FDR, as much as I admire him, may not deserve full credit for his response to the economic crisis caused by the Great Depression. Truth be told, he had a role model in our sage Hillel who dealt with a similar crisis nearly two thousand years earlier.
In the century of Jesus's death, under Roman occupation of the Holy Land, the Sanhedrin maintained significant power over a fractured Jewish people. Surely there was distention among the rank and file, and somewhat like today's various Jewish streams, then the splintering had to do with two main issues, the degree of literality of scriptural interpretation and the form of response to outside aggression.
The more familiar conflict had to do with interpretation. The Seduces and Pharisees fought it out over the meaning of Biblical text and it's role in everyday Jewish practice. The Essenes were cave dwelling eunuchs who never had a chance at a future and the Nazarenes were followers of Jesus of Nazareth.
The other segmentation of the Jewish demographic in Israel was over how to deal with the Roman occupiers. When Yochanan ben Zakai decided to leave Jerusalem and sued the Roman general Vespasian, later turned Caesar, for peace, he did it because Jewish zealots and dagger wielding fanatic “Sicarii” were burning Jewish food in order to cause a general uproar.
During the years leading up to this chaos, there was also a terrible crisis is the economics of the Jews of Israel. The cause was a common Biblical commandment related to the Shabbaton, the Sabbatical year. In this year, we are commanded to forgive all debt (Leviticus 25), among other things. Forgiving debt every seven years became a problem under occupation and lenders started to limit their lending. Hillel, recognizing that the release of debt was a divine commandment, decided to create a legal fiction to get around the forgiveness of debt in the seventh year. Instead of canceling all notes, the religious courts would take control of the notes for the Sabbatical year and then return them to their owners. By doing this, money still flowed and the Jewish economy was saved, as much as possible under Roman occupation.
In a way, I wish the current leadership would do more like the Sanhedrin. Instead of bailing out banks who made predatory loans and are now about to go bust because their borrowers can't pay these notes, I think the notes should be bought by the government.
I know – BIG pause. Catch your breathe. Make some snide remark about my socialist sentiments...But this is how I feel.
Why should we help the people who got us into this mess to begin with? Why not use the $700 billion dollars to create jobs that will insure that people can pay their mortgages? Why not hire a lot of people to regulate banks and commodity exchange more seriously? Why not build some jails for these white collar criminals? Or better yet, put them in with the existing criminals and build schools.
Ever since my adolescence when Reagan became president, I have heard that government is bad and big government is really bad, and I don't get it. Sarah Palin, the Republican vice-presidential candidate, just told Senator Biden in their debate that paying taxes was unpatriotic. I don't get this either. The founders of this great country had some very progressive ideas, and I particularly like the one that said “government for the people by the people.”
Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes said that he likes paying taxes because with them he buys civilization. I agree with the judge. Taxes and public schools are the two best things going for our society. With them we pave our roads, put police and fire people on our streets and teach our citizens the values of our union. As my daughter, Sahar, likes to ask, “How cool is that?”
In many ways, Hillel and FDR were very similar in that they both saved existing systems that failed. The current bailout or rescue, however you call it, is a temporary fix. It may save the system on a temporary basis but somebody needs to ask the tough questions about the system that got us here.
During my college years, just as the Soviet Union was breaking apart, I went to a concert of the British folk rocker Billy Bragg. He said a lot of memorable things that night. Among them, he said that isms are taking a beating right now, “especially the ism that has inspired him his whole life; socialism.” Then he went on to say that whether you call it socialism or humanism or simply chocolate, he sticks to his believe that every human being has a natural born right to the fruits of the Earth and that, even if human beings choose a system that allows some humans to acquire more wealth than others, he believes that every human being desires their basis human needs met. He listed health care, food, shelter, education and fair government that looks after the interests of the majority.
I so agree with Billy Bragg.
One of the things that puzzles me in the current election campaign is the fact that Barack Obama says he will only increase taxes on the top 5% of Americans, but he fails to share with us the fact that the top 5% of Americans control over 80% of the wealth of this country. Don't get me wrong, I support Obama, but what is the big secret. Why hide this terribly disgusting fact? It is simply wrong that any human being should be deprived of their basic necessities when others are comfortable. Yes, there are some who don't try to improve their lot. Some want to live off unemployment. Some drink or shoot their salaries into their awful addictions. But that doesn't mean that they are less than human and less than deserving of their basic needs.
FDR and Hillel were both great leaders in their understanding and leadership by empowering government to intervene and take an active role in the management of their economies for the benefit of the majority. I think they both failed by returning us to the existing system with out asking the tough questions about wealth and equity, about prosperity and equality and about the limits of accumulation wealth at the expense of other human beings.
My hope is that the next leadership, whoever it may be, learns from the examples of these two great leaders and goes one step further. I don't care about the ism attached to it, although I think is comes from my favorite ism - the one that starts with a J. I just want to be sure it raises the bar for all human beings.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Kudos to Niger
Kudos to the government of Niger for deciding to pay reparations of $19,000 to Hadijatou Mani, 24, who was sold into slavery when she was twelve. This is a bold step for a government in a region plagued by human trafficking. 43,000 people are enslaved in Niger against government policy, and slavery persists in Mali, Mauritania and Uganda.
Much has been said about the rightfully vilified slave owner, but I am concerned about the absence of commentary over the behavior of Ms. Mani's parents. According to the New York Times, Ms. Mani "was born into a traditional slave class and sold to Souleymane Naroua," for about $500. By what standard is this an acceptable practice for parents anywhere in our world? Also, where is the outrage over the system that allows the continuation of a "slave class"?
