The farce of prohibiting music on the omer

The omer is a tough time for me because music is so important to me. To go 40 days without music and then not long after another 3 weeks is difficult, especially during the spring and summer when there are so many more opportunities to hear live music.

I also never understood how a capella music is acceptable. If the omer is a mourning period, how does a capella music change anything? Musical instruments don't inherently promote joy and a capella music is in fact often joyous (and terribly kitschy in the modern Ashkenazi world).

I looked up the source of this minhag and was surprised at the result. The ban against music is not found anywhere in the Mishnah, Gemara, or even the Shulchan Aruch. The earliest source is found in a 17th century commentary on the Shulchan Aruch known as the Magen Avraham who argues that celebrational dancing is forbidden. In order to prevent people from dancing in a celebratory way, such as at a wedding or a bar mitzvah, he included that any type of music that brings people to get up and dance is also impermissible. But the logic would follow that music that doesn't encourage shaking your booty, but rather is downtempo, reflective, and most importantly spiritually exalting, is permitted (and maybe even encouraged since it evokes an atmosphere of mourning). Thus, the custom of not listening to music at all is only a chumra (an extra stringency) and the custom of only listening to a capella music is simply misguided.

This leads me to argue that the later rabbis who invented this chumra of only listening to a capella music didn't understand music at all and probably didn't really listen to it themselves. While a capella music can certainly be spiritually exalting (just ask a Catholic - in fact the term itself is Italian for "in the style of the church) it isn't necessarily, and if you have ever heard some of the "omer friendly" music they are trying to sell in music stores here in Jerusalem, you might just lean over and wretch - an act that I would consider not spiritually exalting. They aren't just bad, they also are upbeat and dancy - just because there are no instruments doesn't mean a song with a good rhythm won't encourage you to get up and dance.

It means that unfortunately, I will not be listening to any funk, disco, or electro for the next 40 days, but uplifting genres like classical, post-rock, ambient, maybe some Bon Iver, these are genres I feel comfortable listening to. I'm still deciding which category jazz falls into - I would love to hear some opinions on the matter.

Thanks so much to Rabbi Chaim Brovender at the WebYeshiva for bringing these sources to my attention: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKjYVdH-kAM

Post-Modern Orthodoxy: Who's With Me!?

I haven't been writing so much in this blog because I'm starting to see personal blogging as narcissistic and masturbatory. Who really cares what my opinion is on Israeli politics or the state of Judaism? Lately I found good use for this blog: it worked somewhat as a travel blog to record my experiences, though I had rare occasions with the internet, and it's also a good place to post my philosophical cartoons (more to come!). But I figure, I can also use this space to ramble about my thoughts and dreams so that I can have it written out and refer to it later. If someone finds it and is interested, great for them, but as of now it is mostly for me.

That being said, whoever is reading this is about to partake on a journey into my utopian vision of Judaism, a new sect which I am creating known as Post-Modern Orthodoxy!
In its most basic pshat, its just a silly play on words which means that all laws are subjective depending on who is reading into them, just as post-modern art is based in the personal interpretation of the viewer rather than the message that the artist is trying to convey.

But on a deeper level, I have many issues with the hierarchical and sectarian nature of modern Judaism which I have been trying to grapple with. I used to call myself Orthodox because of the standards that I tried to uphold, but once I started reading too many existentialist thinkers, I had problems seeing everything as objectively as an Orthodox Jew is meant to. During my encounters with progressive pluralist synagogues that challenged the standard norms of where and how each sect is supposed to pray such as Shira Hadasha, the Mission Minyan, and the Open Orthodoxy Movement, I started to think about what "Orthodoxy" meant. I decided that there are many assumptions and associations that people make about Orthodox people that I did not fit into, and I didn't like how people were categorized based on their system of belief. These progressive minyanim challenge the boundaries between sects and break down the differences between them. Why does it matter to conform to the ideology of a specific group-thinking that is mostly outdated anyways? No Conservative Jew actually believes in the power of the Rabbinic Assembly to contemporize Halachah, they do it themselves, and no Reform Jew studies enough text to actually be able to actually decide what is relevant and what is not. Even Orthodox Jews are no long reacting to liberal Judaism (at least those who are self-confident about their lifestyle or who aren't campaigning against the "Holocaust of Intermarriage").

