Posted in Jewish | Tagged Rami shapiro, Shavuot | Leave a Comment »
Martin S. Jaffee offers the following definition of ‘religion’ in his book Early Judaism.
“Religion is an intense and sustained cultivation of a style of life that heightens awareness of morally binding connections between the self, the human community and the most essential structures of reality. Religions posit various orders of reality and help individuals and groups to negotiate their relations with those orders.”
You may have noticed that this definition does not focus on beliefs or rituals. This may surprise you. Jaffee argues that the idea of religion as a collection of beliefs about divine beings expressed in moral behavior, prayers and various forms of communal worship is actually an idea that emerged out of Europe in the 16th century. It was advanced by philosophers, politicians and theologians struggling to define the role of the Church in the emerging national states of Europe.For that time and place, that definition served a useful purpose: to create societies in which Church and State had separate and distinct spheres of life, enabling citizens of different religious beliefs to coexist as relative equals in society.
This particular definition of religion however, has not been reflective of the many ways in which non-European and non-Christian peoples have constructed their own conceptions of the role of holy communities and their institutions in the larger social and political order. Thus, he offered that alternate definition of religion, broad enough to explain human religious behavior across civilizations and millenia.
According to Jaffee, religious patterns of behavior encourage human beings to interpret themselves as moral beings whose destiny is bound with others in a project that brings them into relationship with the fundamental reality of things. In religious systems, the self identified through personal, autobiographical memory tends to be enlarged or enriched as it is interpreted in contexts well beyond personal experience. Personal identity includes a conception of how all these relationships are connected to generations of the distant past and the far-off future, as well as to the forces and powers that are held to account for the world as it is. (page 7)
Certain types of Buddhism, and even, Judaism come to mind. What all religions share, though, is the desire to participate in the essential structures of the world — to those spaces beyond our immediate world where “God” or “enlightenment” or “consciousness” reside.
The means of transport and the conceptualizations of these alternate worlds differs from religion to religion, but constant is the tendency of religions to puncture the apparent solidity of mundane experience and to privilege intimations of other worlds at profounder levels of being.
I don’t know about you, but I love this way of describing religion. It’s like what Rabbi David Wolpe said: “Life is not an intellectual puzzle. Life is a precious one-time chance to grow. We grow not by solving riddles but by creating meaning.”

Is it possible to be a religious atheist? Well, if you take Jaffe’s definition of religion (above), as opposed to a fundamentalist definition of God (an omnipotent, authoritarian entity invervening in human affiars) — then yes, you can be. And you most certainly can be an atheist or a theistic agnostic and have a wedding that is decidedly Jewish.
Posted in a LIVING progressive Judaism!, Weddings Wedding Weddings | Tagged Can you be a religious atheist? Jewish atheism, Martin Jaffee, Rabbi David Wolpe, religion doesn't have to be about dogma, religious atheism, Secular humanism | Leave a Comment »
In my pastoral counseling class for rabbinical school, we’ve been reading on the nature of loss in all its forms: loss of love, loss of health, love of future and its potential.
These readings hit home for quite a few people in my class, particularly in my own home, where we have been struggling with one setback after another for two years.
A year ago, right after our baby was born, my husband was crippled by the searing pain of an L4-L5 disc herniation; it was eventually repaired, but pain and other symptoms still linger. Meanwhile, I developed my own popourri of woes attributed to hypermobility syndrome — a condition whereby one’s joints become too flexible, because my body’s collagen is being manufactured incorrectly.
These experiences have given me a powerful lesson in what it means to “mourn.” I had always thought of mourning and grief as things that happen when a person you love dies. Arthur Frank, in his book “At the Will of the Body: Reflections on Illness,” offers a much broader perspective from his experiences battling cancer. This excerpt, from the chapter “Mourning What Is Lost,” flies open the doors to just how broad mourning and grief can go. He explains it like this:
The loss that accompanies illness begins in the body as pain does, then moves out until it affects the relationships connecting that body to others. My awkward attempts to avoid commitments I was not sure I could fulfill only made people think I was distancing myself from them. I acted not from lack of freiendship but because my body was taking me out of their natural flow of plans and expectations. I lost my sense of belonging … The inability to make specific plans is only the beginning of the loss of belonging. … Loss of the future is complemented by loss of the past. …
Middle age insinuates itself slowly into our bodies and lives. It is the time when on a good day you can still kid yourself into thinking you are as young as ever. Several nights before my surgery, I looked myself in a mirror. My body I saw was not the body I had had at 22 or even 30, but it retained for me a continuity of those bodies. The changes, the deteriorations, had been gradual.