One of the race issues rising from the candidacy of Senator Barack Obama in this country is the question of reconciling with slavery's ghost in America. One way to start reconciliation in a globally productive manner would be to seriously address the issue of human trafficking and the sex trade which persists, even flourishes, worldwide. I was pleased to see that the Bush administration, under Secretary of State Rice, is acting seriously.
According to Humantraffcking.org, "The 2008 Trafficking in Persons Report [by the State Department] on 170 countries is the most comprehensive worldwide report on the efforts of governments to combat severe forms of trafficking in persons. Its findings will raise global awareness and spur countries to take effective actions to counter trafficking in persons...The annual Trafficking in Persons Report serves as the primary diplomatic tool through which the U.S. Government encourages partnership and increased determination in the fight against forced labor, sexual exploitation, and modern-day slavery."
Please take the time to check out the annual Trafficking in Persons Report. Yesterday's decision by Niger is a bold step, but much more needs to be done.
Much has been said about the rightfully vilified slave owner, but I am concerned about the absence of commentary over the behavior of Ms. Mani's parents. According to the New York Times, Ms. Mani "was born into a traditional slave class and sold to Souleymane Naroua," for about $500. By what standard is this an acceptable practice for parents anywhere in our world? Also, where is the outrage over the system that allows the continuation of a "slave class"?
One of the race issues rising from the candidacy of Senator Barack Obama in this country is the question of reconciling with slavery's ghost in America. One way to start reconciliation in a globally productive manner would be to seriously address the issue of human trafficking and the sex trade which persists, even flourishes, worldwide. I was pleased to see that the Bush administration, under Secretary of State Rice, is acting seriously.
According to Humantraffcking.org, "The 2008 Trafficking in Persons Report [by the State Department] on 170 countries is the most comprehensive worldwide report on the efforts of governments to combat severe forms of trafficking in persons. Its findings will raise global awareness and spur countries to take effective actions to counter trafficking in persons...The annual Trafficking in Persons Report serves as the primary diplomatic tool through which the U.S. Government encourages partnership and increased determination in the fight against forced labor, sexual exploitation, and modern-day slavery."
Please take the time to check out the annual Trafficking in Persons Report. Yesterday's decision by Niger is a bold step, but much more needs to be done.
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Remembering Al Boime, my teacher and friend
I first met him like thousands of others, in the auditorium where he taught at UCLA. I will never forget the first class when he jokingly started to read the names of the class roll from what had to be a list of over four hundred students and go up to each student personally to shake a hand and welcome them to class. He didn't even get far into the A's when he stopped and everyone appreciated this as a great icebreaker, but I knew it was much more.
Al Boime, my art history professor and friend, always had a very deep meaning behind everything he did. The joke with shaking hands was merely a joke for many, but for Al it was his way of saying that this is what pedagogy should look like. He couldn't teach without opening the door for friendship and interpersonal discourse, whether he was teaching a seminar or a freshman level intro class, he had to make it human. I entered that door and never left, which is why the news of his death is so painful.
Here's something Al said about his teaching which really illustrates the humility behind this great figure. "By examining the political forces that motivated the art makers and finders, and revealing the hidden mainsprings in visual production, I truly believed that I was contributing to the emancipation of thought, at least in one small corner of the minds of my students and readers. Thus art history became my raison d'être, a vehicle for enhancing the lives of my fellow citizens, while at the same time bringing about a nanno-change toward social justice in society."
A nanno-change? Al, you rocked my world.
I was a student at UCLA while Jesse Helms and his ilk were attacking the National Endowment for the Arts for funding a retrospective of images by Robert Mapplethorpe, and, inspired by Al, I couldn't sit still. I had been studying video art and became very interested in activist filmmaking. Al was off to do research in Washington, D.C. and I followed him there to do some research of my own. From LA, I set up interviews with various congress people and the infamous Senator Helms, but when I got to the Helms office, I was greeted with a handshake and sent off to a noisy cafeteria with two aids who pulled out facsimiles of the Mapplethorpe photographs from a brown paper bag and asked me if I considered this art. “It was kind of like being called a fag on the school yard,” I told Al after the experience. I had traveled all the way from LA on my student budget and didn't get the main interview I had come for. Al had a great idea. He told me about the political pseudo-events that the French artist Delacroix used to do and said he had confidence in me that I could manufacture something much better than a Helms interview. To his credit, I went outside of Congress, put my video camera on a tripod and stood in the frame narrating the story of what happened to me as I took off my clothes. I explained how the image I am creating maybe homoerotic to some viewers, and that I really didn't care as long as it remained erotic to my girlfriend back home. Then I quickly got dressed and ran back to Al's office where I shared with my teacher the story of my conquest. Later that school year, when there was a serious dispute over racism in the university school body elections, around the time of my hero, Abbie Hoffman's suicide, I ran a pig for president of UCLA with huge 8 foot by 4 foot posters of a pig that said, “Eat a fig, do a jig, wear a wig, vote for a pig! Pigasus for President.” Al was elated.
After graduation, in the months leading up to the first Gulf War, I started having mini-salons in my apartment to give exposure to bands and artists I liked and to discuss the big issues of the day. I remember Al coming for a Chanukah salon where we discussed our internal conflict between opposing a military solution and being concerned with the welfare of Israel. Al and I connected over the fact that I was brought up in a socialist Zionist youth movement, and we often talked about the virtues of the kibbutz movement. After the Gulf War, I moved back to Israel with my new girlfriend, now wife, Irit, and lived in Tel-Aviv. I had some government granted rights as a new immigrant which included free tuition at the major universities, so I started a masters degree in art history, but after the first year I couldn't handle it any longer. All the passion for art that I experienced with Al was missing. I learned dates and titles of images, but the social context and great political significance were never mentioned. I wrote to Al to share my discomfort and his response was so inspiring, I wish I could find the letter to quote him. What I understood was that if I am being taught art by methods that canonize the art and the artist in a way that commodifies the artwork and legitimizes the capitalist co-option of the work, then I am not engaging in art history for art's sake. This was what I needed to hear as I decided to leave the program. It also freed me to appreciate art in the way that I most enjoyed it, the way that Al did.
