2. One sentiment that comes up a *lot* on Twitter is that Jews don't believe in Hell or Judaism doesn't believe in Hell.
3. There's an important distinction between these two statements in that the former refers to the beliefs of people while the latter refers to dogma.
As any member of the clergy will confirm, what people believe does not always correlate with what dogma demands.
4. That said, Jewish texts have a wide range of opinions regarding what happens after death. One Biblical example that I will not be discussing here is "She'ol" which you can read more about here: jstor.org/stable/43723088 or here jstor.org/stable/3156568 or Google it.
5. Obviously, the word "Hell" is not going to appear in traditional Jewish sources. However, rabbinic texts speak of "Gehenom" that functions in a similar role to our conventional understanding of Hell as a place where wicked people are punished for their sins
6. The following is an updated version of a class I gave years ago. As always, this is not intended to be exhaustive or comprehensive, but only a survey of various opinions found in rabbinic literature. joshyuter.com/2012/05/23/pod…
7. First, let's discuss where this place called, "Gehenom" exists. Unsurprisingly we find conflicting opinions including those that describe it as "down," another as "up," others w/entrances on earth, either east or west or even next to God
8. Wherever Gehenom is, it's supposedly really, really big.
9. Gehenom isn't just large in area, it also goes deep, either 7 or 14 levels
10. And as with popular conceptions of Hell, a key feature of Gehenom is fire
11. As far as who goes to Gehenom, the obvious answer is wicked people, but we find some variations on how this works.
Here is the opinion of R. Yehoshua b. Levi:
12. Reish Lakish disagrees with the process, or at the very least distinguishes between Jewish and non-Jewish sinners. In fact, acc to Reish Lakish, the fires of Gehenom have no effect on Jewish sinners
13. We also find a possibility of one's stay in Gehenom being temporary i.e. one could go down initially but rise up later.
14. For R. Hanina, everyone who goes down to Gehenom comes up with three exceptions.
15. And on this subject, we find several statements damning to Gehenom people who engage all types of actions.
16. And here are a few more for good measure
17. One fascinating source worth mentioning is the opinion of Reish Lakish in Nedaim 8b in which he states that there is no Gehenom in the World to Come.
18. This is obviously at odds with his other statements describing Gehenom seen above, unless of course, we redefine our conception of "World to Come" (at least in the thought of Reish Lakish) but that's a whole other conversation.
19. In conclusion, regardless of what Jews do or do not believe, rabbinic literature records plenty of statements that discuss a Jewish equivalent of what we conventionally call Hell.
20. The extent to which these sources play a prominent role in Jewish education or are prioritized as dogma will obviously vary based on one's community.
21. For further reading, try tracking down"Hell in Jewish Literature" by Samuel Fox. amazon.com/Hell-Jewish-li…
2. Many people are familiar with the oft-cited Talmudic dictum of Hillel, "What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor." What makes this statement so impactful is the next statement, "This is the entire Torah, the rest is commentary."
3. Hillel's equating of the Golden Rule (in the negative formulation) with the entire Torah has led many people to conclude that this principle is of supreme dogmatic importance in Judaism, perhaps even overriding any and all other considerations.
I say the above reflecting my own bias about what Judaism is (or isn't) and where the boundary lines of Judaism are.
If the Talmud isn't central to one's canon, I question the legitimacy. If the Talmud isn't included in one's canon at all, I deny the legitimacy entirely.
And it's not like they're in line with the Bible either
General Rule: Anyone who makes grandiose claims like these without showing their work deserves to be ignored if not mocked and ridiculed.
Even more important is the complete lack of transparency and accountability of major global (or even national) programs that we're just supposed to support uncritically bec of a putative moral imperative
1. When I was in the US and officiated weddings, I'd often try to get as many women involved as possible depending on the needs and wishes of the couple.
Here's a brief thread of a few things I did to integrate more women into the ceremony without compromising halakhah.
2. First, where relevant, I'd ask women to sign the civil marriage license. Although women cannot serve as halakhic witnesses, there is no problem for signing on as civil witnesses
3. If the chuppah required people to physically hold the poles, I'd include women among the "pole bearers."
(Yes, I explicitly call them, "pole bearers" and at one wedding someone even said, "Hey! That sounds like, 'pall bearers!'")
In all seriousness, I remember having conversations over 10 years ago with Conservative and Reform colleagues who were concerned with the internet making rabbis obsolete. Specifically, "Rabbi Google" came up often.
My take was (and is) that there is no shortage of information or access to information but people are also looking for *trust* in the validity or authority of that information. That not only requires a human but someone who demonstrates trustworthiness on a regular basis.
Consider how often people with "Rabbi" in their title make grand proclamations about Judaism on Twitter, and how often their grand proclamations are easily challenged if not completely debunked in a matter of seconds.