That night I knew that after surgery, I would never be the same. It would irrevocably break my body’s continuity with its past. When you say goodbye to your body, as I was going that night, you say goodby to how you have lived. … Other losses went beyond the body. Cathie and I had always hoped that if the worst happened, friends and relatives would respond with care and involvement. Some came through. Other disappeared. We now find it hard to resume relationships with those who could not acknolwedge the illness that was happening, not just to me but to us. Those relationships were lost.
Together, Cathie and I lost an innocence about the normal expectation of life. At one time it seemed normal to expect to work and accomplish certain things, to have children and watch them grow, to share their experiences with others, to grow old together. Now we realize that these events may or may not happen. Life is contingent. We are no longer sure what it is normal to expect.
… These losses of future and past, of place and innocence, must all be mourned. We should never question how another person chooses to mourn. I was fortunate to have a wife to share my mourning. Sharing losses seemed to be the gentlest way of living with them.
***
Several hundred years ago, a great rabbi, the Rebbe Nachman of Bratzlav, scripted his own prayer for these moments of loss. Here are his words from The Gentle Weapon: Prayers for Everyday and Not-So-Everyday-Moments. I have chosen my own translations for his use of the word “God”:
Dear Soil From Which I Come,
suddenly I am alone; I am in pain.
As I search for some source
of comfort
the world –
the world so full so bustling –
seems so empty now.
It’s cold
and it’s frightening
in this hollow that is me –
in this hollow that once brimmed
with confidence and joy.
Creator, pull me back –
back to the world of the living,
back to the life of action
and human relationships.
(LM 1:277)
It’s a beautiful prayer that brings relief to simply read.
What are your thoughts? Have you experienced a loss that makes Frank’s or Nachman’s words resonate? I’d love to hear your stories or reactions.
***
Where’s a Good Yenta When You Need One!? No need to sulk; The Matchmaker Rabbi is in! To see Joysa’s columns for Jdate, visit here. Her forthcoming book on dating in Jewish suburbia is being represented by Red Sofa Literary Agency.
Posted in a LIVING progressive Judaism! | Tagged Arthur Frank, chronic pain, hybermobility syndrome, Prayer for healing, Prayer for loss, Rebbe nachman | 4 Comments »
I woke up this morning to some stunning news: The talented and soulful singer Neshama Carlebach has come up with a new version of Israel’s national anthem, HaTikva (the Hope), at an invitation by The Forward, a leading national Jewish newspaper.
This “new” version is new in the most startling and thoughtful of ways. With just the slight tweak of a word here, and a phrase there, Carlebach attempts to open up the doors of a song and an anthem that has been excluding more than 20 percent of its own population.
The traditional HaTikva dates to the late 1800s. It was adapted from a poem written by a Jew named Naphtali Imber, who lived in the Austro-Hungarian Empire, now Zolochiv,Ukraine. (As an interesting aside, Imber later converted to Christianity.) The songs words expressed the then-2000-year-old hope of the Jewish people to return to the land of Israel and reclaim it as a sovereign nation.
The Jewish people were kicked out of Israel and into their long trek into the “diaspora” in the year 70 CE, when the Roman Empire destroyed the Second Temple and expelled all the Jews from Jerusalem. (As a point of reference, it is believed Jesus died around the year 35 CE).
Of course there is nothing wrong with expressing the Jewish hope for teshuva, for return. The song was, and remains, one of the most beautiful and moving pieces of music in the entire corpus of our people. Even hearing the song on a chintzy jewelry box brings tears to my eyes.
The song has one fatal flaw, however, and that is this: Not everyone in the state of Israel is Jewish! What might we expect the non-Jews to be thinking and feeling when they are asked to rise, cover their hearts, face the Israeli flag, and then hear lyrics that begin like this?
“As long as in the heart within/
a Jewish soul still yearns/
and onward towards the ends of the east/
An eye still gazes toward Zion…” ?
Israel may call itself the “Jewish state” but Jews aren’t the only people who live there. In fact, a solid 20 percent of Israel’s citizenry are Arabs (either Muslim or Christian.) Plus another potpourri of Asians, Africans, and others constitute the legal population.
When I say “Arabs,” it’s important to keep in mind that we are not talking about the “Palestinians” here – those folks who have no citizenship and are living in the territories of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. What their fate is or should be is beyond the pale of this conversation. I’m talking about actual citizens ofIsrael, who hold Israeli passports and vote in Israeli elections, and elect their own Arab-Israeli members to the Knesset (Congress).
HaTikvah has unofficially been the national anthem of Israel since the state was founded in 1948. It officially became the anthem in 2004, by vote of the Knesset. But this song, by focusing exclusively on Israel’s Jewish character, essentially says that there is no one else there. The fact the song identifies Jews, and not Israelis, as the people of Israel casts all non-Jews (whether Muslim, Christian, Buddhist or atheist) into the disempowering position of invisibility. And everyone knows that invisible people are not equal.
