TheSanhedrin.NET

[Elisheva]

I just found on the Oklahoma Bnei Noah website (okbvs.org) the siddur for BN by Rabbi Yoel Schwartz' and many others, in pdf format.

It is a very difficult project since there is nothing in our sources to base such a "prayer book" on and indeed, in the introduction, Rabbi Schwartz says it was composed for Bnei Noah who asked for it, but (quoted from memory because I could not copy his sentence) not for those who feel they can pray in their own words.

The texts of the Jewish Siddur are chosen and rewritten with delicacy, and it is obvious that the many people who worked on it put in it a lot of thought.

Still - notwithstanding whether it is appropriate to formalize prayers for BN at all (and R. Schwartz' introduction shows he agrees this is not the ideal situation) - there are in this "siddur" itself a number of serious problems of detail. I wish to bring up here just one of them.

On pages 56-58 there is a translation of the "Kedusha" that is said in the blessing before Kriat Shema.
Even Jews who pray alone do not say that section because it requires a minyan, and even a large congregation of BN will never constitute a minyan. So let alone all the other problems, having BN say the Kedusha is totally irresponsible.

Whatever reason might be given to justify that BN may say the Kedusha (such as "it is only a reading", "it is not in Hebrew", "it is not said by obligation") will be either insulting to the halacha, or insulting to the Bnei Noah who have asked for this siddur.

For this and many other reasons, I suggest you put your painstaking work in a Gniza before our prayer service becomes a mockery and replace it by real guidance, according to the halacha.
_________________
Elisheva Barre, author of "TORAH FOR GENTILES, Messianic and Political implications of the Bnei Noah Laws", 2008, 285 pages

[Binyomin]

Rabbi Benamozegh encouraged BN to continue saying their own prayers as well.

Rabbi Schwartz also implied that BN saying their own prayers may be the ideal situation, but has ruled that a BN may pray all the prayers from the Jewish prayer book. Some prayers however don't make sense for a BN to say, so the OKBN prayer book was an attempt to select the prayers and wording that would be more applicable to BN, but still parallel the Jewish prayer book The nascent Sanhedrin supports Rabbi Schwartz rulings in these matters.

Elisheva, regarding the comment about "Kedusha", I don't understand. We do say the "Kedusha" in the "Es shem" prayer before the shema, even without a minyan. So what is the logic?

[Gedaliah]

[Binyomin]

Rabbi Hollander offered these comments:

Dear Rabbi Abramson and Mrs. Elisheva Barre and all,

I read most of "Torah for Gentiles" this Shabbat with appreciation. Of course I could not take notes. I can agree with most of what the book says and can recommend it as a challenging point of view. The rational approach taken by Mrs. Barre, avoiding mysticism, is surely the safest one, since so many false analogies and misunderstandings were promulgated over the generations as a result of mystical [mis-]interpretations.

As Mrs. Barre wrote in the introduction, her book is based mainly on the codification of the Rambam, and I did not try to argue with her interpretations. They are hers, not mine, nor that of the Sanhedrin...

There is NO transgression of ANY halacha in the Siddur... NO sincere prayer is "using the Name of HeShem in vain". For formal confirmation see Orach Hayim 215/2, in the Rema, who says we respond with Amen to the blessing of a non-Jew. If it were blasphemy certainly we would not respond with Amen...

[I tend to agree] that there is no need to take Jewish customs. However, according to Rabbi Kaniewsky [Shone Halachot 304], Bnei Noah can take upon themselves ANY of the Mitzvoth they like - after first having accepted the "seven" - and they are then bound to observe them...

Rabbi Schwartz invites anyone who would like clarification - to write to him [through me, for the time being.]

Rabbi Yeshayahu Hollander

[holdingontoTruth]

Thanks Binyomin for posting this. It just confirms the direction I feel HaShem has been leading us and my problems I had encountered when attempting to stop keeping certain mitzvot after willingly choosing them before HaShem. I hope other non-Jews who have taken certain mitzvot upon themselves willingly will seriously consider this. I know a couple families besides ourselves that were moving in a direction of conversion and were learning and applying many mitzvot in their lives and experiencing much blessing, only to be led away from this back to the basic 7, being told they were disobeying HaShem and may even be blaspheming or worthy of death for their actions...when all they were doing was loving HaShem and loving His mitzvot. After changing and moving away from these things...they felt as if a part of them was dying and went through some depression as a result. Some have come back, like ourselves, to the level of observance they were already doing and are now very happy again.

Andrew

[Elisheva]

[Elisheva]

I will not go over the halachic issues I discussed with Rabbi Hollander in our e-mails. I also corresponded in detail with Pam Rogers who dedicated a lot a work, time, research and HEART in producing this Siddur.

All I wish to say here in this forum is that the "nascent sanhedrin" has no power to outrule the laws established by the Sanhedrin ordained by Moses.

Rabbi Hollander justifies what I think are mistakes in the BN Siddur by quoting a Rama commentary on the Shulchan Aruch and Rabbi Kaniewsky, to which we must add reference to Benamozegh, quoted by Benyomin. I quote the Talmud and its Law codified by the "great luminary", the Rambam.

It is Ezra and his Sanhedrin who established the rules of our prayers, their formulations, manners, and decreed the saying of blessings. They did so by adding stringent instructions not to deviate from the rules they fixed. Their ordinances are binding and cannot be transgressed, lest we lose our unity as a people. The laws of prayer they instituted are based and preconditioned by the special sanctity of Israel עם מקדשי שמך - a people who sanctifies Your Name.