Two years after moving to Israel, Irit and I decided to get married. We had to do it outside of Israel because the Jewish state would only allow us to marry Orthodox, and we were not about to be bullied when it came to making our sacred vows. Instead, we planned three weddings, one in LA where we met, one in Chicago where I grew up, and one in Tel-Aviv where we had an “illegitimate” Reform wedding that became part of the campaign for religious freedom in Israel. Al was at the LA wedding, but told me how proud he was about the Tel-Aviv one. He was also the first to toast us at the conclusion of the ceremony. His wish for us was lots of love and a large family of little Steiner's who could agitate like their father. Al, three kids and fifteen years of marriage later, you got your wish, and much of our children's activism and appreciation of art will always be traced back to you.
Thank you my friend. I will miss you.
Al Boime, my art history professor and friend, always had a very deep meaning behind everything he did. The joke with shaking hands was merely a joke for many, but for Al it was his way of saying that this is what pedagogy should look like. He couldn't teach without opening the door for friendship and interpersonal discourse, whether he was teaching a seminar or a freshman level intro class, he had to make it human. I entered that door and never left, which is why the news of his death is so painful.
Here's something Al said about his teaching which really illustrates the humility behind this great figure. "By examining the political forces that motivated the art makers and finders, and revealing the hidden mainsprings in visual production, I truly believed that I was contributing to the emancipation of thought, at least in one small corner of the minds of my students and readers. Thus art history became my raison d'être, a vehicle for enhancing the lives of my fellow citizens, while at the same time bringing about a nanno-change toward social justice in society."
A nanno-change? Al, you rocked my world.
I was a student at UCLA while Jesse Helms and his ilk were attacking the National Endowment for the Arts for funding a retrospective of images by Robert Mapplethorpe, and, inspired by Al, I couldn't sit still. I had been studying video art and became very interested in activist filmmaking. Al was off to do research in Washington, D.C. and I followed him there to do some research of my own. From LA, I set up interviews with various congress people and the infamous Senator Helms, but when I got to the Helms office, I was greeted with a handshake and sent off to a noisy cafeteria with two aids who pulled out facsimiles of the Mapplethorpe photographs from a brown paper bag and asked me if I considered this art. “It was kind of like being called a fag on the school yard,” I told Al after the experience. I had traveled all the way from LA on my student budget and didn't get the main interview I had come for. Al had a great idea. He told me about the political pseudo-events that the French artist Delacroix used to do and said he had confidence in me that I could manufacture something much better than a Helms interview. To his credit, I went outside of Congress, put my video camera on a tripod and stood in the frame narrating the story of what happened to me as I took off my clothes. I explained how the image I am creating maybe homoerotic to some viewers, and that I really didn't care as long as it remained erotic to my girlfriend back home. Then I quickly got dressed and ran back to Al's office where I shared with my teacher the story of my conquest. Later that school year, when there was a serious dispute over racism in the university school body elections, around the time of my hero, Abbie Hoffman's suicide, I ran a pig for president of UCLA with huge 8 foot by 4 foot posters of a pig that said, “Eat a fig, do a jig, wear a wig, vote for a pig! Pigasus for President.” Al was elated.
After graduation, in the months leading up to the first Gulf War, I started having mini-salons in my apartment to give exposure to bands and artists I liked and to discuss the big issues of the day. I remember Al coming for a Chanukah salon where we discussed our internal conflict between opposing a military solution and being concerned with the welfare of Israel. Al and I connected over the fact that I was brought up in a socialist Zionist youth movement, and we often talked about the virtues of the kibbutz movement. After the Gulf War, I moved back to Israel with my new girlfriend, now wife, Irit, and lived in Tel-Aviv. I had some government granted rights as a new immigrant which included free tuition at the major universities, so I started a masters degree in art history, but after the first year I couldn't handle it any longer. All the passion for art that I experienced with Al was missing. I learned dates and titles of images, but the social context and great political significance were never mentioned. I wrote to Al to share my discomfort and his response was so inspiring, I wish I could find the letter to quote him. What I understood was that if I am being taught art by methods that canonize the art and the artist in a way that commodifies the artwork and legitimizes the capitalist co-option of the work, then I am not engaging in art history for art's sake. This was what I needed to hear as I decided to leave the program. It also freed me to appreciate art in the way that I most enjoyed it, the way that Al did.
Two years after moving to Israel, Irit and I decided to get married. We had to do it outside of Israel because the Jewish state would only allow us to marry Orthodox, and we were not about to be bullied when it came to making our sacred vows. Instead, we planned three weddings, one in LA where we met, one in Chicago where I grew up, and one in Tel-Aviv where we had an “illegitimate” Reform wedding that became part of the campaign for religious freedom in Israel. Al was at the LA wedding, but told me how proud he was about the Tel-Aviv one. He was also the first to toast us at the conclusion of the ceremony. His wish for us was lots of love and a large family of little Steiner's who could agitate like their father. Al, three kids and fifteen years of marriage later, you got your wish, and much of our children's activism and appreciation of art will always be traced back to you.
Thank you my friend. I will miss you.