More important than segmented affiliationism, in this day and age, is finding a spirituality that is right for you. Rather than looking to the past to figure out where one nicely fits into the puzzle, one must look to their peers in the present and decide how their community should work for them. If there are women who want to be counted in the minyan, the community should figure out how to include them. And if there are men who feel uncomfortable hearing women sing, they should also be accounted for. There are no unsurmountable Halachic standards in Post-Modern Orthodoxy, because people should not be forced to conform to a system they don't believe in. On the other hand, PMO does not throw out tradition like other denominations do. Rather than working with nothing and adding on what they feel comfortable with, as Reform Jews do, PMO Jews begin with everything and work as a community to decide what and how they should alter. That is the "Orthodox" part of PMO. This involves a lot of study with the help of every member of the community, in the same way that an Orthodox community spends a lot of time in the Beit Midrash, thus making intensive study an important part of Jewish life as it has for thousands of years. Ideally, this will result in a range of religious practice that includes an egalitarian halachic community such as Shira Hadasha as well as a more liberal pluralistic community that caters to its halachic members such as the Mission Minyan. These communities will be pluralistic, all-inclusive, and non-judgemental.

Sure, they will involve a lot of internal debate, but isn't that what Judaism is all about?

Don't Forget Teshuva

Yesterday, Rabbi Avi Finegold wrote a very nice editorial in The Jew and the Carrot about Agriprocessors that I am starting to agree with.
I was very fiery about this issue after reading allegation after allegation on how terrible that place is. It was their corrupt slaughtering practices that led me to become a vegetarian. I am still very concerned about what is going on behind the doors at Agriprocessors (and all kosher slaughterhouses for that matter) and I am sad that I couldn't attend the interfaith protest there with Rabbi Morris Allan, but after speaking to my Chabad rabbi about the situation I have started to think about it in a different way.
He has a very close relationship with the Rubashkins because Madison is not so far away from Postville, so he drives down there occasionally to get meat and he has been squarely defending them the whole time. Now I think it is a little naive to think that they are completely free of blame, I think there is A LOT of blame to be said for their labor issues, but he reminded me that it is important to differentiate between allegations and convictions.
Until yesterday, the court hadn't ruled anything and all we had to believe was the word of the workers against the word of the management. Now when it comes to huge companies like this that have a history of snaking their way around the law, I think it makes more sense to take the workers complaints more seriously than the management's defense, but (as my rabbi reminded me) both the American legal system and the mishnaic legal system work on the assumption of innocent before proven guilty. At the same time, I could never put all my faith in the American legal system because I know how corrupt it can get - criminals go free and innocent people suffer.
Fortunately, yesterday the courts filed the first criminal charges against Agriprocessors, and I'm sure there are much more to come but, as Rabbi Avi Finegold suggests, especially in the month of Elul, we can't deny them the possibility of teshuva. Apparently, they have already begun.
In response to Governer Chet Culver's denunciation of the plant's labor practices, Agri released a statement explaining how they've helped out Postville and how they're improving the conditions at the plant. Additionally, immediately after the child labor charged were filed against Agri, the OU threatened to remove its hekhsher and almost immediately Agri has made statements about changing for fear of losing the OU. The Jewish Star reports that the OU is even trying to unionize Agri, which would be a big step in the right direction.
So, without trying to sound like an apostate of social justice, we should open our hearts to Agriprocessors. We should continue to criticize them, expect future criminal charges, and take their apologies with a grain of salt (since they didn't lead to much teshuva in the past), but we shouldn't turn a cold shoulder. Ahavat Yisrael even includes corrupt meat murderers and we have to hope that they will change for the better.

J Street Poll Proves Orthodox Jews Are Mostly Idiots

J Street just came out with a really interesting and thorough poll of American Jewish voting patterns and their thoughts on the upcoming elections. Most of the survey was taken to show that Jews who support a peaceful solution in the Middle East and a two state solution in Israel and Palestine are in the majority, something that was brought up multiple times during the Brit Tzedek conference that I attended (you can see me in the video/conference report a bunch of times). This is a point that is very important to pro-Israel pro-peace groups like J Street and Brit Tzedek because by showing that they are the majority in Jewish political discourse, they have better leverage in trying to a build a movement among the national Jewish community.
Some interesting findings:

• 90% of American Jews are dissatisfied with the Bush administration as opposed to 76% nationally.
• 61% of American Jews believe Bush's Middle East policy has made Israel less secure.
• 81% trust that Israel would not agree to a peace deal that endangers its security and support any agreement Israel makers with its Arab neighbors.
• Compared with previous elections, the Jewish vote for Obama as the democratic nominee is the lowest it's been in a long time. According to the poll, 58% said they were definitely voting for Obama, in contrast to approximately 80% for Gore and Clinton and 76% for Kerry.
• 51% have a negative impression of Rev. John Hagee and CUFI while only 19% wouldn't mind burning in Christian hell while all the Evangelicals float up to heaven during the Rapture as long as they can build their settlements in the West Bank had a positive impression.
• And my favorite statistic - presidential vote by religious denomination: Reform is 70% Obama, Conservative is 56% Obama, Unaffiliated/other is 67% Obama, and Orthodox is 77% McCain.

