Guest Panel Discussion on Jewish Identity
Ok I'm tired of hearing my own voice on this blog, so we are going to try something new. Below is a guest post by Shmuel, a longtime friend of UH, and superstar law student, and in comments are some really great responses that probe the issue further. Please add to the conversation if you can!
Hi All,
An unsettling incident took place today, and I’d like to hear your reaction. I was in the student lounge, studying for finals with Sam, a fellow 2L in the law school. Sam has always told me about his Jewish identity. He is from a small Southern city, where his family has lived for about two hundred years. They still have a Sefer Torah that their great…grandparents hid from Union soldiers during the Civil War. The family now affiliates with the Reform movement. Sam is religiously literate and completely identifies as a Jew.
We began chatting about how we need to get married within the next year (i.e. by the end of law school) as once work began. there would be no time to date. Sam mentioned that New York Jews do not consider a Jew from the South an authentic Jew (an interesting point), nor for that matter, do Orthodox Jews consider him a Jew. I asked why not? Sam replied that his mother is not Jewish. I asked him how he knew that this affected his Jewish status. Sam explained that during his bar mitzvah trip to Israel, while at the Kotel, a chassid approached him. The chassid asked Sam if he wanted to put on tfillin. Sam agreed. He then asked Sam if he was Jewish. Sam told him that he was. The chassid next asked Sam if both parents were Jewish, When Sam answered no - his mother was not Jewish - the chassid immediately walked away.
Sam's story deeply disturbs me. Sam bears all of the burdens of being Jewish, (among them, identifying with a small persecuted minority – which is perhaps not a big deal in New York, but is certainly a formidable challenge in the Deep South. Sam has told me that while growing up, every few months he would need to explain to someone why he did not accept the Lord Jesus Christ as his Savior. ) . He participates in Jewish practice and culture (he went to his first Purim shpiel this year). Yet we do not consider him a Jew. Someone who has a Jewish mother however, we do consider a Jew, even were he to change his name to Smith and celebrate Christmas. The arbitrary criteria we employ to determine Jewishness seems deeply unfair, indeed almost unethical. I told Sam that the archetype of conversion in the Bible is Ruth, and that her conversion consisted of publicly identifying with the Jewish people - am'ech ami. It is true that the Orthodox halakha has additional criteria when considering the question of who is a Jew. Yet fundamentally, it seems that the public identification with the plight of the Jewish people is all that really matters.
At this point, two issues need to be addressed:
1. How does one respond to Sam? Do you tell him that it is true, he is a gentile? How do you explain / justify the halakha to him?
2. How do we justify the halakha to ourselves? One can answer that being Jewish is simply a formal legal status, that is devoid of any meaning. But if we consider being Jewish to be something more meaningful, why make it contingent upon descent from the mother? How do you exclude someone from the Jewish people (although he is more involved than most Jews) simply because the wrong parent wasn't Jewish?
Shmuel sent his question out in an email before allowing me to post it on the blog. Below is a sampling of the back and forth.
More Thoughts?
10 comments:
Hey Shmuel. I like your answer- it was probably the best answer for the continuation of your friendship and it hasa strong element of authenticity.
As far as the substantive issue goes- I think every group has its ground rules for acceptance. If you wan to be one of the "guys", say in a lab research environment (of course no relation to my current circumstance) you have to go out for drinks, make appropriately timed dirty jokes, etc.. If you want to be Orthodox, granted
it's a bit trickier. I am aware of the fact that there are people who are considered Orthodox despite every attemptthey make to the contrary. However, other than being buried in a Jewish cemetary, I'm not sure what benefits they
really have. As far as the argument that it's not fair that some are born into Orthodoxy and others aren't, I think that's true for every social/cultural club- there is a host of advantages and disadvantages that we're born with that affect the extent to which we'll be given access to a given group.
I had a relevant experience with a non-Jewish friend in the lab who has been dating this Syrian Jew for several years, and it was her impression from speaking with him and being with his family that even if she converted, she would not be considered one of them. She thought that meant that you couldn't "really" convert into Judaism. After being all scholarly with her, telling her that Judaism fully embraces converts, I realized how foolish I was being. This guy was from a Syrian family and they have their own rules of admission to the club. Conversion is just not enough.