This ideological problem has been a hard one for lovers of Israel to respond to. On the one hand, we can’t fathom not having this song as our anthem. It feels as crucial to Israel’s spirit and soul as a fresh-made falafel, the searing view from Masada, and the white stoned walls of Jerusalem. It would be less painful to cut off a limb than it would be to take down HaTikva from the mantel of national anthem.
On the other hand, people of conscience can’t in good conscience fail to be troubled by what Hatikva doesn’t say – by how silence makes a statement in and of itself.
It took someone with the sensitivity and raw courage of Neshama Carlebach to fix this vexing dilemma. And like all acts of courage meant to open doors, welcome in, and improve the brotherly love between people, she will no doubt be skewered for her actions by all the groups, left, and right, whose entire purpose for being is to keep divisions and antagonisms spinning on to the end of the next millennium.
Yasher Koah, Neshama Carlebach, for this beautiful, delicately done remake of Israel’s beloved anthem. Like the finest surgeon, you excised only what needed to go, and replaced it with a perfect, more inclusive alternative.
Now that the hard work is done, the really hard work begins. We need you, readers and lovers of Israel, to start contacting The Forward, the Knesset, and anyone else you can think of, to make these new lyrics a permanent change to the song!!
Here are the revised words below. Changes are in bold, with the original words following in brackets.
As long as the heart within
An Israeli [Jewish] soul still yearns
And onward, towards the East
An eye still gazes towards our country [Zion]
We have still not lost our hope
our ancient [2000 year] hope
To be a free people in the land of our fathers [our land]
in the city in which David, in which David encamped [land of Zion and Jerusalem]
To be a free people in our land
In the land of Zion and Jerusalem
Neshama Carlebach is very aware of the sensitive nature of the song. As she explained to the Jerusalem Post,
“I think it was a very controversial move, because to change the lyrics to a precious song like ‘Hatikva’ is a very big statement… It’s not about leaving the world we were in behind; it’s about opening our doors wider. I feel that if the world sees, in my own humble opinion, that Israel is not just a small exclusive group that they can’t touch, but a larger entity that’s willing to wrap our arms around the whole of humanity or even change our anthem, we’re opening our doors, and maybe the press would be better.”
***
Where’s a Good Yenta When You Need One!? No need to sulk; The Matchmaker Rabbi is in! To see Joysa’s columns for Jdate, visit here. Her forthcoming book on dating in Jewish suburbia is being represented by Red Sofa Literary Agency.
Posted in Jewish | Tagged Israel's national anthem, Neshama carlebach, New version of Hatikva | 24 Comments »
When I bought this plastic bowl at the supermarket today, the label said: “Great for serving matzoh ball soup, charoset or salt water for the parsley at your Passover seder!” It wasn’t until I got home, opened up a new box of FrootLoops, and poured in the cereal that a light bulb went off and I keeled over in laughter.
Hey, it was 5 boxes of FrootLoops for $5. What the heck would you have done!?!
I should mail this picture to the OU* and give them a heart attack. Why spend the energy engaging in abstract ideological debate when you can just send a sweet picture like this one?
B’teavon and Happy Passover Day 4, dear readers! May we all go from Redemption to Freedom in the coming year!
* Orthodox Union, the governing body of orthodox Jewish movements
Posted in Jewish | Tagged Happy Passover 'n a bowl of Froot Loops! | 1 Comment »
This week, I took a “gulp” and did one of those things one is always reluctant to do: I pulled the plug. I called it quits on a venture that I was once very excited about, and which, by all outward measures, had clearly failed.
In this particular case, pulling the plug didn’t matter much. It was not one of those Big Plug-Pullings, like ending a relationship or quitting a job. I simply closed the social club I had formed online (at Meetup.com) for Jewish parents with infants or small children.
I had 36 members (supposedly) in Mainline Mazal Tots, and had scheduled more than 20 gatherings or “outings” where we could meet (zoo, kids’ gym, etc). Most of us live within 10 miles of each other. We all have a child under age 3. And, over the course of two years, I only actually met 3 of these 36 people.
It may seem surprising, but this reality didn’t actually “hurt my feelings.” Hey, there’s one upside to surviving teenage social ostracism, right!? Besides, you can’t be rejected by people you have never met.
What endlessly irked me, though, and the truth which I will, knowing me, wrestle with for years, is the fact people simply didn’t care enough to come. Not Jewishly. Not parentally. Not any-lly.