GRRRR!! Why is Orthodoxy so overwhelmingly conservative?! Where does it say in the halacha that you have to be trigger happy and hate Arabs?
It is really difficult trying to be observant but always running into this polarization: You are either unorthodox and liberal or you are observant and right-wing, with few exceptions. I don't understand why it has to be this way. Tikkun and the NSP are supposed to be the exception, the "spiritual left". But that's exactly what they are - spiritual. There are no Orthodox Jews in the NSP (and I wouldn't blame them. It's tough to take your observance seriously when everyone else is singing Od Yavo Shalom Aleinu as a spiritual mantra, shaking a tambourine, and reading Kabbalah self-help books). I pray that one day I'll find a community to live in where I can be strengthened by both their faith in Torah (albeit a critical one) and activity in liberal politics.



By the way, I am thinking about changing the name of my blog to Bein Hashmashot. Jerusalén is just my nom de guerre in capoeira, it doesn't really have anything to do with my blog except for being the Portuguese pronunciation of Jerusalem (I got that name because, of cooas, I'm the token religious Jew in the class). If I do make the change, I'll explain the significance of bein hashmashot (twilight) when it happens.

Why, Adam Sandler, Why?

Last night I was intending to see this really cool documentary at the Pacific Film Archive called The Decline of Western Civilization (with the director present) about Punk in the early 80's, but it was sold out. So after some discussion, we headed over to pay 10 bucks for Adam Sandler's new movie about an Israeli hair dresser.
I'll admit, it was exactly what I expected it to be. It was incredibly stupid with some funny slapstick and we were the only ones in the theater laughing at the Israeli jokes. But one thing that I didn't expect to see (although I guess I should have) was all the horrendous stereotyping that went on throughout the film. I didn't like constant use of the word feygele to make fun of hair dressers (yet a fair criticism of the macho attitude of Israeli society), and the terrible way that Palestinians were portrayed. Jack Shaheen is having a field day with this movie.
At the beginning there was a funny bit of dialogue that showed that the makers of the movie weren't total Islamophobic idiots. As Zohan, the superhuman Israeli counter-terrorism commando, has a fight scene with Hamas terrorists, in between punches in kicks they begin to argue about the conflict saying, "you know, its not so cut and dry, we've been here for a long time" "Right, and there were never any Jews in the Middle East." After hearing that exchange I had false hopes that the movie would continue with witty, intelligent humor instead of Sandler's usual poo poo jokes, but I was wrong. I should have remembered that movies like this are funny for the first ten minutes in order to hook you, and then they just get stupid.
They started blurring the lines between Arab and Palestinian, at some points given them Saudi head coverings, confusing the Lebanese flag with the Palestinian flag, and persisting the Arab stereotypes that have been going on since the beginning of Hollywood. The writers must have done their homework. I can just see them watching Lawrence of Arabia, taking notes, and saying, "Yeah, thats offensive and inaccurate, let's add that to the storyboard." Having the evil Palestinian leader surrounded by a harem of belly dancers and making the Arabs so incompetent that they couldn't figure out how to make a bomb, forcing them to call the Hizbollah hotline, must have been taken straight out of Arabs in American Media 101.
I understand that stereotypes are funny and that they are an easy way to introduce a character in a short period of time, but we shouldn't be trying to persist those stereotypes. It is movies like these that lead to the experience that I had in the airport in Detroit. Producers should start focusing less on "how can we make the most money with the least amount of thought" and more on "how can we make a great movie that will be funny for a mainstream audience."
Even comedic movies that focus on stereotypes can be made intelligent. Take Borat, for example. It was a smart film because they used stereotypes to poke fun at the kind of people who use and believe these stereotypes. So although there were parts of the movie that seemed anti-semitic, in reality they were making fun of anti-semites and may have even opened peoples consciousness to antisemitism. We need more Sacha Baron Cohen films.

