Download Sources ǀ Supplemental Sources

Part of the series, The Dynamics of Change 

With Dr. Michal Raucher, 91�첥 Fellow and Associate Professor of Jewish Studies at Rutgers University 

In the 1980s, the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards—the Conservative Movement’s central authority on Jewish law—ruled on abortion’s permissibility based on a justification framework. This framework assumes that abortion is generally prohibited but permitted in certain circumstances. They based their position on their reading of particular biblical and rabbinic sources. In the decades that followed, many Jewish institutions in the United States supported abortion rights on similar grounds and using the same texts. More recently, we’ve seen a shift in Jewish attitudes towards abortion. As more Jews have shared their own abortion experiences, their narratives have moved to the forefront and shifted the conversation. Jews are now advocating for abortion rights based on their experiences of abortion and a different reading of classical sources. In this session, we explore why and how this change occurred and consider the impact it might have on abortion rights in the United States. 

ABOUT THE SERIES

Change is an integral part of life and a central feature of the Jewish experience. Join 91�첥 scholars for an in-depth exploration of significant changes—religious, political, and personal—throughout Jewish history and life. Together we’ll consider core questions such as: What inspires change? What circumstances are most conducive to change, and what (or who) drives it? How do we experience change and adapt to its impact? How can Jewish values and ideas inspire us to change the world for the better?   

Inspired by the legacy of Rabbi Neil Gillman (��”l), in the year of his fifth yahrzeit 

Can Jewish thought help us understand our role in confronting climate change? Can it guide us when facing the loss of a loved one? In our modern, technology-saturated society, are there ways to feel close to God, to sense and appreciate sacred moments? Can Jewish theology speak to issues we care about and bring greater meaning to our lives? Rabbi Neil Gillman (��”��)—who taught theology at 91�첥 and at countless synagogues during his long and distinguished career—believed that Jewish theology should be the province of all Jews and that it should honestly address the challenges of the day. Inspired by his legacy, our panelists will explore new directions in Jewish theology and what they have to say to contemporary Jews.

Panelists

Professor Mara Benjamin is chair of Religion and Irene Kaplan Leiwant Professor and chair of Jewish Studies at Mount Holyoke College in South Hadley, Massachusetts. She is a scholar of modern Jewish thought and theology, and teaches a wide variety of topics in academic and community settings. Her most recent book, The Obligated Self: Maternal Subjectivity and Jewish Thought, investigates the religious dimensions of caring for young children in the context of Jewish thought and tradition. Her first book, Rosenzweig’s Bible: Reinventing Scripture for Jewish Modernity, examined the theological and political stakes of the endeavor to reinvigorate the Jewish Bible in a historicist age. It focused on the work of Franz Rosenzweig, one of the key Jewish religious philosophers of the modern period.

Rabbi Toba Spitzer has served Congregation Dorshei Tzedek in West Newton, Massachusetts, since she was ordained in 1997 at the Reconstructionist Rabbinical College. She recently published God Is Here: Reimagining the Divine, a book of popular theology that is already transforming hearts, minds, and lives. She is a teacher of courses on Judaism and economic justice, Reconstructionist Judaism, new approaches to thinking about God, and the practice of integrating Jewish spiritual and ethical teachings into daily life. She served as the president of the Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association from 2007–2009 and was the first LGBTQ rabbi to head a national rabbinic organization. She is the immediate past president of the Massachusetts Board of Rabbis.

Rabbi Mychal B. Springer is manager of clinical pastoral education at New York-Presbyterian Hospital and adjunct instructor of pastoral care and counseling at 91�첥. She founded the Center for Pastoral Education at 91�첥 in 2009. Over a 10-year period she oversaw an intensive hospice chaplaincy training program in collaboration with Metropolitan Jewish Health System’s Hospice. She served The Rabbinical School at 91�첥 as associate dean and director of field education. She co-edited Sisters in Mourning: Daughters Reflecting on Care, Loss, and Meaning and published “Presence in a Time of Distancing: Spiritual Care in an Acute Care Setting” in Jewish End-of-Life Care in a Virtual Age: Our Traditions Reimagined. She is a certified Jewish chaplain in Neshama: Association of Jewish Chaplains.

