At first glance, Orthodox Judaism is not compatible with the prevailing world view of equal treatment for all people, regardless of their race, gender or religion. But modern Orthodox Jews share the sense that egalitarianism is a positive moral value, so they cannot simply dismiss this contemporary ethos as incompatible with their faith. In a range of ways and variety of perspectives from the leading Orthodox scholars in the field, this collection of essays explores the affinities and disaffinities between egalitarianism and Jewish tradition.

One of the most basic questions for any legal system is that of methodology: how one interprets, analyzes, weighs, and applies a mass of often competing legal rules, precedents, practices, customs, and traditions to reach final determinations and practical guidance about the correct legal-prescribed course of action in any given situation. Questions of legal methodology raise not only practical concerns, but theoretical and philosophical ones as well. We expect law to be more than the arbitrary result of a given decision maker's personal preferences, and so we demand that legal methodologies be principled as well as practical. These issues are especially acute in religious legal systems, where the stakes are raised by concerns for respecting not just human, but divine law. Despite this, the major scholars and codifiers of halakhah, or Jewish law, have only rarely explicated their own methods for reaching principled legal decisions. This book explains the major jurisprudential factors driving the halakhic jurisprudence of Rabbi Yehiel Mikhel Epstein, twentieth-century author of the Arukh Hashulchan-the most comprehensive, seminal, and original modern restatement of Jewish law since Maimonides. Reasoning inductively from a broad review of hundreds of rulings from the Orach Chaim section of the Arukh Hashulchan, the book teases out and explicates ten core halakhic principles that animate Rabbi Epstein's halakhic decision-making. Along the way, it compares the Arukh Hashulchan methodology to that of the Mishna Berura. This book will help any reader understand important methodological issues in both Jewish and general jurisprudence.

Over the last several hundred years, the recitation of Havineinu, an abridged version of the daily prayer usually recited in pressing situations, has functionally ceased. This study addressed the legal analysis used to explain that change. Though the shift in perspective has been gradual, the book argues that the resulting profound change in the interpretation of halachic texts has had a direct influence on the understanding and the practice of Jewish law. It examines the sources and processes that have shaped the contours of Havineinu over time, exemplifying the subtle changes that occur in the development of halacha as a result of "chiddush," or innovation.

Marriage, Sex and Family in Judaism explores Jewish marriage from historical and contemporary perspectives, focusing on the religious and legal concepts of marriage, and the social impact of family in the Jewish community. The book does not advocate one perspective or another; instead, the essays range from conservative to liberal viewpoints, offering readers a well-balanced mixture of perspectives on Jewish marriage.

Marriage, Sex and Family in Judaism explores Jewish marriage from historical and contemporary perspectives, focusing on the religious and legal concepts of marriage, and the social impact of family in the Jewish community. The book does not advocate one perspective or another; instead, the essays range from conservative to liberal viewpoints, offering readers a well-balanced mixture of perspectives on Jewish marriage.

This volume examines the limits Islam, Judaism, and Christianity have set for the use of coercive violence. It probes the agreements and disagreements of these major religious traditions on pacifism (the abjurance of all force) and quietism (the avoidance of force unless certain stringent conditions are met). The distinguished contributors examine the foundations for nonviolence in each religion, criticize the positions each religion has taken, address the inherent challenges nonviolence poses, and evaluate the difficulty of practicing nonviolence in a secular society. The concluding essay defines the common ground, isolates the points of conflict, and suggests avenues of further inquiry. The most important contribution this volume makes is to demonstrate that no Western religious tradition provides a basis for the glorification of violence. Rather, each accepts warfare as a regretted necessity and sets strict limits on the use of force. This work offers new insights for those interested in the ethics of warfare, peace studies, religious traditions, and international affairs.

This book explores the rise of private arbitration in religious and other values-oriented communities, and it argues that secular societies should use secular legal frameworks to facilitate, enforce, and also regulate religious arbitration. It covers the history of religious arbitration; the kinds of faith-based dispute resolution models currently in use; how the law should perceive them; and what the role of religious arbitration in the United States and the western world should be. Part One examines why religious individuals and communities are increasingly turning to private faith-based dispute resolution to arbitrate their litigious disputes. It focuses on why religious communities feel disenfranchised from secular law, and particularly secular family law. Part Two looks at why American law is so comfortable with faith-based arbitration, given its penchant for enabling parties to order their relationships and resolve their disputes using norms and values that are often different from and sometimes opposed to secular standards. Part Three weighs the proper procedural, jurisdictional, and contractual limits of arbitration generally, and of religious arbitration particularly. It identifies and explains the reasonable limitations on religious arbitration. Part Four examines whether secular societies should facilitate effective, legally enforceable religious dispute resolution, and it argues that religious arbitration is not only good for the religious community itself, but that having many different avenues for faith-based arbitration which are properly limited is good for any vibrant pluralistic democracy inhabited by diverse faith groups.

At first glance, Orthodox Judaism is not compatible with the prevailing world view of equal treatment for all people, regardless of their race, gender or religion. But modern Orthodox Jews share the sense that egalitarianism is a positive moral value, so they cannot simply dismiss this contemporary ethos as incompatible with their faith. In a range of ways and variety of perspectives from the leading Orthodox scholars in the field, this collection of essays explores the affinities and disaffinities between egalitarianism and Jewish tradition.