Oral Law vs. Written Law (Jewish History Essay)

Before the destruction of the first and second Beit Mikdash, which was the center of worship for Jews during the first and second temple period, the Jewish people only knew how to follow Halacha (Jewish Law) according to what was written in the Torah. However, since the destruction of the second Beit Mikdash and the adaptations that were made in order for Judaism to continue on, a new kind of Jewish Law was developed: the Torah shebaal peh, or oral law. Both the written law and the oral law contain positive as well as negative aspects, which means the people of the modern Reform movement should take into consideration both types of law when deciding how to follow Halacha because, although they are different, they are both equally important. 
In comparison to any kind of oral law, written law is more set in stone which diminishes the ability to change it. This aspect of the written law can be viewed in both a positive and a negative perspective; some may say that the law should never be changed anyways, but others may say that the law must be changed in order for it to apply to modern day society. A beneficial aspect of the written law includes that fact that questions such as, "who was there?" and, "what happened?" are easily answered by simply looking back in the Torah. Another positive facet of written law is that it was "Halacha l'Moshe m'Sinai" or "the law given to Moses at Sinai" which means that it is considered the law that God gave to the Jewish people to follow. On the other hand, because written law can't be changed or adapted, the rules that we are required to follow as Am Yisrael (the Jewish people) are harder to obey due to the dramatic societal changes that occur between time periods. The Reform movement should definitely consider what is required in written law because it supposedly contains what God commanded on the day Moses stood on top of Mount Sinai to receive the Torah. We, as the people of Reform Judaism, cannot just throw away what our religion is solely based on. However, following exactly what the written law tells us to do may be slightly more difficult than what the oral law tells us to do.
While written law is more set in stone, oral law has the ability to be changed, leaving room for interpretation as well as modernization. In other words, oral law is slightly more controversial under the circumstances that people were better able to bend and twist its interpretation whether it was by accident or on purpose. Late in the first century, Rabbi Akiva adopted the responsibility of organizing the newly formed oral law into six books; this strategy made it easier for the Jews to find a specific law that they were looking for when trying to determine how to follow it. Then around 200CE, Yehudah HaNasi finalized Rabbi Akiva's organization and wrote down the oral law into what we know as the Mishnah. About 300 years later, a man named Rav Ashi wrote the Babylonian Talmud, which is a combination of the Mishnah and the Gmarah (commentary on the Mishnah). The Talmud is used by Am Israel to discuss Halacha and interpret what it means and what we need to do in order to follow it. For example, in the Torah it says that God told Moses, "Do not boil a child in its mother's milk." One way to interpret this statement is to believe that keeping Kosher only involves not mixing red meat with dairy, but not necessarily to not mix all meat and dairy. However, the topic of keeping Kosher can be interpreted in many different ways. Of course there are other stories included in the Torah that talk about different rules of keeping Kosher, such as those that relate to eating pork and shellfish, but even those stories can be interpreted in several ways. From a positive, and especially a Reform perspective, its considered a good thing that halacha can be interpreted in multiple ways because all people are able to take what they personally think is important out of the oral law and follow it the way they see is best fit for themselves, while still keeping Jewish tradition. In contrast to this positive look on oral law, others, such as Orthodox or maybe even Conservative Jews, may find it a very negative aspect that it is able to be interpreted in several ways because if everyone is following one law in hundreds of different ways, how can we, the Jewish people, define ourselves as one religion, one nation? The flexibility itself contains both the positives as well as the negatives of oral law.
One day in Jewish History class, we were discussing whether or not interpreting and modernizing Halacha is okay to do. Personally, I believe that as long as we, the Reform Jews, don't drift too far from the law given to Moses at Sinai, or what is written in the Torah, then we should be adapting Halacha in order for us to keep tradition while also making it easy to live in modern-day society. Reform Judaism is all about allowing people to be Jewish in the way that they see is best fit for them, without forgetting where we came from. Besides the fact that there are several varying streams of Judaism, we are all still one people, one religion, one nation. Whether or not we agree or disagree about the modernization of Halacha is not nearly as important as recognizing the fact that we all believe that, as Jews, our goal is to better the world and help those in need. Therefore, if the Reform movement decides that we can better follow Halacha if we adapt it to the society in which we all live, then why shouldn't we do exactly that? After all, without reforming the Jewish Law, how can we consider ourselves "Reform" Jews?

History in America vs. History in Israel

Throughout the entire semester, our Jewish History teachers have been emphasizing how everything we learn in class can be seen through the remains of the events that occurred all over Israel. Yesterday, we visited the crusader fortress where the Ashkenazi Jews had been persecuted. While I was sitting inside of one of the many well-preserved, stone rooms I realized that what our Jewish History teachers had been emphasizing was 110% true. At home, when we learn about American History, we don't necessarily feel the connection to what took place simply because we rarely get the chance to see where it happened and what's left from it. For example, when we learned about the American Revolution, we never got to visit Yorktown where the final battle took place. Or when we were learning about the Civil War, we never had a chance to visit the Southern states to see where we fought the Confederates. But in Israel, every time we learn about a major event that took place and influenced Judaism and Am Yisrael (the people of Israel) we go to the place in which that specific event occurred. Of course I realize that Israel is probably a hundred times smaller than the United States, so that definitely has an effect on why we can't travel to every place where some part of the history of America happened. But here in Israel, it's actually the coolest thing ever that we get to go to every preserved site where something super important and influential happened. In the beginning of the semester, I didn't really understand why our Jewish History teachers tried so hard to emphasize that everything we learn about can be proven through the remnants of each event, but now I realize that we are so lucky to be able to see exactly that.