Saturday, October 18, 2008
In the Sukkah after a Day of Canvassing for Obama
After a day in Gary, Indiana (no it didn't smell like when you pass through on the expressway), working for Barack Obama, which for me means working for the benefit of my country, I rushed home to be a member of a minyan at my neighbor/friend's house. We sat until the last minute we could and still pray the mincha (afternoon) service because we didn't have a group of ten Jewish men. It was painful because we had adult, dedicated, believing women in the room, and I was more valuable to them because of my penis and its missing foreskin. How absurd and disrespectful. I understand that they believe that women are not bound to mitzvot like men, thus they don't have to make time for every prayer service, but if they're in the room and willing, how could an agnostic like me be more valuable than one of the women of valor in their midst?
Also, their were jokes about bringing the Muslim neighbor which were not met be rebuke (myself included). And there was the standard comments about Obama after people noticed my buttons. "He's gonna ruin this country." "He's bad for Israel." "He's a Muslim."
All my life, I have been diligent about doing the right thing, especially socially. I am weird this way. I really feel compelled to do good by my nation, the poor, my neighbors...And I take it seriously. So when I am in these situations where I see people take more care about following the specific nuances of a ritual, and don't care about the message it sends to women, about the Muslim neighbor being denigrated, or the member of the community who doesn't share the opinions of the majority (or at least the vocal minority), I cannot help but ask myself if the idea my rabbi frequently espouses, that the system of mitzvot is designed to make us better people, is really unsuccessful or designed for other purposes, like control. With all due respect to my rabbi, sometimes I look at my community and think that the designer(s) of halacha were just trying to control the masses and gather power for themselves.
Also, their were jokes about bringing the Muslim neighbor which were not met be rebuke (myself included). And there was the standard comments about Obama after people noticed my buttons. "He's gonna ruin this country." "He's bad for Israel." "He's a Muslim."
All my life, I have been diligent about doing the right thing, especially socially. I am weird this way. I really feel compelled to do good by my nation, the poor, my neighbors...And I take it seriously. So when I am in these situations where I see people take more care about following the specific nuances of a ritual, and don't care about the message it sends to women, about the Muslim neighbor being denigrated, or the member of the community who doesn't share the opinions of the majority (or at least the vocal minority), I cannot help but ask myself if the idea my rabbi frequently espouses, that the system of mitzvot is designed to make us better people, is really unsuccessful or designed for other purposes, like control. With all due respect to my rabbi, sometimes I look at my community and think that the designer(s) of halacha were just trying to control the masses and gather power for themselves.
Friday, October 17, 2008
One step for Hebrew Seminar for the Deaf; another for Judaism
Yesterday the Chicago Board of Rabbis voted to accept rabbis ordained at the Hebrew Seminary for the Deaf as members of the CBR. This is a big step forward for my seminary and for Judaism.
Over the last decade, several new rabbinic programs have started up; one in Boston at the Hebrew College, The Academy for Jewish Religion in New York City and now in Los Angeles, and the Hebrew Seminary for the Deaf. There may be others that I am unaware of.
All of these schools are not affiliated with the "official" streams; Reform, Reconstructionist, Conservative or Orthodox. "Official" is a difficult term and I don't want to break it apart right here. What I want to do is point out that this change is part of a pluralization of Judaism that has always existed but at times has been hidden and hushed to create the impression of a monolithic religion. The irony of this is that the orthodox community, which in many ways has been most challenged by the elasticity of Jewish engagement with our religion, is probably the most pluralistic in their numerous divisions and schools.
Anyway, I am very grateful for the bold step of the Chicago Board of Rabbis, and I look forward to my ordination and entrance into this important organization in my Chicago community.
Over the last decade, several new rabbinic programs have started up; one in Boston at the Hebrew College, The Academy for Jewish Religion in New York City and now in Los Angeles, and the Hebrew Seminary for the Deaf. There may be others that I am unaware of.
All of these schools are not affiliated with the "official" streams; Reform, Reconstructionist, Conservative or Orthodox. "Official" is a difficult term and I don't want to break it apart right here. What I want to do is point out that this change is part of a pluralization of Judaism that has always existed but at times has been hidden and hushed to create the impression of a monolithic religion. The irony of this is that the orthodox community, which in many ways has been most challenged by the elasticity of Jewish engagement with our religion, is probably the most pluralistic in their numerous divisions and schools.
Anyway, I am very grateful for the bold step of the Chicago Board of Rabbis, and I look forward to my ordination and entrance into this important organization in my Chicago community.
Thursday, October 16, 2008
Kosher with Justice
(I wrote this before the Days of Awe and forgot to post it. It is still relevant and needs to be acted upon.)
Agriprocessors Inc. is the nation’s largest kosher meat packer and has just been presented with over 9000 criminal charges for child labor in addition to charges relating to the employment of illegal immigrants and use of hazardous chemicals. What do we do with this information as Jews?
In the New York Times I read that Rabbi Menachem Genack, in charge of kosher supervision for the Orthodox Union, said he would consider suspending supervision of kosher production at Agriprocessors. “Because of the new charges in the state of Iowa, we believe it is in the best interest of the kosher consuming public to have new management with a new C.E.O. that will give people a new sense of confidence that all laws and regulations are being completely complied with.” Agriprocessors, the largest producer of kosher meat, with annual kosher sales estimated at $80 million, must listen to the Orthodox Union.
On May 12th, 389 illegal immigrant workers were detained at Agriprocessors plant in Postville, Iowa, in a raid by the Immigration and Naturalization Services. This came long after PETA, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals exposed unethical treatment and slaughter of cattle at the plant. What do we individuals do with this information as consumers of Agriprocessors meat?
In addition to reading about Agriprocessors in the New York Times, I was proud to hear my rabbi, Allan Kensky, speak about these abuses from his pulpit just after PETA released a video on YouTube exposing the situation in Postville, long before the Orthodox Union responded. I learned from my rabbi that the Conservative Movement was creating a new kosher designation call Heksher Tsedek, a seal of kashrut that raised the bar to include justice in the all aspects of kashrut. No longer can kosher meat be prepared through means that do not conform to Jewish values. Now kashrut will be a value, not just a method of preparing or a prohibition on certain types of foods.
