I wanted to pretend it wasn't a problem. Wasn't an issue. Wasn't the elephant in the room.
The first time I heard this accusation I was flummoxed. What? Of course Reform Jews are Jewish. Where did that even come from?? Where do people even get these things from?? How do people believe these things about us?
But I think I understand things a little better now. And that's good news and bad news. This blog has helped crystallize for me what exactly the issue is. In Judaism, there's a teaching:
I've learned much from all my teachers. But from my students most of all.That's how I feel about all those who read and comment on this blog. And here's what I've learned (and please hang on to the end; this is like a geometry proof. If you hate geometry, hang on anyway; it's like a recipe):
1. Orthodox people define Judaism very technically. Either you're born to a Jewish mother, or you convert according to halacha (Jewish law).
2. However, Reform Jews (I think) define Judaism more conditionally. If you feel Jewish, act Jewish, raise the kids Jewish, were raised Jew-ish, you're Jewish.
3. In some cases, the Orthodox view will be more inclusive (like when a born Jew celebrates Christmas, wears a cross, burns the Israeli flag, and eats pepperoni pizza, he's still as Jewish as Moses, according to Orthodox philosophy).
4. In some cases, the Reform view will be more inclusive (like when someone is born to a Jewish father but not a Jewish mother, he is still Jewish if he behaves Jewishly, according to Reform philosophy).
5. Therefore, since Reform Jews tie identity with behavior, they think Orthodox Jews do, too.
6. Therefore, a Reform Jew who isn't very observant might assume that the Orthodox don't consider him Jewish, since he figures that if he were Orthodox, he wouldn't consider himself Jewish.
7. This is not true, since the Orthodox tie identity to technical status only (while acknowledging that observance is very important but simply not a condition for status).
8. That's the good news.
9. The bad news is that since Orthodoxy asserts that only technical status determines Jewishness, conversion can become a sticking point.
10. However, this is highly dependent on personal circumstances and each situation is taken case-by-case.
11. Finally, I consider issues of personal status to be extremely private and unless there's a practical reason that someone is asking me or needs to be told for halachic (Jewish law) reasons, I don't intervene in this area.
12. Of all the things I deal with in Jewish education, this is by far the most sensitive and potentially hurtful: who is and isn't a Jew?
13. I wish I never had to hurt anyone's feelings and that my religious beliefs and standards never had to make anyone feel bad.
14. In the vast majority of cases, they don't.
How are you used to thinking about identity - Jewish (technical) or Jew-ish (behavior-based)?
UPDATE: May 8, 2012 - Due to the unprecedented number of comments below, you must scroll to the bottom of the page and click "load more" to view the more recent comments.
numbers 5 & 6 were a very valuable insight for me - thx
ReplyDeleteThis is a very interesting insight. I think that you are right. I am a convert and I feel fairly comfortable telling this to most religious Jews, but I rarely tell nonreligious Jews and never non-Jews. Over the past 26 years I have found that the first group considers me to be a Jew, but the second group? not always. and the last? I really do not like the reactions I have received.i am interested to read other people's reactions.
ReplyDeleteI don't think it is or will be or even "can" be, but I sort a wish it boiled down to actions and behaviour, basically good behaviour earns you the title , general bad behaviour excludes you from wearing it.
ReplyDeleteAn interesting wish. But then we would never have to own anyone who behaves badly... (is that the good news or the bad news?)
DeleteRuchi, this list explains the concept from both sides so well. The position you're in, being active with all kinds of Jews, really helps those of us on the outside (or inside, as the case may be) to see the bigger picture. You're doing great work, and anyone who knows you knows that you would never attempt to hurt someone, so if it happens there's got to be a good reason.
ReplyDelete2. However, Reform Jews (I think) define Judaism more conditionally. If you feel Jewish, act Jewish, raise the kids Jewish, were raised Jew-ish, you're Jewish.
ReplyDeleteWhile there may be some Reform Jews who feel this way, this is not the official position of the Reform movement. An individual is Jewish either through conversion or if the following conditions are met: born to a Jewish parent AND is reared solely as a Jew AND identifies with Judaism to the exclusion of all faiths.
(See here for the actual Responsum on this issue: http://data.ccarnet.org/cgi-bin/respdisp.pl?file=38&year=carr)
Thanks, Frumesarah. I added the parenthetical "I think" - I know that I don't know the official position, so your comment is helpful. Presumably the official position of the movement is also in understanding that Orthodox Jews do, indeed, acknowledge Reform Jews as Jews. This piece is directed toward that misunderstanding by the laity.
DeleteAlso, FS, this is just my hypothesis. If you have other insights on this pervasive accusation, I'd be interested in you sharing it. Thanks.
DeleteI don't think the movement takes an official position on what other groups/people think of Reform Jews.
DeleteThe Rebbetzin is correct when she says that the Movement does not take a position on what other groups think.
DeleteWhat is of particular interest is that while Reform Judaism accepts an individual's Jewish status if he or she has a Jewish father/non-Jewish mother, most Reform Jews are ignorant of this and believe that only a Jewish mother "counts." Clearly, education is lacking within our own movement.
Ladies: do you have another possible explanation for why R Jews think that O Jews do not consider them Jewish? Do you think it's mainly the patrilineal descent thing? Or do you think it's because O Jews really do think so?
DeleteTwo-fold.
Delete1) I imagine that quite a number of R Jews have had conversations that have resulted in being told by O Jews that they are not Jewish.
2) R Jews who continue to feel inauthentic as Jews. Their own misgivings, lack of knowledge, lack of education, lack of ritual observance all feed feelings in inadequacy, etc.
per #1, do you mean apart from the patrilineal/conversion issues?
DeleteYes, #1 & 2 from FS, and yes - apart from patrilineal/conversion. I myself was told this on many occasions by people who really what they meant was "the way you are Jewish is not really Jewish" because of course, halachicly there would be no argument that I'm Jewish. It does not help that Orthodox Jews in the public, mainstream, such as Norman Lamm, chancellor of YU, say things like, and I quote, “The Reform Movement may show a rise, because if you add goyim to Jews then you will do OK.” He is referring to patrilineal descent, but of course, it can be read any way. Full article here:http://www.jweekly.com/article/full/38071/yu-chancellor-non-orthodox-judaism-on-the-way-out1/. This was from an article where he informed the public he would be saying Kaddish for the Reform and Conservative movements because, in his opinion, only Orthodox Judaism could survive. So, you see, how the problem immediately becomes much more complex. It becomes a pervasive attitude, sadly.
DeleteRuchi, I'm curious how you would address the very public comments made by a leader in O-Judaism. I have had many, many non-O people ask me about this - I'm trying to address it both through sharing this post and by equating it to Governor Kasich making a bold, negative statement and people from Indiana assuming ALL Ohioans feel that way. We know, of course, that all Ohioans would not agree with the Governor, but the PERCEPTION is created. thoughts on how to address this?
DeleteLeah, are you talking about the Norman Lamm link or another recent story?
DeleteThe Norman Lamm link, in addition to other public statements by one other person - when I find the link I'll let you know.
DeleteI'll wait to read it and then respond.
Deletecan't find the link and don't feel comfortable with the potential L"H b/c I don't have the link. I guess the Lamm quote will have to do.
Deletealso, btw, we had a similar issue w/something some macher in R-J said and OH the damage control . . .
DeleteThere's a big difference between what he said and how he said it. I have seen in my life that most things can be said in a nice way, even if they're not palatable. If both parties are (best case scenario) emotionally intelligent and working on reducing ego, it can be done. I don't know why NL felt compelled to make this public statement, but clearly the language is incendiary.
DeleteWould you like to know if I agree with the actual content? He made two statements:
1. Non-Orthodox Jewry will be disappearing
2. The "goyim" line (oy)
As far as #1, who knows?? No one is a prophet today. Perhaps NL knows more than me; he's certainly been around more blocks than I have. The bottom line is, it's a projection, not a fact, and even if he's right, what goal does it serve to say so?
#2: Offensive language aside (not that the word itself is offensive but it can certainly be perceived this way, especially in this context) this is basically the patrilineal/conversion debate. Factually, he's got a point, but I find the tone rude and again wonder: what purpose do statements like this serve?
This really goes back to the Jewish unity thing. Based on what I've learned in my education, there is almost nothing more important than getting along.
I don't get #10. What's the antecedent for "this"?
ReplyDeleteA convert's status. I like people who use the word antecedent.
ReplyDeleteWell, it's pretty clear that it's only dependent within Orthodox conversions. Otherwise, it's pretty clear-cut from the Orthodox perspective.
Delete(And I appreciate that you didn't have to look up the word! :))
How do you know I didn't? ;) only me and my hairdresser will know!
DeleteFor me, this comes from comments when I was a child - I was raised in a Conservative synagogue and my Orthodox friend told me I wasn't really Jewish. I have heard this more than once as a child. I had two Jewish parents but I simply wasn't as observant as the Orthodox families. It was very confusing to a child who attended services every Shabbat, kept Kosher, and celebrated the holidays much the way my Orthodox friends do.
ReplyDeleteRecently I was with my very Orthodox family for Pesach. They were wonderful to me, but I couldn't help noticing little comments like, "what you consider keeping kosher." So I think it comes down to attitude. I recognize that the standards are different among different people. But this attitude (from both sides of the "fence") can be divisive.
I totally get that, Susan. Kids are so black-and-white like that. With each of my kids I've had to teach them carefully that driving on Shabbat or eating non-kosher food (or women wearing pants and guys not wearing a kippa! lol) does not mean you're not Jewish! I think it comes from the child's logic that we do certain things because we're Jewish therefore it must follow that someone who doesn't do those things aren't Jewish.
DeleteSorry to hear, btw, that you felt there was a condescending attitude from the family you were at for Pesach. That's a shame.
Ditto. But questioning the nature of kosher is different from questioning the practitioner's Jewish status.
DeleteRuchi - you are correct, but for people who may not have as sophisticated understanding of the distinctions (most lay people in my community), it FEELS as if someone is questioning their status - even though you and I know there is a difference.
DeleteYou are absolutely correct. That is important.
DeleteLittle O kids have to be taught this point. Since the only world they know is observant, the assume all Jews are observant. They only know that which they are told, but once it is explained to them they are cool with it.
ReplyDeleteI had talked about something like this in this post:
http://frumanista.blogspot.com/2011/06/are-we-really-that-bad.html
But if the Reform consider a Jewish father to be sufficient to label a child "Jewish," then that does make things complicated. Yo momma is Jewish, you are Jewish, no matter how you live your life; it's a racial thing as much as cultural, halachically.
Saying "I feel Jewish!" isn't sufficient to gain official "Jewish" status by us O; that's why there is such a rigorous conversion process. You really want to be one of us? It's not easy. We don't proselytize. Are you sure? Let's take a few years to see.
Good point, and nice post there. Example: my 5-year-old and I were discussing what he should do if he gets lost. He though hard, then said: "Find a Jewish person!" There's only so much complexity I'm going to offer a 5-year-old on that. He meant, someone who dresses in an obviously Jewish, observant way (yarmulke/kippah for the guy, long skirt and head covering for the mom). At a certain age, you have to let your kid live in a black-and-white world. As they grow and mature, they need and deserve a multi-layered view of our fellow Jews and fellow humans.
Delete(In the end I told him the best thing is to find a Jewish mommy with kids, because she will probably know him, or if he can't find a Jewish mommy, he should find any mommy with kids because she will probably know how to take care of lost kids. Good thing his face screams "I am a Koval!")
