Dennis Prager. You either love him or hate him. Since I’m not into politics, I find his political stuff kind of boring. But his theological and people stuff? Fascinating.
So I’ve got him on the radio on Thursday – the Seder was the following day and I’m driving around on some final errands with Dennis on the radio. I pull into the store I need but I can’t turn the car off because I can’t stop listening. BTDT?
A guy called in and is telling Dennis this (subject to my memory):
Dennis, I’m a liberal Reform Jew from New Jersey [Dennis himself is sort of a Reformadox Jew and is very outspoken about his Judaism]. In college I became an evangelical Christian and I eventually met a Christian woman. Well, her values are very conservative and she’s a Republican, and Dennis, I gotta tell you, sometimes I just feel like I’m in a mixed marriage.
He went on to describe some of their differences and how he is finding himself coming around to her way of thinking, etc. While I’m thinking, gosh, when I hear someone say mixed marriage, the first thing I think of is Jew/Christian. This guy did not appear to be conflicted about his religious crossover but his political crossover was a big deal. What a leap for me to even try and understand that!
My husband was once talking to a family prior to a bris (he’s a mohel, and yes, we’ve already heard that joke). The dad was describing his son, who had become religious. “Rabbi,” he said, “It was so hard for our family. I would have EVEN preferred that he become a REPUBLICAN!”
Which was extraordinarily enlightening for us, on a few fronts. One, how very, very awful it can feel to Jewish liberal family members when “one of theirs” becomes religious, and two, how very, very wrong it seems to Jewish liberal folks to be a Republican. (And finally, the things people will say to Rabbis could fill a book.) Which is worse? I guess it depends for whom.
Is religion, then, the culture, and political ideology the religion, as Dennis asserted after the call concluded? Would your family consider it worse if you married “out” religiously or politically?
One of the things that interest me greatly about liberal Judaism is a sort of generalized agreement that intermarriage is something to avoid as a nation. I’m not really sure where this fits into liberal “as long as we’re good people” kind of thinking. And in my unofficial research, I find most Jews that think intermarriage is unwise are hard-pressed to come up with a solid reason WHY. Is this attitude, that intermarriage ought be avoided, fading with time in our post-modern world?
What do you think?
Wow! I'm so glad you wrote something on this topic. As a 23-year-old Jewish woman from an intermarried family (my mother is Jewish, my father is not), and as someone who has learned a lot about Judaism from an Orthodox perspective since I’ve gone to college, I think about this issue all the time.
Because my father isn't Jewish, I don't think it would matter to my parents if I married a non-Jewish man. However, it is extremely important to me to marry a Jewish man and I will not date non- Jewish men. Also, I’m a Democrat and would be fine with marrying a Republican. Also a little background on me religiously….I grew up in a Reform household, but when I began learning about Judaism through an Orthodox lens, I developed much more of an affinity for it. I developed this fascination and love for various concepts in Judaism that I found particularly beautiful (mainly Shabbat and tznius) and slowly began to take on a few things- stopped using my phone and computer on Shabbat when I could, began to dress more modestly and eventually this past year began to keep a kosher kitchen in my apartment. While I love certain aspects of being Jewish and identify as Jewish, I do not believe in the divinity of the Torah and frequently doubt the existence of God. I also take the Torah as a story, without historical accuracy.
This paradox is something I think I will continue to struggle with for a long time (maybe the rest of my life?). I often wish I could pick a side (either leave Judaism all together or become an observant Jew), but I just seem to want to straddle both worlds, which of course, is impossible. For a couple of years in college, I stopped identifying as Jewish (because how could I be Jewish if I didn’t believe in God?) but was eventually drawn back in when I realized how much I missed it. If I had to put myself in category, I’d say a non-believing Jew who approaches Judaism intellectually and prefers to learn about Judaism from an Orthodox perspective.
I have many non-Jewish friends and a lot of them have asked me why I want to marry someone Jewish, after all I don’t even believed in God- so how could marrying someone Jewish matter to me? When this question comes up I’m generally speechless and don’t know how to answer. The best way I can answer is that I want someone who can approach Judaism intellectually with me and be able to sympathize and understand my doubts about Judaism, but also things that I find most beautiful.