Torah teaches us the importance of ethical business practice in Leviticus when we read, “You shall not falsify measures of length, weight or capacity. You shall have an honest balance, honest weights, an honest ephah, and an honest hin.” (Lev. 19:35)
Torah also teaches us about the ethical treatment of those who work for us. “The wages of a laborer shall not remain with [us] until morning (Lev. 19:13) and “[We] shall not abuse a needy and destitute laborer, whether a fellow countryman or a stranger…[We] must pay him his wages on the same day…for he is needy and sets his life on it, (Deut. 24:14-15)”
The actions the Conservative Movement are something I am proud of for one other reason. In Judaism we are taught to rebuke our fellow. "You shall surely rebuke your neighbor, but not do a sin in the process." (Leviticus 19:17) But it also qualifies the way we rebuke. From his pulpit, Rabbi Kensky told our congregation that he forbids purchasing Agriprocessors brands (Aaron’s Best and Rubashkin’s, among others) for the congregation. He also strongly encouraged us to boycott these brands. This was his form of thoughtful rebuke within the community. It is especially beautiful in light of the fact that Rabbi Kensky is a vegetarian and need not be bothered by this fiasco on a personal consumption level.
The Jewish Council on Urban Affairs in Chicago had a different approach to rebuke. They organized two bus loads of Chicagoans to travel to Postville and take action. These activists both demonstrated against Agriprocessors and in support of the immigrant families. JCUA’s position took rebuke to the general public while the Conservative Movement and my rabbi kept rebuke within the community. I am certain that both sides considered the qualification of rebuke laid out in Torah, “not [to]do a sin in the process." Both came up with very different answers, which is one of the great things about Judaism.
In speaking with Rabbi Taylor, the rabbi I work with at Congregation Solel, we considered having our congregants sign petitions to local grocers asking them to stop selling Agriprocessor’s brands in their stores. It is hard to put political pressure on markets when you are not the consumers of their goods. Reform Jews do not see kashrut as a binding mitsva for them. They see Jewish law as binding if it is about ethical behavior. I have a problem with this. On the one hand, I am for constantly reviewing and renewing the systems that guide my life and my Judaism. On the other hand, ethics cannot be the benchmark of Jewish behavior. What makes us unique is not our values, but how we get their. Without Yiddishkeit and a discussion about God, we would just be a humanistic community. There is room for atheism and agnosticism in the Jewish discourse, but there is no Judaism without Shabbat, Hebrew, Torah and community. Of course, this is a tangent to the discussion of Agriprocessors.
The other concern about the conversation with Rabbi Taylor is the second half of the rebuke command. Are we doing good by hurting Agriprocessors? When I was a college student in the 1980’s we demanded divestment from our universities as a way of forcing South Africa to end the terrible apartheid system. The reason we allowed ourselves to work for divestment is that we understood that the oppressed people in South Africa wanted us to use this tactic. I don’t know whether a poor Guatemalan immigrant family wants us to hurt the employer who, even while abusing them, pays their wages and puts food on their table. This is a terribly complicated question. How do we avoid sin in the process of rebuke?
A more complicated question is why do we allow the system to get to this before we take action? Why do we find ourselves reacting to the world instead of leading to the promised land of our liking? On one level, Rabbi Kensky is very right to respond to a Jewish problem strictly within our community. On another level, JCUA is right to make this a national issue and protest in public because we live among different people. And on still another level, Rabbi Taylor’s and my plan to lead a boycott of the Agriprocessors brands in our community is a great way to take action that will both affect change and cause an internal discussion among Jews. But I think the most important issue here is the one not addressed. We live in a country that includes and depends on human beings who live outside of the law, are not protected by it and are abused because of their illegal status. This is not the kind of country I want to live it.
While I have responded to the situation in Postville with a personal boycott of Agriprocessor’s brands, I have not done enough to address the situation of those abused by my country’s system. In this month of Elul, a time for reconciliation between people, I feel as if my indifference to the plight of undocumented people is a place where I deserve rebuke, and I vow to do more to understand these issues, formulate my own vision and take action.
Agriprocessors Inc. is the nation’s largest kosher meat packer and has just been presented with over 9000 criminal charges for child labor in addition to charges relating to the employment of illegal immigrants and use of hazardous chemicals. What do we do with this information as Jews?
In the New York Times I read that Rabbi Menachem Genack, in charge of kosher supervision for the Orthodox Union, said he would consider suspending supervision of kosher production at Agriprocessors. “Because of the new charges in the state of Iowa, we believe it is in the best interest of the kosher consuming public to have new management with a new C.E.O. that will give people a new sense of confidence that all laws and regulations are being completely complied with.” Agriprocessors, the largest producer of kosher meat, with annual kosher sales estimated at $80 million, must listen to the Orthodox Union.
On May 12th, 389 illegal immigrant workers were detained at Agriprocessors plant in Postville, Iowa, in a raid by the Immigration and Naturalization Services. This came long after PETA, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals exposed unethical treatment and slaughter of cattle at the plant. What do we individuals do with this information as consumers of Agriprocessors meat?
In addition to reading about Agriprocessors in the New York Times, I was proud to hear my rabbi, Allan Kensky, speak about these abuses from his pulpit just after PETA released a video on YouTube exposing the situation in Postville, long before the Orthodox Union responded. I learned from my rabbi that the Conservative Movement was creating a new kosher designation call Heksher Tsedek, a seal of kashrut that raised the bar to include justice in the all aspects of kashrut. No longer can kosher meat be prepared through means that do not conform to Jewish values. Now kashrut will be a value, not just a method of preparing or a prohibition on certain types of foods.