Also: the not proselytizing thing. Y'know, sometimes I feel that it is more PC to not proselytize (Jews certainly take offense to being proselytized to) and sometimes I wonder if it's more PC to reach out and include (call it whatever you want). Which is why, while we should always be nice, PC isn't a reliable arbiter of behavior.
Yes, I do wonder what you [Ruchi] see yourself as doing here sometimes-'proselytize' sounds very Christian to me. Kiruv/outreach makes sense. I would love to hear more about this, although I know you are rather reserved on the blog about your own views and purposes apart from Jewish unity and respectful exchange. I like the idea of it NOT being outreach, personally, but just contact or basic 'discussion', because otherwise I feel like it makes me into someone 'outside' who needs 'reaching out to', a Jewish charity case, which I don't feel I am and would feel a bit demeaning.
DeleteBy "here" I assume you mean on this blog. My goal is two-fold: one, de-mystify Orthodox Judaism by being a real face, one that is hopefully normal, friendly, reasonable, and kind. Two, foster open dialogue between the denominations that is safe and respectful so we can mutually understand one another.
DeleteAnd if someone feels drawn closer to their Jewish soul or feels more inspired to try some Jewish practices because of it, well, I think that's beautiful.
In my work I get asked if my goal is to "convert" people. I posted about that here: http://outoftheorthobox.blogspot.com/2011/11/are-you-in-cult-or-are-you-trying-to.html
As if I could convert a Jew...or *make* any be Orthodox!!
As it so happens, conversion with a Reform rabbi is also a lengthy and rigorous process. Including, for a majority of Reform rabbis, milah (ritual circumcision) and t'vilah (ritual immersion).
DeleteFS can you describe more about that? I think it's important for people to know exactly what it involves. Also, you say "majority" - is this a movement-wide policy, or does it vary by the specific rabbi?
DeleteThe Movement "encourages" the use of traditional gerut rituals. R rabbis have the authority to determine whether or not they require said rituals. One generation ago, my father was one of the few who required mikvah and brit and stood out among his colleagues. Now, I am not certain if I know any colleagues who do not have their candidates perform the rituals.
DeleteWhen I work with a candidate, there is a period of study that is supplemented with ongoing sessions with me. Reading, learning, living Jewishly. Synagogue attendance. I also have my candidates keep a journal throughout the entire process. I have had candidates ready to complete the official process after a couple of years and have had some who take longer.
Working with gerim has provided some of my most cherished moments in the rabbinate. Their passion, enthusiasm, and fresh perspectives have opened my eyes to nuances in Judaism that can oft time remain hidden to those who are fortunate to be born into it.
Great list. Very clear. And indeed the #5-6 are illuminating, because identity vs. official status can get confusing and your analysis of how a Reform person might think an Orthodox person would think that a Reform person isn't 'really Jewish' is helpful (much clearer in your words than in my summary).
ReplyDeleteNow, that said, there would be HUNDREDS of posts I could paste in here from other blogs out there in the J-blogosphere where Orthodox Jews comment about Reform services, Conservative practices, Reconstructionist customs and so on, and add, "What do they know, they aren't even real Jews?" or "That's not even Jewish!" Maybe those people are ignorant, but they still say those things. About people and practices that, at least within their own circles, identify as Jewish.
So that suggests to me that Ruchi has the official line on WHO is Jewish correct but there is a lot of casual interpretation--of people AND esp. of practices--that don't fit into this line.
Ugh, why am I in the Pacific time zone where there won't be any time for a good dialogue before you all start Shabbat??
Uch. Fellow bloggers.
Delete:)
I wonder if you would push those people against the wall and say "But are they still JEWISH???" they'd say, well, yeah!
It's not just bloggers. It's teachers and rebbeing. My teen was explicitly informed that reform are not Jewish by her parshah teacher. I had to do a lot of re-education before I finally pulled her out.
DeleteI think a lot of it is the patrilineal descent issue. And the rest is simple cognitive dissonance. Many orthodox Jews see their religious lives as more taxing, more difficult- kosher food, shabbos limitations, tuition prices, etc. So they want something to show for it. They want to say they are the authentic thing, the real Jews and everyone else is a poor imitation. - MP
* rebbeim :)
DeleteMaybe. I never heard anything like that growing up.
DeleteOk, here's another thought. Reform Jews are less worried about 'who is a Jew' because the criteria for Reform Jews are 'looser' and self-identification and patrilineality are among the criteria. Orthodox Jews, as Ruchi points out, have a certain laxity insofar as self-identification and other criteria (I love the pepperoni pizza-Christmas Jew) don't even matter if the halachic criteria are met. And I am still loving Ruchi's analysis of how Reform Jews could PROJECT onto Orthodox Jews an idea that they are not 'really Jewish' because the Reform Jews take behavior and identity as significant criteria for Jewishness and Orthodox don't.
ReplyDeleteBut maybe where non-Orthodox Jews feel more slighted, or frankly *I* feel more sensitive, is not about 'who' counts as a Jew but WHAT counts as Jewish. What practices, what beliefs, what customs, what cultural elements. Actually I think this is as least as sensitive as WHO counts as a Jew.
This is where it can seem as though Orthodoxy defines WHAT is Jewish and what is not--because it finds its own interpretation of Judaism to be NOT an interpretation at all, but 'the real thing'. So Orthodoxy takes itself as the authority regarding WHAT is really Jewish, and seems thereby to belittle non-Orthodox practices and customs that differ from Orthodoxy.
Interesting (I've been waiting for you!).
DeleteWhat do YOU think is Orthodoxy's position on which behaviors qualify as Jewish?
Yeah, the time zone thing is a bummer, I always feel 'too late', or if you post in the evening, 'too early'. And Fridays everyone disappears too early for me.
DeleteSo what do I think O-Jews think is really Jewish behavior? Warning, it's about to get circular, but it is meant respectfully in any case: I think Orthodox Jews take as 'really Jewish' behavior that which conforms most to their own interpretation of Judaism, which they actually don't perceive AS an INTERPRETATION but AS Judaism per se (while nonetheless acknowledging that interpretation or analysis of the Torah is required to make it consistent and fit with modern life).
And this is mainly a pretty literal reading of the Torah as interpreted by the genealogy of Talmudists et al. by way of the rabbis, as then translated into very specific rules about specific behaviors--and the more stringently one follows those, the 'more Jewish' the behavior is.
But wait. Here I thought you were going to specify specific mitzvot like shabbat, kosher, etc. And instead you're just saying Orthodox people think being Jewish is what Orthodox people think being Jewish means. So maybe I misunderstood, or maybe you'd prefer not to be very specific...? Not sure, but I'd love for you to develop this thought a bit since I believe we're on the brink of something valuable.
DeleteThanks for the followup. I did mean the circularity in my answer, because the role of interpretation in what is Jewish practice seems to me central for all Jewish practices, even for O-Jews, which to me means that things are not as cut-and-dry as we human beings would like them to be, and likewise (in my view) what counts as Judaism might not be as cut-and-dry as some Orthodox people might want it to be. So for instance "keeping Shabbat" is yes a Jewish practice--but figuring out what 'keeping' and 'resting' and 'work' are has required huge elaboration and interpretation, and so differences have arisen, and why should the O interpretation of what these words mean be considered the "real" one? Please know that I mean that last question genuinely, not plaintively. Really, why?
DeleteFor instance, I guess God doesn't say in particular that you can't carry a purse on Shabbat, instead that interpretation of 'work' was decided by interpreters along the way, and then the Eruv got brought in, which makes things more practical. All of which I respect and understand as interpretive interventions by human beings in trying to follow what they interpret as God's law.
So to answer your comment about the mitzvot, from what I understand, O-Jews consider Jewish practice a life that attempts to follow what they consider the 613 mitzvot in the Torah--I write 'what they consider' only to point out that even that number has been debated, there is a history to how to count those and which lines count as commandments and so on. For me the historical character of Judaism and the interpretive work that goes into it are part of what make it fascinating, so none of this is meant as "why I'm not Orthodox". Rather I am puzzled by the view, expressed in comments to this post, that O-Judaism is the real one and other interpretations of Judaism are not.
It really boils down to the concept of "mesorah" - Orthodox Jews attempt and purport to follow an unbroken chain of tradition stretching back generation to generation from Sinai.
DeleteMaybe they sometimes fail in that mission, or maybe mistakes have been made through the long and circuitous centuries, but that's the goal and that's the claim. Yes, some customs/traditions have been added or faded away but the basic 613 will never change, no matter what.
The idea is that there's an outside, objective source that we are looking to for guidance - it doesn't come from within ourselves.
That's why Orthodox Jews think their practice is the "authentic" one - that's always been our goal - to retain the authenticity in its original as much as possible.
I don't think Reform Judaism (and again, please correct me if I'm wrong) even tries to discover what ancient Jews did, because isn't the whole idea to autonomously choose what is relevant/meaningful, and to update and "reform" as the generations progress?
I do not mean this with disrespect (it's hard to convey tone in print). Just stating that the goals are just different.
Orthodoxy attempts to preserve the original, while Reform seeks to continually evolve with the times.
Am I wrong?
If you're willing to spend a little money, you might try looking at Reform Responsa for the Twenty-First Century: Sh'eilot Ut'shuvot. I only have the previous volume, Teshuvot for the Nineties, which is organized into 4 sections Orach Chaim, Yoreh Deah, Chosen Mishpat, and Even HaEzer.
DeleteWading into the fray here...
DeleteReform Jews *do* try to discover what ancient Jews did. The idea isn't to autonomously choose what is meaningful/relevant, not exactly. The idea is to make informed decisions about mitzvot based on a thorough examination of the mitzvah's history, how it's typically observed, reasons behind it, etc. For example, a Reform Jew might examine the rules of kashrut as regards wine, and learn more about the reasons why you couldn't drink wine made (or touched) by non-Jews - by examining source texts as well as reading responsa. Finally, he or she would make a decision based on that information - such a decision might be "No modern wineries make wine intended to be used in idol worship, and therefore the need for a hechsher is obselete, so I'll drink non-kosher wine" OR the decision might be "This is a long-held custom and should be upheld for the sake of being able to have other Jews feel comfortable drinking wine in my home." Both of those decisions would be valid. On the other hand, a Jew who says "I don't require kosher wine because it's too inconvenient and difficult that way" is being lazy, not Reform.
Ultimately Reform Jews don't recognize halacha as directly from Hashem - it's seen as the best attempt of some very intelligent and dedicated men to determine the best way to carry out the mitzvot from the Torah (as in, the five books... not the entire body of scholarly Jewish work that O Jews call Torah.) We have more information than they did, our challenges are different, the world is different. The mitzvot still apply, but we need not apply them identically.
Did that make any sense? I feel like I should offer a disclaimer that this is my understanding and may be quite flawed.
I have so much else to say about this issue, but I'm tired of typing for tonight. Here are some of my main (unelaborated) points; let me know if you want to hear more about them:
1. The perceived insult is not about Jewish identity and all that legality, it's about the validity of non-Orthodox Jewish practice.
2. There is a difference between the intention and philosophy of Reform Judaism and the real-life practice of some Reform Jews. If you're going to judge Orthodox Judaism by its best adherents, then we need to judge Reform Judaism the same way.
3. My background has been pretty varied: Conservative day school, Reform summer camp, and then worked for an Orthodox rabbi in a student outreach organization. Working with said Rabbi really helped me to understand why, to an Orthodox Jew, there is only one *right* way to observe the mitzvot. That's not going to change. Hence Reform, Conservative, Reconstructionist, Humanistic and other Jews will always be able to accept Orthodox practice as one valid form of Jewish observance, but Orthodox Jews will probably never be able to view non-Orthodox practice as anything but misguided, flawed, or flat-out wrong.