Moderator

Professor Arnold M. Eisen, one of the world’s foremost authorities on American Judaism, is chancellor emeritus of 91�첥 and professor of Jewish thought. He became chancellor in 2007 and stepped down in spring 2020 to return to teaching and scholarship as a full-time member of the 91�첥 faculty. During his tenure as chancellor, he transformed the education of religious, pedagogical, professional, and lay leaders for North American Jewry, with a focus on graduating highly skilled, innovative leaders who bring Judaism alive in ways that speak authentically to Jews at a time of rapid and far-reaching change. He is the author of Galut: Modern Jewish Reflection on Homelessness and Homecoming and Rethinking Modern Judaism: Ritual, Commandment, Community, among other works, and co-author of The Jew Within.

About the Rapaport Memorial Lecture

The annual Henry N. and Selma S. Rapaport Memorial Lecture was established in 1982 by Selma S. Rapaport (1916–2010), who served as president of the Women’s League for Conservative Judaism and as a longtime 91�첥 board member, in memory of her late husband. A distinguished attorney and committed Jew, Henry N. Rapaport (1905–1980) served as president of Temple Israel Center in White Plains, New York, and as president of United Synagogue. He was an active member of the 91�첥 board, and a generous benefactor of 91�첥’s scholarly programs.

Download Sources

Part of the series, Relating to God

With Dr. Arnold Eisen, chancellor emeritus and professor of Jewish Thought, 91�첥

Professor Eisen explores recent developments in Jewish thought about God and what God requires of us as Jews and human beings against the background of past Jewish thought, recent work by non-Jewish thinkers, and Professor Eisen’s own theological reflections in the age of COVID.

This session was generously sponsored by Yale Asbell, 91�첥 trustee

ABOUT THE SERIES

Relating to God Join 91�첥 scholars to explore what Jewish texts and thought can teach us about how we might understand, experience, and be in relationship with the divine.

See All Sessions in the Series

SPONSOR A SESSION

Did you know that you can sponsor a learning session to honor a loved one, celebrate an occasion, or commemorate a yahrzeit? To learn more, contact learninglives@jtsa.edu.

Sunday, May 15, 2022

Jewish learning has long focused on texts by an elite group of ancient rabbis. What would it mean to radically expand our canon, incorporating the voices of women, Jews of Color, people with disabilities, and other historically marginalized groups? 91�첥 scholars will introduce new voices and also offer new lenses through which to read ancient texts. Together we will explore how diversifying our canonical texts can help us create a more inclusive Jewish community. 

Chancellor Shuly Rubin Schwartz
Keynote presentation: “Expanding the Canon at 91�첥 and Beyond”

Study sessions led by 91�첥 scholars and alumni: 

Program Partners:

 &�Բ�����;



 

THE HENRY N. AND SELMA S. RAPAPORT MEMORIAL LECTURE

“The New Jew”—a recent Israeli TV documentary series exploring the diverse and creative ways in which American Jews express their Jewishness—was immensely popular in Israel. What accounts for Israelis’ positive response to several distinctively American models of Jewish identity and practice? How can religious expression in the U.S. help progressive Israeli leaders combat the understanding that persists among many Israelis that they can only be either Orthodox or secular? Join three creative Israeli experts and leaders to explore these questions, learn about progressive religious innovations already happening in Israel, and consider what’s at stake for all of us in how Israelis choose to be Jewish.

Due to copyright restrictions, the two clips from “The New Jew” that were screened during the program are replaced by explanatory slides in the recording.