Torah teaches us the importance of ethical business practice in Leviticus when we read, “You shall not falsify measures of length, weight or capacity. You shall have an honest balance, honest weights, an honest ephah, and an honest hin.” (Lev. 19:35)
Torah also teaches us about the ethical treatment of those who work for us. “The wages of a laborer shall not remain with [us] until morning (Lev. 19:13) and “[We] shall not abuse a needy and destitute laborer, whether a fellow countryman or a stranger…[We] must pay him his wages on the same day…for he is needy and sets his life on it, (Deut. 24:14-15)”
The actions the Conservative Movement are something I am proud of for one other reason. In Judaism we are taught to rebuke our fellow. "You shall surely rebuke your neighbor, but not do a sin in the process." (Leviticus 19:17) But it also qualifies the way we rebuke. From his pulpit, Rabbi Kensky told our congregation that he forbids purchasing Agriprocessors brands (Aaron’s Best and Rubashkin’s, among others) for the congregation. He also strongly encouraged us to boycott these brands. This was his form of thoughtful rebuke within the community. It is especially beautiful in light of the fact that Rabbi Kensky is a vegetarian and need not be bothered by this fiasco on a personal consumption level.
The Jewish Council on Urban Affairs in Chicago had a different approach to rebuke. They organized two bus loads of Chicagoans to travel to Postville and take action. These activists both demonstrated against Agriprocessors and in support of the immigrant families. JCUA’s position took rebuke to the general public while the Conservative Movement and my rabbi kept rebuke within the community. I am certain that both sides considered the qualification of rebuke laid out in Torah, “not [to]do a sin in the process." Both came up with very different answers, which is one of the great things about Judaism.
In speaking with Rabbi Taylor, the rabbi I work with at Congregation Solel, we considered having our congregants sign petitions to local grocers asking them to stop selling Agriprocessor’s brands in their stores. It is hard to put political pressure on markets when you are not the consumers of their goods. Reform Jews do not see kashrut as a binding mitsva for them. They see Jewish law as binding if it is about ethical behavior. I have a problem with this. On the one hand, I am for constantly reviewing and renewing the systems that guide my life and my Judaism. On the other hand, ethics cannot be the benchmark of Jewish behavior. What makes us unique is not our values, but how we get their. Without Yiddishkeit and a discussion about God, we would just be a humanistic community. There is room for atheism and agnosticism in the Jewish discourse, but there is no Judaism without Shabbat, Hebrew, Torah and community. Of course, this is a tangent to the discussion of Agriprocessors.
The other concern about the conversation with Rabbi Taylor is the second half of the rebuke command. Are we doing good by hurting Agriprocessors? When I was a college student in the 1980’s we demanded divestment from our universities as a way of forcing South Africa to end the terrible apartheid system. The reason we allowed ourselves to work for divestment is that we understood that the oppressed people in South Africa wanted us to use this tactic. I don’t know whether a poor Guatemalan immigrant family wants us to hurt the employer who, even while abusing them, pays their wages and puts food on their table. This is a terribly complicated question. How do we avoid sin in the process of rebuke?
A more complicated question is why do we allow the system to get to this before we take action? Why do we find ourselves reacting to the world instead of leading to the promised land of our liking? On one level, Rabbi Kensky is very right to respond to a Jewish problem strictly within our community. On another level, JCUA is right to make this a national issue and protest in public because we live among different people. And on still another level, Rabbi Taylor’s and my plan to lead a boycott of the Agriprocessors brands in our community is a great way to take action that will both affect change and cause an internal discussion among Jews. But I think the most important issue here is the one not addressed. We live in a country that includes and depends on human beings who live outside of the law, are not protected by it and are abused because of their illegal status. This is not the kind of country I want to live it.
While I have responded to the situation in Postville with a personal boycott of Agriprocessor’s brands, I have not done enough to address the situation of those abused by my country’s system. In this month of Elul, a time for reconciliation between people, I feel as if my indifference to the plight of undocumented people is a place where I deserve rebuke, and I vow to do more to understand these issues, formulate my own vision and take action.
Monday, October 13, 2008
A Jewish Napoleon Complex
Chabad Chassidism's founder, Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi, The Rebbe, (1745-1812) a significant Jewish opponent to Napoleon, once wrote to Rabbi Moshe Meislish of Vilna about the possibility of a Napoleonic conquest of Europe.
If Bonaparte will be victorious, Jewish wealth will increase and prestige of the Jewish people will be raised; but their hearts will disintegrate and be distanced from their Father in Heaven. But if [Russia Czar] A[lexandar] will be victorious, although Israel's poverty will increase and their prestige will be lowered, their hearts will be joined, bound and unified with their Father in Heaven. (Igrot Kodesh Admur HaZaken, letter # 64)
I wonder if Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi were to visit us today, would he feel like a prophet? How would he feel about the modern State of Israel? What would he say about the the form of Judaism he spawned?
On a very personal level, I think he was prophetic, but I'm not sure I love his choice of words. Has the Jewish heart disintegrated? Have we distanced ourselves from our “Father in Heaven”? I am also uncomfortable with his assertion that poverty and lowered prestige are essential for a divine connection. But sometimes I look around me and I think that he really understood historical trends.
Israel, for example, is collectively wealthier than it has ever been, although the wealth is concentrated in very few hands. Yet, Israel, overall, is very narcissistic, lacking empathy for its Palestinian neighbors, pre-occupied with itself and “Megalomaniacal,” as Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said about its position in the world, particularly with regard to Iran. What would Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi say about the modern Jewish state?
America, on the other hand, the home of the most free Jewish community in history, is also the home of the greatest Jewish assimilation ever. Have our Jewish hearts disintegrated and have we distanced ourselves from our Heavenly Father? I would have to disagree with this assertion, although I am under no illusions that something about our freedom has changed us.
