement in military issues more interesting. An examination of his Halakhic rulings in this matter shows that Rabbi Auerbach comprehended not only the complexity of being a religious soldier in the Army but also the complexity of the operational needs of the Army. Here I identify and analyze Rabbi Auerbach’s Halakhic rulings on military issues in two aspects: a) regular military issues; b) different Halakhic issues on which Rabbi Auerbach imported military discussions and terminology into the halakhic discourse. Moreover, I show that Rabbi Auerbach worked in the light of the principle, “The Nullification of the Individual” (my terminology). Finally, I compare Rabbi Auerbach’s attitude towards Citizen-State issues to that of the German philosopher G.W.F. Hegel.
David Levy - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
LibGuides: Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra: Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra
2014Co-Authors: David LevyAbstract:The polymath Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra was a philosopher, astronomer, mathematician, poet, linguist, Biblical commentator, and physician.
-
LibGuides: Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra: Articles and Books
2014Co-Authors: David LevyAbstract:The polymath Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra was a philosopher, astronomer, mathematician, poet, linguist, Biblical commentator, and physician.
-
LibGuides: Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra: Websites
2014Co-Authors: David LevyAbstract:The polymath Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra was a philosopher, astronomer, mathematician, poet, linguist, Biblical commentator, and physician.
Larry Stowers - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Rabbi David Zaslow and Debra Zaslow
2014Co-Authors: Larry StowersAbstract:Photograph of Rabbi David and Debra Zaslow from the 47th Church and Synagogue Library Association conference, which was held at the Crowne Plaza hotel in Portland, Oregon. They are seated at a table with David's book "Jesus First Century Rabbi", Debra's book "Bringing Bubbe Home", and a CD put together by Debra called "Return Again" full of audio stories. Attendees across from them are purchasing items and having them signed.
-
Rabbi David Zaslow sitting down
2014Co-Authors: Larry StowersAbstract:Photograph of Rabbi David Zaslow from the 47th Church and Synagogue Library Association conference, which was held at the Crowne Plaza hotel in Portland, Oregon. He is sitting down at a table. Zaslow was a guest speaker at the event.
Menachem Kerenkratz - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Rabbi yoel teitelbaum the satmar rebbe and the rise of anti zionism in american orthodoxy
Contemporary Jewry, 2017Co-Authors: Menachem KerenkratzAbstract:Since the late 19th century American Orthodox Jews presented an almost united front in support of the Zionist cause. This state of affairs lasted until the late 1930s. Since then, and especially after the establishment of the state of Israel in 1948, a growing number of Rabbis and lay Orthodox openly expressed anti-Zionist opinions. Although there are several possible sociological, demographic and religious explanations of this historical paradox, this article focuses on what many, I included, consider the most significant factor, namely Rabbi Yoel Teitelbaum (1887–1979) - the Satmar Rebbe. Rabbi Yoel arrived in the USA in 1946, and two years later decided to settle there and to establish his own congregation. In order to mark his unique Extreme Orthodox philosophy, and to set it apart from America’s mainstream Orthodoxy, he promoted a distinctive anti-Zionist and anti-Israeli ideology that was based on religious arguments. Although he initially encountered overwhelming opposition, over time the number of his supporters grew to unimaginable proportions. As the Israeli government began legislating laws that reflected the will of its secular majority, the conflicts that arose between it and the Haredi society escalated. This drove other American religious leaders to become more critical of what they considered Israel’s anti-religious policy. In time, American Orthodoxy began to view anti-Zionism as a legitimate, halacha-based religious position.
-
hast thou escaped and also taken possession the responses of the satmar rebbe Rabbi yoel teitelbaum and his followers to criticism of his conduct during and after the holocaust
Dapim: Studies on the Holocaust, 2014Co-Authors: Menachem KerenkratzAbstract:Rabbi Yoel Teitelbaum – the Satmar Rebbe was among the most known Rabbinical figures after the Holocaust. He became known for establishing a large and prosperous Hasidic court while at the same time maintaining ultra-conservative, extreme orthodox and anti-Zionist views. His unique theological interpretation of the Holocaust asserted that the severe sins committed by Zionism forced God to punish the People of Israel by the harshest of punishments – the Holocaust. This article will explore the assumption that Rabbi Yoel's views on that matter were influenced by his own experiences and by his need to explain his acts, or lack of them, before, during and after the Holocaust. The first section will describe the Rabbi's life and actions during the Holocaust, both at personal and public levels, as reflected in his biographies, the local press, memoirs written by his Hasidim and archival sources. The second section will evaluate Rabbi Yoel's dubious conduct, both as an individual person and in his capacity as a ...
