I really liked Dr. Cohen’s talk about the beginnings of the Conservative movement, though at the end I found myself wanting to know more. Judaism and all of its depth is so interesting to me. Spiritually I find a connection with its teachings, but culturally and educationally I always find myself wanting more (hence the Jewish Studies minor). This brief history of the movement was very well explained, especially in light of the blurred lines and beliefs that came with it. I wish we had time to learn more about Schecter, whose name I have heard my entire life but have known nothing about. As I said in the question/answer period, I want to know more about what those blurred lines really consist of between the movements, and why it is that people disagree over those topics. Maybe we could even have a class on why the famous people in Judaism, be it Schecter or the others whose names we hear everywhere, are actually famous. The most intriguing discussions are the ones which open up all sorts of possibilities for further research, and Cohen’s talk definitely achieved this. He seems like a great, untapped resource that would be an enthusiastic addition to our Jewish Studies department.
One of the issues that I think have been glazed over in both Cohen’s talk and our discussion last week is the affect of the society that is “America” on the religion and culture of Judaism. I feel like I have all of these arguments to support my beliefs and all of these ideas about how to create affective change, but I wonder how many of them really draw from Jewish ideas as opposed to American ideas. Is it possible for the two to truly co-exist? In looking at some of the different responses to last weeks speaker, specifically Roni’s, I can’t help but wonder if some of my beliefs are truly so “Americanized” that they discount the basics of Judaism. Come to think of it—what are the basics of Judaism?? I feel like I’m rambling, but I guess the bottom line is this. At one point in high school, I was at a youth group retreat and we were participating in a program that touched upon American and Jewish identity. The question was asked “Are you and American-Jew, or a Jewish-American?” I’m pretty sure that, at the time, I answered American-Jew, and yet now I find myself wondering what that means. And for that matter, if it’s true, do I like that answer? These topics about the blurring lines of what’s acceptable for each sect, and the fact that these severely differing sects of Judaism even exist, really make you think about what it means to be Jewish and to live life according to Jewish ideas and beliefs. I guess I just have to believe that there can be a balance between the part of myself that is overtaken by America, and the part of myself that refuses to let go of Judaism.
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Michael Cohen-Solomon Schecter
The thing that first struck me about Michael Cohen's lecture was his enthusiasm and evident excitement that this topic gave him. Because of that, i found it easy to engage in what he had to say and he kept my attention. Being someone who is interested in history and people, the background of Solomon Schecter was something both interesting and new to me. Although I identify with the conservative movement and belonging to a conservative temple, I never knew specifically how the movement began. The only thing i knew about Solomon Schecter was that it was a private day school where some of my friends had gone.
The most interesting thing that i found was the fact that this idea of unity ultimately divided the religion. Because Schecter wanted to be accepting, I understand how he didn't see a division coming. But at the same time, when you are veering off away from the traditional, you are inevitably creating a separate category.
Something else that i found particularly interesting was the loyalty of the diciples. The way Cohen described their lifestyles was almost in a cult-like fashion. But if it wasn't for these people who basically sacrificed a normal life, maybe we would never have a modern take on Judaism. Who knows, just a thought.
The most interesting thing that i found was the fact that this idea of unity ultimately divided the religion. Because Schecter wanted to be accepting, I understand how he didn't see a division coming. But at the same time, when you are veering off away from the traditional, you are inevitably creating a separate category.
Something else that i found particularly interesting was the loyalty of the diciples. The way Cohen described their lifestyles was almost in a cult-like fashion. But if it wasn't for these people who basically sacrificed a normal life, maybe we would never have a modern take on Judaism. Who knows, just a thought.
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
rab reisner
Well this was the first time i had ever listened to a Jewish person speak about their religion. I am not Jewish, I'm not religious at all really. I don't have any Jewish friends, and i have never even as much as read about something that had to do with any thing in the Jewish community. My high school cut the holocaust out of the curriculum so i don't even have that much background.
My mind was very stimulated, and i thought very much after class about the concept of Tikkun Olam. I am still not sure if i agree or disagree with the idea of being able to tweak the bible (im not sure if they call their writings the bible so sorry) according to todays society even taking into consideration some "pop culture." I know nothing about the rules for being gay and religion accept that its usually not good. And i feel that changing Jewish law from what the bible says about homosexual behavior to what is accepted by todays liberal population is not exactly holey. Thats as far as i wanted to get into the topic of homosexuals, but regardless the concept of Tikkun Olam was interesting and thought stimulating to me.