Men Who Bake Challah (Jewish History Blog Assignment)

Before reading this article, I never would have guessed that baking challah was a gendered act in Judaism. I can't say it doesn't make sense, because women used to be associated with domestic tasks such as cooking and cleaning (and, unfortunately, still are in some cultures/religions). But assuming that baking challah is a job that can only be done by women is just plain silly, at least in my opinion. And apparently I share that opinion with several other Jewish men. According to the article, "challah baking has become increasingly popular among Jewish men." They even consider it a way of honoring Shabbat- liking how it impresses Shabbat guests and enjoying the intimate feeling it brings when using a family recipe. While it's recognizable that challah baking is associated with femininity, its gendered heritage is unclear especially when compared to traditions such as lighting the candles and immersing in the mikveh (ritual bath)- both of which have stronger female identities. 
I have yet to decide whether this article makes me feel better or worse about gender equality within Judaism. While it's great news that a previously considered feminine act has now become so popular among men, its also kind of dumb (for lack of a better word) to even gender an act such as baking challah. But that's just how I'm looking at the situation...I guess I was just surprised at the fact that such a simple task was labeled as "feminine." However, it's mind-easing to know that it is increasing in popularity among men. This proves that labeling tasks as "masculine" or "feminine" is pointless because, in future societies, the gender that the task was previously associated with may change. I can't say that I care a lot about this for the sole reason that Reform Judaism does not associate any acts with the male or female gender, but men baking challah could reveal to Orthodox Jews that gendered tasks, in reality, are unisex.

http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-life-and-religion/198163/challah-and-the-men-who-bake-it

To Keep Kosher or to Not Keep Kosher

This question is one that I have considered before, but pre-EIE I have always ended up answering this question with a "no way I LOVE cheeseburgers, AND bacon, AND shellfish." Now, though, while I am forced to keep kosher here in Israel and am learning about the specific laws in Jewish History class, I have been exposed to a new perspective on keeping kosher. Today in class we learned about how, in the Torah, God speaks to Moses and says "do not boil a kid in its mother's milk" and Moses is left to interpret it in the way he thinks is right. But today, according to Oral Law, the rules of keeping kosher seem to be a lot more strict. When I hear the word "kosher" I immediately think about dairy and meat and how they are not meant to be eaten together at all, along with not eating shellfish and pork. However, in class we discussed how the rules of keeping kosher can be interpreted in many ways (surprise, surprise) which is similar to just about every other law that is written in the Torah. It was interesting to hear everyone's separate opinions on what it means to keep kosher, and it has truly opened my mind up to whether or not I would remain eating kosher even after I arrive home in America. 

With this thought in mind, I would have to consider many things. For instance, would I strictly separate dairy meals from meat meals like I do here? Or would I go by the literal meaning "do not boil a kid in its mother's milk" and simply not mix red meat with dairy? Also, would I be able to keep myself from eating bacon? Maybe so...there's always turkey bacon as an alternative (but we all know that it doesn't taste as great). Another decision I would have to make is whether or not I would eat shellfish ever again, which keep in mind, is one of my FAVORITE foods. Basically, I have a lot to think about: is my Jewish identity worth sacrificing delicious food for? Does keeping kosher really matter all that much to me? I personally believe that following a few certain Jewish laws as a Reform Jew is not so important. On the other hand, how can I define as Jewish if I don't do what is traditionally practiced? There are a lot of unclear answers to a lot of big questions involving Judaism, and the interpretation of keeping kosher is definitely among them. 

The Voice of an Arab-Israeli Doctor (Jewish History Blog Assignment)

Faiza, and Arab-Israeli doctor, lives in an Arab neighborhood in Jerusalem called Shuafat and is the head of the intensive care unit at a private hospital in Israel. She has an immense love for Israel and claims that it "gives you the opportunity to express your human potential." Throughout the article Faiza talks about how happy she is with her life here in Israel, specifically being able to witness the risks that Israeli soldiers take in order to care for Syrians and get them to a hospital safely. She also mentions that whenever she goes home to meet with her family, she has to remain quiet and resist from defending Israel in front of her brothers and their families to prevent putting her own children in a risky situation. However, Faiza's Arab brothers do not prevent her from feeling the joy she receives from her life in Israel.
It's incredible to read something so optimistic about a topic that isn't exactly filled with positivity. Faiza emphasizes the coexistence that is present in Israel throughout this article and how thankful she is for that. Her exact words being, "here Arab people are the happiest Arabs in the Middle East" and while many people may disagree with that statement, her opinion is one that brings optimism to people all over Israel. Living here for a little over a month now (although it feels like I've been here for years) allows me to relate to this feeling that Faiza has shared. I feel 100% at home here in Israel, and knowing that a vast diversity of people are happy living here as well is nice to think about due to the many tragedies that have taken place because of how isolated some parts of the country are from this feeling of acceptance and coexistence among us.
If you'd like to read the article itself, you can find it through this link and I hope it will put as big a smile on your face as mine.
http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/what-israel-is-giving-me-the-voice-of-an-arab-doctor/