First of all, anyone who posts here as "OOTOB Fan" is automatically my BFF. So…hi!
I find your comments very, very interesting. The journey, the struggle, the loose ends in terms of not really being sure why you feel the way you do, and your honesty and candor in expressing it all. I want to wish you lots of success and strength in your journey. May your soul find its home and may the journey be a sweet one.
Please visit again soon.
OOTOB Fan… does it get any better than that?
Thanks, Ruchi, I very much appreciate your kind words. I'm a regular reader although usually when I comment I use my first name or initials. But since this post was more personal I decided to give myself a nick name!
OOTOB Fan – you are not alone! My husband and I straddle any number of worlds with our beliefs, lifestyle, and observance! It IS possible – I'm not going to say it's easy, but it IS possible to have a fulfilling Jewish life while exploring what that means to you. I'm so impressed you want to continue the journey – and basically what Ruchi said – your honesty is awesome and I look forward to reading more of your thoughts!
What an interesting topic. Having spent most of my life in a liberal Reform home and community, being identified as either a Republican or Religious would yield the same response.. DISMAY!
My parents were both Democrats, and a few years after my father's death, my mother remarried. (Both my mother and step-father are now deceased) My mother's second husband grew up in a religious home and practiced Reform Judaism. What was a shocker for me, was that he was a Republican, and was very vocal with his thoughts about "US". I would frequently feel like I was with Archie Bunker from "All in the Family". I was Mike (Gloria's husband). The difference being, after the first few times TRYING to have a conversation about political matters, I learned to keep my thoughts to myself.
Over the past 6 months, I was sharing a meal with a family and other guests. What was different at this meal was that there were political discussions and they were about "US". I learned my lesson from years earlier and didn't say a word. I was the lone wolf at the table. I was thinking to myself, I am not Orthodox, and I am not a Republican. BREATHE. What is so wonderful for me in these past 4 years of learning, is that I have grown into a MODERATE person. Thanks for a great topic of conversation.
🙂 Love this. Thanks for weighing in. The ability to remain silent is a sign of great strength.
I grew up in a very reform household. My mother, a child of Holocaust survivors, intermarried when I was 8 years old. She told me that it didn't matter who you married, as long as the man treats you with respect. She also always told me that you can pray to G-d in any house of worship.
When I was 14 years old we had a discussion group at my synagogue for parents and children. It was supposed to be an open forum for parents to tell their children how they feel about intermarriage. Again my mother told me that as long as the man treated me with respect she didn't care what religion he is.
My father didn't intermarry until after I became observant, but he also had no problem with who I wanted to marry, as long as he was a nice guy.
My mother also felt that as a child she missed out because she was not allowed to celebrate xmas, easter, or any other of the Christian holidays, so in my house growing up I celebrated all the holidays, even though both my parents are Jewish.
I think that because the Jews were persecuted in Holocaust, that Jews today feel that they have no right to push away anyone. I also think that they people that grew up in the 60s and 70s have this "one love" feeling. Intermarriage is something that has affected my family and my husbands. It is something that we deal with on a daily basis when our family members ask us why we will not come to a wedding or other functions celebrating intermarriage.
If it weren't for Chabad, I would have most likely intermarried.
Hope this information was helpful.
Thanks Yiskah. A few thoughts: firstly, I like how you credited Chabad with your choice to marry Jewish. I think anyone who is married to a Jew should actually take a moment to think: what inspired that? And to feel (and maybe express) that gratitude. That is a big deal.
Also, I think you are right about the Holocaust connection. Here's more on that: http://www.njjewishnews.com/article/9005/when-it-comes-to-intermarriage-experts-confuse-cause-and-effect#.T4tkxXpXk3w
I don't agree with everything in the article, not at all, but it touches on that insightful comment.
very cool that you credit Chabad with your decision not to intermarry. I hadn't thought much about if I cared about marrying Jewish until I met an Orthodox family through the Aish outreach at my school- and I credit them with my decision to make sure I marry a Jewish man!