JetBlue Cargo Cults

Coming back from the Brit Tzedek V'Shalom conference yesterday, I made a stop at the airport chapel at Dulles International to daven mincha.
I've always found those things intriguing because it's a space for everyone of any faith to pray; in fact it's a beautiful symbol of interfaith acceptance. It's true that not everyone would pray in an interfaith chapel (most notably, ultra-orthodox Jews because you can't daven in a place of avodah zara, and they consider Christianity idolatry), but for the majority of people who would want a space for prayer at an airport, they are placed into a room where all faiths interact, whether they want to or not.
I had prayed in an airport chapel before, but this time I truly had a soulgasm of religious pluralism. I never pray mincha, but I decided to do it that day, so I followed the qiblah arrow in order to find East (I always jitter with interfath excitement when I do that) and I prayed with unbelievable kavana (which happens next to never outside of kabbalat shabbat). When I finished and turned around, there were three other people in the room: a muslim TSA employee doing salah, a Catholic woman kneeling, and a man meditating. It was truly a beautiful sight.
It makes me wonder, what is unique about an airport that such a space can exist? I mean really, an airport? When I think interfaith activity and multiculturalism, certainly that is not the first thing that comes to my head. But it makes sense - everyone has to fly somewhere, sometime. You always see people of all different backgrounds in airports wearing a hijab, or a kippah, or a sari, or a Buddhist robe, so everyone needs to pray too, isn't that why the interfaith chapel exists?
I wouldn't want my davening experience to always be in an interfaith setting because I usually love the exclusivity of my own community synagogue (although there is probably some significance to the fact that I had amazing kavana at that chapel, which is so rare. But then again, maybe it was superficial kavana because I subconsciously wanted to give religious Judaism a good name by giving my audience a show of religious devotion), but it's a great opportunity to experience that, especially in such a random location.

A Utopian Rant. Thanks for that Rabbi Lerner!

Sometimes I feel like the Rabbis kinda hijacked Torah.
Every mitzvah was commanded in order to be suitable for the times. The sacrafices were only done because that was the way people connected to G-d at that time, now we connect through prayer because we have progressed with time. Similarly, we were given loads of laws on kashrut because that's how people ate back then, but now we can be progessive about dietary laws by keeping vegetarian (with a hechsher tzedek of course). So too, we were polygamous at a time and now we stay devoted to one person. It's too bad there is no sanhedrin to be able to further progress in halacha. Hehe, I guess the further West I go, the more liberal I get, and the more I reconnect with my Conservative roots.
But as we can see with the recent ridiculousness of the High Rabbinical Court in Israel, a sanhedrin wouldn't be the best idea at the moment.
The only way that we can progress in halacha is if all Jews can agree on certain changes. And that can only happen if all Jews unilaterally support something (which, at the moment, seems impossible). That's why when every Jew in the world will get together and support something (or at least keep two shabbases) the moshiach will arrive. Only then can we move foreward in halacha towards a place that is objectively progessive towards a utopian society.
Now I understand better why groups like Chabad and Aish are trying to get all Jews to become more religious. I disagree with their method though, I think it is something that can only happen organically and I sure hope that in the times of moshiach everyone will not be either Chabad or Aish. I think pluralism is a more feasible option.
It definitely works, and the more I travel, the more I see it working successfully. I saw it at the Mission Minyan and I saw it on Shavuot. On Shavuot, the entire Jewish community of Berkeley got together and had a unified Tikkun Leil Shavuot where rabbis and scholars of every denomination were giving lectures or programs throughout the night. It was a beautiful thing and someone said it's the only place in the world where that happens. Obviously, not everyone in that room would agree on a utopian vision of society, but I think that working together and having dialogue with each other is better than trying to convince everyone else that your way is right. I don't think that there's one type of Judaism that right. I don't even think my way is right (whatever that way is). Just as Judaism was meant to grow with the times, so will we continue to do so in the future, and the eventual Zion will consist of a society that is greater than any that exist today.
Amen Selah!

A Fascist Against Islamo-Fascism

Earlier this week this cartoon appeared in the student newspaper at the University of Madison - Milwaukee. It is a depiction of David Horowitz, a Jewish neocon who associates with that constituency for Jews who support Islamophobia. He's been traveling around the US, going to different universities and doing this Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week which is all about scaring people about the evils of political Islam and how it threatens the US. He's the kind of guy who would show Obsession every hour on the hour on Tisha B'Av (An Aish tactic) and call upon moderate Muslims to save their religion.
When David Horowitz came here, he caused a bit of a commotion (as was his plan, I'm sure). His donors paid for a page add in the Badger Herald calling out the MSA of being a Jihadist organization and coercing them to support him or else he would have them blacklisted. Of course, the MSA didn't support him and, in fact, they went to his talk and wore all green in solidarity. They didn't speak out in order to protest the event like the ISO did which I'm glad because I think disruption of free speech is a cowardly tactic. But anyways, Horowitz is exactly the kind of AIPAC-loving Jew that is screwing things up for American Judaism as well as Israel's image in America.
So he decided to come over to UW-M to have an Islamo-Fascism Week There, and this cartoon was distributed by the MSA. Apparently, the person who drew it is not part of the MSA, they just distributed it. But I think the cartoon is great, it's a great representation of David Horowitz. He loves to call out organizations as being fascist but his methods are so medieval: He blacklists, he promotes hate, and he's just an overall unpleasant guy. So when I saw this cartoon in the Badger Herald I thought it was so funny and I was in immediate support.
And, to make things even better, Horowitz's reaction to the cartoon perfectly exemplified his character. He flipped out and called it antisemitic, arguing that they gave him a hooknose so its obviously slander and wildly inappropriate. Couldn't have been more spot on, right? Of course he pulls the antisemitism card, making him the victim and the MSA the badguys. It's perfect. And his arguments are so funny too:

“Sure, it’s free speech. It’s just inappropriate for a campus. I don’t think the university should have banned it from being posted, but had that been a cartoon on blacks or gays, there would have been hell to pay — there should be one standard rule.”