But I guess I'm not really getting to the substantive issue, which is your second question. Should we change our admission criterion to whoever identifies with us in addition to whoever is born as one of us? I guess that's one option- it wouldn't
be a very desired club- it would quickly lose its appeal.
The other option is to cease valueing people by which club they identify with. We may not be able to mess around with the laws of who is a Jew or not because of the all the consequences to marriages (see the entire screwed up Jewish community that can't marry each other), but while keeping our ancient laws, we can also adopt a more liberal ideology, which states that there are a ton of really interesting, smart, kind, and wonderful people out there to appreciate: Jewish and non-Jewish. I consider social groups to be valuable constructs for life- but despite my allegiances toward Yehuda Halevi, they don't dictate my fundamental beliefs about people.
I would agree with you if we were solely talking about admission into the "Orthodox" club . However, i do think that admission into the Jewish club is more basic. The same Orthodox halakha that defines who is a Jew and who isn't also defines how we are to treat those who are not Jewish. Thus if you a not a member of the club
- you cannot touch my wine
- I cannot eat any food you cook, even if kosher (bishul akum)
- I cannot leave a meat sandwich unattended in your presence (basar she'nistalek min ha'ayin)
- your kids cannot date my kids
- I cannot count you for a zimmun, a minyan, call you to the torah
Basically , I cannot include you as an active participant in public Jewish ceremonies , and I must take of the many steps to actively socially distance myself from you.
So as much as my modern liberal values cause me to think you are a great guy , the halakha forces me to treat you as a goy. It severely restricts my ability to treat with you respect and dignity. The definition of who is a Jew is really not such a trivial matter, as admission into the lab scientist or Orthodox Jew club is . The halakha tries to dehumanize those who it does not consider a Jew. By definition it reaches to some of the most basic aspects of social interaction. It makes little sense in my mind to define Judaism genetically when the repercussions are almost wholly social.
Much as I would like to, I really, really don't have time to start up with this now, but I can't let Shmuel's faulty logic stand, either, so just a few words: First, I think that Responder A has it right: A Jew is a Jew, a non-Jew is a non-Jew, and all of humanity is created b'tzelem Elokim and must be treated as such. The laws separating Jews and non-Jews that Shmuel cites are meant to preserve the boundaries between social groups that allow those social groups to exist. They do not dehumanize- certainly not in the way that Christian and Muslim laws respecting so-called heathens have dehumanized Jews and others over the centuries, often quite literally (i.e., by taking their lives). (Incidentally, I heard R. Dr. Lamm, shlit"a, speak on the topic last night, at the illustrious Spanish & Portuguese Synagogue in New York.) But don't think I am saying that b/c they dehumanize us we can do the same- by no means- I am saying that our laws preserve certain social boundaries, in the same way that, for example, lawyers keep non-members of the bar from doing some things (e.g., what I should really be doing now) that could be done perfectly well by one who has not jumped through just the right hoops (and paid all the right people) to get a certificate to hang on his wall. I don't view any of you as less human because you have not joined the bar, but I would lose my own license and bear both civil and criminal liability if I let you review some of my documents (which is like, say, letting you cook for me if you were a non-Jew). Bottom line: Every group has rules about how to relate to non-members, and those often become an excuse to discriminate (in the pejorative sense), or, worse, to dehumanize. But the rules themselves do not insist on such attitudes (and other rules may even discourage them)- these attitudes come from some other morally dubious and psycho-socially corrupt source.
Also, Shmuel, the repercussions of many other genetically difined traits are mostly social (beauty, intelligence, wealth, health, race, gender, nationality, etc.)- why should religion differ? O.k., I really, really have to go now (I feel like Juliet's nurse when she returns from inquiring after Romeo's welfare in exile, saying that she is too breathless to tell what she has found, and Juliet asks how she can be out of breath when she has breath to say so). But one more thing, Shmuel: I have always felt that you treat me with great respect and dignity, and yet you would not count me for a zimmun or a minyan or call me to the Torah, either. I guess that there are other ways to show respect and dignity besides those that break down all social boundaries (and thus dishonor the whole).