Panelists:

Rabbi Tamar Elad Appelbaum, founder and spiritual leader of ZION: An Eretz Israeli Congregation in Jerusalem

Shmuel Rosner, columnist, editor, author, and think tank fellow based in Tel Aviv

Moshe Samuels, creator, chief of research, and deputy editor and writer of “The New Jew“ TV series; and CEO of Shazur / Interwoven

Moderator: Rabbi Julia Andelman, Director of Community Engagement, 91�첥

Parashat Masei (at Numbers 34) contains what we might call a map in prose. This map describes the extent of the Promised Land that the Israelites will soon enter. The boundaries are defined as follows:

• The southern boundary runs through the Negev Desert about 30–45 miles south of Beersheva, so that the northern part of Negev is within the Promised Land.
• Much of the western boundary consists of the Mediterranean Sea. Moving southward, the western boundary continues along the riverbed called the River of Egypt (נחל מצרים), Wadi El-Arish today, which runs west of the Gaza Strip.
• The northern boundary runs through current-day Lebanon, probably starting slightly south of Beirut and extending east.
• The eastern boundary’s northern flank is somewhere to the east of Damascus. It then moves westward to Lake Kinneret (the Sea of Galilee), and continues south along the Jordan River and the Dead Sea.

But next week’s parashah, at Deut. 1:7, provides a different description of the Promised Land’s borders, also found in more detail in Gen. 15:18–21. According to the map those passages share, the Promised Land is considerably larger:

• The western boundary is still the Mediterranean and the River of Egypt.
• The northern boundary is not clarified with great specificity, but it seems to extend up to Asia Minor (today’s Turkey).
• The eastern boundary is the Euphrates River in northeastern Syria.
• The southern boundary is not spelled out, but it may extend all the way to the Gulf of Eilat.

The most important difference between the two maps involves Transjordan, which was inhabited in ancient times by two and a half Israelite tribes: Reuben, Gad, and part of Manasseh. Several passages elsewhere in the Bible agree with one or the other map. Josh. 13, 14, and 22 describe how each of the twelve tribes received their own territory under the supervision of Joshua. These chapters assume the map from this week’s reading in Numbers, treating Israelite tribes in Transjordan as residing outside Israel’s territory. But other passages agree with Deut. 1 and Gen. 15, regarding the Transjordan’s inhabitants as within the Promised Land (Exod. 23:31, Deut. 11:24, Josh. 21, 2 Sam. 24, and 1 Kings 4–5).

How can we account for the presence of these two “maps” in the Torah? Modern biblical scholars such as me believe that the Torah was formed when scribes combined several documents that had been written by groups of sages, priests, and prophets from ancient Israel. All of them were mediating and interpreting messages from God and traditions they received from their ancestors. The more limited map of the Promised Land from this week’s parashah stems from the Priestly school of ancient Israel, whom we call the P authors. The other map appears in Deuteronomy, which was written by Levites, and in sections of Genesis and Exodus written by scribes called the J and E authors.

The differing opinions regarding borders lead each school of thought to view certain events differently from the other. Where did God change Jacob’s name to Israel? J and P both remember this important event: In J (Gen. 32:27–30), this event happened at Penuel, in Transjordan. But that version of the story is problematic for the Priestly authors, because in their view, Penuel is located outside the Promised Land, and one would assume this momentous event took place inside the Land. In a P passage (Gen. 35.6–15), God bestows the name Israel on Jacob and his progeny at Bethel, on the west side of the Jordan River.

Similarly, in this week’s Torah reading: when P tells us about the tribes of Reuben and Gad settling in Transjordan, they make it clear that their settlement there it is a concession. God permits them to live there only if they help conquer the Promised Land too (Num. 32:16ff.); the key word repeated in verses 20, 23, 29, and 30, is אם, “if.” When Deuteronomy tells us about this same event at the end of next week’s parashah (3:12ff.), the tribes’ settlement there is neither conditional nor a concession. The land east of the Jordan is God’s gift to those tribes; the key verb is נתתי, “I have given you” (vv. 12, 13, 15, 16, 18, 19, and twice in 20). The men from these tribes still fight in the Israelite army, but their receipt of their land in Transjordan is not contingent on their doing so.