Hm... guess I wasn't that tired of typing.
Thoughts?
I appreciate this post a lot, really clearly put.
DeleteSCJ, yes, thanks for your eloquent points.
DeleteI hope I've addressed some of your ideas below. For now, I'd like to address this:
"There is a difference between the intention and philosophy of Reform Judaism and the real-life practice of some Reform Jews. If you're going to judge Orthodox Judaism by its best adherents, then we need to judge Reform Judaism the same way."
I would differ. I don't think "Orthodox Judaism" or "Reform Judaism" should be judged by its best adherents. I don't even think it should be judged by its code of behavior (although some would disagree with me, as in "don't judge Judaism by the Jews"). I think it ought to be judged by the philosophies and behaviors of the *majority* of its members.
SCJ WOW that was awesome - excellent description. excellent! Ruchi. If, what you said in your last paragraph is to be applied, I do not think either of our groups would fare too well.
DeleteSCJ, re #1, that's NOT what I hear from people. If they said that, I'd completely understand where it's coming from. It's not about the validity of the practice, it's "Why don't you think we're Jews?"
Delete#2: So how do you, Leah, feel it ought to be judged? By its best adherents, even if there's a huge gap from there to the majority of the practitioners of the movement? By its behavioral code, whether halacha or something else?
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DeleteI simply don't think it ought to be judged. At all. Live and let live, I say.
DeleteLeah, of course I don't mean judge for the sake of judging. But if a newly married couple, for example, were synagogue shopping, and coming to your congregation to determine if they wanted to join, what would you prefer they look at: Reform *philosophy*, its best adherents, or the general community as a whole?
Deleteboth Fairmount Temple's best adherents AND the community as a whole. They both represent our community - i really cannot say one or the other. If I were shul-shopping, I'd look at the best adherents myself, because those are generally the most active members and that is whom I would be participating with. I would also certainly look at the general community as a factor, but second, not first.
Delete...and the actual philosophy of the movement?
DeleteRuchi, this is so individual - if the couple is unsure where they fit it, then of course they're going to have to look at philosophy and ideology, assuming they have the bounty of choices we are lucky enough to have here in CLE. But ultimately, I think individual shul communities should be judged as stand-alones. because one frum/Reform shul in Monsey is not the same as frum/Reform shul in CLE.
DeleteRuchi, thanks for your post. Hoo boy, is this a potentially explosive topic, and I love that you discuss it in such a dispassionate and clear way.
ReplyDeleteComing from the perspective of someone who grew up very Jewishly identified, but had a mother with a non-Orthodox conversion, it was one of the most painful experiences of my life to find out that I "wasn't Jewish." Not as, I had assumed, in a "well, those crazy Orthodox people don't consider you Jewish, but everyone else does, honey" kinda way. Like, actually, not halachically Jewish. Ouch.
Looking back 10 years later, I am grateful that I had the opportunity to really make a hard and fast commitment to Torah that meant no going back, no changing my mind (I wonder what would happen if more ba'alei teshuva had to go through some kind of process like this, instead of just geirim).
But I cried throughout the conversion. I cried when they were asking me the questions. I cried in the mikveh. Because even then, it didn't seem fair. I felt so Jewish! I always had! The geirus didn't change how I felt about myself at all!
You can't bring up matters of identity without hurting the person in question unless you have a solid relationship. Now being on the other side of the fence (so to speak), I would be horrified to think that people thought me hateful or close minded for believing in Orthodox standards of halachic status. But I could understand that it causes a lot of pain, even if i meant no harm.
So for now, I'll let Ruchi do the talking :)
Wow.
DeleteYou stated this more eloquently than I could have.
Funny how I can say some things in person that I can't say on the blog, and I can some things on the blog that I can't say in person.
I think there is another unfortunate aspect to this you are missing. I've often heard O Jews address non-O Jews using the phrase "You are Jewish, but the religion you practice isn't Judaism." In the eyes of some of the O Jews who say this, they are extending an olive branch. They don't seem to realise the branch is poking out the eye of the person to whom they say it. So I'm Jewish, but the faith practiced by my parents, by the rabbis and my Hebrew school teacher, by my spouse and my children isn't really Judaism? I've rarely seen this phrase result in increased tolerance and understanding for the O point of view by those to whom it is addressed.
ReplyDeleteGuess what? Everyone thinks they're right. A little emotional intelligence would go a long way. There's a fascinating study cited by Malcolm Gladwell in "Blink" where avowed non-racists show racist tendencies when asked to make spur-of-the-moment decisions. Frightening.
DeleteEveryone does not think they are right for whom? Lots of heterodox Jews will say their observance is right for them, but if someone wants to live a more observant lifestyle that is fine with them. That is in contrast to the standard O view that as expressed by anonymous that anyone who is not following O is objectively wrong, and most likely ignorant of 'true' Judaism.
DeleteLarry, that may be so on paper but I have found that that in real life, it's often not so. I know a number of people raised Reform and Conservative who would love to be more Orthodox, but are intimidated by family backlash.
DeleteIt might also be helpful to choose different language. Do Ruchi's number of people raised Reform and Conservative who would love to be more Orthodox really want to be more Orthodox? Or do they yearn to be more observant? Because those are not identical. Furthermore, it is possible, as I can attest, to take on mitzvot that appear from the outside no different from the most stringently-observant, but are being observed by a Reform Jewess and in concert with Reform theology.
DeleteDoes that make sense??
FS, you're right. I used those two words interchangeably - many folks do (like Larry) - and it can be confusing. I meant Orthodox, actually, because they have come to view the commandments as binding (as I clarified below, I hope correctly) AND wish to observe more.
DeleteI have learned from you and Leah that there are observant Reform Jews, and this has been enlightening to me. To be honest, it interests me greatly and I'd love to go out for coffee with the two of you and learn more. I guess the blog will have to do for now :)
That would be fun - what an interesting conversation we would have!
Deleteas an orthodox FFB, i have always thought of reform and conservative jews, as jews who have lost out on what God intended for us, the beauty of the brilliance of Torah and a Torah life. most reform and conservative jews could say that their ancestors were orthodox, whether one or more generations before, and who lost their orthodoxy either because of persecution or because they chose to belong to a more progressive judaism that wanted to choose the traditions that they liked and toss the ones that didn't fit for them. it doesn't make it not judaism, and it doesn't make them not jews, but it makes it very watered down judaism. it's like saying i believe in God, but i don't believe the Torah is relevant today; it's second guessing the original manuscript, which orthodoxy believes to be the blueprint for life. it's almost like writing a new testament that believes that the Torah is just a story. orthodoxy believes that the Torah is a living Torah, and that its wisdom is as true today as it was when it was given. i just don't understand how someone can believe that God gave us the Torah and everything in it, but our human mind can decide what is and isn't relevant today.
ReplyDeleteI think in fact that some of the Orthodox discussions around non-O Judaism get caught in several conflicting claims: They [C and RJ observance] are Judaism, but watered down; they are not Judaism, because Judaism is not anything less than adherence to the whole Torah [as O-Jews have interpreted it]; non-O Jewish practice is 'not as Jewish' or 'not really' Jewish . . . . because it's not 'real Judaism', which is 'what we do' because our Judaism is the real one, and also it's 'more'. 'More' and 'real' are both problematic categories, and here they are on one hand taken synonymously and on the other hand work against each other.
DeleteAnon - this is your opinion, to which you are certainly entitled! No question, many people agree with you. But it simply isn't kind or right to tell someone that. Not that I'm suggesting you do - perhaps you don't. But many, many other O-Jews do. And it's offensive.
DeleteBecause I am a Reform Jew, and the Torah for me is a Living Torah, it's wisdom is relevant today in my life, and I am a religious person. I am not "missing out" - I am embracing my history, my ancestors, my DNA. For someone to tell me otherwise is simply offensive. Again, I am not taking issue with the opinion itself - everyone is entitled to their opinions and beliefs - absolutely. I have no problem with this. I have my own a few of which I imagine you would find offensive if I actually said them to you. Which is why I don't. And I think that is the point Ruchi is trying to make.
Some of you may be wondering why I published Anon's comment. I did so for two reasons:
Delete1. I (hopefully correctly) discerned that it was not intended with disrespect, although I am fully aware that it came across that way
2. I think it's very important that this point be aired and discussed. I can't tell you how important it is that we are talking about this, and not fighting.
Thank you for hanging in there and continuing to plow through the issues with me.
I think anon unwittingly revealed a truth about difficult conversations: Saying "I don't hate you or feel contempt for you. I love you and I feel sorry for you." is not always a winning debate technique, sincerity notwithstanding.
DeleteTo me it also doesn't feel like a stab at accomplishing Jewish unity. It is not loving nor kind, it is tolerance and pity in my view.
DeleteEssentially, nobody wants to be "felt sorry" for. Pity is unwelcome.
DeleteSo anonymous, I understand your philosophy, but invite you to think about how your expression of it makes others feel. And I'm sorry I'm using you as an example, but I hope you understand the spirit in which it's offered.
Tackling this issue takes a lot of courage. What adds to the courage is that unlike posts you've written on other hot-button issues, this post will not solve the problem. It's not like people who know of this issue can come to the site, read this post, and say, "Well, THAT solves the problem!"
ReplyDeleteEvery passing year for the last 30 years, the percentage of people actively involved in the Reform Judaism Community who qualify as technically Jewish by the Orthodox standards you have explained so well shrinks dramatically. This has the very real and painful effects. For those who are active in the RJ world but whose lives intersect even in passing with the world that respects Orthodox standards, it is a pain that is intense and unremitting. For those like yourself and the growing number of Orthodox Jews who wish to create a bridge of respect and outreach, the world of those to reach out to becomes smaller and smaller and smaller. And that limbo world grows and grows. In many places, it has already grown to the point that it is no longer accurate to say "They're Jewish, but not observant." When a person's assertion of Core Identity is denied by others whose opinions are respected, it makes a big gooey psychological mess.
Which leads to point 11: You might not want to get involved, and might want to respect other people's privacy. But Shuls and Schools and Minyans don't have that liberty. They have to be "mean".
(If you want to keep this comment off your website, I understand.)
A lot of my more recent posts aren't solving a problem but opening up people's eyes to "the other way of thinking about things." Solving problems is probably too ambitious for this blogger, but mutual respect and understanding, that's where I'm going.
DeleteAnd to your list of shuls, schools, and minyans... add mohels. Not so fun having to balance two of your dearest values: veracity of Torah, and being kind to everyone.
Don't underestimate yourself. I think you've solved tons of problems on this blog. Sometimes clarification is all that is needed to make things better.
DeleteWell, thank you. I hope so! And if so, thank you for being part of the solution!
DeleteRD that was very sensitively put. And, I'm going to be truly honest here, it is a divide that I, IMHO, do not think we will be able to bridge. If there were 10 million Ruchis and 10 million Leah's, halacha is still going to be halacha. And O-Jews, minyans, mohels, schools, shuls etc will still have to make these decisions and it will still be painful for all involved. It's what it is. What's important is this kind of discussion to promote at least the understanding of both sides, if not the acceptance.
DeleteIrreconcilable differences are generally grounds for divorce. We've been there before several times over. Maybe it's time yet again?
DeleteUm, who would be divorcing whom in this analogy? Orthodox divorcing Reform? That would be one way to get closer to Jewish unity--kick out the people who don't fit your criteria?
DeleteEeps. I don't like the way that sounds. I think Leah means - agree to disagree.
DeleteI was referring to Ben-Yehoshua's comment about divorce. I think Leah was much more about accepting unbridgeability and having discussions within that unbridgeability--which in my view is also about as much unity as we can expect, and frankly is as much as I would want, because anything else would either require 'divorce' or someone giving up what they hold dear.