I could have kept this Meetup group going indefinitely. At times, I thought I would. My family went to these places anyway, and we had fun. But the annual cost as an “organizer” on Meetup was $150 a year. At some point you have to level with yourself and admit: Well, I’m clearly an organizer of a group that doesn’t want to “be.” So what’s the point? I’m better off giving $150 to the Ocean Conservancy. The ocean will be grateful.
You, patient readers, are not my therapist. I could vent and raise my voice and flail my arms. But, I’ve already done that. That’s what spouses are for: To be an audience.
The more naked and poignant point is that we live in a society too tired, stressed and stretched out to think that something like this matters.
And / or another possible answer is, we live among a people that no longer feels an innate bond to make that extra initial effort to form a bond.
We stood at Sinai and have now, literally, become strangers. We moved out of the shtetl, and have, the lot of us, said “good riddance.” Not just to the poverty, sexism, superstition and anti-Semitism (I concur!) — but also to the neighbors, sick bed visits and play dates.
Alas.
I look back at the rich forest of our history, longing for a sense of community not shared by the community I want to build community with.
Around the year 300 C.E., in the city of Babylon, a nucleus of learned Jewish men sat down and recorded their thoughts and verbal traditions. I could argue with any number of “truths” they offered up about the world, but some of them so resonate this mortal experience.
We human beings aren’t wired to live alone, operate in isolation or bring ourselves up when we have fallen. We, like all good primates, are wired for each other.
Talmud Bavli Berachot 5b tells this tale:
Rabbi Hiyya bar Abba fell ill and Rabbi Johanan went in to visit him. He [R. Johanan] said to him: “Are your sufferings welcome to you?” He replied: “Neither they nor their reward.” He [R. Johanan] said to him: “Give me your hand.” He gave him his hand and he [R. Johanan] raised him.
Rabbi Johanan fell ill and Rabbi Hanina went in to visit him. He [R. Hanina] said to him: “Are your sufferings welcome to you?” He replied: “Neither they nor their reward.” He said to him: “Give me your hand.” He [R. Hanina] gave him his hand and he raised him.
Why could not R. Johanan raise himself? They replied: “The prisoner cannot free himself from jail.”
Posted in Jewish | Tagged Finding hope in company of others, Talmud Berachot 5b | 1 Comment »
Out West where I come from, there are many Jewish communities that are small, and can’t afford their
own building. When that’s the case, the community’s first choice is usually to find a Unitarian Universalist church to sublet space from.
Why the Unitarians? One answer to this question comes from an unlikely source: The Rev. A. Powell Davies (1902-1957). In 1944, he gave the following sermon at his church. Substitute the word “church” for “synagogue,” and I think he captured a crucial contemporary sentiment of liberal Judaism completely!
In his eloquent speech, the Rev. Davies gives several reasons for coming together to davven (pray).
Do we pray because God needs us to? No. We pray because WE need to.
Let me tell you why I come to church. I come to church—and would whether I was a preacher or not—because I fall below my own standards and need to be constantly brought back to them. It is not enough that I should think about the world and its problems at the level of a newspaper report or a magazine discussion. It could too soon become too low a level. I must have my conscience sharpened—sharpened until it goads me to the most thorough and responsible thinking of which I am capable. I must feel again the love I owe my fellow men (and women). I must not only hear about it but feel it. In church, I do.I need to be reminded that there are things I must do in the world—unselfish things, things undertaken at the level of idealism. Workaday enthusiasms are not enough. They wear out too soon. I want to experience human nature at its best—and be reminded of its highest possibilities, and this happens to me in church. It may seem as though the same things could be found in solitude, but it does not easily happen so.In a congregation we share each other’s spiritual needs and reinforce each other. In some ways, the soul is never lonelier than in a church service. That is certainly true of a pulpit, for a pulpit is the most intimately lonely place in the world—yet it is a loneliness that has strength in it. Perhaps this is because the innermost solitude of the human heart is in some paradoxical way a thing that can be shared—that must be shared—if the spirit of God is to find a full entrance into it.We meet each other as friends and neighbors anywhere and everywhere, but we seldom do so in the consciousness of our souls’ deepest yearnings. But in church we do—in a way that protects us from all that is intrusive, yet leaves us knowing that we all have the same yearning, the same spiritual loneliness, the same need of assurance and faith and hope. We are brought together at the highest level possible. We are not merely an audience, we are a congregation.I doubt whether I could stand the thought of the cruelty and misery of the present world unless I could know, through an experience that renewed itself over and over again, that at the heart of life there is assurance, that I can hold an ultimate belief that all is well. And this happens in church.Life must have its sacred moments and its holy places. The soul will always seek its nurture. For religious experience—which is life at its most intense, life at its best—is something we cannot do without.
Posted in a LIVING progressive Judaism! | Tagged Synagogue membership, Unitarian A. Powell Davies | Leave a Comment »