Yup…I know exactly what you mean about DP. Some of his opinions do not sit well with me at all. But most do.
Love the Seder line – that is awesome!
I have always wondered about something since I have friends who say they are "Conservadox". Can a born Reform Jew just say they are Orthodox and be accepted as such since converts who converted even Conservative have to then convert Orthodox if they want to be accepted as a "real Jew"? Does that run on sentence make any sense?
Anyone can say they are anything. There are no initiation rites to be Orthodox, unless you're talking conversion. However, the general benchmarks of being Orthodox are keeping kosher, women using the mikveh (another post), and observing Shabbat (the most obvious one being not driving or getting in a car from sunset on Friday till nightfall on Saturday). So while anyone can *say* anything, not anyone will necessarily believe just anything. Not sure if that answers your question but something tells me we're headed toward another post…
@Me: Did you mean will Orthodox people accept you as a "real Jew"? The answer to that would be, if you're born a Jew (i.e. your mother is Jewish) then you're just as Jewish as any Orthodox rabbi. Any conversions along the line (say, your mother converted according to Reform standards) would throw a wrench in that unless it was a strictly Orthodox conversion.
Can a born Reform Jew just say they are Orthodox and be accepted as such
Depends where and for what purpose. In many Orthodox communities you can be counted for a minyan or given an aliyah (if male) without any difficulty at all. If you want to an Orthodox rabbi to officiate at your wedding he may require some proof of Jewish descent in the female line before deciding to do so. This is especially true in Israel, where proof of one's Jewish bona fides is required for all state recognized religious marriages in country.
As the percentage of members of the Reform community who are Jews through bilateral descent or through conversion or by descent from someone who falls into one of those categories grows over the coming years, I expect increasing difficulties in moving from the Reform community to an Orthodox one.
Hi Larry,
I agree with your forecast, and that it's an extremely unfortunate situation.
well, i'm not sure 'unfortunate' is the word i would have chosen; 'complicated' maybe. but it is the individual's choice to move from Reform to Orthodox, and that person then has to deal with the halachic issues that arise – which can be complicated, but not unfortunate.
I'd go with unfortunate. The fact that one's identity as a Jew may be called into question will, I think, discourage certain people who might otherwise have joined an Orthodox community from choosing to do so. If a precautionary conversion (gerut l'chumra) is required this might break up budding romances where the traditional Jew is a Cohen. And in terms of Jewish unity on a mass scale, rather than in individual cases, unfortunate is undoubtedly a better word than complicated IMO.
I don't agree. There are other, tradition, observant choices for people if the Orthodox community they live in will not recognize them as Jews or make their conversion to Orthodoxy easier (which is possible from a halachic standpoint. it can be easier than the many fences that are erected around the conversion process). Also, if a person is truly, truly committed to Orthodoxy, they will, by force of their convictions, do what is necessary to make their conversion happen. If they choose not to, I'm not convinced they were meant to be Orthodox. Just my 2 cents.
Leah, the reason I used the word "unfortunate" is not because I think everyone should be Orthodox. It's because the more definitions there are for who is Jewish, the more splintered we become as a people.
Oh, Ruchi, I totally know that! I just don't agree 🙂
Wait, which part of it do you not agree with?
the "unfortunate" part and that the more definitions for who is Jewish the more splintered we are. I think every Jew should be able to find a community in which they are comfortable. It's up to us who care the most about Am/Clal Yisrael to build the bridges between the communities.
For the sake of this discussion, let's imagine we are talking about the US and the Confederacy. Is it sad that there were two definitions of what it meant to be an American? Is it sad the that nation became splintered? Was it wise to attempt to re-unite, even though it meant some elements giving up their identities? Let's say it wasn't a war. Let's say everyone amicably chose a side and our nation became divided in half, and we all got along. Has something precious been lost?