When lamenting/praising the existence of religious boundaries I think it’s also important to keep in mind what people actually want from their religious status, and whether they are actually being prevented from getting it. I didn't find Sam's story as disturbing as you did Shmuel, if his sense of self was really predicated upon religious legitimacy from Orthodox people he could convert-chances are he has a vague sense that they are wrong and that he is authentically Jewish in some way. There is a rich and booming New York Jewish culture out there for anyone who is interested, regardless of ethnic origin. Sometimes these Jews complain about Orthodox intolerance, but that’s one strand among a million other things they are concerned with. For example, along the lines of Rachel’s analogy (although she will hate what I’m saying)- there is no doubt that the halakhic system makes assumptions about me as a woman that I don’t agree with, and sometimes that bothers me, but for the most part, I have ample cultural resources available to me that let me construct a sense of identity that doesn't make me on the same plane as ktanim and avadim. If I were an agunah, i would think differently about this, and if Sam was say, a mamzer, someone whose participation in the halakhic framework actually denies him a shot at happiness, I’m sure he would think differently about his situation as well.
But for now, aren't there always people who will think we are illegitimate for some reason or another? How can you make accomodations for all of them, or even any of them? If you feel uncomfortable with a system that excludes people like Sam, then that is your problem, not Sam's. But maybe you would agree with that. I forgot where I was going with this-but I really do think, when considering the negative sociological impact of certain laws, its help to actually look at sociology-whether making certain textual or legal changes would actually change the deeper structures of the way people
live.
Dear Shmuel,
Sorry that I am both late and in a rush (preparing for what is often deemed, perhaps hyperbolically, the world's toughest math exam in a month) and cannot give full justice to my thoughts.
Firstly, it is ironic that this was one of the first emails I received upon returning home from a visit to Poland, particularly Treblina, Majdanek, and Auschwitz. While a full reaction would be an essay in itself, I would like to bring a point germane to this conversation: People like to point out that Hitler did not care about who was halakhically and ritually observant- Judaism was both a race and a fraternity of sorts (membership through affiliation). And the point is exactly that: Hitler viewed a lens that was wider than halakhah, so we should be forgiving as well in not applying the strict letter of the law.
Your difficulty, Shmuel, lies in the fact that while you have adopted a supra-Halakhic value system, your Jewish outlook on the world, perhaps because of your upbringing, is overly halakha-centric. This is the singular fault with Orthodoxy: It encourages a monochromatic view of things, viewed only through the lens of the halakha. The law makes our value judgements and is the source of any conversation we may have about something or someone. One of the things which struck me during the trip is that Orthodoxy, for those who adhere strictly to a halakhah-informed worldview, does not have a place in its pantheon for heroes such as Mordechai Anieliwiecz, Anatoly Sharansky, and Theodore Herzl. Besides for Satmar, the charedi world is agnostic about the State of Israel. To me, that is a huge indictment of their theology- they are incapable of passing judgment on one of the central historical events of the Jewish people and even the entire 20th century. But the significance cannot be expressed in halakhic terms (with a bracha? without a bracha? C'mon!). The same applies to the Holocaust- Orthodoxy cannot articulate a meaningful theology that does justice to the magnitude of the event (note that most major theological responses are heterodox: Rubinstein, Greenberg. These responses strike a chord, but Orthodoxy is unable to even contemplate along these lines). It must insist on a response along the lines of earlier tragedies already dealt with in the halakhic corpus.
The answer to your dilemma, Shmuel, lies in the fact that we consider Sharanksy a hero- and a Jewish hero at that. Yet we view them, not just as heroes, but as Jewish heroes, even though the halakha doesn't classify him as such. And we recognize the sheer importance of the state of Israel to the Jewish people. These ideas lead us to the inescapable conclusion that as Jews, we have values and rubrics outside the halakha.