Prayer is called the "service of the heart", and all that matters is the INTENTION - to know the One whom we address. Here is, in the language of the Rambam, the basic Torah commandment of prayer, at the very opening of his Laws of Prayer:

"The Torah does not set the number of prayers [to be said each day], it does not give its formulation, it does not set fixed times for prayer… the obligation to pray is for a person to beseech and supplicate each day; to [first] praise HaShem, then implore and beg for what he needs, and then to thank HaShem for His goodness to him, each one the way he can. If he is fluent, he elaborates his supplications and requests; if he is not articulate, he speaks the way he can, and any time he wants. So too, the number of prayers a day is according to each person’s capability. One will pray once a day, and another several times. And everyone prays in the direction of the Temple, from wherever he is. This is how it was done since the time of our teacher Moses until the time of Ezra".

This is the proper way to turn to God, for Jews as well as Gentiles. It changed for Israel at the time and Ezra, and for Gentiles it is still the same.
_________________
Elisheva Barre, author of "TORAH FOR GENTILES, Messianic and Political implications of the Bnei Noah Laws", 2008, 285 pages

[Binyomin]

Firstly, this is only your interpretation of the Rambam. You are equating your interpretation of the Rambam (which is not supported by other authorities), with "laws established by the Sanhedrin ordained by Moses." [You yourself have said that through careful in depth study over many years, one can learn the intent of the Rambam. If the meaning Rambam is not obvious to all, then it is subject to interpretation, and this case is one more example of that]

Secondly, as we have discussed before you are denying authority to all the great gedolim who lived after the Rambam and continue with us today, to either elaborate on or disagree with the Rambam. This is a very aggressive statement, and few will agree with you.

Best wishes
Binyomin

[Elisheva]

Benyomin,

These are NOT a refutation of the point at hand!
If you want to prove the Siddur written for BN is "kosher", you have to bring halachic arguments. Those R. Hollander brought I already refuted with source-proof and arguments.

You avoid that, just because you do not want to accept the "nascent sanhedrin" could be mistaken. The real Sanhedrin will recognize its mistake, even if it is a last bench talmid who tells them. If they don't, he himself is not bound by their supreme authority to follow what he knows is not a proper ruling. Kal v'Chomer concerning the "gdolim" you refer to.

NO ONE disagrees that the Kedusha needs a minyan. And no one disagrees that the SAGES decreed strict limitations to the blessings they formulated "B'Shem u'Malchut". What you call MY "interpretation of the Rambam" is supported by the Talmud and the "gdolim" who did NOT change that, and these are ALL the "gdolim" sepharadim. This is not a question of mere diverging customs, but a point of basic Torah Law for ALL Israel. So I am not denying the authority of the "gdolim" you refer to. I am saying that we have ONE law. It cannot be changed.

So please tell me where in the TALMUD do you have permission
1. to say the Kedusha NOT in a minyan,
2. to change anything in the blessings B'Shem u'Machut,
3. To allow Gentiles to copy rituals instituted specifically for Israel, Ha'Am Ha'Mekadesh Eyt HaShem?

R. Schwartz who has not yet expressed himself on this forum knows what I am saying is correct since he made a restriction that this siddur is for BN who are not fluent.

Please Rabbi Schwartz, explain to us:

If the siddur is OK, why isn't it OK for every Ben Noah?
If it is restrictively OK, why does the restriction not apply to all BN?

Thank you.
_________________
Elisheva Barre, author of "TORAH FOR GENTILES, Messianic and Political implications of the Bnei Noah Laws", 2008, 285 pages

[Binyomin]

[Elisheva]

Your reply is quite clear Benyomin,
Since every halachic authority may interpret the law to suit the needs of his time, without being bound by the laws, rules, and authority of the Sages who transmitted the tradition we received from Moses, then every interpretation is valid and acceptable.
As a result, we have today a polytheistic Judaism, conversions which are not accepted by opposing factions, Bnei Noah who are confused, and a secular state that is Jewish in its own way...
Obviously, you cannot understand what I am talking about, because you do not want to.
_________________
Elisheva Barre, author of "TORAH FOR GENTILES, Messianic and Political implications of the Bnei Noah Laws", 2008, 285 pages

[Simple Jew]

Well, this time I have to agree with Elisheva. It is not proper for Bnai Noach to say Kedusha, both halachicaly and mainly hashkaficly.
Binyomin (and others), please review some good commentary on siddur and see why we include the kedusha in Birchas Yotzer Or and how it is different (and similar) to the Kedusha of Shmone Esre. All commentators agree that this is a privilege of Klal Yisroel alone.

[Binyomin]

I don't dispute that point. I do dispute the idea that our halakhic leaders have led us into polytheism.

I understood the reasoning of Rabbi Schwartz to be
1) He did not consider these verses in the BN prayer book to be a recitation of the kedusha in the halachic sense.
2) We are not obligated to prevent a BN from copying Jewish ritual.
3) If copying Jewish ritual brings a BN closer to proper observance, then we may be obligated to assist them in this matter.

I have requested a clarification on this point.

[Simple Jew]

But if they are not saying them as Kedusha, they should make sure to announce that they are just reading verses from TaNaCh (like, lehavdil, a Jew without a minyan should read them with teamim - according to most acharonim).