What? I don't know if Horowitz has a hooknose or not, and in fact, I don't think it really matters. I just don't see how a critique over his political views has anything to do with being black or gay. No one said anything about his Judaism, and if we accept his argument by imagining the same cartoon where he is black or wearing a pink scarf, would that change anything about his caveman attitude?
Mohamad Elsayed, president of the MSA of UW-M summarizes Horowitz's whole demeanor very eloquently:

“In typical demagogic form, Horowitz tries to characterize the very legitimate and very justifiable attack against him as an attack on all Jews. How ludicrous.”

The Jewish community in Milwaukee really freaked out too and is in full support behind Horowitz, speaking out against antisemitism. I hate how the conservative Jewish communities go along with this propaganda, it's a chillul Hashem. Hopefully, my generation of progressive Jews and Muslims can work to get rid of this nonsense. Enshallah.

Agnostic Bar Mitzvah

I found this on College Humor so it is obviously supposed to be funny, but I actually think it's really depressing. I think it is a serious critique of what has become of the more liberal sides of Judaism. I assume this is a Reform synagogue but I think that the same critique applies to Conservative as well.
There are two issues that I have with this dvar torah. The first issue that I have is the lack of knowledge that this young man has about what Judaism believes and that this ignorance has led him to come to these conclusions (or lack of conclusions) about G-d. I am not saying that there is no place for agnosticism in Judaism, in fact I believe that aspects of agnosticism, questioning, and skepticism are healthy and that they lead to progress within Jewish theology and philosophy. My critique is of the whole process of Bar and Bat Mitzvah within Unorthodoxy in America. This boy speaks very eloquently about his lack of faith in G-d and I think it is a very standard view among young American Jews, in fact I think he is very brave to say these things on the day of his Bar Mitzvah since most agnostic thirteen-year-olds just regurgitate what they think the congregation wants to hear. I know I did.
What makes me sad watching this video is that no one encouraged him to have faith and that there was no positive role-model of faith to guide him. His Bar Mitzvah was forced and he just went through the motions like most Bnai Mitzvah. It is true that I don't know the back story of this video and it is possible that he did have positive role models, maybe he is just an ardent atheist who is very grounded in his views about G-d. If this is true then my only critique is that he shouldn't be having a Bar Mitzvah at all because it is unfair to him. Rather, I can say with some certainty that his parents probably did not encourage him because they are most likely skeptics too, and his rabbi didn't encourage him because they probably barely know each other. I know this because this is the society that I grew up in and I know that it was true for me.
This leads me to my second issue with this video - that no one objected to this dvar (in fact it seems to have been encouraged) and that everyone in the congregation accepts it as a legitimate sermon; they are all laughing and enjoying it and in the end the rabbi even makes a joke about it. Of course, as much as I believe that this type of discourse should not be allowed in a synagogue setting, again, I am not saying that this is wrong. I am against censorship, I support this boy's agnosticism, and I am not trying to sound like the rigid Orthodox rabbi who only says, "no." Rather, I'm trying to point out that the problem is that this is not shocking to anyone, because there are very few people in the congregation who would disagree with him, it is only funny because no one every brings it up on the bimah of a synagogue.
This, to me, is the reality of Unorthodoxy. It seems so counter-intuitive that there would be a synagogue, a place of worship, filled with skeptics, agnostics, and potentially even atheists. Why go through the rituals if they are meaningless? If no one cares about the object of the tradition, why is there any need for the tradition at all? And what is the rabbi's role in this situation? I assume he is a man of faith because if he isn't that would just be silly. (Are there such things as agnostic rabbis?) His job should be to impart some type of love for G-d or appreciation of the teachings to a boy who is getting Bar Mitzvah'd. So did he fail with this one? If it can be considered a failure then I would say that almost all rabbis outside of Orthodoxy fail at this. I am sure that the lack of rapport between the boy and rabbi has to do with the size of the congregation, and that the boy probably never comes to synagogue. So then it leads into the issues of synagogue membership. Why do people pay dues when they only come out of guilt or adherence to tradition? Why do people care? Why do they lie to themselves?
I really feel so bad for this boy and I think that the majority of boys and girls in his position feel exactly the same way. It really shouldn't be this way. Halachicly, a Bar Mitzvah is a time where the boy or girl is now old enough so that the mitzvot that are incumbent on them become their responsibility and not their parents. So, halachicly, if a boy or girl doesn't want to do the mitzvot because they don't believe in them, they shouldn't become a Bar or Bat Mitzvah because it defeats the whole purpose. I guess I just don't understand the concept of a Bar Mitzvah within Reform Judaism (and Conservative now that they don't care about mitzvot anymore). If someone knows why, theologically, Reform Judaism (and soon to be Conservative Judaism also) continues to have Bnai Mitzvah if it is not about mitzvot anymore, please tell me. It is obviously not a coming-of-age ceremony because the kids are only thirteen. So what is the point?