Ooh, you're opening a can of worms talking about the Confederacy with me in the room. But I shall resist the urge to say anything … resisting … resisting … visiting YouTube for some pleasure … 😛
Michael – thank you for resisting it. :<)
Oh so is *that* what libertarianism is?? 😉
Well, it depends. 🙂 According to some, the Civil War was fought over taxation, not slavery. Lincoln, in his First Inaugural, said he would invade the South not for the sake of slavery but only for the sake of collecting taxes. Indeed, if you check the Confederate Constitution – which was just a modified US Constitution – it changed nothing about slavery, but it banned the Hamiltonian system (of which Lincoln was an adherent) of "internal improvements" and "bounties" (corporate welfare and subsidies) and it said that every law must deal with one and only one subject (so no omnibus bills with a million pork-barrel riders). Based on Lincoln's own First Inaugural and that Confederate Constitution, it would seem the Civil War was a war over whether big business would be in bed with government (Lincoln) or not (the South).
The Acton-Lee Correspondence (the same Acton who said that power corrupts and absolute power absolutely) is also revealing:
Acton: "I saw in State Rights the only availing check upon the absolutism of the sovereign will, and secession filled me with hope, not as the destruction but as the redemption of Democracy. The institutions of your Republic have not exercised on the old world the salutary and liberating influence which ought to have belonged to them, by reason of those defects and abuses of principle which the Confederate Constitution was expressly and wisely calculated to remedy. I believed that the example of that great Reform would have blessed all the races of mankind by establishing true freedom purged of the native dangers and disorders of Republics. Therefore I deemed that you were fighting the battles of our liberty, our progress, and our civilization; and I mourn for the stake which was lost at Richmond more deeply than I rejoice over that which was saved at Waterloo."
Lee: "I can only say that while I have considered the preservation of the constitutional power of the General Government to be the foundation of our peace and safety at home and abroad, I yet believe that the maintenance of the rights and authority reserved to the states and to the people, not only essential to the adjustment and balance of the general system, but the safeguard to the continuance of a free government. I consider it as the chief source of stability to our political system, whereas the consolidation of the states into one vast republic, sure to be aggressive abroad and despotic at home, will be the certain precursor of that ruin which has overwhelmed all those that have preceded it. I need not refer one so well acquainted as you are with American history, to the State papers of Washington and Jefferson, the representatives of the federal and democratic parties, denouncing consolidation and centralization of power, as tending to the subversion of State Governments, and to despotism."
It is worth adding that Lee himself was personally opposed to slavery, and said that new Christian abolition societies were already threatening slavery in the South before the Northern invasion. Given that Lee was personally opposed to slavery, it is difficult to say he fought for the protection of slavery…
Back to the Ruchi/Leah discussion, in case people are still reading:
It sounds like what's at stake here is the question of Jewish 'unity', which I learned from this blog is considered a very important thing in Ruchi's community, vs. more possibilities for defining Jewishness, even taking into account that a wider range of definitions will likely involve more conflicting elements and less agreement (although we also know that bitter disagreements are at least as likely to arise between people/groups who are closer to rather than further away from each other).
So for Ruchi, 'splintering' among Jews is a problem, for Leah, 'more possibilities for feeling comfortable in Judaism' is a different way of framing the same phenomenon?
This is pretty fascinating as a question. I'll hold off because I'm not sure if the thread is dead for now.
Consider my thanks for not going there withdrawn. I don't have time today,so I will pick on one tiny thing that I knew where to look – the idea that Lee opposed slavery.
Lee once asserted in a letter that slavery was a “moral & political evil.” But in that same letter, he argued that there was no sense protesting the peculiar institution and that its demise should be left to “a wise Merciful Providence.”
Source. See also PBS' American Experience: Robert E. Lee.
Larry, and Michael, I'm sure you gentlemen notice that the Confederacy was an ANALOGY…:)
SBW: I can't speak for Leah, but for me, there are two issues at stake. One is indeed as you mentioned – that Jewish unity is an extremely important goal. Issue two is that since I believe that Torah was handed to us from Sinai, when Judaism is redefined in more liberal ways (while I respect the free will endowed by us from God to do whatever we wish), I also question the ability of the Jewish soul to connect Jewishly with its source in the context of that new and edited version of Judaism, when certain key elements are no longer considered important, necessary, or relevant.