DeleteI don't like it either. I am all about Jewish unity and am very cognizant of the fact that our enemies don't make a distinction between us. However, if we mutually decide that one party doesn't have any right to meddle in the membership criteria of another and the facts on the ground are such that this makes a huge difference very fast - what is the solution?
DeleteThat someone from the outside wants to come and join a warm and welcoming Reform congregation is wonderful. However, when that person thinks she is joining the Jewish people and finds out decades later (or more common and worse yet - her kids find out) that for most Jewish people (1.8 mln Reform out of 13-16 mln Jews worldwide) she is not - who has the responsibility for that pain? That is no longer wonderful.
Ben-Yehoshua, what if there ISN'T a solution? There may not be. This may be an issue that is painful and ongoing. And that's ok. Not great, but there it is. What family members do you know that get along fabulously all the time? The Jewish people are no different.
DeleteMost Reform rabbis I know inform potential converts of all of their options, and give them all the info in order to make an informed choice, including what geirut means in Conservative and Orthodox Judaism (remember, it's not just Orthodox Jews who accept only matrilineal descent, and a Reform conversion doesn't always fly in Conservative circles either). The convert goes into this understanding the potential ramifications. It's up to them to decide how they want to proceed and deal with future children, etc.
I have family members who have had repercussions because of certain things that weren't done in infancy and other family issues, and it was handled with diplomacy and respect on all sides, and the adult involved did not blame anyone, and other family members moved on. I'm not going to say there wasn't pain, there was, on all sides. And no one made compromises, by the way. The adult in question adhered strictly to halacha as directed by his Rav, and everyone else attended to their needs. But ultimately everyone found a way to have "shalom bayit".
But up against the wall they would likely not yield on the question of whether my practice/interpretation of Judaism is "really Jewish". See Larry's comment below on the 'olive branch' that pokes out the eye.
ReplyDeleteAnd they would say "yes they are Jewish" but have contempt for what they perceive as the non-Jewish practice that 'passes' for Jewish (in their view, not mine). And even more contempt, from what I have seen, for Conservative and Modern Orthodox Jews who 'should know better' because they are not as 'ill-informed' as Reform Jews but nonetheless do not follow proper Judaism.
Um, Larry above. Last comment meant as a response to Ruchi's response where she says O-Jews would against a wall admit that non-O-Jews are Jewish.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI think the three possible reactions would be: contempt, ignorance, and curiosity. The same three that would probably be coming from the other direction as well.
Deletei'm so sorry you ascribe the orthodox feeling towards conservative jews as contempt, and i feel very sad that you should think that. i can assure you that most orthodox that i know, feel simply that the conservative missed out and simply werent taught. in fact, i believe that someone like ruchi would agree that the conservative folks who are learning at JFX have never heard of the beauty of judaism, and are soaking in the Torah that they missed out. this is far from contempt. for me, all i want is to share the beauty of Torah life with those who missed out.
ReplyDeleteAlthough is not meant with contempt, this post comes across to me as insulting. To say that Conservative Jews missed out, weren't taught, and have not heard of the beauty of Judaism? So ONLY Orthodoxy is beautiful? ONLY Orthodoxy is Judaism?
DeleteWhat are your feelings towards Jewishly educated heterdox Jews? My wife and I had to choose between egalitarianism and living in an observant community, and reluctantly chose the latter. I know people who chose the former and I can't say they were wrong.
DeleteAs a heterodox from birth I can say that most FFBs have never heard the beauty of the voice of a woman leading prayers, or the experienced repeated pleasure of watching a woman cry the first time she publicly reads Torah after she waited most of a lifetime to do so, or the simple ease of being a woman and doing Jewish things that the Orthodox associate with men without it being considered transgressive.
Larry, I hear your reluctance loud and clear, but why did you ultimately choose to go with the observant community?
DeleteAnd if I've heard the beauty of a man's voice leading prayers, and I've heard the beauty of a woman's voice leading prayers for women, and I've experienced the pleasure of watching a young man from the former Soviet Union read Torah after waiting most of a lifetime to do it, or watch a young Down's Syndrome girl celebrate her Bat Mitzvah...what exactly have I missed out on? As an Orthodox woman I have never felt left out of the richness of Jewish life.
I'll chime in here from personal experience - growing up in the Conservative, Egalitarian "movement." I had every opportunity a woman might "want" in contrast to Orthodox Judaism. I was a "feminist" par excellance, consonant with my liberal NY upbringing. I read Torah, I chanted Haftorah on a regular basis at Shul, I led minyanim, I had an awesome bas mitzvah, I even wore a Tallis for a time (albeit briefly). I had a group of friends that all thought the same as me - one is even now a Rabbi in the Conservative movement!
DeleteBut, honestly, in my later high school years I started to really (really) delve into the meanings behind the differing responsibilities for men and women in Orthodox Judaism. And at first I was struck because it didn't seem so "crazy" to me. I thought I would be outraged and instead I was intrigued. Then I dug deeper and the authenticity, the tradition, and the (frankly) overarching message that women were exempt from some mitzvos because they could be, not because there was anything wrong,all resonated with me. And as I started to explore the Orthodox world I appreciated most of all the dialogue that teachers, mentors and just regular Orthodox people were willing to engage in (similar to this blog).
I think that women, overall, including myself, tend to look at what we don't have because that's what the feminist culture around us has inculcated. I believe that I had a great benefit in that I took the time (and had people to talk to) to look at what women DO have in Orthodox Judaism and WHY. And that, honestly, changed my outlook and the trajectory of my life forever.
Chavi, thanks for sharing your thoughts.
DeleteI'd love to hear other readers' thoughts on your experience.
The overwhelming majority of Orthodox women in my community are largely satisfied with their roles. But I live in a Modern Orthodox community, where one could, if one found that life intolerable, leave for the local conservative shul without paying a social penalty in terms of being ostracized by their friends and family, so those who feel that way have done so. Also, there is a smal minority of women who participate in such things as Women's Tefilla Groups etc and are happy with that compromise.
DeleteThe longer I live in an O community, the less I think it is possible to have some sort of mixed egalitarianism such as the C Rabbi Joel Roth tried to support with his Roth teshuvah. (Standing on one foot, he suggested that women who took on the obligation to daven 3 times a day could thereafter function the same as men with respect to leading prayers, while women who took no such oath would remain unable to do so.) If my suspicion is right and a community can't survive half egalitarian and half non-egalitarian, I have to reluctantly support the non-egalitarians. They were here first, and they have nowhere else to go at any price.
What an interesting post! Great subject. The difficult part for me to accept in Orthodox Judaism is not that women and men are seen as different (and therefore have different roles), but that women have no public decision making power. They cannot be Rabbi's, they are almost never President of a Shul or another Orthodox Organization ( I don't know if this is actual Halacha or just social stigma against women in leadership positions).
DeleteHi! And thank you!
DeleteI've blogged about this here:
http://outoftheorthobox.blogspot.com/2011/08/mythbusters-2-orthodox-women-are-second.html
But your stance is understandable. Again, as I've mentioned elsewhere in this (increasingly long) comment section, if it's about clarifying what is the mesorah (unbroken chain of tradition from Sinai), then it's on me to reconcile what I want with what I feel to be truth.
And again I reiterate what I've mentioned elsewhere: never have I felt left out, undervalued or misunderstood as a woman in my upbringing or opportunities as an Orthodox woman.
Ruchi, thanks for sharing that post. While I can understand your point about the private sphere (the women's sphere, according to Orthodox Judaism) not being valued as much as the public sphere, some of the reasons I've learned about why women cannot be Rabbi's and hold pubic leadership positions don't hold water with me. Some kind of make sense, like women not having time bound Mitzot ( so therefore, why is someone who isn't obligated, to say daven Mincha, leading mincha), but other reasons seem downright sexist. These include the idea that it's not tznius for a women to lead a man in prayer (even if she's dressed tzniusly) and of course then there would be the issue of Kol esha (men can't hear women sing- I think that's what it's called?). Another reason I learned is that women are better at multi-tasking than men and therefore don't have the ability to focus on one specific task (say studying to be a Rabbi), the way men do. This last reason is exceptionally ludicrous to me. I guess it seems strange to me to have very educated and successful women (say as a Torah Teacher or in the secular world- Doctor, lawyer etc.) and then tell them they cannot lead and are unable to contribute to public decision making processes in the Orthodox Jewish world.
DeleteI've never actually heard the third reason. Is there a source for that?
DeleteI learn with a chevrutah through Partners in Torah and she taught me that. I will ask her for her source.
DeleteAny congregational rabbi who is not good at multitasking will quickly find themselves out of a job. Just saying.
DeleteOOTOB, this is really a tangent (albeit an important one) but I'll say this:
DeleteOne of the things that Orthodox Jews believe about Judaism is that the commandments are here to stay, whether we discover reasons for them that resonate with us or not. The "reasons" for mitzvot are not described in the Torah, and purposefully: because (and this is an advanced concept, so stay with me) we are meant to do things because God said so, and He created us and knows what is good for us.
That said, we are encouraged to seek insights/reasons that resonate with us to make these practices more meaningful and fulfilling, but my observance of the mitzvot should not hinge on my discovering that reason. So any reasons offered for why women aren't rabbis are *possible insights* (take them or leave them).
The law, however remains.
I know this flies in the face of how the world at large approaches life, and it's, like I said, an advanced approach that not everyone will be able to accept.
Parts of the Orthodox movement are chafing against this restriction and are moving toward ordination of women. When they do, they take themselves out of the Orthodox movement.
For me personally, I get it. I look at how women in politics, for example, are viewed and treated and discussed, and how men in politics are, and I go back to the notion that God didn't feel it was the most opportune way for women to achieve spiritual greatness - by being held up in the public eye and having to be a man in a man's world. For some this will resonate, and others will be highly critical of my words and feelings, and that's OK.
Ruchi, thanks for responding to my questions. Sorry about the tangent! I think this topic (the one of the post, not my tangent) is a very sensitive issue but is so important to talk about. I was raised in a Reform Community and I'm so thankful to have a Jewish mother (albeit a non-Jewish father) but MANY (I'd say up to 50%) do not fall under the category of halachically Jewish according to Orthodox Judaism. I didn't understand this growing up, but once I learned about this in college it made me very sad to know that people in my "Jewish" community, weren't actually considered Jewish at all.
Deleteyou're right, it probably does sound somewhat condescending, but it's how i feel. i believe that God is great, and God is good, and He didn't give us a Torah that is irrelevant. So if you believe part of the Torah, you have to believe all of it. I believe that God and His Torah is not only beautiful, but brilliant, and choosing to keep only part of it, is therefore missing out.
ReplyDeleteI came a little late to the party on this one, but after reading through all 120+ comments, and trying to follow the many varied tangents that developed, I keep coming back to these comments from Anonymous. So I hope Ruchi will allow my response.
DeleteAnonymous, I share many of your thoughts - I believe that God gave us the Torah, and we are supposed to follow it faithfully. I believe that God, and Torah, are beautiful and brilliant. But I think the component that is missing in your comments is acknowledging that following this mesorah the way you do is a CHOICE. Hashem gave all of us free will. Can you truly respect someone who has applied their divinely granted intelligence and free will and reached different conclusions than you have? I believe I do, and from what I have seen on this blog, I think Ruchi does.
It may be harder for you, as an FFB, to see. You are living in the way you are raised, in the way that most people you know live. Yet, you, too have made a choice to live this way. Must that choice include judging/ devaluing/ pitying people who have made different choices? Perhaps we can leave the judgement to Hashem, the True Judge, and focus on accepting varied human choices.
