Reason For Contemporary Observance
Both Orthodox and Conservative Judaism currently have multiple views on the reason for contemporary observance of ritual washing and immersion obligation.
In Orthodox Judaism, opinion is generally split between a view that maintains that those Biblical rules related to ritual purity that are possible to observe in the absence of a Temple and a Red heifer remain in force and Jews remain Biblically obligated to observe such of them as they can, and a view that Biblical ritual impurity requirements apply only in the presence of a Temple in Jerusalem and the current rules represent only rabbinic ordinances, practices decreed by the Rabbis in memory of the Temple.
In December 2006, Conservative Judaism's Committee on Jewish Law and Standards issued three responsa on the subject of Niddah. All three ruled the traditional requirements of ritual washing remained in effect for Conservative Jews (with some leniencies and liberalization of interpretation), but disagreed on the reasoning for continuing this practices as well as on the validity of specific leniencies. Two of the opinions reflect reasoning similar to the respective Orthodox views (Biblical requirements or rabbinic ordinances enacted in remembrance of the Temple.) A third opinion expressed the view that Conservative Judaism should disconnect ritual purity practices from the Temple in Jerusalem or its memory, and offered a new approach based on what it called the concept of holiness rather than the concept of purity. Thus, Conservative ideology, under its philosophy of pluralism, supports a range of views on this subject, from views similar to the Orthodox view to views expressing a need for a contemporary reorientation. Most Conservative Jews do not observe the laws of niddah.
Read more about this topic: Ritual Washing In Judaism
Famous quotes containing the words reason for, reason, contemporary and/or observance:
“So far no actual revolutionary masses have come into view. This might be considered sufficient reason for reproaching someone who has set out to describe a revolution. But it is not our fault. This is, after all, a German revolution.”
—Alfred Döblin (1878–1957)
“... the first reason for psychology’s failure to understand what people are and how they act, is that clinicians and psychiatrists, who are generally the theoreticians on these matters, have essentially made up myths without any evidence to support them; the second reason for psychology’s failure is that personality theory has looked for inner traits when it should have been looking for social context.”
—Naomi Weisstein (b. 1939)
“Generally there is no consistent evidence of significant differences in school achievement between children of working and nonworking mothers, but differences that do appear are often related to maternal satisfaction with her chosen role, and the quality of substitute care.”
—Ruth E. Zambrana, U.S. researcher, M. Hurst, and R.L. Hite. “The Working Mother in Contemporary Perspectives: A Review of Literature,” Pediatrics (December 1979)
“The possibility of divorce renders both marriage partners stricter in their observance of the duties they owe to each other. Divorces help to improve morals and to increase the population.”
—Denis Diderot (1713–1784)