The issue with food being produced in a humane way, and their being a "stamp of approval" for the foods who's production was supervised and considered acceptable made such incredible sense to me that it was hard for me to believe this was not already being done everywhere. I grew up on a dairy farm and treating our animals humanely and ethically and making sure things were as clean and correct as possible was our main priority. We believed that the animals give back to you only as mush as you gave to them. And the same went for our workers, we believed that the better we treated them the higher quality work and product we would get. I believe it should be federal law that every part of the food production process from animal to worker to plant to machine to factories should be monitored and only sold if approved. Im very happy that the Jewish have stepped up and started such a system. Im probably the most "out there" entry, sorry, like i said this is my first experience with any knowledge of the religion or its people.
My mind was very stimulated, and i thought very much after class about the concept of Tikkun Olam. I am still not sure if i agree or disagree with the idea of being able to tweak the bible (im not sure if they call their writings the bible so sorry) according to todays society even taking into consideration some "pop culture." I know nothing about the rules for being gay and religion accept that its usually not good. And i feel that changing Jewish law from what the bible says about homosexual behavior to what is accepted by todays liberal population is not exactly holey. Thats as far as i wanted to get into the topic of homosexuals, but regardless the concept of Tikkun Olam was interesting and thought stimulating to me.
The issue with food being produced in a humane way, and their being a "stamp of approval" for the foods who's production was supervised and considered acceptable made such incredible sense to me that it was hard for me to believe this was not already being done everywhere. I grew up on a dairy farm and treating our animals humanely and ethically and making sure things were as clean and correct as possible was our main priority. We believed that the animals give back to you only as mush as you gave to them. And the same went for our workers, we believed that the better we treated them the higher quality work and product we would get. I believe it should be federal law that every part of the food production process from animal to worker to plant to machine to factories should be monitored and only sold if approved. Im very happy that the Jewish have stepped up and started such a system. Im probably the most "out there" entry, sorry, like i said this is my first experience with any knowledge of the religion or its people.
Monday, February 25, 2008
Rabbi Riesner's lecture
I found that Rabbi Reisner’s lecture was very fascinating and practical to the current state of Conservative Judaism. The process behind the amendments to Jewish law was something that stuck me as very interesting, since I never realized that the law was adaptable to modern society in such a formal manor. However, I found the Rabbi’s views on homosexuality in today’s Jewish society very contradicting. I thought the way Rabbi Reisner and other people in his position define homosexuality is ridiculous. It plays way to many semantics in defining who is a homosexual and who can be a Rabbi. That being said, the comparison that was made between economic growth amendments in Jewish law and sexual preference amendments had no business being made. Those are two totally different subjects, and are like comparing apples to oranges. The fact that a homosexual Rabbi is allowed to practice while being celibate, but not while sexually active with another man makes no sense. This is a subject that Conservative Judaism really needs to take a sound stand on. Being in the middle on a subject like this can discrepancies within the Jewish community and stop progress on modernizing other, more pressing issues that need to be amended in Jewish law.
Sunday, February 24, 2008
Does the Torah change? - Roni Sneiderman
I realize that time constraints limit the depth on which Rabbi Reisner could expound on a sensitive subject such as homosexuality.
The current definition used by Rabbi Reisner a conservative Jew, for Tikkun Olam is amending Jewish law so that it is responsive to the needs of the "real world". Rabbi Reisner pointed out a precedence existing in the time of the mishnah to support this definition. Rabbi Reisner used Hillel's ruling about repayment of debts in order to maintain a constant flow in the economy. The outcome being that all individual debts were canceled by the 50th year .Hillel enacted his version of Tikkun Olam to prevent the economy from coming to a halt.
What I fail to understand in Rabbi Reisner's example is how one can take a precedence based on an economic decision and apply it to homosexuality.The former decision had to do with the financial survival of the Jewish people,while homosexuality has to do with the cessation of producing viable Jewish offspring. Just because a law was changed to encourage economic growth how does one justify changing a law to do with behavior that threatens the survival of the Jewish people? Homosexuality is forbidden by the Torah. The Torah is a divine document that all Jews are bound to. Finding new ways to interpret the verse " thou shall not lie with another man" means 2 things. One, we are allowing American trends and values to infiltrate and dictate our Jewish mores, so that the definition of Tikkun Olam is no longer meeting the needs of all Jews rather it is there to serve the needs of the real "Christan" world. Two, using the definition Tikkun Olam is a way to absolve oneself from the laws of the Torah, in the process, excluding oneself from the Jewish community.
If one believes that G-d's creation has a purpose, that our lives have a specific mission to accomplish in this world, then we need to reexamine how homosexual behavior fits with the Divine plan.This type of behavior does not lead to the furtherance of our Jewish people . Instead , no hope of potential Jewish offspring exists when one engages in homosexual behavior. The first commandment of the Torah is be fruitful and multiply. How then can a homosexual fulfill this obligation?