Yikes!! That was a statement.
Yes it is, I really appreciate your clarity and frankness. This will make for fruitful future discussions (even if not this one) about what 'editing' or redefining Judaism means. Thanks.
I also question the ability of the Jewish soul to connect Jewishly with its source in the context of that new and edited version of Judaism
This is the part where I have to respectfully drop out of a conversation. I have heard women tell an Orthodox Jew how spiritually fulfilling they find leading prayers, reading Torah for a congregation, writing tefillin scrolls and so forth, and then heard the guy explain that they actually weren't feeling spiritual at all, that their feelings came from the Yetzer Hara and were a temptation to be resisted. I just can't tell other people what they are 'really' feeling – it is beyond my ability to do so.
So when you say that you doubt the ability of a Jewish soul to connect to Hashem through a heterodox faith, what do you say when someone tells you they manage it just fine, thanks very much?
Larry,
This is a very good question. Firstly, I don't question how any "feels." And I don't tell anyone what to do.
But the way I understand things is that doing what is spiritual and "feeling spiritual" are very often not correlated. When I eat matza on Pesach, that is hugely spiritual. Doesn't usually feel that way, though. I could wrap myself in a non-kosher tallis or eat a non-kosher challah. Spiritual or no?
Feelings are notoriously capricious and differ from person to person. Should our Torah then be open to completely individual interpretation?
The way I see it is that Hashem created us, created our sould, and gave us intructions as to how to feed and nurture that soul.
However.
If someone discovers or worships Hashem via a movement that has other policies as to what is spiritual, it is not for me to doubt that individual's experience. He/she may very well be deriving soul-food from it, or not. I question it, is all I'm saying, if certain key elements are edited out or missing, because I believe God knew what He was doing when He gave us Torah in its entirety.
Fascinating exchange.
I could (and might) write an entire blog post on this subject. First, from my perspective, I grew up in a household where my parents disliked organized religion (my dad because his parents shoved it down his throat – I have some cruel stories to tell – and my mom because her parents considered organized religion beneath them.) They met up finding themselves soul mates for a zillion reasons, including the fact that they were exactly on the same page regarding religion. They brought us up knowing we were Jewish, kept up certain family traditions, Dad played organ in a synagogue, but never made us go to Hebrew school, etc, etc, etc.
So… the big joke growing up (as my parents were crunchy granola Democrats and huge Mets fans) was that my sister and I could date/marry whomever we pleased: black, white, Jew, Christian, man, woman if we loved them and they were nice to us. The only people who were off limits were Republicans and Yankee fans. My sister attended Peabody Conservatory, and then my dad expanded the forbidden list to include Tenors. "If you marry a YANKEE FAN, how would you raise the KIDS???"
Funnily, I am in a mixed religious marriage (Dave is Catholic) and we also find ourselves on exactly the same page religiously. We met in college, and had each just come away from serious relationships. Me with a Jew who was much more observant/religious than I was, and Dave with a Christian who drank much more Kool-Aid than he did. When we found each other, it was such a relief, because even though we were from different religions, we were exactly on the same page regarding the role it played in our lives, what we loved and didn't love about each religion, etc.
Interestingly, our wedding ceremony was legal according to Judaism (my uncle, who was a judge, married us) but not according to Catholicism. As a result, we did pre-cana counseling after we were married (sort of post-cana, actually) and were counseled by a priest and a rabbi (separately) before the Catholic ceremony. To their credit, regarding the raising of children, BOTH OF THEM said they felt the actual religion we chose was much less important than that we AGREED on the decision. They each felt the tension created by religious friction between the parents was potentially much more damaging than the actual choice we made. I can't tell you how much we appreciated and respected them for this guidance.
I can't speak for other Jews, but for me, religion and politics are so sensitive. It's a great relief to me that my husband and I agree on both. Whether or not a couple agrees on either, though, is much less important than their having genuine respect and support for the other's point of view. If you choose someone as a life partner, hopefully it is because you support them and know their heart, even if their thinking diverges from yours. We are trying to impart on our children that respect and kindness can overcome so many obstacles – including people who love each other but think differently from each other.