Azzan Yadin - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Rabbi akiva s youth
The Jewish Quarterly Review, 2010Co-Authors: Azzan YadinAbstract:Despite its almost universal acceptance, the story of Rabbi Akiba's youthful ignorance is not attested in tannaitic sources. Indeed, analysis of the manuscript traditions of Sifre Deuteronomy §357 allows us to recover a tannaitic dictum that identifies Rabbi Akiba as a student of Torah from childhood. The present article lays out the philological argument for accepting this reading, and outlines some of the broader issues the trajectory of Rabbi Akiba's biography raises. Finally, it suggests a possible motivation for this dramatic turn in the post-tannaitic representation of Rabbi Akiba.
-
scripture as logos Rabbi ishmael and the origins of midrash
Journal of Biblical Literature, 2004Co-Authors: Azzan YadinAbstract:Scripture as Logos: Rabbi Ishmael and the Origins of Midrash, by Azzan Yadin. Divinations. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004. Pp. xiii + 231. $55.00 (hardcover). ISBN: 0812237919. The central thesis of Scripture as Logos is that the Tannai m (second-third centuries C.E. Rabbis) who composed the Ishmaelian midrashic collections (basically the Mekhilta of Rabbi Ishtnael and Sifre Numbers) instituted a relatively restrained approach to the interpretation of Scripture. The notion of a fully polysemous Torah was not shared bv these Rabbis. Their motto might be summarized as "Be silent until the text speaks," a motto that contrasts with that which they ascribe to their opponents, who say to the text, "Be silent until I expound." The reader of Scripture is to engage in moderately passive hermeneutics; the meaning of Scripture is not entirely open, as some literary theorists might propose, but rather semi-closed. The reader must accept interpretive cues from Scripture itself and not impart them from without. Scripture speaks to its interpreter and acts as its interpreter's teacher in a system where ultimately authority and control belong to the text itself. The classification of the midrashic schools into those of R. Ishmael and those of R. Aqiva upon which Yadin's work rests is worthy of note. Over one hundred years ago, David Zvi Huffman demonstrated that the halakic/tannaitic midrashim can be separated into these two schools. This classification was reinforced by the research of Jacob Nahum Epstein and Menahem Kahana, among others. Recently the classification was challenged by Gary Porton and Jay Harris. Yadin's book is a welcome response to their challenge. While we can no longer be certain that these midrashic collections reflect the opinions of their eponymous fathers, we can be certain of the basic differences between them. Overwhelming textual evidence for such a classification has been documented, and neither Porton nor Harris directly addresses this evidence. Yadin refutes Harris's implication that nineteenth-century' polemical scholars/Rabbis constructed the idea of the Ishmaelian school and its "simpler," less fanciful approach to biblical interpretation. Yadin convincingly demonstrates that such an approach did exist and is not a scholarly fantasy. Yadin begins by analyzing the different uses of two terms which frequently appear in Ishmaelian midrashim: Torah and ha-katuv ("the verse"). As a term, Torah stands for the voice of revelation and is usually used to introduce Scripture itself. It is a voice of authority, but it speaks in the past and is not active. In contrast, ha-katuv is the midrashic voice, a teacher of Scripture, and it steins from Scripture itself. The personification of ha-katuv as Scripture teaching the hermeneutics of Scripture serves as a basis for the remainder of the book. In ch. 2, Yadin examines the restraint demanded of the Scriptural reader in Ishmaelian midrashim. He elucidates a fascinating exchange between R. Eliezer and R. Ishmael, in which the latter rebukes the former for replacing the proper submission to the verse with aggressive hyper-interpretation. While R. Ishmael listens to the verse and then interprets, R. Eliezer tells the verse to "be silent" until he is done interpreting. As part of their hermeneutical strategy, Ishmaelian midrashim claim that certain words in Scripture are "marked" and therefore "available" for interpretation. The reader is to search for and locate such marks (superfluity, anomalous spellings, and other such phenomena) and then and only then interpret them. Even this search for "markers" is restrained. Not all verses are "marked" and some "markers" merely lead toward understanding the simple, noninterpreted meaning of the verse. Without evidence of "marking," the Scriptural interpreter has no right to engage in creative exegesis. In contrast, the Sifra, the pinnacle of Aqivan midrashic creation, perceives all words as potentially "marked" and hence makes the category of "marked" meaningless since it has no contrast. …