Miriam, this is a helpful view for me into what an Orthodox view could mean when combined with acceptance of other practices. It sounds like this, and maybe also from Ruchi, that O-Jews might have an easier time accepting or acknowledging INDIVIDUAL Jews who practice differently (i.e. not Orthodox practice) than they have acknowledging MOVEMENTS that diverge from O-Judaism. Am I misunderstanding that?
DeleteI think this is entirely correct for many Orthodox Jews. Paradoxically, this means that in many ways such people find it easier to get along with completely secular Jews than with seriously religious heterodox Jews.
DeleteAn interesting (and from the O view, somewhat left of center) perspective on Orthodox relations with both heterodox Jews and heterodox movements can be found in Rabbi Norman Lamm's essay 70 faces of Torah. Start on page 137 and read as far as Google books will let you.
DeleteMiriam, thank you. I would just qualify the word "choice" as I did elsewhere here - everyone has the right choose, but I don't think all choices are equally valid.
DeleteYes, SBW - I think that is exactly correct. I totally understand a Jew who says, "Wow. Shabbos. So beautiful. I get it. But I just can't do that. Too hard, too complicated, I'm too old..." But to institutionalize that non-observance, and vote to make it OK, this is problematic for me to accept.
Ruchi, this is really fascinating. You "understand" the "lazy Jew" (not meant insultingly, but descriptively as a shorthand) but what does that understanding mean?
DeleteBecause according to some of the posts here about Reform Judaism, from which I have learned a lot (e.g. SCJ and Leah) I'm actually not a very good Reform Jew, I'm a "lazy Jew"--which honestly sounds more like me and I don't take it as an insult (although I know that for people for whom Jewish practice is more significant, it would be). Like I have not really considered how the mitzvot apply (e.g. in an age where winemakers don't operate with idol-worship in mind) although I like the idea of doing that examination of the mitzvot. So if I say, I'm a very minimally practicing and believing Jew, that's easier for an O-Jew to accept than "I'm a Reform Jew"? What kinds of 'judgments' go with that? This blog is mostly not judgmental, but I gather in the larger O-world there would be some. The O-world (not this blog, which has shown incredible restraint and openness toward others) has less 'distaste' or 'smugness' or 'difficulty accepting' the non-sectarian-identified 'lazy Jew' than the proudly identified Reform Jew?
And now I want another round of this whole post where REFORM Judaism is at the center-what counts, what doesn't, what's lazy, what's lax, what's on the spectrum. But I know that's not Ruchi's specialization.
I don't have a problem with either *Jew* - I do have a problem with organizational decisions rendering non-observance OK.
DeleteAs I said above, I have no problem with individuals but I find certain philosophies problematic.
I think, based on many things I've read here, that the dearest value in Orthodoxy might just be authenticity. And the dearest value in Reformism might just be autonomy. Is that right? Because if so, each is a threat to the other.
And then you add in disputed personal status, due to the two contested concepts of patrileneal descent and conversion, and you have practical as well as philosophical disagreement.
How much this should bother me is an excellent question.
My two dearest values are veracity of Torah and being nice to everyone. When they clash...?? Even if I'm "nice," my ideas can be hurtful. But as I ended the original post, in the vast majority of cases, people get that I'm not trying to be judgmental or rude.
I hope this whole conversation has been a step toward that awareness.
SBW post coming forthwith! Funny you should mention it - it's been in the works since this morning (it will be a guest post). I do not think the dearest value in Reform Judaism is autonomy. The dearest values in Reform Judaism are God, Torah and Israel. Interpreted and observed markedly different from other forms of Judaism, but those are the dearest values. Not authenticity, not autonomy.
DeleteAnd I'm in the same boat. I have beliefs and feelings that even when I'm at my most diplomatic and "nice", they are painful for others. It's what it is. I try not to let it interfere with my personal relationships, but sometimes it does.
SBW, I think the reason it's easier for Orthodox Jews to accept a "lazy Jew" than a serious, observant Conservative or Reform Jew is because you can say of the "lazy Jew" that Orthodoxy is the Judaism she doesn't practice. LJ's (Lazy Jews), at least to the Orthodox, agree that the entire Torah (including mishnah, talmud, all of halacha) is divine and binding, they just won't do anything about it. Other movements, though, dispute the divinity of the Torah - and that's where it chafes against OJ.
DeleteRuchi, am I on the right track?
Yes. Except I would just reiterate that I don't have a problem with either JEW but rather with the IDEOLOGY.
DeleteRR - of course God, Israel, and Torah. Orthodoxy would agree with THAT. Question is, by what mechanism do you determine what that looks like in actual daily living?
DeleteIf "authenticity" is the answer to that question in Orthodoxy, what would be its parallel in Reformism (is that the noun?) - informed choice? Something else?
Hm, I'll be eager to see what knowledgeable people will say to that last question. I can imagine that Reform doesn't have a 'parallel' value to authenticity. I think you're looking to a source for authority.
DeleteSBW, what do you mean by your last line?
DeleteSorry to have scrambled and then cut off that thought. I meant that you sounded like you were looking for a Reform principle, parallel to O's principle of authenticity, that would explain where Reform Judaism comes by its authority, where its bindingness and authoritativeness come from. For O-Jews it sounds like the authority is based on the 'authenticity' or unbrokenness that you ascribe to the teachings going back to Moses. I will be curious to see if the more informed Reform people will say that there is such a 'bedrock' foundation for Reform Judaism. I think, but don't know at all for sure, that Reform Judaism is a bit more comfortable without that same kind of absolutely solid sense of being grounded on an objective and ahistorical truth. I know I am, i.e. that the less-than-solid ground is part of the appeal.
DeleteRuchi, can you explain what you mean by "authenticity"? I might be better able to answer your question.
DeleteI grew up as a Reform Jew before patrilineal descent was accepted. I know people who converted because their father was Jewish but their mother was not. And since that change in Reform policy happened while I was in college, I've also known people who did not have to convert (but i also know that many of them have been made aware that while the Reform movement recognizes their "Jewish"ness other denominations of Judaism might not, and they might want to consider conversion). I've also known people who converted from other religions (in my immediate and extended family), however many of them have been told that since their conversion was performed by a non-Orthodox Rabbi, they would not be considered Jewish by the Orthodox community.
ReplyDeleteI was raised that Reform Jews are Reform and not Orthodox because they make choices about the observances they follow. And the continuum from very little ritual observance to almost Orthodox-like ritual observance is extremely wide among Reform Jews and that as you "move up" in denomination (from Reform to Conservative to Orthodox, not really sure where Reconstructionist falls as since Humanistic seems to be ritual without faith or very little faith in HaShem, I tend to lump that at the same "level" as Reform) the expectation of observance is greater.
I've also always been taught that you don't ask. If a person says they are a Jew, then ok. That you're not supposed to question how they are a Jew (through their Mother or via conversion) because you aren't supposed to treat the converted any differently from those who are born into the religion (it is up to them to meet the obligations that they have made through conversion).
Anonymous, thank you. This is very enlightening.
DeleteI have one comment. You write: "I was raised that Reform Jews are Reform and not Orthodox because they make choices about the observances they follow."
This sort of confuses me, because I was also raised that we all have choices. It's called "free will" and it is a basic endowment of God that is core and central to the experience of being a human being. We make choices every moment of every day, and this was a huge piece of my Jewish education.
I think it might be more accurate to state that the Reform movement doesn't believe that mitzvot are binding, and that one can choose which obligations will be binding for him or her. Whereas Orthodoxy states that we are obligated in all the mitzvot, and that we have free will about which we will keep and which we will not keep (or keep in part, or sometimes, or half-heartedly) but that at the end of the day there will be consequences for our choices.
If I have this wrong on the Reform piece, someone please correct me.
Reform Jews can choose not to follow specific mitzvot without sinning. Orthodox Jews lack that capability, according to their theology.
DeleteI think, and someone please correct me if I'm wrong, that Reform Jews *do* consider the mitzvot as binding. What isn't binding is the halacha. Mitzvot straight from the Torah (and by this I mean the written, NOT oral torah) are binding on Reform Jews. Things from the oral torah/ mitzvot miderabbanan are not binding on Reform Jews.
DeleteSCJ and LL, it seems your explanations contradict each other. Maybe someone can clarify.
DeleteSCJ: following mitzvot straight from the Torah without Talmudic input is often more stringent than with it, and I don't really see Reform communities (or even its clergy) observing that way.
SCJ and Ruchi - no mitzvot/halacha are Divinely binding.
DeleteOutside of the 10 commandments. I'm pretty sure everyone accepts those as binding :-) Now, you may ask why those and not the others? GREAT questions! and it has about 1000 different answers.
DeleteWell, Leah... you're venturing into murky territory. Shabbat, belief in G-d...? (this reminds me of the recent conversation on your blog).
DeleteBelief in G-d...?
DeleteThe Reform movement has a specific teshuvah stating that congregations that belong to the Humanistic Jewish movement (which espouses a doctrine call 'ignosticism' which basically says that nothing meaningful can be said about God) may not be accepted in the Reform movement, since they (the Reform movement) require belief in God as a pre-requisite for congregational affiliation. (Their attitude towards individual atheists is more nuanced.)
Shabbat is a better example. The Reform movement agrees to 'remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.' They simply don't accept the rabbinical mountains suspended by the hair of the biblical law. (That's a phrase from the Talmud, by the way). They also aren't Kararites, as suggested by SCJ above. I am not aware of any Reform teshuvah that forbids eating the hindquarters of a cow, or even just eating (non-kosher) hamburger because it has a chance of containing bits of the sciatic nerve. They don't support the law of ben sorer u'moreh. The early foundation documents of the Reform Movement (such as the Pittsuburg Platform specifically say they regard the ethical commandments of Judaism as binding and not the ritual ones. To quote from the document I just linked to:
3. We recognize in the Mosaic legislation a system of training the Jewish people for its mission during its national life in Palestine, and today we accept as binding only its moral laws, and maintain only such ceremonies as elevate and sanctify our lives, but reject al such as are not adapted to the views and habits of modern civilization.
4. We hold that all such Mosaic and rabbinical laws as regulate diet, priestly purity, and dress originated in ages and under the influence of ideas entirely foreign to our present mental and spiritual state. They fail to impress the modern Jew with a spirit of priestly holiness; their observance in our days is apt rather to obstruct than to further modern spiritual elevation.
Note that the Reform movement has changed significantly since those days. After the founding of the state of Israel, Zionism became acceptable. In the past 20 years there has been an increased interest in ritual.
Larry is entirely correct. Also in his assertion that the last generation has seen observance of ritual laws and customs come very much on to the scene, in some significant ways. This does not, however, change the status of these laws in the eyes of the Reform movement - they are not binding, with, of course as Larry mentioned, the belief in God. You can, in fact, choose not to acknowledge the sabbath (or any mitzvot) at all and be a Reform Jew.
DeleteInteresting stuff. Never knew this, or at least not specifically.
DeleteRebbetzin rocks - I didn't know that, and now I'm a bit confused... must go and do some reading.
DeleteRR can you clarify about belief in God. Can you not observe that and still be a Reform Jew? I ask based on an experience with a Reform Rabbi - not sure if it was isolated to that congregation, or OK with the general movement.
DeleteAgain, only citing teshuvot and other documents and not based on real life experience:
DeleteResponsa on a humanist congregation asking to join the URJ. Also contains thoughts on individual atheists.
Is there anything I have to believe or do in order to call myself a Reform Jew?l
I think your disclaimer is important, btw. And thanks for these links, and the others. I have found them hugely interesting.
