Home Home / Letter from Judge Alvin Hellerstein abo…

Correspondence

March 2, 1967

Letter from Judge Alvin Hellerstein about the Torah's Position on Abortion (1967)

Halachik Method
View The Text

This content is currently available in its original PDF format. As we expand the library, we plan to add a text version as well.

RELATED CONTENT

Article

Love and Law: The Rejection of Jewish Marriage Law Poses a Threat to the Unborn and to Our People (1969)

Jews who have not been brought up in the full Jewish tradition are often taken aback at the way in which Judaism expresses its concerns about marriage and married life. Even when predisposed to a sympathetic appreciation of the Torah tradition, such people cannot understand the severely legal manner of the Jewish doctrine of marriage. When discussing the relationship between husband and wife, the Talmud speaks of mitzvah and din, of halachah and issitr, of rights and duties—exactly, it seems, in the same terms of its discourses on civil and commerical law. Is there no difference, people ask, between the area of domestic relationships and these others? Is not the derogatory charge of “legalism” so often pressed against us just- ified in the light of Judaism’s treatment of marriage in the language of commandments and prohibitions, laws and duties? The modern mentality cannot understand that these laws referring to family life should constitute as much as one fourth of the entire Shidchan Aruch, the code of Jewish law; that married life should be based on any factor other than love.Of course, husband and wife, parents and children, cannot think only of their rights and their demands upon each other. For a family to be successful there must be love and patience and tenderness and a willing- ness to forgive and forget and forego. The Talmud (Kiddushin 41a) teaches that the famous command- merit, v’ahavta le’reiacha kamocha, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” refers, in the first instance, to one's wife. And Maimonides codifies as Jewish law (Hilchos I shun 15:19) the statement of the Sages that a man should honor his wife more than himself—in the manner in which he provides for her—and love her as much as himself. Having said this—it is a self-evident principle—we must add another truism: love itself is an insufficient basis for life. Solomon proclaimed that Azah ka-maves ahavah, “Love is as strong as death.” Love is powe…
Halachik Method

Correspondence

Exchange with Judge Alvin Hellerstein about the Jewish View on Marriage and Divorce (1968)

Dear Rabbi Lamm: Your essay “Law and Love” in the February 23, 1968 edition of the "Bulletin" has filled me with disquiet and I should like to deliver myself of some thoughts. You say “We are discharging our responsibility to them [our fellow Jews who have abandoned Jewish marriage law] and to their children. . .and to generations yet unborn, informing them and cautioning them about the Torah's law of marriage and legitimacy." I gather you mean that we, the Orthodox, are responsibly upholding the letter of our law of marriage and divorce and woe to those who do not heed. In my opinion, this view is irresponsible, not responsible, in terms of real problems with which people become involved. If, as I believe is the case, people are asked to decide whether to submit to a set of laws in circumstances where applications are manifestly unjust and harsh or ignore the law, the law will be ignored and held up to ridicule, and indifference and disrespect to all its precepts will be encouraged. As I suggest below, the law regarding divorce is in immediate need of reform and it is not seemly to caution others unless there is a will and intention to bring such a reform about. Let us take the case of a woman, wronged by an adulterous husband who abandons her and their children and moves to a distant state, perhaps to remarry or otherwise to take up life anew. From every point of view, the best course for the woman, for herself and her children, would be to divorce herself from her husband and remarry. Civil law permits this. With the husband's consent, Jewish law permits this. In times of old, consent of the husband could often be compelled for by custom and law a man could only with difficulty escape the jurisdiction of the rabbis. Consent cannot be compelled today. Should not law recognize this changed condition? Was God at Sinai deficient in his omniscience so as not to foresee such a changed condition? I cannot believe that religious institutions can be so paralyzed as not t…
General Jewish Thought Halachik Method Practical Halacha Marriage & Sexuality

Correspondence

Letter to Dr. Feldblum about Maimonides' View of Post-Second Temple Halacha (1970)

Dear Meyer Simcha: I am sorry that I had to leave early this past Sunday, in the midst of the remarks of the third speaker. But I am very pleased, indeed, that I had the opportunity to hear all your remarks in your lecture. I was fascinated by your theory of the Halakhah according to Maimonides, especially the concept that a conscious decision was made at the time of the destruction of the Temple to opt for the unity of the people at the expense of greater flexibility and fluidity in halakhic decision-making. If this theory can be substantiated, I think it will be a most important contribution to the philosophy of Halakhah.As you so rightly implied, the whole discussion is "dangerous," but that is no excuse for failing to confront it squarely even while being circumspect.I strongly urge you to write up your ideas, including both segments, the scholarly-historical, and the contemporary, and publish it. Until you do, I would very much appreciate receiving from you basic references, especially to Maimonides and any modern historians, to allow me my own satisfaction as to the basic validity of the idea.Once again, it was a genuine pleasure hearing you, and I do hope we shall have many opportunities to meet personally.Cordially yours,RABBI NORMAN LAMM
Halachik Method