-
Scripture as Logos: Rabbi Ishmael and the Origins of Midrash - Scripture as Logos: Rabbi Ishmael and the Origins of Midrash
Journal of Biblical Literature, 2004Co-Authors: Azzan YadinAbstract:Scripture as Logos: Rabbi Ishmael and the Origins of Midrash, by Azzan Yadin. Divinations. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004. Pp. xiii + 231. $55.00 (hardcover). ISBN: 0812237919. The central thesis of Scripture as Logos is that the Tannai m (second-third centuries C.E. Rabbis) who composed the Ishmaelian midrashic collections (basically the Mekhilta of Rabbi Ishtnael and Sifre Numbers) instituted a relatively restrained approach to the interpretation of Scripture. The notion of a fully polysemous Torah was not shared bv these Rabbis. Their motto might be summarized as "Be silent until the text speaks," a motto that contrasts with that which they ascribe to their opponents, who say to the text, "Be silent until I expound." The reader of Scripture is to engage in moderately passive hermeneutics; the meaning of Scripture is not entirely open, as some literary theorists might propose, but rather semi-closed. The reader must accept interpretive cues from Scripture itself and not impart them from without. Scripture speaks to its interpreter and acts as its interpreter's teacher in a system where ultimately authority and control belong to the text itself. The classification of the midrashic schools into those of R. Ishmael and those of R. Aqiva upon which Yadin's work rests is worthy of note. Over one hundred years ago, David Zvi Huffman demonstrated that the halakic/tannaitic midrashim can be separated into these two schools. This classification was reinforced by the research of Jacob Nahum Epstein and Menahem Kahana, among others. Recently the classification was challenged by Gary Porton and Jay Harris. Yadin's book is a welcome response to their challenge. While we can no longer be certain that these midrashic collections reflect the opinions of their eponymous fathers, we can be certain of the basic differences between them. Overwhelming textual evidence for such a classification has been documented, and neither Porton nor Harris directly addresses this evidence. Yadin refutes Harris's implication that nineteenth-century' polemical scholars/Rabbis constructed the idea of the Ishmaelian school and its "simpler," less fanciful approach to biblical interpretation. Yadin convincingly demonstrates that such an approach did exist and is not a scholarly fantasy. Yadin begins by analyzing the different uses of two terms which frequently appear in Ishmaelian midrashim: Torah and ha-katuv ("the verse"). As a term, Torah stands for the voice of revelation and is usually used to introduce Scripture itself. It is a voice of authority, but it speaks in the past and is not active. In contrast, ha-katuv is the midrashic voice, a teacher of Scripture, and it steins from Scripture itself. The personification of ha-katuv as Scripture teaching the hermeneutics of Scripture serves as a basis for the remainder of the book. In ch. 2, Yadin examines the restraint demanded of the Scriptural reader in Ishmaelian midrashim. He elucidates a fascinating exchange between R. Eliezer and R. Ishmael, in which the latter rebukes the former for replacing the proper submission to the verse with aggressive hyper-interpretation. While R. Ishmael listens to the verse and then interprets, R. Eliezer tells the verse to "be silent" until he is done interpreting. As part of their hermeneutical strategy, Ishmaelian midrashim claim that certain words in Scripture are "marked" and therefore "available" for interpretation. The reader is to search for and locate such marks (superfluity, anomalous spellings, and other such phenomena) and then and only then interpret them. Even this search for "markers" is restrained. Not all verses are "marked" and some "markers" merely lead toward understanding the simple, noninterpreted meaning of the verse. Without evidence of "marking," the Scriptural interpreter has no right to engage in creative exegesis. In contrast, the Sifra, the pinnacle of Aqivan midrashic creation, perceives all words as potentially "marked" and hence makes the category of "marked" meaningless since it has no contrast. …