DeleteMe too. I didn't realize, for instance, that Reform Judaism is doctrinally Zionist (see Ruchi's recent post on Israeli politics). What is also really interesting is that the Reform Responsa says the same thing about the Humanist congregation that the O-Jews here say about Reform Judaism: individuals can reject certain parts of practice or belief and still 'belong', but a congregation/institution that wants to share a 'name' with us (Judaism [for O-Jews], or Reform Judaism), is a different story.
DeleteAgain, and I've addressed this in several of my own posts, the mandate of the movement is belief in God. That is non-negotiable. Larry has linked to accurate and informed sources. I have no idea what happened with that rabbi, I'd be happy to discuss it, but the movement is very clear on this issue. One's personal feelings/beliefs, as you well know, are a different matter. I am certain that there are people of every Jewish stripe who question God's existence, and some of them may even deny it. I think each of us can cite examples of people we've met or known from all denominations who fall into this category. PUBLICLY and by its institution, this is not acceptable in Reform Judaism. PRIVATELY, those of us in the Jewish "professional" world often encounter people who are searching and looking for guidance.
DeleteWhat you are struggling with, and it is apparent to me that I have not made it clear, is that "belief in God" does not necessarily mean "belief in the anthropomorphized God of the Torah". You can believe in the Almighty, HaShem, HaMakom, whatever you want to call, but not necessarily in direct revelation. The two are NOT mutually inclusive/exclusive in Reform ideology.
RE: conversion. Here's an interesting piece from my friend Allison at jewinthecity.com:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.jewinthecity.com/2010/08/changing-teams-amare-stoudemire-and-the-orthodox-perspective-on-converting-to-judaism/
Thank you Ruchi for sharing this post! I think the conversation is an important one for people to have, who may not otherwise have a forum to do so!
ReplyDeleteI have found that another reasonable way to frame the conversation is to see that Orthodox Judaism views Jewish Identity as more akin to Citizenship. It's a Legal Reality of belonging to a Nation. All Nations have laws that define natural-born citizenship, and define who remains a citizen and cannot be deported no matter how many laws they break. Patriotism would not be enough to define a citizen. In my observation, those who do not subscribe to Halacha are more accustomed to thinking of Jewish Identity as a Personal Faith Community which should be entirely or almost-entirely definable by personal identification. The pain remains.
ReplyDeleteRD, Your analogy to citizenship is great, helps me to understand this much much better. But I I can't figure out from the post what your view is here. What pain, do you mean that non-O Jews don't feel acknowledged by O Jews?
DeleteIt's not a matter of what my view is per se. Halacha is clear on this point, and the feelings don't change that. But I have seen the emotional anguish that non-acceptance has on people who consider their inner identity to be Jewish but who are not accepted as Jews by the Halachic community. And I empathize very strongly with that pain.
DeleteHidden within the citizenship analogy is the presumption that only Orthodox courts and rabbis count. Otherwise the current situation would be as if one gained American citizenship in New York, and was told by Arizonans that you weren't "really" American.
DeleteI don't want to belabor the point, but since you asked LL, here goes: I've given this analogy some thought. Here's how I see it applying: According to the Orthodox POV, the Talmud's rulings (including its ruling on matrilineal descent) are analogous to the acts and rulings of the National Congress or Supreme Court. Any rabbinic opinion after Talmudic times, and there have been plenty, is at best analogous to a State Government's law. So any rabbi or Jewish group that seeks to change the Talmud's definition could at best and at most generous be compared to a court in Wyoming overturning an Act of Congress or ruling of the Supreme Court.
DeleteSo if O-Jews think that only O-Judaism is Judaism, what is Jewish unity?
ReplyDeleteNow THAT is a great question.
DeleteUnity (of any kind) is the ability to love and be kind to people even when you disagree with their choices or behaviors.
It's not that Orthodox Jews think that only Orthodox Judaism is Judaism - it's halachic observance that defines Judaism. Groups or philosophies that start uprooting and altering defined practices and observances, or claiming certain foundational beliefs are invalid - those are the ones that begin to fall out of the realm of "normative" Judaism from the perspective of the more broad-minded Orthodox folk (others may already dismiss them).
DeleteBack in the day, people from different backgrounds - at least in Out of Towner communities, like where my parents are from - people from Orthodox backgrounds married others from Conservative or Reform backgrounds without much issue. Mind you, these are people who themselves are more laid back in their approach to Judaism.
Back then, there wouldn't be any major issues from such a practice, because all the Orthodox people knew that a potential spouse had two halachically Jewish parents. The advent of patrilineal descent and cultural identity has thrown a giant monkey wrench into the works. Now people don't know who to trust - added on top of an increase in particular-ness about minutiae of observance and stringencies that further drives people apart.
Jewish unity is a paramount value, but it seems that people tend to find more excuses to push it aside, rather than finding reasons to come together, despite philisophic differences...
I think your first line is central to the disagreement I have with a lot of the posts here. 'Halachic observance" is not just a two-word phrase, it's got a lot to be unpacked. In my view, it is already an INTERPRETATION. What the rules are, how they apply, and what it means to observe them are NOT straightforward but historically determined and have even evolved. I get what Ruchi's saying about believing in 'the 613' and the unbroken reception thereof, but can one practice Judaism and NOT believe in unbroken reception?
DeleteMaybe this goes back to the 'isms' post we had awhile back, as in which 'isms' determine your values. I'm not so worried about a perfectly coherent and intact 'ism'. They are all muddy and we live with them muddily. It doesn't make it wrong, invalid, not-beautiful, on the contrary, it is part of what makes it more compelling and beautiful. To me.
SBW: in a way you're right, and in a way it's not so.
DeleteDoes Reform Judaism consider itself an halachic movement? If so, what does that mean? To me, halachic Judaism means that there's an outside code, that we hope and believe is as close to the original intent as possible, that will never be relaxed as times change.
No vote, no Rabbinic board, will ever repeal an existing halacha. Even if what exists is already an interpretation, a LAW (note I do not refer to customs) will never be repealed, no matter what.
Does Conservative Judaism consider itself an halachic movement? If so, how is it different from the Reform halacha?
I think these are important questions and I would be grateful to have them clarified by those that are knowledgeable in these areas.
Reform Judaism is not an halachic movement. I cannot speak for Conservative Judaism.
DeleteTheological question here for O-Jews: If I practiced like you, and tried to fulfill as many Mitzvot as possible in the same ways you do, but did not accept the "original intent" and "unbroken lineage" ideas, would that be within O-Judaism? I realize it probably never happens that way, but I am trying to understand how practice fits with belief, and with which beliefs, for O-Judaism. Actually I guess I'm trying to figure out in a more self-interested way where we are furthest apart, i.e. in practice or in belief.
DeleteGood question. I would say practice.
DeleteI find the two biggest differences between Orthodox Jews and most non-Orthodox Jews, in the real world are:
1. Knowledge of laws and traditions and customs
2. Practice of the above
Belief is a whole other kettle of fish. Rarely I will come across a very observant non-Orthodox Jew. My husband actually asked a very observant Conservative Rabbi (keeps strictly kosher, won't drive on Shabbat) - What is the difference between you and me? Why don't you term yourself "Orthodox"? And he answered that he doesn't believe in the Divinity of the Oral Law (although he did practice much of it).
But I think this is the exception rather than the rule. I think people like to hang out with like-minded people in terms of similar practice. Beliefs, perhaps, are more private.
Also, I know a number of Orthodox Jews who practice and affiliate Orthodox yet struggle, sometimes mightily, with what they believe.
What does that mean - divinity of Oral Law? We obviously would not need most of the Talmud (or even Mishna for that matter) if it was that simple. The mere fact that the Rabbi's argue means that no more than one opinion can come from Moses and even that is not likely.
DeleteIn fact the Talmud itself has a story to illustrate this point (Bava Metsia, 59b) - An incident where in the course of a halachic dispute, Rabbi Eliezer quotes enlists the Heavens to testify that his opinion is correct and a "heavenly voice" supports him. Then Rabbi Yehoshua, his student(!) quotes the book of Deuteronomy "It (the Law) is not in the Heavens". And the final decision follows the majority.
As a side issue Ruchi, should this discussion ever end :>) it might be interesting to explore a few classical Jewish stories where the Orthodox and heterodox have radically different understandings of what the stories mean. Off the top of my head I suggest:
Delete1) the story above of the oven of Akni
2) Moses' visit to Rabbi Akiva's academy
3) "These and these are the words of the living G-d".
While I'm not sure what you mean (you have a much stronger knowledge of heterodox philosophy that I do), it might be. Also, how each group arrived at that understanding.
DeleteLarry, time to update your blog so I can figure out better just where you're coming from. :) Is there such thing as heterodox-Reform? Or heteroprax-Reform? Maybe I need to go shopping for a new designation...?
DeleteBut I also see much better now how O-Jews resent the other movements more than the individual practice variations--but then for that same reason I also see how practice variations NEED a 'movement name' in order to define themselves NOT just as 'deficient- or lazy-O-Jews' but as BEING an actual 'brand' of Jew in their own right. Which is precisely what O-Jews will have trouble accepting.
Good luck pinning Larry down to a category :)
DeleteAs has been noted earlier, as a Reform Jew - grew up entirely non-practicing/observing, embracing Judaism (in addition to "Jewish-ness") as an adult - the more I have come to know the full spectrum of Jewish practice and identity, the more I have felt accepted and the more I have accepted my own Jewish identity.
ReplyDeleteI know many an Orthodox Jew, including rabbis, who have never, ever questioned my being Jewish. Whether they would eat in my home or offer me an aliyah - that's another matter. Which I understand and accept from my end - now that I know more about Orthodoxy.
Rather than a black-or-white definition of (as someone above said) WHO or WHAT is a Jew, we should be speaking more about a Jewish continuum or spectrum. Indeed, I think that is how it is being defined in this discussion. There is always a Jew who is more observant, more knowledgable, more committed, than I am - than all of us here. It was ever thus: in the Temple era, in Babylon, in Anatevka, on the Lower East Side, in your own shul, wherever Jews are, there is always at least one fellow Jew "doing more" Judaism or "being more" Jewish than another. And that includes the Jews who never go to shul and may not even know they are Jews. They are still Jews.
Although I cannot cite the source, I have heard Rabbi Michael Melchior - an Orthodox Israeli - teach that the Talmud holds that Jewish identity is never to be questioned or doubted or inquired about. This is true for all Jews, including converts. We are not supposed to even ask a person if they are a convert: once one converts, one is no longer a convert. Some opinion holds that even if you go back to being a pagan or Christian the day after finishing your conversion, you are still a Jew forever.
Torah Judaism itself is flexible and evolving: just ask the original Jewish reformers, the Rabbis of the Talmud. Without that flexibility, that ability to evolve, Judaism - and Jews - would have died out a long, long time ago.
Welcome to OOTOB and thanks very much for your interesting comments. I love the continuum model - and I believe that is how G-d views us. Furthermore, I believe each of us is traveling a different continuum and one cannot be compared to another.
DeleteContinuum sounds nice, except it is linear and this seems always to end up with "Orthodox" being the "higher" end. I like a circular continuum instead. The comment below by Savta sort of echoes that problem, of some brand (wrong word I know) feeling like they are 'more' and 'more real' Jews.
DeleteThe more I think about it, the more I have to go back to Ruchi's statement above that "everyone thinks they are right". I can see WHY O-Jews believe sincerely that their Judaism is the REAL one, but I also can't "jump over my shadow" as they say in other languages and not think that MY idea is right that Judaism is historical, not monolithic, even contradictory.