The Halakha imposes a strict and binary worldview on it- but only if we accept that that is the measure we take. You might be interested in reading Shaye Cohen's The Beginings of Judaism in which he has an essay on Jewish identity in the classical world. Before the rabbis said "to be Jewish you must do X or descend from Y". Therefore, people weren't either Jewish or not. Some identified with Jews more and some identified with Jews less. Cohen's creates a seven-level heuristic scale for determining Jewishness (I can't recall if formal conversion was the final step). But the point was, it wasn't that you were Jewish or not Jewish. You were Jewish in some ways, perhaps not in others. There was not set line that created a binary identity. Jewishness was a palette from which one drew the primary colors of identity. If you were far more connected to jewish practices than greek ones, people would consider you Jewish- and you would be Jewish!
Obviously, a legal system cannot deal with such fluidity and must impose a definite border and the appropriate halakhic consequnces follow. Although Rav Soloveitchik would vehemently protest, you can point out to Sam at this point that the halakha is just one of the manifold expressions of Jewishness. He is still Jewish, very, very Jewish as explained in the paragraph above. But he can expand his Jewish identity, just as we all can. In some ways, Sam, by maintaining identity in adverse circumstances, is more Jewish than we are. In others, by this system called halacha, we are more Jewish than Sam. According to Cohen, matrineal descent could be a functional of the historic circumstance of rabbinic times and is not a reflection of ontology (again, this particular point borders on heterodox- but it is valid to Sam and in an academic context).
Part of maintaining a Jewish identity in the wider world is developing a wide range of tools and definitions as to what it means to be Jewish. Mordechai Anieliwicz is a great hero of mine, even though the Gedolim would have disagreed with what he did (they were very into passivity during ther Holocaust). I do not find this a contradiction to being a halakhic Jew. Similarly, Sam Cone can be a great Jew, even if the halakha does not view him as such.
I hope this is helpful, let me know what you think,
Amitai
Judaism cannot look down upon non-Jews. It would be difficult to justify, mostly because being born a Jew not really a choice. Non-Jews are expected to follow the 7 mizwot bne noäch, and in fact we are meant to look with envy on a person who is not burdened with all the mizwot and resposibility the arises as a Jew. That being said, people love burden. People cannot live without it; parents, friends, life - all a burden. Nobody would tell someone not to embrace a burden. So, how could one possible explain to a non-Jew that he is, in fact, "lucky" to not be a Jew, when all he wants in life is the burden of Judaism?
shmuel-
im surprised you didnt ask sam how his mother's religious status effects his own perceptions of his jewishness. I can imagine that a person who chooses to marry a Jew in the deep south will be identified as a jew by others. did she actively maintain an alternate religious practice? did she practice judaism? did she just never undergo a formal conversion process from any denomination? why did she choose to do these? Sounds to me like their story is parallel to biblical families: hebrew men who marry various women along the way in areas with no other hebrews and these women then become hebrews themselves by tribal affiliation.
One thing Ive done is that I just dont ask about how people are Jewish. This sometimes rattles the fibers of my ortho upbringing, but its a challenge I think is important to work on. When I found out that a good friend's mom had converted, and I knew that on the one hand her dad was from a traditional sephardi family, but on the other hand they are not observant by any standard definitions, I spent 2 years not asking her for details of her mothers conversion because I had already made the decision that I considered her Jewish and I didnt want information that would cause me to act differently around her in regards to certain things (like benefitting from melacha that she did on shabbat) bc I could say 'well, shes not technically jewish...'
Its not really a solution, but I guess its my own personal standard of ameikh ami.
It's a tough one. On the one hand, what can I do, it's halacha. On the other, I've had my own Jewishness questioned, just enough to give me a sense of how hurtful it can be to have your identity denied. Maybe I need to learn not to let it get to me, but it seems to hurt most people.
I tend to deal with all this by thinking of these people as Jewish for all but ritual purposes. Halachically, that's a contradiction. But when someone is so engaged and committed, I simply am going to relate to her/him as Jewish.
I also do all in my power to avoid any situation where this could be an issue, like keeping to mevushal grape products. A friend of mine used to leave the shul building if a student with a non-jewish mother was the 10th in the room, so that she wouldn't be singled out as the reason for not having a minyan.
But it's still a cover-up, and I'm still uncomfortable.
I recently blogged about matrilineal descent. Thought it might be of interest.
we didn't make the rules. G-d made the rules and told it to us in the torah
Post a Comment