Masorti Judaism

On July first, Rabbi David Golinkin become President Emeritus of the Schechter Institutes - the central institution of Israel’s Masorti Movement. The reason that Israel and much of Europe (along with an increasing number of young Americans and Canadians) prefer the nomenclature of Masorti to Conservative is due to the former’s more “traditional” connotation. Appreciating some of Rabbi Golinkin’s halakhic positions illustrates how different these two terms can be.

For many years, Golinkin authored a regular Halakhah column called Aseh Lecha Rav. Selections of the Hebrew teshuvot that he wrote, largely in response to real questions from his students and colleagues, were published in two volumes of She’eulot U’Teshuvot Aseh Lecha Rav (Schechter Institutes, 2019 and 2024).

Golinkin’s introduction outlines six principles of Conservative/Masorti psak. I first heard them presented when he was a scholar-in-residence at the Highland Park Conservative Temple while I was a student at Rutgers:

1. “There is an attempt to preserve the tradition as much as possible.”

2. “A lenient ruling is preferable to a strict ruling.”

3. “Before giving a halakhic ruling, the subject is studied in a historic-scientific fashion in order to determine if the law or custom derives from the Torah, the talmudic sages, the Early Rabbis (geonim and rishonim)… There is more readiness to change a relatively new halakhah, one which has not been adopted by the entire community, or something which is only a custom.”

4. “The Shulhan Arukh is a standard code of Jewish law… This code is certainly an important halakhic source, but, for several reasons, it should not be viewed as the ultimate authority.”

5. “Halakhic pluralism is maintained when there are two legitimate ways to rule on a halakhic issue.”

6. “Much emphasis is placed on the moral component of Judaism and of the Halakhah.”

These principles are not so different from what can be seen on the progressive end of Orthodoxy. Yet, on women’s issues, he aligns almost-entirely with Conservative norms. In his book Maamad Isha b’Halakhah: She’elot U’Teshuvot (Schechter Institutes, 2001 in Hebrew and 2012 in English), Golinkin fully supports women counting in minyan, reading the Torah, leading services, and serving as poskot halakhah while abolishing the practice of mechitza. At the same time, he strongly rejects attempts to change liturgy too much, limiting additions of the imahot in the Amidah to the insertion of piyyutim rather than allowing for any change in the language of brachot. Golinkin thus stakes out a decidedly conservative position on liturgy within the otherwise progressive movement he identifies with. This follows in the footsteps of his teacher, Rabbi Joel Roth.

This conservatism is also apparent in how Rabbi Golinkin addresses the use of Zoom for minyanim. The American Conservative Movement quickly allowed for minyanim assembled purely virtually to recite all prayers, both during the week and on Shabbat/Yom Tov. Golinkin, along with several colleagues from the European Masorti Movement, took a different approach.

In the first teshuva of Aseh Lecha Rav volume two, Golinkin ruled that even at a time when in-person minyanim are impossible, ten or more Jews who convene on Zoom must skip barchu, kaddish, and kedushah. Even mourners, he ruled, would have to recite an alternative to the kaddish they so desperately want to say for loved ones.

In the very next teshuvah, Golinkin emphasizes that the use of electricity on Shabbat is the antithesis of Heschel’s idea of “a palace in time” and must be avoided. Rather than even allowing a passive livestream, Golinkin advised coming together before Shabbat for a mincha services (with no devarim shebidekusha) and full Kabbalat Shabbat. Computers would then be turned off to privately daven maariv and accept Shabbat.

He rules similarly on the question of Zoom Passover Sedarim. Acknowledging that there is reason to be more lenient with electricity on Yom Tov than on Shabbat, Golinkin nevertheless advises against holding a Zoom Seder because the standard practice of observant Jews is to treat Yom Tov like Shabbat regarding the use of electricity and also because typing on the computer would be a violation of writing regardless of electric source. In a ruling with repercussions for many Conservative synagogues, he also notes that intentionally recording a Zoom on Shabbat or Yom Tov (such as to broadly disseminate a sermon) would be problematic.

In addition to those sort of “hot-button” questions, the vast majority of Rabbi Golinkin’s collected teshuvot address a wide range of “run-of-the-mill” questions that are not dissimilar to what any Orthodox posek would be asked. “Do I really need to kiss my tzitzis when saying Shema?” “Why do some communities sing mizmor shir l’yom haShabbat at Shabbat Mincha?” “Why do we eat dairy on Shavuot?” '“What’s up with kids dancing with flags on Simchat Torah?” “Why do we call the Shabbat before Pesach Shabbat Ha-Gadol?” “What do we do when erev Pesach is on Shabbat?” “Why do we light Chanukah Candles in shul?” “Can I daven in sandals?” “Do I need to write the word “G-d” with the dash?” “Is it better for the Chazan to go fast or slow?” and many more. These are only a selection of the mundane questions addressed in both volumes of Aseh Lecha Rav.

To my mind, Rabbi Golinkin’s halakhic writings are important for a variety of reasons. Firstly, these works represent a Masorti Posek writing in Hebrew for a wide audience. In an age of CJLS responsa that read more like academic articles than traditional rabbinic literature, this is a wonderful way of bridging the gap between different genres of religious writing and is a style that Orthodox readers can identity with.

Secondly, the questions Rabbi Golinkin addresses highlight the differences between what his immediate community is thinking about compared to the broader Conservative Movement. One only has to take a look at recent CJLS responsa to see that they rarely opine on day-to-day questions in the way that Rabbi Golinkin does. This is likely because they do not have people asking those sorts of questions as Golinkin does.

Finally, readers of all backgrounds can see just how different that Conservative Movement we’re familiar with could be if different voices were held up on this side of the pond. It’s thus reassuring that Rabbi Golinkin and his students are the ones manning the ship in Israel/Europe and I remain hopeful that their traditional style of Conservative Judaism can make a comeback amongst some of the traditional-leaning younger generation in the US and Canada who are dissatisfied with the direction a majority of the movement has moved in matters of halakhah while remaining committed to the value of gender egalitarianism (I doubt its a coincidence that the grassroots organization that replaced the USCJ’s Koach initiative at universities is called Masorti on Campus). Alongside the growing popularity of Hadar, it may well be time for Masorti Judaism to plant seeds in the US.

All in all, I suspect Orthodox readers have a lot to gain from Rabbi Golinkin’s teshuvot. He addresses the questions he is asked in a scholarly yet recognizably rabbinic way that those who are traditionally educated will no doubt appreciate. His responsa are informative, well-researched, and compellingly presented. It’s easy to guess where he’ll land on some particular questions since he reliably follows the principles laid out in his introduction, but that just emphasizes the consistency of his approach which I think is a positive. I don’t expect many of my regular readers to agree with all his conclusions on questions of egalitarianism, but his presentations of the issues are well worth grappling with as the Jewish world continues to move in increasingly post-denominational directions.

Mazal Tov, Rabbi Golinkin, on a well-deserved retirement!