The Reform community does not simply accept anyone who "feels Jewish" as a Jew. Who came up with that one? The child still has to have a Jewish parent (modern DNA testing could eliminate suspicion) AND has to be raised exclusively as a Jew. To push the citizenship analogy: a child of any US citizen is automatically a citizen, whether or not the other parent is a US citizen - but the parent has to assert that right if only one is a citizen and the child is born somewhere else.
ReplyDeleteIt is sometimes said that Reform Jews have a greater capacity to live with ambiguity. I'm intensely uncomfortable with people who have all the answers to ANY problem.
I sometimes have the same reaction to Orthodox people "welcoming" me to the "way of HaShem" as I do to Christians offering me the inexpressible joy of knowing Jesus. They are just trying to be nice. But it feels more like disrespect than anything else, a smug belief that my life (or my death) would be so much better if I believed exactly what they believe, if I would just change.
Hi SavtaV,
DeleteTake this example (which I do not believe is isolated): I was talking to a Jewish woman whose son married a Korean woman. The mom said that while her daughter-in-law has not converted, and is not interested in conversion, she is "more Jewish" than her own son, since she is planning on raising the kids Jewish (her son does not feel strongly about it) and enjoys celebrating Jewish as opposed to non-Jewish holidays. Were this family to "join a Reform community" - would this women be accepted (by the laity) as a Jew?
I am not sure what you meant about people who have all the answers - can you elaborate on that?
As far as your final point, what are your feelings on an active, vibrant Reform community welcoming an unaffiliated or secular Jew, or a traditional Conservative community welcoming a former Reform Jew? Do you think there is also a (smug?) belief that your life will be better/enriched by belonging to their particular brand of Judaism? Or (and I am honestly asking the question) do you feel that the smugness is unique to the Orthodox?
Hi Ruchi,
DeleteIn your Korean daughter-in-law example, of course she would not be considered a Jew by anyone. The real question is about the children. It's not enough to "raise the kids Jewish" by celebrating holidays. They need to be educated by the community (attend religious school, Hebrew school, etc.) all the way through confirmation (generally 10th grade) so that they have enough knowledge and maturity to understand what they are confirming.
When you talk about "all the mitzvot" you mean your understanding of the mitzvot. If you say that there is only one list of mitzvot and that those are the ones you follow, it sounds to me like you think you have all the answers. But even if I were to accept as binding everything in Talmud and all the sages up to, say, the year 1800, that would still not dictate to me what I should do with the light in my refrigerator on Shabbat (I don't care), or whether I could eat imitation crab that is certified kosher (that's something I wouldn't do - a topic for another conversation).
Our Reform community is wide open to anyone who is curious, and we welcome them in every way we can. There is great beauty and meaning in our prayer, in our observances, in our support for each other, and we love to share it. But I honestly do not think that our particular brand of Judaism is right for everyone. For example, I would never try to convince you that you'd feel so much better on a hot summer day at the playground if you just took off your wig - and that HaShem wouldn't mind at all. But you might believe (whether or not you said so out loud) that I would feel better if I put one on!
Ruchi, I won't speak for Savta, but your example of the Korean woman is interesting. At the Reform synagogue we sometimes go to, I imagine people would be friendly not care about whether she is a Jew or not. Probably privately people might be interested that an Asian-appearing person were present, but in a way it's no one's business 'what' she is, she's at the service and participating and so she is one of the congregation at least for this morning.
DeleteSavtaV, I don't have all the answers. Not at all. In fact, the more I learn, the more humbled I am by the depth and breadth and infinity of it all. I do, though, believe that there are 613 mitzvot and that the more of them I can keep the better off I will be.
DeleteAs far as your wig example, I don't think anyone feels better with a wig on. They're so annoying. I wear it because I think it's the right thing to do, not because I enjoy the experience. I do think if you wore one it would be a mitzvah, but I'm wise enough to understand that it's ridiculous to suggest it.
But your point is well taken. You're saying (I think) that Reform Judaism is by definition pluralistic and therefore not for everyone; it maintains that there are many correct ways to be Jewish. Parenthetically, I find that many individuals don't act according to this in the real world. Which is understandable; many Orthodox Jews don't act according to their denominations' edicts either. But when a real-life Conservative Rabbi, for example, discourages people from becoming Orthodox, it doesn't seem so pluralistic.
Orthodox Judaism doesn't claim to be pluralistic. It has always attempted to remain true to mesorah (unbroken chain of tradition). So its inability to proclaim all streams as equally valid, while uncomfortable for many (on both sides) is simply consistent with that long-standing approach.
Trust me, I wish I could be more pluralistic sometimes. It would make my life a lot easier. But I simply don't believe that there are many valid ways to be right on every issue, and I can't disregard that.
I must reiterate, and I hope this is obvious, that I form my opinions about *denominations* and *ideologies* and strive to remain positive and loving and accepting of all *people*.
Ruchi, you said it so much better than I did. Please remind me to read ALL the comments next time!
DeleteYour final statement illustrates what so many people find difficult: in a very absurd twist, Reform and Conservative Jews often wish that Orthodox Jews would love and accept them for *what* they are - serious, observant Jews - and not for *who* they are - individual people. It's like the Xtian philosophy of "love the sinner, hate the sin" - it's well-intended, but can feel insulting nonetheless.
Kudos to you for writing about this difficult issue, and kol hakavod to all the commenters for keeping it so respectful. I've enjoyed reading this.
Ruchi, just one clarification: you wear a wig because you "think it's the right thing to do", which trumps physical comfort. So on balance, you feel better wearing one than not. I feel the same way about many of the mitzvot I observe as a religious Reform Jew. And I certainly agree with you that there are many issues for which there are NOT many valid ways to be right. We just disagree on the details.
DeleteThank you so much for this exchange. It has been really interesting and enlightening.
SCJ:
DeleteThanks, first off. It *has* been a difficult but important, and hopefully important conversation.
Second, I *do* view many non-Orthodox Jews as serious, proud, educated and observant. Especially the more I come to understand the nuances outside of Othodox circles. (I know this is uncommon; it's a byproduct of my work.) However, I can't reconcile Reform and Conservative ideology with what I know and hold dear about mesorah. So it's not "love the sinner" - any mitzvah that any Jew does is precious and beautiful, and it's not for me to judge that which they do not do. Maybe I'll be judged more harshly for my mistakes since I've done more studying.
This is where I have to interject that denominations are man-made. All Jews are on a continuum of observance, from little to a lot, and, no, Orthodoxy doesn't necessarily come out on top because God judged us each as individuals based on a hugely complex algorithm, of which I am (thankfully) not privy to.
For me, two things remain:
1. The more mitzvot the better
2. I strive to remain as faithful to mesorah (the original intent of the Torah and Talmud) as possible.
SavtaV: thank you for the clarification: Yes, that is right. And thank YOU for your important contribution to this conversation.
Amendment: I didn't mean to say "Orthodoxy doesn't necessarily come out on top" - I meant to say that if you're Orthodox, you don't necessarily come out on top.
Delete... a child of any US citizen is automatically a citizen, whether or not the other parent is a US citizen....
DeleteActually, not necessarily. There are some very specific rules and requirements that even American citizens must meet in order to transmit citizenship to children born to them and a non-citizen (at least, in the case of kids born abroad- obviously, this does not apply to children born in the U.S., as all are citizens immediately). This, as well as a few other reasons that I just don't have time to discuss at length right now, is why I'm not a big fan of the "Jewish status is like citizenship" argument. It differs in a few really specific ways, and popular an analogy as it is in certain circles, it's not the greatest one, IMHO (not least because it essentially calls non-Orthodox converts illegal immigrants, which really isn't a great base on which to build a compassionate and respectful dialogue about Jewish status). Personally, I find it condescending and somewhat offensive every time I read it. This could be because I deal with questions of citizenship and immigration status as part of my job, of course.
Hi Diplogeek,
DeleteTruthfully most analogies are just that: imperfect analogies that are useful in some or a number of aspects and off-kilter in other aspects. I find the citizenship analogy useful in terms of how those that wish to join from the outside need to prove themselves, while those that are born in are "allowed" to be unpatriotic to a certain extent without being stripped of citizenship.
But "patriotism" isn't required of any citizen, born or naturalized. There is no patriotic litmus test involved with becoming a citizen. There's a short test of American civics and history (which requires memorizing facts, not patriotism), there's a residency requirement, There's a citizenship oath pledging certain loyalties to the U.S. (but then, we as a country allows dual citizenship, as well, so how does that work?), there are a few other things, but there is nothing that obligates new citizens to be patriotic. Perhaps because every person likely has a different definition of what constitutes patriotic behavior. And while many new citizens are certainly patriotic people in the sense that they are proud of their new status and love their adopted country, there are also some who are not. We do not make a practice of taking away people's passports or questioning their citizenship based on things like whether we consider them to be sufficiently patriotic. And, of course, using patriotism as a benchmark also calls into question the Jewish pride of non-Orthodox Jews, which is also likely to upset and offend.
DeleteOrthodox Jews are considered Orthodox, by and large, because of their interpretation of and commitment to following Jewish law. You can be as proud to be Jewish as anyone out there, but that doesn't make you Orthodox (or, if you're a convert, Jewish at all, depending on who you're talking to). The problem is that the analogy doesn't fit when you speak in terms of law, because, of course, anyone in the United States, whether citizen or not, is subject to American law, so instead we end up using nebulous things like "patriotism" that aren't easily defined and don't actually apply to the question of citizenship at all.
And while I agree that analogies are helpful, I think some are more helpful than others. As someone who has read, more than once, the "non-Orthodox converts = illegal immigrants" trope explicitly spelled, I question how helpful this analogy really is, accuracy aside. I think it encourages people to think of certain denominations and certain people of questionable status as interlopers of some kind, and that's probably not a great attitude to convey.
I hear you loud and clear. I've learned something new from you, and I appreciate it.
DeleteQuestion: is there anything a would-be citizen might do that would prevent citizenship from being granted? Any allegiances, affiliations, practices?
Interesting that I just found this line in one of the Reform responsa that Larry linked:
DeleteSimilarly, an American citizen is free to declare the Constitution a worthless document, while applicants for citizenship are in a different class regarding their affirmations. Their admissibility is judged on the basis of that very Constitution.
That's true in a sense, but aside from taking an oath to the principles of the United States and the citizenship test that everyone hears about, it's not as if applicants for citizenship, the government generally takes citizenship applicants' word for it that they mean what they say when they take the oath. And if a citizen decides the day after taking their oath that in fact, they disagree with X, Y and Z amendments to the Constitution, no one is going to retroactively declare their citizenship null and void. Ditto if someone gains citizenship and goes out a week later and gets busted robbing a liquor store. They might be in jail, but they're not going to lose their status. That is not, unfortunately, always the case with conversion.
DeleteI'm not really trying to argue about the analogy; I'm aware that it's a very popular one (in circles other than Orthodox, as well, though I've heard it from Orthodox sources the most frequently). It doesn't matter much to me whether it's a Reform rabbi using it or an Orthodox one; I find it equally off-putting in either case. Like I said, it could be because it's too close to home for me, but I don't think that's the only reason. If one takes this analogy to a few of its natural conclusions, I think it can foster a lot of attitudes that cause more harm than good.
Thank you for tackling an obviously difficult issue.
ReplyDeleteI think, that the current issue is not so much as to the conversions, or who is considered Jewish - as it is to those who wish to get married later on.
I am afraid that if this continues, marriage between the Orthodox, Conservative and Reform Jews (and all denominations thereof) will become far fewer. Not just because it's really hard for a person with one hashkafic background to adjust to another's, but because there may be some doubt as to the other person not being considered intermarriage on some level. I am afraid that what this will accomplish is to completely split the Orthodox and other communities wide apart. This is my main issue with the differences between the communities.