In Rabbi Shlomo Schwartz' Grateful Deadesque, chassidic high holiday services on Pico Boulevard in Los Angeles (according to my friend DS Racer) they dance, mockingly, right before they blow the shofar at the end of Neilah, on Yom Kippur, as they sing "Napoleon's Victory March." This is their way of cheering on the Czar over the emperor in fantasies of maintaining their poverty and persecution in order to sustain their connection to God. This is hard for me to understand.
According to DS Racer, “the telephone poles all over Pico/Robertson have posters hung on them, advertising chicken-swingers who can come to your home and perform these Kapparos rituals... BTW, Kapparos is on page 1 of the Chabad Yom Kippur machzor, and actually tells people to use chickens, and not some symbolic substitute.”
Kapparot (the modern Hebrew letter Taf at the end should sound like an English letter T) is a form of cruelty to animals. It is an old tradition that needs to be reevaluated in our times. Doing so is not indicative of a disintegrating heart or a distancing of ourselves from God. Jewish traditions have always been changed and reformed. Using a rubber chicken or dropping the ritual altogether is not blasphemy. It is illustrative of why God gave us minds of our own and free will, to make choices, and hopefully righteous ones.
Still, I am not totally dissing Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi. While Chabad has hardened Judaism into a primitive set of rules and regulations, I think other streams of our tradition have gone to far in different directions. Chaim Nachman Bialik wrote a beautiful essay about the tension between Halacha and Aggadah. I would quote it, but I am not a good translator and it is written in Hebrew. Halacha, our path, is a set of codes that are supposed to be followed by virtue of the fact that they are God's legal system. They don't need to make sense to us. We just need to be diligent and disciplined. Aggadah is the rich lore and legend that we were given and which is not as easily understood.
Between Halacha and Aggadah the tension is between strict laws that have been interpreted many ways and a library of stories which are also their to be interpreted. An Orthodox rabbi I sometimes study with recently taught me that the difference between the streams is the rules by which we do our interpretation. Of course, he added that his interpretation (Orthodox) is the correct method.
I repeatedly say that the beauty of the Talmud is the machloket, the debate which is incomplete and waiting for us to engage with. I don't think we need to be poor and oppressed to engage, but Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi is right that certain conditions need to be in place in order for the debate to be Jewish, otherwise our hearts do turn from Judaism, not exactly disintegrate as he puts it.
For the past year plus, I have worked in the Reform movement as a director of education, and I seriously struggle with the idea that the Halacha can be segmented into ethical and other paths. The Reform movement does not see itself bound to Halacha as the Conservative and Orthodox do. They adhere to what they consider ethical halacha and their Judaism becomes very centered on social justice and God.
In Conservative Judaism, they see themselves as a Halachik movement, but they interpret the Halacha in a way that fits the times yet still adheres to the Rabbinic tradition of loyalty to Torah and machloket (debate). In some ways, this works best for me because it respects the idea that Judaism is a discipline that is intended to make us better people. Within “better people” there is the concern for social justice, but there is a solid position regarding the relativism of only following ethical Halacha. Also, the debate about the interpretation of Halacha and the system of disciple which makes us better people is a debate that doesn't have to include God. The Rabbis said that Torah was at the center. I have my own interpretation of the phrase found in the Sayings of our Fathers, “The world rests on three pillars; Torah, Avodah and Gmilut Chassadim.” Torah is clear. Gmilut Chassadim is understood as acts of loving kindness, and Avodah can be interpreted as either worship or work. I side with the latter. I don't need to make a decision about God in order to believe that our system of Halacha is intended to make us better people. I just need to believe that the machloket is still going on. This is what troubles me about Chabad.
Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi could have done a lot more to save Judaism by creating a movement that was open to debate as a reflection of our times then building a wall around the Torah made of poverty and persecution. If only he could have applied his prophetic vision to the need to adhere to our role as a holy people with a holy mission instead of getting tangled up in the minutiae of following a Halacha in strict detail. Who cares if the chicken you swing over your head is a really chicken or a rubber chicken? The one who should care (excluding the chicken's mother) is the person who is making this world better for us all through a system of rituals that keep us on the right path. If that takes a kaparot ritual, fine. So be it. But it also takes a modern interpretation of a ritual that is currently critical of this abusive practice against animals.
One of the beauties of our Machloket is that we debate over generations. Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi, I'd like you to know that I have trouble with some of your practices as I see them in my lifetime. Maybe they were right for you in your time, but we need to live in the reality of this world today, and this world is much more tolerant and the lot of many Jews is much more wealthy. Maybe if you can step outside of the wall you built around our Torah, we can start talking about our mission as Jews instead of hiding ourselves inside the world of victimization and poverty. Napoleon certainly was not a wonderful guy, but he spread religious freedom throughout Europe and gave us a chance to participate as full citizens in the way we shape the world we live in. Now, let's put our heads together and see how we can make the best of this new position of the Jew in the world. I think together we can do great things.
If Bonaparte will be victorious, Jewish wealth will increase and prestige of the Jewish people will be raised; but their hearts will disintegrate and be distanced from their Father in Heaven. But if [Russia Czar] A[lexandar] will be victorious, although Israel's poverty will increase and their prestige will be lowered, their hearts will be joined, bound and unified with their Father in Heaven. (Igrot Kodesh Admur HaZaken, letter # 64)
I wonder if Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi were to visit us today, would he feel like a prophet? How would he feel about the modern State of Israel? What would he say about the the form of Judaism he spawned?