The FFB and the Status Quo

I've learned that I don't usually get along that well with FFBs (Frum From Birth).
When I was at Yeshiva University for Purim, I began to realize, as I have in other Modern Orthodox circles, that many people who grow up in that lifestyle take Judaism for granted. They consider themselves the same as any other doctor or lawyer, they just happen to wear a kippah and pray three times a day. For me, and for other Ba'alei Teshuva, I don't want to live the same life as I did before, just this time I keep Shabbas, I want to have my entire life encompassed by Judaism. But then again, I don't reject the culture that I grew up in. In fact, I think there's a lot I can learn from it.
It just seems to me that theres a status quo when it comes to Modern Orthodoxy that many young Jews feel that they have to live by. Like gender roles, for instance. I understand that there are certain defined gender roles in Orthodox Judaism, and I recognize them- I think they are true, but I think it should be taken at a very minimal level. Yes, the woman is the master of the home, she is caring and nurturing, while the man supports the family and community, teaches, and works. But does that mean that a woman can't be a community leader? Or that a man can't take time off work to raise his kids? I feel like there's this assumption that boys have to be boyish - immature, loud, and only friends with other boys, while girls have to be girly - constantly talking about who's engaged, worrying about their appearance, rebuking boys for being immature, etc. A couple times that weekend, I heard these ridiculous generalizations coming from young men (engaged nonetheless) like, "Girls aren't funny" or "I don't like hanging out with girls" and the like. But, as terribly sexist as that sounds, I think it's almost justified because the girls really aren't fun to hang out with because having a personality is shunned in that society.
Ok I'm also making generalizations and I'm judging, which I shouldn't, but when I became more religious, I didn't feel like I had to accept the status quo. In fact, I still want to change it, and I think that a lot of Ba'alei Teshuva have that mentality. We have the advantage that we have seen this world from both the outside and the inside (although some try to ignore that), and we need to use that advantage to make this world better. It's not enough to be a ben-Torah or an Eishit Chayil, you can't just follow the mitzvot and say that that's enough, you have to do Tikkun Olam in a tangible sense, whether it's by helping to make peace in the world or by bringing the coming of moshiach sooner (which SHOULD BE the same thing). It's sad that many FFBs (and many Ba'alei Teshuva who wish that they were born frum)

Activists = Atheists... why?

Today I received the bi-weekly update for the Madison Activists Calender in my email. I usually enjoy getting this because it gives me the opportunity to see what kind of political and activist events are going on in Madison that I wouldn't normally know about. It's also cool to hear what the Madison-Rafah group is doing (the controversial group that is trying to make Rafah, the one with the Qassams, Madison's sister city) and what kind of anti-Israel stuff they are promoting. This week they are sponsoring the Madison leg of the play My Name is Rachel Corrie.
But today the calender really offended me. On the list of activist events on campus for the week was Richard Dawkins' lecture on his book The G-d Delusion. Now, don't get me wrong, I have a ticket for the lecture and I plan on going because I really enjoy getting pissed off, but what does a lecture supporting atheism have anything to do with activism?
I quickly sent the editor of the calender an email back with an ad absurdum argument, trying to "understand where he was coming from" in a slightly sarcastic way.

What does [a pro-atheism lecture] have to do with activism? Are you implying that a religiously observant activist is an oxymoron? I should hope not because that would be a very close-minded approach to society at large.
And if that is not what you were implying, then why would you put an event that has to do with religion (or lack thereof) on your calender? How is that any different then posting a lecture about the positive aspects of religion or even a scholarly or critical lecture on religion given at the university? Obviously, events like that are not the type of events you are trying to promote by sending out the calender.
And if you mentioned Richard Dawkins' lecture because you thought that many people who are activists would also be interested in the lecture (which is true and I plan on attending that lecture) then it is not an activist calender anymore - it is an events calender for things that are going on in Madison with an emphasis on activism. And that doesn't seem right to me. Stick with what you know.