Thank you so much for opening up your page to this topic, and for your sensitive treatment of this subject.
Wow. You do have some story to tell. Now sports is a whole 'nother thing I don't get. How will you raise the kids…lol, but to some people it's not so funny.
While I would never recommend intermarriage, if a couple is already intermarried and the Jewish spouse becomes more interested in his/her faith (though often the non-Jewish spouse drives the journey as there is no "baggage" – as your dad experienced), the marriage need not dissolve. I so agree that where there is respect, a desire to work on one's character, and mutual support, an amicable solution can often be discovered. What happens to the kids largely depends on the above.
Thanks so much for your story. I hope you do write a post about it. We all have so much to learn from one another.
Aliza – awesome comment, really interesting. I totally agree – whichever religion is chosen, it should be ONE – the parents should agree. Very responsible clergy you met with.
Ok, first of all the things people say to rabbis . . . don't even get me started! HA! Secondly, NOT a DP fan – forgetting his politics for a second, I don't appreciate how he represents (or doesn't) Reform Judaism. I'd be surprised if he actually considered himself Reform, or if he just belongs to a Reform shul. I don't know. At any rate, this is a very interesting segment of his show!
So I think it's true – in general, regardless of denomination, I do think many people feel that "intermarriage is something to be avoided as a nation" as you say. I just think people understand the longevity issue – the more intermarriage, the less likely it is that the Jewish people will continue to grow. That's not to say that intermarried families don't raise Jewish children; many of them do. But many of them don't. Certainly I very much respect people's choices, and do not judge what is in other people's hearts! But for my family though, I'm in favor of expanding and growing our people as much as possible, so for me, intermarriage is not, and never was, an option.
BTW one thing I think is important to mention is that many people who become engaged to a non-Jew encourage that person to choose Judaism, and many do (of their own volition as well not "just for marriage"). This, in my opinion, is an excellent thing, as the result is a family with 2 Jewish parents. I find it irritating when people say someone intermarried and fail to mention that the spouse is now a Jew. Because that is not an intermarriage.
It wasn't even a question growing up in my Reform household – it was something understood. You date Jews, you marry Jews. End of story. Now, my brother ended up taking that a few steps further – he became Orthodox. And while my parents definitely went through an adjustment period (and still sometimes have a hard time with certain things), I can tell you that if he had "married out" it would have been far more traumatic for them. They eventually would have adjusted and accepted the non-Jewish spouse into the family, because they are about the most decent, good people I know, but it would have been hard for them.
As for politics, ya know, I can't see how that could possibly be on the same level as religion, unless the partner in the relationship was super-active politically and their beliefs ran truly counter to the deep values of the other partner. Mr. EK and I don't agree on some political stuff, but the really BIG stuff we do, and I do think that would be hard if, for example, he was anti-choice and I was pro-choice, and he went a lobbied in front of Planned Parenthood clinics or something – that would be, um, not good for me. BUT if he just held different beliefs and voted accordingly and nothing else, I'm not sure that would bother me as much. But I don't really know. It's an excellent question.
In the end I just want to reiterate that while I am not in favor of intermarriage (not such a surprise, I know), I really do not feel that I can judge other people's choices – I cannot possibly know what is in everyone's hearts and minds, and I wouldn't ever want to judge two people who have found each other and created a beautiful family. Any more than I would want them to judge me for my choices and beliefs. I think that mutual respect is really important. It's why I love being a part of my shul community – we are very open and accepting to so many kinds of families and choices – including my own! Which I could not say about every Reform shul. Anyway, interesting discussion.
Leah, if you say that intermarriage is problematic because it will yield fewer Jews, I have to ask: why do we want more Jews? Re: your brother, I have heard some people say they'd rather their kids be on drugs than Orthodox – at least the former is a familiar problem.