Finally, placing homosexual rabbis in Jewish leadership roles sends the wrong message!It implies that the laws of the Torah don't apply to everyone;that the Torah laws are not relevant in the "real world". This is not the "real world" we live in--- it is G-d's.
Response to Rabbi Reisner
I found Rabbi Reisner's lecture to be very interesting and thought provoking. Last semester in a Jewish Studies class, I learned how different movements deal with Halakha. However, it is very different to hear a leader of a movement discuss this. I consider myself socially liberal and Jewish, whether or not this is in complete accordance with Jewish tradition. As we heard, Jewish tradition is composed of both Rabbinic and Biblical tradition. Rab. Reisner used both in his explanations of homosexuality and the new cheksher tzedek. I think it is in the true spirit of tikun olam to ensure that food is prepared according to law with utmost respect for human dignity. However, I am not sure if I am comfortable with some of the logic Rab. Reisner used to explain the Conservative movement's view on homosexuality. As Rabbinic tradition is from man, it is fallible. As he explained, much of it exists to prevent any sort of infraction on a Biblical prohibition and the different penalties for infractions reflect this. Biblical prohibitions are found directly in the Torah, the word of HaShem. While it is impossible to follow every single commandment in its entirety, they are generally clear in their meaning. I understand that person's sexual orientation is not by choice, but I have trouble following Rab. Reisner's explanation of the Conservative Movement's position. Two passages in Leviticus explicitly forbid homosexual acts between men as well as other various sexual prohibitions. It does not say that homosexuality is wrong, but some practices are wrong. Rab. Reisner's explanation using human dignity as a trump to HaShem's word does not sit well with me. I am not sure how homosexual practices fit into Jewish law, but I did not find that explanation to be a satisfactory solution to the issue.
Rabbi Reisner's Lecture
Rabbi Reisner began his lecture by talking about a definition of Tikkum Olam which I had never heard before. In regard to the rabbinic text, he said that it referred to remending Jewish law so it fits the needs of the world. This idea of remending law is new to me, as I attended a synagogue with a much more conservative view concerning textual observance growing up.
I found Rabbi Reisner’s description of the dichotomy in conservative judaism’s views toward homosexuality very eye opening. Although there was a consensus statement that “we do not discriminate against sinners,” the rest of the views were much more ambiguous. I had no idea about the rabbinic definition of sex, or the stipulation that a gay man could become a rabbi if he decided to remain celibate (though I am admitedly still puzzled by the logistics of that situation.)
On a side note, I also found it very interesting about the conservative ruling that hearing aids are permitted on Shabbat, since they ruled that human dignity overrides the electronic prohibition. Theoretically speaking however, could the principle of human dignity also be used to justify other prohibitions?
I found Rabbi Reisner’s description of the dichotomy in conservative judaism’s views toward homosexuality very eye opening. Although there was a consensus statement that “we do not discriminate against sinners,” the rest of the views were much more ambiguous. I had no idea about the rabbinic definition of sex, or the stipulation that a gay man could become a rabbi if he decided to remain celibate (though I am admitedly still puzzled by the logistics of that situation.)
On a side note, I also found it very interesting about the conservative ruling that hearing aids are permitted on Shabbat, since they ruled that human dignity overrides the electronic prohibition. Theoretically speaking however, could the principle of human dignity also be used to justify other prohibitions?
Saturday, February 23, 2008
Rabbi Reisner's Talk
I was very excited that the first presentation we had was so interesting. Rabbi Reisner took one of the most popular concepts in reform Judaism, Tikkun Olam, and allowed us to view it in a new and worldly relevant way. I knew that Tikkun Olam dealt with community service and social action, but I did not realize that it's original meaning pertained to Jewish law. I also knew to some extent that the Judaism allowed for amendments to laws so as to pertain to the constantly changing world, but I was unaware of some of the processes behind these amendments. Rabbi Reisner's speech was very educational, even if some of the views that he held were different from my own.
I really liked the insight that we were afforded into the Conservative sects struggle with homosexuality. I have always been very liberal in my views concerning homosexuality, mainly because I believe it to be a characteristic that is not chosen but innate. Although religion is not based off of science, with all of the knowledge we have in this day and age, science is often hard to ignore. And so, my biggest argument matches that of the half of the committee which was concerned with GOD's "wiring." If GOD has given life to each person and imbedded in this person the trait of homosexuality, then who are we to say that it is against the laws which he himself gave us? Obviously the debate is much more complex than that one argument, but it was just really interesting to learn that the Conservative movement is not discounting that possibility. The discussions on human dignity trumping restrictions of law were also both optimistic and, quite frankly, comforting haha.