For instance, if an Orthodox man falls in love with a Reform woman who is considered Jewish on her father's side - what is the status of the children?
What happens if or when those in the Orthodox community cannot consider marrying Jews from other denominations due to uncertainty of their halachic status as Jews?
Gives a whole new meaning to "shidduch crisis."
Hi Sparrow, and welcome to OOTOB!
DeleteYou're right, and there's another problem attached. The Orthodox folks who will consider your point problematic will be blamed by more liberal Jews for the problem, and the movement that are OK with it will be blamed by the Orthodox for the problem.
So now we have a crisis, mutual blame, and a practical impasse.
Yuk.
Hey Ruchi Koval, and thank you!
DeleteI'm sorry I took so long to respond.
Exactly - it's this point that I think may be at the heart of so much of these issues.
"You guys are being exclusionary!"
"Seriously, what do you believe in?"
"Do you have any idea why you do what you do?"
"Why don't you ever think for yourself?"
"Are you really a Jew?"
It's that last question, underneath the rhetoric, that I think is the main sticking point (and impasse). You're right, it is a cause of blame. More than that, I think it's a cause of hurt.
I think the ones really being injured in this case are those who are caught in the middle - deemed Jewish by one side and outsiders on the other side. I wish I saw some way of resolving that issue.
It's enough of a trouble in the present, but I'm concerned that, because of this, Orthodoxy in its various forms will no longer interact with Conservative and Reform Judaism as Jews on any level in a generation or so.
Exactly. And as ben-yehoshua has asked, "Who is responsible for that pain?" It's possible that when the Reform movement adopted patrilineal descent and its own standards for conversion, it was hoping for more inclusion and greater observance, perhaps not realizing the unintended circumstances that would result.
DeleteSometimes it feels to me as though Orthodoxy is being blamed for not accepting these standards, and that doesn't seem justified.
Ruchi, I never thought about it this way, thanks. How much do you think the pain over the patrilineal/conversion differences is due to the question of Israeli standards and their relationship to O-Judaism vs. questions for Jews living in the U.S. or elsewhere outside Israel?
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteRuchi, first off all, kol hakavod for writing such a sensitive, well-balanced post on such a painfully sensitive subject. The nasty, nasty things I've seen on some orthodox-centric websites about Reform Judaism - well, suffice it to say it sounds like it would be preferable to not be Jewish at all than to be the shallow, pale, heretical farce that is apparently Reform Judaism. Your balanced perspective and your quest to seek the middle ground and make issues clear are heartfelt, honest, and sincere, and as a Reform convert-in-the-making, I truly appreciate your efforts.
ReplyDeleteRena, I'm not Frume Sarah, nor am I a rabbi, merely a person converting through the Reform Movement. My converting rabbi defines living Jewishly in two ways: one, by taking on more observances of aspects of Jewish life and ritual (observing Passover, celebrating Shabbat in a way that is personally meaningful, attending services), and integrating into the community. I'm certainly aware of mitzvot and am trying to think of how I can incorporate them into my observance, but seeing as how I'm at the very early stages of my process and still focusing on the URJ's "Intro to Judaism" class part, I don't know how much/little observance of mitzvot will be emphasized as I go on. I will say this, though: my rabbi has a sincere love of Judaism and seems to want to encourage people to take on as many mitzvot as possible, in a way that makes sense for their lives. Does that make sense?
Thank you Maya for your kind words and input.
DeleteWow... This is a very raw and sensitive issue that could have easily exploded and I am impressed by everyone keeping their cool.
ReplyDeleteWhile lots of good arguments were brought up by all contributors, I think a few more points bear mentioning:
1. The Orthodox "stance" of considering Heterodox practice "not Jewish" is not unique to O's. I think one issue that binds us much more than Israel is the visceral exclusion of Jews for Jesus and/or Hebrew Christians. Even though their attitude on Torah from God and mitsvot tend to differ little from the Orthodox and the Reform should appreciate their right to "interpret" various "texts" (especially Isiah 53) as they see fit.
2. Does the exclusion of Humanists from the WUPJ imply that they are not "Jewish (enough)" for the Reform? (Side question - can any Conservative/Open Orthodox shul join? Do they have to be Egalitarian?)
3. If there were to develop an ultra right wing Jewish group, which saw a form of Jewish Jihad as their main expression of Jewishness. Let's say their principle definition of "Jewishness" was whether one served in the IDF elite units and is ready to show "the Arabs" who's boss. Would the liberal Jews find it hard to claim that their practice was neither beautiful nor Jewish?
4. In the end of the day, who owns the labels? Who bears responsibility for changing definitions of accepted terms?
Hi BY and welcome to OOTOB.
DeleteThanks for these interesting questions. I would love to hear other opinions on this.
some more questions that came to mind after reading through all comments here more carefully:
ReplyDelete1) what is "heterodox"?
2) if the rabbi doesn't determine how one should keep a mitzva, only you yourself, according to your own understanding of the scriptures, then does s/he have a function aside from sermons in the temple?
and thank you so much to all the contributors for this wonderful, knowledgeable clarification of so many issues!
1) Heterodox is a quick and hopefully inoffensive way of saying 'all Jewish movements except the orthodox."
Delete2) We're not Protestants. No one I'm aware of holds that Jews should reach conclusions using sola scriptura. The Reform movement holds that indvidual Jews should make informed decisions, and the rabbi serves as a teacher to make you informed. That covers a lot more ground than simply sermons.
Also, a rabbi is a pastor - hospital visits, chesed work, funerals, weddings, bar mitzvahs, baby namings, counseling, teaching . . . chief cook and bottle washer in most places :)
DeleteI wish to clarify rena's question.
DeleteSince, in Orthodox, a major function of the rabbi is to clarify and guide with halacha. The rabbi knows more halacha, and therefore can issue "psak" - decisions - as well as "eitzah" - general moral and spiritual guidance with life's dilemmas, based on Torah wisdom.
The life cycle stuff is kind of secondary to all of that.
So I think that rena, and many other Orthodox Jews, when thinking about how Reform Jews are not halacha-driven, might wonder, if their rabbi did not serve that function, what would he do?
Hence the question.
understood. see above. that is what at least 1 rabbi i know does :) but yes, the majority of his time is on the above, not being a posek. although there is some of that - but the majority is above.
Deleteif I understood Frume Sarah and Maya correctly, the reform stance to mitzvos is acceptance on your own personal comfort level, not dictated by your rabbi nor black and white like the orthodox.
ReplyDeletedid I get that right?
and Frume Sarah: yes, I know that even amongst the reform, geirut is a process which includes study, but I'm intrigued to hear if final acceptance of an individual as a Jew is dependent on keeping the mitzvot (however the individual interprets them?) or mainly synagogue attendance?
I must thank you all - I'm learning a lot here!
I think the best we can hope for is to see the way the term 'Judaism' is used become equivalent to the way the term 'Christianity' is used. There are numerous Christian sects, almost all of them consider their particular form the most correct one. They feel some degree of fellowship with other sects that they don't feel with those they designate as non-Christian. There is dispute on exactly who falls into the category and who doesn't, and the exact list varies depending on who is being asked.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, this works for Christianity for two reasons. One is that contemporary Christianity is a religion alone, while Judaism is much more than that. The second is that they had a series of bitter wars over the centuries that left a belief that yelling about things is better than physically fighting over them. Judaism has been a religion of the powerless - one of the biggest adaptations it is going through in the 58th century is learning how to deal from a position of strength. Intelligence consists of learning from your mistakes, wisdom consists of learning from the mistakes of others. Let's hope we can be wise and avoid literal civil war.
I realize this takes us into what might seem like a digression, but I think it's a really fascinating comparison to consider:
DeleteChristianity, as you say, is more an umbrella term for a lot of denominations, but for historical and doctrinal reasons those denominations don't lend themselves to a "linear continuum" interpretation, where it might appear that one denomination is "more observant" and others "less observant", which seems [not necessarily accurately] to be the case with O- C- and R-Judaism.
Observant Catholics, for instance, might consider themselves "more observant" if they go to confession frequently. But then most Protestants would not recognize that as "more observant" Christianity, but only as a specifically Catholic ritual. And then you have Amish and all kinds of other movements that develop various cultural elements around theological elements--they look pretty "observant" with their highly visible old-fashioned ways, but other Christian denominations wouldn't find that kind of "observance" particularly Christian at all.
Because the Jewish 'denominations' have less doctrinal divergence [or do they not have less? divinity of the Talmud, for instance??], and indeed did not [yet] have the bitter wars that drove Christians far apart, it looks like there is more of one single axis for making distinctions, i.e. that of "how observant?" But I like the analogy insofar as it suggests that the CULTURAL evolutions that go along with Reform and Conservative Judaism could be considered part of what makes them what they are. Which of course would not be recognized by O-Judaism as belonging to Judaism the religion. But maybe then the goal is to worry LESS about what the other "denominations" recognize, the way that the Amish don't care what the Catholics think?? But then again, if O-Jews care more about Jewish unity then they will care more than in the analogy to Amish-Catholic. And certainly a lot of Jews wouldn't want to own an analogy to Christian constellations of belief and practice. And they will evoke anti-Semitism, rightfully so, as making no such distinction. But then, do we really want to take anti-Semitism as the guide for how to define ourselves?
Need to think about this, I"m just wondering 'out loud' here. Also I am pretty ignorant of how different Sephardi or Yemenite or Ethiopian Jewish practices or beliefs are--and I also apologize in advance if I use terminology that is not preferred by the groups I'm trying to refer to.
Sephardi, Oriental and Yemenite Jews follow the accepted rules for deriving halacha. As such, even though their answers might sometimes differ and at times appear very lenient (Shabbat is one example) at other times they are more strict (Kashrut, hair covering). Different approaches exist within different Ashkenazi communities as well, so this is not new.
DeleteEthiopians didn't practice Judaism, at least in recent centuries, and as such need to convert to be considered Jewish. However, they have special status since they are recognized as descendants of the tribe of Dan.
There is an organization working on finding other descendents of the lost tribes, notably the Bnei Menashe of Manipour (India)
Thanks for the info. I guess I was hoping for some example of a "brand" of Judaism that didn't just look like "more" or "less" observant, but "differently" observant, inspired by the comparison to the very heterogeneous Christian denominations that each think they are 'the real thing' (presumably, I don't know).
DeleteSo a thought experiment: the words "Orthodox", "Reform", "Conservative" etc. disappear from the planet (also "Chassidic" and "Haredi" and any other parallel designations anyone can think of). The words "Jewish" "Jew" and "Judaism" are metaphysically-linguistically sprayed with a substance that repels all modifiers. After that we have Jewish individuals, who do and believe things, often somewhat different things. And different congregations doing different things, with people in those congregations doing a range of things that are like and unlike the congregation as a whole.
Would this be more toward Jewish unity? Would the disputes be more or less intense? Would there have to be a re-sorting of congregations and individuals into named sub-groups? If God could peel the name "Jewish" or "synagogue" or "shul" off any of the buildings used by these congregations, would He?
Please disregard the last sentence. He's God, he could already have done that.
DeleteFor the purposes of Ruchi's thread the more important question is what would happen to the groups of people and how they regard each other?
Another couple of tangential links for people who want to read *gasp* physical books
ReplyDeleteTwo Jews Can Still Be a Mixed Marriage: Reconciling Differences Over Judaism in Your Marriage"
What Do You Mean, You Can't Eat in My Home?: A Guide to How Newly Observant Jews and Their Less Observant Relatives Can Still Get Along