Re: politics, upon further reflection, I think the reason I always say that politics bore me is NOT that the issues bore me – the other stuff (the one-upmanship, the game) bores me. The issues are dearly important to me, but my faith informs them, so I don't need politics. As you, I vote according to my beliefs on any given issue and therefore consider myself neither Republican nor Democrat. If my husband and I had different beliefs I would consider that problematic religiously. Politics play a minuscule role in our lives.
omg. drugs rather than Orthodox? that is, honestly, sick. And why do we want more Jews? I mean, isn't it a good thing to increase our numbers? I'm not sure I understand what you're asking.
I love the challenge that Ruchi's question poses–why do we want more Jews? Really, WHY? And whatever the answer is, WHY that? And then WHY that answer . . . [imagine the 3-yr-old here]. For me, it is not so obvious that increasing 'our' numbers is such an imperative. And I get the impression that even where most respondents here feel similarly about intermarriage, it might be for rather different reasons.
For instance, I have gotten the impression from Ruchi's other posts that part of her belief is that "Jewish souls" are in themselves utterly precious, and so having more kids and marrying Jewish are part of increasing that sort of 'absolute value' of more Jewish souls existing in the world. That is what I consider a 'metaphysical' view (sorry if the term is not one you appreciate, I mean it as a neutral description). I don't share that view, but I'm interested in WHY this idea. Leah, I think, has a less metaphysical and more worldly, historical, or nation-oriented perspective, that Jews should marry Jews, raise Jewish kids and thereby perpetuate the Jewish nation because it is what we are and we are what it is and has been, and if we don't do it, then there will be less Jews and even maybe none someday. I think this might be slightly different from Ruchi's view because the WHY is more a matter of perpetuating what WE are and what our ancestors have been, have given us, have fought for, and died for. In this vein, I will note that my (barely observant) mother once said every Jewish woman should have 3 babies, one to replace each parent and one "for the Holocaust". Why? Do we owe it to Holocaust victims to have more children? How does this in any way 'compensate' for those deaths? Do we owe it to God or to the Jewish nation? And why? Where do we get these kinds of debts, are we born with them or what? What do we owe to an identity? Are we really 'a nation'? Is there such thing as Jewish identity without nationhood? For Ruchi I'm not so sure it's about the WE as an identity to be preserved as much as about the idea of "Jewish souls" as such, although of course she and her loved ones are themselves Jewish souls.
Might be hair-splitting, but I am interested in the very subtle differences in where people get their answers, or assumptions, about the WHY.
You are right. I do take quite a metaphysical view, and proudly. I think it's a great word to describe what I do.
The Holocaust is oft-quoted as a reason to marry in, and again I challenge: why? Why? Why? Why? To continue? So what about us must continue, if not the metaphysical? Mustn't there be an inherent value to "us" in order to justify our continue-hood? Because of the Holocaust? So if not for that horrific stain on history, it wouldn't matter? Continuity for the sake of continuity is barely logical. Else it borders on racism, as one of my commenters suggested.
So this is not something I have a reason for that is concrete. I just think it's good to have more of us around 🙂 I guess I do have an irrational fear of extinction. Also, I'm a combo of metaphysical and national. I feel the same way about Jewish souls, as well as our numbers, if that makes sense. I don't know if "replacing" people is something I think about, but I do hope I honor those who suffered and died at the hands of all our oppressors (from Egypt on . . .) by bringing Jewish souls into the world. I have a friend from my grad school days who had 7 children, one for each of the 6 million and the 7th representing our future (who amazingly was born on Yom Ha'atzma'ut!). While it's not my "thing" I respect the symbolism for them, children of survivors.
Ruchi, I don't understand your last 2 lines "Continuity for the sake of continuity is barely logical. Else it borders on racism, as one of my commenters suggested." What do you mean by this?
Thanks for clarifying, Leah. What I meant was, if someone says, we need more Jews…we need to continue to Jewish people, but they don't say WHY it is important that there be more Jews or why it is important that the Jewish people continue to exist, then it's continuity for the sake of continuity. It's not so logical. Perpetuation of a species for its own sake is not a reason for perpetuation. Isn't that what the great American melting pot is all about? To say that the Jewish race must continue without knowing why is just a superiority thing.
