adam@npois.UUCP (Adam V. Reed) (02/24/85)
Ari Gross has written that >Orthodoxy, however, is the only true extension of >biblical Judaism. Clearly, in the times of the Bible Jews ate only >Kosher food (both in and out of the house). Is there any other sect >of Judaism today whose adherents without exception abide by this >very clear Biblical precept ? Or, perchance you believe that King >David used to frequent McDonald's on the sly ? You may be surprised to hear this from a Humanistic Jew, but I agree that the observance of mitzvot goes to the heart of the question. Our difference is in the interpretation of what a "very clear Biblical precept" actually means. My view is that the mitzvot are defined by their impact on human beings; while they are taught to us by means of concrete examples, it is the human impact, and not the substance of the concrete example, that defines their true observance. As a Humanistic Jew, I view the mitzvot of Kashrut as teaching us to refrain from contaminating our bodies with things harmful to our health. In biblical times, this precept was taught through prohibition against foods which either spoiled rapidly or carried parasites. Today, pork, shellfish etc. are no longer tref in the original sense of being dangerous to human health. On the other hand, some things not known at the time of the writing down of the Torah, such as cigarettes, ARE tref in this sense. So to a Humanistic Jew, the question poses itself like this: Is an Orthodox truly "shomer Kashrut" when he rejects perfectly healthy foods but ingests truly tref substances such as tobacco smoke? Isn't a Humanistic Jew, who eats things that are healthy today (regardless of how tref they were ages ago) but scrupulously refrains from defiling his body with things that are destroying human health now, closer in his observance to the actual substance and meaning of Kashrut? Adam ben Tzvi Aharon (Adam V. Reed) npois!adam
josie@phoenix.UUCP (Jack Gross) (02/26/85)
I must admit that today I learned something new. I never heard of a "Humanistic" jew. Does it mean that I am not a human jew ? To say that pork and other such things that are specifically forbidden in the torah are permissable nowadays,thanks to the Food & Drug Administration's efforts, is going to far. If one can claim that because times are different he no longer must follow certain laws, what is to say that he should follow any of them at all. For all we know in our modern world we are not the "chosen people" any more too. I don't go for it! Yakov Gross
arig@cvl.UUCP (Ari Gross) (02/26/85)
> Ari Gross has written that > >Orthodoxy, however, is the only true extension of > >biblical Judaism. Clearly, in the times of the Bible Jews ate only > >Kosher food (both in and out of the house). Is there any other sect > >of Judaism today whose adherents without exception abide by this > >very clear Biblical precept ? > So to a Humanistic Jew, the question poses itself like this: > Is an Orthodox truly "shomer Kashrut" when he rejects perfectly healthy > foods but ingests truly tref substances such as tobacco smoke? Isn't a > Humanistic Jew, who eats things that are healthy today (regardless of > how tref they were ages ago) but scrupulously refrains from defiling his > body with things that are destroying human health now, closer in his > observance to the actual substance and meaning of Kashrut? > > Adam ben Tzvi Aharon > (Adam V. Reed) > npois!adam How does a Humanist Jew keep the mitzvah of Parah Aaduma (the sprinkling of the ashes of a red heifer on one defiled by a corpse)? And what is today's humanistic equivalent of "killing out Amalek" ? Was that precept just to appeal to the bloodthirsty Israelites but has no bearing on the 'enlightened'? What is the equivalent of 'hilchot sotah' -- making alimony payments ? I think that a humanistic approach fails to consider the fact that if the Torah is of divine origin then it is rather presumptuous of us to assume that we can know all the reasons that motivated Him to give us a particular mitzvah and are therefore capable of substituting it for its moral (humanistic) equivalent. What if there are additional reasons for the precept that supersede our limited knowledge and understanding? If, on the other hand, the Torah is not of divine origin then why would a humanistic Jew feel compelled to keep any of its precepts' moral equivalents? Ari Gross arig@cvl.arpa
meth@csd2.UUCP (Asher Meth) (02/27/85)
