Presence

I wanted to post my thoughts on R. Gottlieb's drasha, but I wanted to do it as a separate post, so there would be no confusion as to what I am saying and what R. Gottlieb said. There will be much news that will be coming out over the coming weeks, and I will have to decide if, what and how I want to comment on it. In the mean time, I wanted to offer a concise thought on how and why these changes came about.

My main thought about this is that it shows the positive value of the Internet in contemporary Orthodox society. I firmly believe that the reason this issue is finally being dealt with in a forthright manner by the rabbinate is that they have no choice but to do so. The way information is controlled and disseminated to and within the community has fundamentally changed. This is due in large part to the web in general, and blogs in particular. That is not to say that everything done on the web is done appropriately or in the best possible fashion, but the very existence of the medium, and the fact that information can be published and circulated freely and quickly, has made past approaches to this problem no longer viable. That is not to say that past approaches were correct, either; the existence of the web has enabled a more accurate understanding of the magnitude of the problem to become apparent to those who erred with good intentions and now have the ability to make changes.

Let me make it clear that I do not mean this to be critical of the rabbinate; on the contrary, the fact that they are addressing the issue, rather than not, is responsible and commendable. I do think, however, it is important to recognize the crucial role that the "grass roots" had in bringing about this change.

As a general rule, in any social ecosystem, those in positions of authority by definition maintain the status quo; change must come from the people, and it is the responsibility of those with authority to be sensitive to the needs of the people and judge how to best respond. There is a famous interchange between two poskim that beautifully illustrates this point. The Terumat HaDeshen would often invent theoretical cases to server as the basis for responsum. The Magen Avraham frowned on this practice, arguing that a posek receives special divine guidance when weighing an issue of halachic jurisprudence from an actual real, live person. I don't think it's homiletics to explain this as meaning that halachic decisions are more meaningful when considered in the context of those that practice them, and that the posek must first and foremost respond to the individual.

At any rate, those of us who believe that blogs in particular, and the web in general, have a positive role to play in the Jewish community can count this as a point in our favor.

For more thoughts check out Kefirot's post on the subject.