Yeah the last sentence was a little harsh but it was only because I didn't have a great argument for why his calender should stay an activist-events-only calender. That's really his decision.
But it just seems like such a double standard to me. When it comes to secular liberalism, you can be gay, you can (or should) be vegan, you can be a feminist, you can be any race or ethnicity, but you can't be religious because all religious people are uneducated and blind and addicted to the opiate of the masses. But it is really them who are blind to their own contradictions and hypocrisies. It's for the same reason (I believe) that the Emma Goldman Co-op didn't accept me. Their three pillars were anarchism, feminism, and anti-racism, which I hold very closely (well, maybe not so much the anarchism part), but when I asked the coordinator why I wasn't accepted, she said, "You seem like a great individual, but Emma Goldman has a certain image that it needs to uphold." Read - we don't want anyone religious here because it might make us look less liberal. That's bullshit. Liberalism is all about changing the status quo to make a more ideal society, but when they refuse to include religious people in their fights for social justice and peace, they neglect their own values.
This is why organizations like Uri Li'Tzedek and Rabbis for Human Rights are so important right now. It is true that for some reason the religious tend to ignore the social justice aspects of their communities and I really have no idea why that is, but it gives a bad name for us. Organizations like that not only help the communities around them, but they help repair the image of religious people being apathetic to the world around them in ways that are not directly tied to religiosity.
The problem is that even though it is true that the Orthodox need to work harder on the words of G-d Himself, "צדק, צדק תרדף - Justice, justice you shall pursue," it is not something that should be accepted by the secular liberals. Racism still exists, but they fight that. Chauvinism still exists, and that is being fought too. But religionism (I just made that word up) is not only not being fought, it is being propagated, and that is wrong.

Update: Turns out I overreacted. Here's the email John sent back to me:

Hello Eric,
I'm sorry you found the calendar listing of Prof. Dawkins lecture "offensive." I must admit, that when I first opened your email I thought it was another pro-Israeli person calling me "anti-semitic" for including Palestinian solidarity events! As you can imagine, I get lots of those, along with other assorted unpleasantries.

Actually, I try to include most every UW Distinguished Lectures in the calendar precisely because they are often controversial speakers. Personally, I've found other UW Distinguished lectures much more "offensive", such as David Horowitz, but I've included them nonetheless since it is good for folks to hear another side if they wish.

Obviously, I do not endorse the politics of everything I include in the calendar. The listing is for informational purposes only.

Best - John

I sent him an email back apologizing for becoming emotional. So I was wrong this time, but I still believe in what I wrote, even though John might be an exception. Let's hope that in fact more people are like John who do not hold a double standard.

Me + Morality

I feel like my entire life is one big moral dilemma.
Ten minutes don't go by without me debating over whether or not some superfluous action is acceptable for me to commit. I constantly put myself in situations where I have to stop and think, "Is good ol' KBH behind me on this?"
Friday night was a great example of this self-imposed ethical pickle. I went to see the Black Lips for free after I left Hillel (which is a questionable move already). It was a great show, I talked to the guitarist with the dental grill about his experiences touring Israel and Palestine, and I was gonna go with Nev to her friend's place to chill afterwards. When we left the Union, the free bus was sitting on the curb and everyone ran to catch it, so I cussed and headed over there, trying to figure out what my next move would be. I couldn't just let the bus leave because then they would think, "Did we lose Eric?" but then again, I couldn't really get on the bus, the whole thing has gotta be muktzah. So I jumped on, asked the bus driver how long he was sticking around for (less than a minute) and ran to the back to give the briefest explanation of anti-busness on Shabbat ever which included the classic John Goodman à la Big Lebowski quote. But as I was finishing my 15 second speech, the bus started to pull away, which was definitely against Shabbas, so I ran to the front of the bus yelling, "STOP THE BUS!" as if I was saving an old lady who just had a heart attack. Immediately the bus driver stopped and I jumped off, giggling over the complete ridiculousness of the situation. I treated getting off that bus as if it was a life-or-death situation, like it was the most important thing I would ever do. It's funny because who else worries about these sorts of things? And the best part is, circumstances like that happen to me all the time.
In some senses, these dilemmas are crazy and unexplainable. Why should I worry so much about not mixing wool and linen? It doesn't make any sense to me and a normal person would think that I'm just being ridiculous. But in other senses, it's somewhat heartening to have a strict moral code to follow; it keeps me in check. It makes me a better person to constantly be thinking to myself, "Am I doing the right thing?" It gives my life meaning. How often does a normal American think about morality? Certainly most people don't think twice about breaking the speed limit, and very few have ethical debates over theft or murder. So when I made the decision not to eat the donut holes in my Messianism class today because they didn't have a hechsher, it made me feel good. I did something that G-d wanted, and I'm proud of that.
In A Year of Living Biblically (which I just finished), A. J. Jacobs discusses the same issues that I'm having:

