Sephardi tradition

Hi all,

I see so clearly now why there's a Sephardic tradition and why there's multiple Ashkenazi one. The world can change Jews  or Jews  can change the world.  It's worth the risk.In short Torah , precisely because it is God's gift and is divine is strong and powerful enough to withstand whatever the world says . I've never really understood Ashkenazi Orthodox, especially the Ultra Orthodox  Haredi  desire for isolationism as much as possible.

I believe that  tradition and halachic approach can adapt and change throughout time,  without the concept or the law  being made irrelevant or denying the Torah . Rabbis are free to rule with leniency rather than ruling strictly and of course  the community itself is the keeper of the tradition it wants to keep.

This was the tradition and Mesorah as it was taught to me by my grandparents when I was not at my boarding school or at my uncle's farm in Yorkshire (I was orphaned from birth , hence these three were my biggest influence growing up ). They even studied the Torah in the traditional Sephardi way and not the current Lithuanian Ashkenazi Haredi  school which is dominant today. I was brought up with a more open inquisitive approach to the non Jewish world without a sense of wanting to abandon Judaism or Torah. My grandparents were particularly concerned that we received a broad education combining Limudei Kodesh (study of Jewish sacred Texts) with Limudei  Khol (that is general studies  i.e. "secular education" ).    

But can Judaism change ? Yes it can.  But sometimes we don't see it or don't want to see it. Maybe we are also guilty of contemporary linking to 3,000  years ago   , if we  think our teacher  Moses stood at Sinai with a black hat . Or maybe ripped jeans and trainers. But it does change and it doesn't change. That's a paradox. Our community  prefers to ignore paradoxes and we think what we tbobk was always the way , so we can not get headaches over the fact that Torah is from God and God and the Torah don't change, even when they do.  Let's live with the paradox.

For example Abraham argued to save Sodom , Jonah to not preach to the Goy and got swallowed by a whale.  Was not God open to be challenged ? In a more seemingly mundane example,  Jewellery isn't supposed to be worn on shabbat according to the  Sages of the Talmud.   Yet the tradition since the Rishonim, has been that  women are permitted to wear jewellery on Shabbat. Chazon Ovadia (Rabbi Ovadia Yoesf )  also confirms this to be the case.

In the 19th century , Rabbi  Mani  ( chief Rabbi of Hebron) had  visited India and helped the Mesopotamian Jews who had immigrated  there (including some of my forebears)   decided that the streets of Bombay couldn't be considered public domain on shabbat "de'orayta" ( from written Torah)  but   public domain only " de'rabannan" (from Rabbinical decree) .

Rabbi Somekh , the Rosh Yeshiva (that's the Jewish equivalent of an Oxbridge Don) and  communal leader of Mesopotamian Jewry disagreed in discussion- because such as ruling went against The Shulchan Aruch  ,  but did accept Rabbi Mani's rationale . This  was to help the community's undertaking and observance of Shabbat  :in short so  non Jews  could carry parasol and other items  in the hot weather , for the community to attend synagogue , rather than them doing so themselves and thus violating Shabbat and to keep the community together ,even though his ruling was different and contrary to previous Sephardi ruling. There was no crises and no split .

In respect of women and whether we are second class citizens in Judaism. Haredi may think so. I have no needs to look for ancient tomes to argue with them. My tradition clearly states that women can have the right to vote,  be leaders and secular judges. From a 70 year old source

Rabbi Uziel was chief Rabbi of Mandatory Palestine and Israel and was a key influence in arguing for women to vote, be leaders and enter public offices. 

Rabbi Uziel in part of his responsa , asked rhetorically were women not "creatures created in the image of God and blessed with intelligence?" Are they not subject to the decisions made by the elected assembly? "How can you grab both ends of the rope at the same time: impose disciplinary obligation [the obligation to obey the decisions of the elected representatives] on them but deny them the right to vote?"

And in addition :

"Reason allows us to say that in any serious and productive conversation there is no [case for restriction] on the basis of licentiousness, for every day men meet women in commercial transactions and negotiate, and there is neither breach nor outcry. And even those who have a proclivity for promiscuity would not think of prohibited relations while focusing in earnest on their trade. And our Sages did not say “do not extend conversation with a woman” (Mishna, Avot 1:5) but [only] with respect to an idle conversation that has no [valid] purpose, and such discourse does lead to transgression, but not an exchange of debate in important and public matters. And it is not the case that sitting in shared space and proximity for the sake of public service, which is עבודת הקדש, habituates towards wrongdoing and leads to light-headedness…”

Shabbat Slalom!