Yom Shelishi Leparshas Tatzaveh, 5 ADAR 5745 Adam V. Reed writes : >My view is that the mitzvot are defined by their >impact on human beings; while they are taught to us by means of concrete >examples, it is the human impact, and not the substance of the concrete >example, that defines their true observance. Where does your definition come from? What basis does it have? Why do you presuppose that the mitzvos are reflected ONLY in their impact on human beings? >As a Humanistic Jew, I view the mitzvot of Kashrut as teaching us to >refrain from contaminating our bodies with things harmful to our health. >In biblical times, this precept was taught through prohibition against >foods which either spoiled rapidly or carried parasites. Today, pork, >shellfish etc. are no longer tref in the original sense of being >dangerous to human health. On the other hand, some things not known at >the time of the writing down of the Torah, such as cigarettes, ARE tref >in this sense. (ASIDE : What is a Humanistic Jew? A simple definition will do. How do such Jews fit into the larger scheme?) Since when does ANY mitzvah, Kashrus as an example, relate ONLY to the human bodies that our souls are placed in while we exist on this world? Is there not a soul? If you agree that you have a soul, (and, as Jews, we do believe that the soul exists and is an important component of every person) what function does it play in your life? In your afterlife? How do the things that you do while in your body relate to, and affect, your soul, both in the HERE and in the HEREAFTER? (Yes, as Jews, we believe in a HEREAFTER.) Are you worried ONLY about contaminating your body and not you soul? After 120 years, the soul leaves the body and the body is placed in the earth, and decays; it disintegrates and returns to its original state of "affar vaeffer", dust and ashes. How is your body (which, for argument's sake, we will assume is less contaminated than a non-Humanistic's) any better off than a non-Humanistic's? Perhaps your body is healthier; why not become a body builder? I do NOT mean to deride the idea of taking care of yourself, including your health, as best as you can. We are commanded to do that, too - "ushemartem meod lenafshoseichem". However, do not think, even for a moment, that the only thing that is important is physical health and well-being. That is all fine and well, when put in the proper perspective of good spiritual health. As the rabbi of a shul that I used to daven at used to say : What is the difference between a mikveh (ritualarium) and a bathtub? A clean bath makes you physically clean (but, if it is dirty, it does NOTHING); a dirty mikveh (by its nature of being a mikveh - irrespective of its cleanliness) makes you spiritually "clean" or "pure". A woman, observing the laws of "Taharas Hamishpachah" (Family Purity), will become permitted to her husband only after immersion in a kosher mikveh; a bathtub CANNOT function in place of a kosher mikveh. It is nice and proper for the mikveh to be clean. It should NOT be the case that women must feel disgusted about going to the mikveh because of its state of cleanliness. The point of all this is that, in Judaism, we believe that there is a spiritual aspect in EVERYTHING, especially mitzvos that we are commanded to do. This is in addition to the physical aspect that we can find in the performance of such. >So to a Humanistic Jew, the question poses itself like this: >Is an Orthodox truly "shomer Kashrut" when he rejects perfectly healthy >foods but ingests truly tref substances such as tobacco smoke? Isn't a >Humanistic Jew, who eats things that are healthy today (regardless of >how tref they were ages ago) but scrupulously refrains from defiling his >body with things that are destroying human health now, closer in his >observance to the actual substance and meaning of Kashrut? I would say that "healthy foods", in Judaism, may have a different definition than in the sense you wish to portray. "Healthy" is certainly reflected in the physical sense, but, perhaps even more importantly, it is reflected in the spiritual sense. Re : tobacco (sp?) smoke - As I mentioned above : "ushemartem meod lenafshoseichem". ("Dai lechakima beremizah".) --------------------------------------- There are some times that one canNOT stand by idly and let comments go by without responding !! --------------------------------------- A freilichen Purim, and A kosheren Pesach to one and all. Asher Meth USENET : allegra!cmcl2!csd2!meth ARPANET : meth@nyu-csd2.arpa