I shouldn't look at the Bible as a collection of pesky tasks on my to-do list. I have to look forward to the commandments. I have to love them.
And in a few cases - just a handful, really - I'm starting to. Like, with the Sabbath. I used to orient my week around Monday, the start of the secular workweek. Now it's the Sabbath. Everything leads up to the Sabbath. On Friday morning I start prepping for it like I'm going on a big date. I make a huge pot of coffee so that I don't have to do anything resembling cooking on the Sabbath. I pile my research books in a corner.
And when the sun sets, I flip off my computer and get to work not working. Because resting is, paradoxically, difficult. The writer Judith Shulevitz talks about how avoiding business requires much effort. She's right. You can't talk about work, you can't even think about work. A notion about Esquire will creep into my brain - I have to write that article on weddings for Thursday - and I'll squash it down. Another will pop up. It's like a mental Whac-a-Mole. By the end of Saturday, as the sun finally sets, I feel as if I've done something strenuous but healthy, like I've taken a run through Central Park. I feel good, like I deserved the endorphin rush the Sabbath gave me. And then I start to look forward to next week's Sabbath.

I can really relate to him. He went though the same transformation that I did, albeit his was an experiment and mine was... uh, real I guess. But reading through it, I couldn't help but nod my head at the issues he was dealing with, such as- the problems with following laws that don't make sense, getting into awkward social situations because of certain laws, trying to weed out laws that are way too extreme to follow at this point in my life, and trying to connect with G-d but feeling a gap. I ask myself the same questions he asked all the time, but for him the experiment is over, whereas for me, it will keep on going until the day I die (bi'ezrat Hashem).
In fact, I believe this is a good thing. Anyone who believes that they fully understand their religion and know exactly what to do, obviously has no idea what their religion teaches. It is that kind of mentality that leads to fanaticism. The search for answers is the Jewish way, it is what we have been doing for 3000 years, and it is what we will continue to do for however long it takes. Yes, I believe that there is an answer out there, but we are not ready for it yet. Right now, searching and winnowing is how we are going to progress, and only through wandering will we eventually find our way.

I am officially a terrorist

Last week I visited Tammy in SyraJews. Getting there was a huge balagan because of the ice storm that swept through the Midwest, but my favorite part of the voyage was my encounter with the police.
I had a layover in Detroit, and I was talking to Tammy on the phone while I was at the gate waiting for the flight. I was telling her how I hadn't davened yet, and how davening in front of everyone in the Detroit airport was sketchy, but definitely not as sketchy as when I davened in the lobby of a hotel in Egypt when I was there with her last summer. I said sarcastically that there is probably less of a Taliban presence in this airport than there was in that hotel. And then, I went on to tell her how I learned some new words in Arabic. And then I did this crazy prayer ritual. Normal activity in the life of Eric, right?
But when we started boarding, the lady at the desk pulled me aside because she wanted to "have a word with me." Apparently, I had made some other passengers "feel uncomfortable" by using the word "Taliban" in public. And the procedure for dealing with possible terrorists is to immediately inform the captain, who ordered that I was not allowed to get on the plane until the airport police had come and interrogated me, and that if it took long enough they would fly away without me. So I watched everyone else board the plane as I was questioned by three police officers who proceeded to ask me stupid questions and check my criminal record. The whole time I had to stop myself from flipping out at the ridiculousness of the situation, but I knew that if I did that, there was no way I was getting to SyraJews before Shabbas. I eventually got on the plane and made it there, although I did get some really nice looks as I boarded the plane at the last minute. I stared back at my "fellow passengers" with my beady Jihad-eyes hoping to freak them out, but trying to avoid making any sudden movements so as not to get shot by a sky marshal.

My reaction to the whole situation can be summed up in one phrase, "What the fuck!?" It's not like the new Arabic words I had learned were "lets kill Americans" or "I can't wait to blow myself up on this flight." Of course, no one should be profiled for looking or acting like a terrorist, but... I don't even look Arab! I look as white as any other stupid hillbilly on that flight. They hear the word "Taliban" in an airport and they freak out? What kind of people have Americans evolved into since 9/11? And that they can't even tell the difference between a Muslim prayer and a Jewish prayer? These people must have been so ignorant, sucking in every anti-Arab anti-Muslim slogan they hear, soaking up all of Bush's anti-terrorist propaganda for the past seven years. I really think its sad. I can't imagine what its like for arabic-speakers or people with hijabs or even dark skin. I got a little taste of what they must experience all the time.
It's a good thing I cut off my beard a week ago though, it was huge. I definitely would not have gotten on the flight with that baby.