The challenge posed by the changing world scene to traditional Judaism in its philosophical aspects has been discussed by previous lecturers. The advent of modern science brought with it a new conception of the universe and of man’s place within it, and Judaism was required to respond. This philosophical dialogue is of great significance. But ultimately, Judaism’s survival depends on Halakhah. If Halakhah is not preserved, then no matter how successful the philosophical adjustments, Judaism will not endure. Conversely, if Halakhah can be preserved within the changing world, then philosophers may struggle – but they will have something of enduring value to reflect on.Just as the philosophies nourished by modern science conflicted with Jewish philosophy, so too the practical discoveries and inventions of natural science presented great challenges to the halakhist. And just as in natural science the science itself is primary and philosophy flows from it, so too in Judaism – Halakhah is the given, the primary datum, the raw material. Philosophy must grow out of Halakhah, not the reverse.Indeed, the modern age of science has posed mighty challenges to Halakhah:Artificial insemination (late 19th century – reproduction without copulation) Electricity, radio, television – including ethical questions of communication Halakhah had three options in response to modern science and technology:A) Succumb – argue that Halakhah and science occupy different worlds and Halakhah is therefore obsolete; permit anything new by default B) Ignore – retreat into the ghetto, declare all innovation forbidden C) Creative Response – treat the challenge of modernity as a catalyst for internal growthIt is a testimony to the inner vitality of Halakhah that it chose the third path.As one editorial in Science put it, “dither” – kinetic friction is better than static inertia. Halakhah has always existed “in a dither” – from the days of Moses until today – and it is precisely this tension that has kep…

1. For this last lecture…melarge of שאלות I dealt with in my own experience, as example of problems that dimurn, and admit of, Hal solutions. 2. V-C – not all שאלות worthy of repention have (o many that are – no times). Some silly p’s surely in career – a) do photos of over relatives require קבורה? b) woman חשרח. Her favorite color green. But blue eyes. Bury her in green gown or blue one? 3) P in India – how run of haunted house (exorcisms!)

1. What motivated me to choose the theme of novelty and creativity (or חידוש) in Jewish life is not some academic speculation but a worry – that a rupture is taking place between the past and the future of creativity in both Halakhah and מחשבה – although I shall concentrate on the former. All of us here are, directly or indirectly, disciples of the Rav שליט"א, and for us creativity is an accepted part of our דרך both in הלכה ומחשבה. Can any of us imagine a שעור or דרשה of the Rav without a marvelous

His Personality: Civility. It emerges from the responsum that is the subject of this sheur that the local Rav, who referred the problem to R. Isaac Elchanan, had made a mistake; had he given the elderly couple who turned to him for guidance the right advice, the problem that so distressed the wife after her husband’s demise would never have arisen. Yet note how civil, even respectful, R. Isaac Elchanan is of this anonymous Rav: First—he lets him remain anonymous; he has no interest in exposing him to the opprobrium of his colleagues. Second, he does not insult him—no calling him an am ha-aretz, and no blistering attack demanding that he should have consulted him as a higher authority; and third, a special effort to interpret his actions in a favorable light. This is how a true gadol be’Yisrael acts—and how we too should conduct ourselves. The Halakhic Process. An important lesson to be learned from analysis of this responsum of R. Isaac Elchanan concerns the nature of the whole halakhic method. To put it into somewhat extreme forms, abandoning subtlety for the sake of clarity, there are two competing points of view: a) the halakhic process is totally objective and univocal; our purpose is but to discover the single halakhic truth, and to approach the question at hand utterly without prejudice or bias. b) the Halakha is what we want it to be; it is the formal dressing for rabbinic policy, whether explicit or implicit, conscious or unconscious. The responsum we studied belies both of these conflicting theses—each in a different way. The second view, that the Rabbis can make of the Halakha whatever they wish, is not only inconsistent with the whole history of Halakha, but it is pernicious in that it contradicts the most basic assumptions of the Halakha. It assumes an almost infinite plasticity on the part of the Halakha, and bears within itself serious antinomian consequences. If indeed, as the early Reformers and later their Conservative followers maintained, and is …