We can notice a consistent מחלוקת or debate in the Torah about the extent of the Promised Land. The Torah provides two conflicting maps of the Land, along with two sets of texts that consistently view events through the lens provided by the one map or the other.

What do we learn from all this?

First, of all, it is significant that the debate occurs at all. The boundaries of the Land of Israel according to the Bible are not set in stone; there is more than one biblical view of its correct or ideal boundaries. Similar flexibility regarding the boundaries shows up in the Book of Kings. After Hiram the king of Tyre provides lumber and gold with which Solomon had the Temple built, Solomon transferred twenty towns in the Galilee to King Hiram to pay for these materials (1 Kings 9:11). This story gives rise to another disagreement, however. Later biblical historians who wrote the Book of Chronicles regarded the idea that the king of Israel could give up parts of the Promised Land in the conduct of international diplomacy as problematic, and so they altered the story so that Hiram granted the towns to Solomon (2 Chron. 8:2). (However the later version does not quite explain why Hiram would pay Solomon in return for goods that Hiram sent to Solomon!)

The variety of views grows even larger in rabbinic literature. The Mishnah asks what areas are covered by the laws of shemittah, the command to let farmland lie fallow every seventh year (����𱹾�’i�� 6:1). It rules that the Land of Israel within which land must lie fallow does not correspond to either biblical map. Instead, these laws are fully in effect only in the limited area settled by the Jews who returned from the Babylonian exile. In areas that had been settled by the Israelites centuries earlier in the time of Joshua, the laws of shemittah are partially in effect. And what of areas of the Land (according to either biblical map) that were not settled by Israelites at all—that is, Syria and Lebanon? The Mishnah rules that the laws of shemittah are not in effect there at all. For the Sages of the Mishnah, political realities play a role in defining the extent of the Land for halakhic purposes.

There is some flexibility regarding the boundaries of the Land. The Torah gives more than one map. The Mishnah assumes that the boundaries change over time.

But the whole debate is premised on a bedrock assumption: although the boundaries can shift, there are boundaries. Whatever their disagreements over details, all the biblical authors agree that there is such a thing as the Promised Land, and it’s located on the eastern shores of the Mediterranean Sea. Some Jews in modern times (for example, in Germany in the 19th century) wanted to eliminate notions of Promised Land and sacred space from Judaism. For the varied authors of the Torah, such a purging is just not possible. Like it or not, land matters to Judaism. There’s flexibility regarding where and how it matters, but not on the question of whether it matters at all.

This lesson goes beyond geography. The same basic idea that comes out of comparing this week’s Torah reading with next week’s applies more broadly in Judaism: There are boundaries. We can debate where they should be located; sometimes, they move. But the debate starts from the acknowledgement that boundaries are important to us as Jews.

This lesson is one that has particular import for Conservative Jews. The project of our movement is to bring Torah and its observance into the modern world. As we do so, it’s crucial to recall that in מַסְעֵינו, in our journeys, we’re not free as Jews to go anywhere at all. This is something Jews on the right and on the left both need to accept. Jews on the right need to realize that boundaries can be flexible, and the Bible is okay with that. Jews on the left need to realize there are boundaries, so that not every change we want to make is acceptable.

One might have thought that a list of geographic place-names, a map in prose, might be a little, well, boring, or even irrelevant. But a careful look at what seems boring in this week’s Torah reading turns out to be instructive. In the ways they differ, and in the ways they don’t, the Torah’s varied maps of the Promised Land serve as instruction, as guidance, as Torah for us modern Jews.

The publication and distribution of the 91�첥 Commentary are made possible by a generous grant from Rita Dee (��”l) and Harold Hassenfeld (��”l).