‘The Halakhic Profile of Rabbi Shlomo Goren: Studies in the Adjudicatory Deliberations and Modes of Substantiation in his Halakhic Writings’

Aviad (Yehiel) Hollander completes his PhD dissertation in 2011 at at Bar-Ilan University’s Department of Talmud: “The Halakhic Profile of Rabbi Shlomo Goren: Studies in the Adjudicatory Deliberations and Modes of Substantiation in his Halakhic Writings.” The work examines how Goren reached his halakhic decisions — the internal reasoning processes (“shikulim”/adjudicatory deliberations), the sources and arguments he used to justify (“bisus”/substantiation) his rulings, and the overall profile of his halakhic thinking. It draws directly from Goren’s own extensive published halakhic writings and responsa.
Scholars who cite it (in journals on Jewish law, religion & state, IDF halakha, etc.) treat it as the major academic reference for understanding Goren’s jurisprudential approach, especially on topics like military halakha and the role of the IDF rabbinate (which Goren founded), balancing strict halakha with the needs of a modern Jewish state (“dual loyalty to halakha and the state” — a phrase Hollander himself uses in later published work based on the thesis), and the specific controversial rulings (e.g., the Langer children mamzerut case, conversions, Shabbat observance in the military, international law in wartime, etc.).
Hollander (who served as an IDF military chaplain and has written extensively on religion & state/religion & the IDF) approaches Goren as a Religious Zionist decisor who developed a distinctive “Zionist-messianic” halakhic style. This style prioritized the value of Jewish sovereignty, the state, and the army as halakhic factors. Where Haredi rabbis appear in the picture, it is usually as the contrast or source of criticism: Goren’s innovative or lenient rulings (especially when they clashed with traditional Haredi positions) frequently led to rejection or ostracism by parts of the Haredi world. Hollander’s earlier 2010 paper discusses this dynamic using the Langer case as an example: Goren’s refusal to back down from peer criticism contributed to his isolation from the broader rabbinic (especially Haredi) establishment.
This is a methodological study of one major decisor’s thought and is typical of Bar-Ilan-style academic Talmud/halakhah research. Hollander’s later writings (e.g., the article “Dual Loyalty to Halakha and the State: Rabbi Goren’s Ruling as a Test Case”) continue this analytical line.