On a very personal level, I think he was prophetic, but I'm not sure I love his choice of words. Has the Jewish heart disintegrated? Have we distanced ourselves from our “Father in Heaven”? I am also uncomfortable with his assertion that poverty and lowered prestige are essential for a divine connection. But sometimes I look around me and I think that he really understood historical trends.
Israel, for example, is collectively wealthier than it has ever been, although the wealth is concentrated in very few hands. Yet, Israel, overall, is very narcissistic, lacking empathy for its Palestinian neighbors, pre-occupied with itself and “Megalomaniacal,” as Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said about its position in the world, particularly with regard to Iran. What would Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi say about the modern Jewish state?
America, on the other hand, the home of the most free Jewish community in history, is also the home of the greatest Jewish assimilation ever. Have our Jewish hearts disintegrated and have we distanced ourselves from our Heavenly Father? I would have to disagree with this assertion, although I am under no illusions that something about our freedom has changed us.
In Rabbi Shlomo Schwartz' Grateful Deadesque, chassidic high holiday services on Pico Boulevard in Los Angeles (according to my friend DS Racer) they dance, mockingly, right before they blow the shofar at the end of Neilah, on Yom Kippur, as they sing "Napoleon's Victory March." This is their way of cheering on the Czar over the emperor in fantasies of maintaining their poverty and persecution in order to sustain their connection to God. This is hard for me to understand.
According to DS Racer, “the telephone poles all over Pico/Robertson have posters hung on them, advertising chicken-swingers who can come to your home and perform these Kapparos rituals... BTW, Kapparos is on page 1 of the Chabad Yom Kippur machzor, and actually tells people to use chickens, and not some symbolic substitute.”
Kapparot (the modern Hebrew letter Taf at the end should sound like an English letter T) is a form of cruelty to animals. It is an old tradition that needs to be reevaluated in our times. Doing so is not indicative of a disintegrating heart or a distancing of ourselves from God. Jewish traditions have always been changed and reformed. Using a rubber chicken or dropping the ritual altogether is not blasphemy. It is illustrative of why God gave us minds of our own and free will, to make choices, and hopefully righteous ones.
Still, I am not totally dissing Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi. While Chabad has hardened Judaism into a primitive set of rules and regulations, I think other streams of our tradition have gone to far in different directions. Chaim Nachman Bialik wrote a beautiful essay about the tension between Halacha and Aggadah. I would quote it, but I am not a good translator and it is written in Hebrew. Halacha, our path, is a set of codes that are supposed to be followed by virtue of the fact that they are God's legal system. They don't need to make sense to us. We just need to be diligent and disciplined. Aggadah is the rich lore and legend that we were given and which is not as easily understood.
Between Halacha and Aggadah the tension is between strict laws that have been interpreted many ways and a library of stories which are also their to be interpreted. An Orthodox rabbi I sometimes study with recently taught me that the difference between the streams is the rules by which we do our interpretation. Of course, he added that his interpretation (Orthodox) is the correct method.
I repeatedly say that the beauty of the Talmud is the machloket, the debate which is incomplete and waiting for us to engage with. I don't think we need to be poor and oppressed to engage, but Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi is right that certain conditions need to be in place in order for the debate to be Jewish, otherwise our hearts do turn from Judaism, not exactly disintegrate as he puts it.
For the past year plus, I have worked in the Reform movement as a director of education, and I seriously struggle with the idea that the Halacha can be segmented into ethical and other paths. The Reform movement does not see itself bound to Halacha as the Conservative and Orthodox do. They adhere to what they consider ethical halacha and their Judaism becomes very centered on social justice and God.
In Conservative Judaism, they see themselves as a Halachik movement, but they interpret the Halacha in a way that fits the times yet still adheres to the Rabbinic tradition of loyalty to Torah and machloket (debate). In some ways, this works best for me because it respects the idea that Judaism is a discipline that is intended to make us better people. Within “better people” there is the concern for social justice, but there is a solid position regarding the relativism of only following ethical Halacha. Also, the debate about the interpretation of Halacha and the system of disciple which makes us better people is a debate that doesn't have to include God. The Rabbis said that Torah was at the center. I have my own interpretation of the phrase found in the Sayings of our Fathers, “The world rests on three pillars; Torah, Avodah and Gmilut Chassadim.” Torah is clear. Gmilut Chassadim is understood as acts of loving kindness, and Avodah can be interpreted as either worship or work. I side with the latter. I don't need to make a decision about God in order to believe that our system of Halacha is intended to make us better people. I just need to believe that the machloket is still going on. This is what troubles me about Chabad.
Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi could have done a lot more to save Judaism by creating a movement that was open to debate as a reflection of our times then building a wall around the Torah made of poverty and persecution. If only he could have applied his prophetic vision to the need to adhere to our role as a holy people with a holy mission instead of getting tangled up in the minutiae of following a Halacha in strict detail. Who cares if the chicken you swing over your head is a really chicken or a rubber chicken? The one who should care (excluding the chicken's mother) is the person who is making this world better for us all through a system of rituals that keep us on the right path. If that takes a kaparot ritual, fine. So be it. But it also takes a modern interpretation of a ritual that is currently critical of this abusive practice against animals.
One of the beauties of our Machloket is that we debate over generations. Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi, I'd like you to know that I have trouble with some of your practices as I see them in my lifetime. Maybe they were right for you in your time, but we need to live in the reality of this world today, and this world is much more tolerant and the lot of many Jews is much more wealthy. Maybe if you can step outside of the wall you built around our Torah, we can start talking about our mission as Jews instead of hiding ourselves inside the world of victimization and poverty. Napoleon certainly was not a wonderful guy, but he spread religious freedom throughout Europe and gave us a chance to participate as full citizens in the way we shape the world we live in. Now, let's put our heads together and see how we can make the best of this new position of the Jew in the world. I think together we can do great things.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Subscribe
Posts
All Comments