Overall I just really appreciated the fact that Rabbi Reisner was so real with us. Often times I feel like people in difficult situations involving Jewish law will beat around the bush or try and switch topics, and I find myself consistantly getting irritated. Even if some of his opinions differed from my own, the thorough discussion of evidence and argument for each position presented was enlightening and again, appreciated.
I really liked the insight that we were afforded into the Conservative sects struggle with homosexuality. I have always been very liberal in my views concerning homosexuality, mainly because I believe it to be a characteristic that is not chosen but innate. Although religion is not based off of science, with all of the knowledge we have in this day and age, science is often hard to ignore. And so, my biggest argument matches that of the half of the committee which was concerned with GOD's "wiring." If GOD has given life to each person and imbedded in this person the trait of homosexuality, then who are we to say that it is against the laws which he himself gave us? Obviously the debate is much more complex than that one argument, but it was just really interesting to learn that the Conservative movement is not discounting that possibility. The discussions on human dignity trumping restrictions of law were also both optimistic and, quite frankly, comforting haha.
Overall I just really appreciated the fact that Rabbi Reisner was so real with us. Often times I feel like people in difficult situations involving Jewish law will beat around the bush or try and switch topics, and I find myself consistantly getting irritated. Even if some of his opinions differed from my own, the thorough discussion of evidence and argument for each position presented was enlightening and again, appreciated.
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Rabbi Reisner - Tikkun Olam Response
I thoroughly enjoyed Rabbi Reisner's talk about Tikkun Olam. I am a Reform Jew and because this is how I was brought up I never really think about the struggle with old Rabbinic laws and literature. I am a large proponent of Tikkun Olam in todays society both in the social action definition and the classic Rabbinic literature definition. I do believe that some of the classic laws although they are traditional should be updated to fit present society. This was definitely interesting and refreshing to see some of these topics, which were forbidden, brought back and reviewed in todays light. Although I have a very liberal view of topics such as homosexuals, I appreciate attempts to redefine the meaning of the Rabbinic text and the fact that human dignity overrules Jewish law even if it did not lead to a consensus amongst the Committee of Jewish Law and Standards.
The Hechsher Tzedek story was very interesting as well however I did not see how this was an example of Tikkun Olam as much as the first. I don't think this was a change from Rabbinic Law it was an addition. They were keeping the standards set by Kashrut officials but they were adding a new stamp that would ensure human safety and treatment. I do think this is a good idea and I would definitely be more inclined to purchase something that was made by a company who treated their employees fairly.
Overall, I definitely enjoyed Rabbi Reisner's speech and am looking forward to learning new things.
feb 19th
I thought Rabbi Reisner's lecture on Tuesday was very interesting and thought provoking. He spoke about issues that never really crossed my mind such as gays and lesbians and the way they are viewed within Judaism. I liked the idea that human dignity takes precidence over any Rabbinic law. I have always felt that Judasim has a rational, humanistic and natural way at viewing life and hearing that expressed through Rabbi Reisners examples solidified my feeling. To learn about the Committee of Jewish laws and standards was also something interesting. It made me think about the religion as an evolving and timeless entity.
Rabbi Reisner Response
I really enjoyed Rabbi Reisner's topic. This was for a few reasons. First of all, I think Tikkun Olam; social and community service is so important. I find that one of Judaism's best attributes is the importance it places on Tikkun Olam. I had, though, never thought of Tikkun Olam by it's classic meaning which was brought from the Mishneh of ammending Jewish law so it is responsive to the real needs of the world. I thought it was really interesting that the conservative movement feels that they are reverting back to the earliest meaning of Tikkun Olam with the example of the question of Homosexuals in Judaism. I really enjoyed and appreciated the approach that they took to answering the question. The Committee on Jewish Law and Standards found a very open minded and sincere answer to a difficult question.
Secondly, I am really excited and interested in Hechsher Tzedek. I have always been really interested in products that ensure the betterment of society and the world. I always check to see that products are not tested on animals, or that the materials are made from recycled materials or can be recycled. I would definitely look out to buy those products that are marked with a Hechsher Tzedek in order to support those organizations that are truly acting with proper behavior.
I thought that Rabbi Reisner was a really engaging and interesting speaker. He was very deliberate and clear in his presentation and he answered all the questions asked really well.
-Amy Zitelman
Secondly, I am really excited and interested in Hechsher Tzedek. I have always been really interested in products that ensure the betterment of society and the world. I always check to see that products are not tested on animals, or that the materials are made from recycled materials or can be recycled. I would definitely look out to buy those products that are marked with a Hechsher Tzedek in order to support those organizations that are truly acting with proper behavior.
I thought that Rabbi Reisner was a really engaging and interesting speaker. He was very deliberate and clear in his presentation and he answered all the questions asked really well.
-Amy Zitelman
Monday, February 11, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)