This topic bothers me not at all. I also don't understand why people get riled about it. As far as I know, belief in God and the Torah pretty much cements belief in the eternity of the Jewish people. I don't see what the increasing rates of intermarriage have to do with that, unless one has doubts about God's promises to Avraham and the rest. – MPMP
In part I feel the same way you do. The Jewish people will always survive. However, *individual* Jews sacrifice their connection to their spiritual source via intermarriage. Because I care about individual Jews, and not just about the sum total, I care about this problem.
Ruchi, this is illuminating. But I get the feeling that you are perhaps unusual in this approach?
That depends what you mean by "unusual." In the book I referenced in a previous post, "Letters to a Buddhist Jew" by Rabbi Akiva Tatz, p. 85, he states:
"The Jewish people's survival is not our problem. It is not a problem at all; it has been promised by the One who is entirely capable of delivering on His promises…Our problem is…the survival of Jews – individual Jews have no guarantee of survival [as Jews]…"
His analogy is when leaves fall off a tree, the tree will not die. But the individual leaves may well die.
Ruchi, when you say that *individual* Jews sacrifice their connection to their spiritual source via intermarriage, my first reaction is to think, "well then, how connected were they really (in their own minds)?"
And I love how you're asking, "why?" For my husband it's ideological, and not necessarily in a way that most Orthodox Jews would appreciate. He feels that with the rightward shift that seems to be happening today, the Jewish world will soon be polarized into Ultra-Orthodox and completely secular. His goal is to produce a small gaggle of religiously committed, but not ultra-orthodox, Jews. Strange, no?
True but marriage sort of seals the deal. Not for everyone, and not for always (necessarily) but generally.
I am actually highly impressed with your husband's logic. Does that seem counter-intuitive? It's just that so few people think globally and communally about these things. For so many it's narrow and myopic and maybe selfish and whom you fall in love with and others can worry about the State of the Nation.
Fascinating post. I used to love listening to Dennis Prager when I lived on the west coast (harder to work into my schedule now).
It was funny to read this today because I noticed over the holiday that there were several times when I was talking to someone in the religious community and I almost assumed they shared my political views (Republican). This happened both in a private conversation and at a Yom Tov meal during which the host and another guest got into a heated political discussion. The guests liberal leanings surprised the rest of the table because of our basic assumptions.
I never let on when my political views diverge from those of the crowd I'm in. I just prefer to talk about other things. But when I discover that a non-Orthodox Jew is a Republican, I likewise am surprised!! Assumptions…
oh I stay away from politics. esp in my community – while I may be liberal on social issues (marriage equality, women's health issues, health care in general, etc) I am very much NOT liberal on issues of Israel's security and place in the world, and many people in our community are. While I have always found people to be respectful, I just don't want to get into it. On the other end, I travel in other circles where being socially liberal is not super-popular so I keep my thoughts to myself. It's not worth the potential conflict.
I am always amazed at how seriously the normal average American takes politics. When the KoD and I got married, there was no thought whether our politics lined up (they don't.) What mattered primarily to us was the religious values. The first argument we EVER had in our married life was to do with politics. I have learned to leave it alone.
Very interesting thread!
Exactly! See my response to Leah above – I think that has a lot to do with it.
Hadassah, it probably has to do with the extent to which one's political beliefs are an extension of one's ethical and religious beliefs. If one's politics are an extension of one's ethics and religion, then to "intermarry" politically is akin to "intermarrying" ethically or religiously, with all that entails.
Myself, for example, my becoming a libertarian was a direct result of my being Orthodox. My application of the Talmud to Israeli politics led me straight into libertarianism. So for me to marry a non-libertarian would be difficult – though not necessarily impossible – because my libertarianism is inextricably bound up with my Orthodox Judaism.
And I'll tell you what, finding libertarian Orthodox Jewish woman is difficult, especially in Israel, because Israel is a fundamentally socialistic country.
(The founding Labor Zionists were all socialists, while the competing Revisionist Zionists were all fascists, followers of Mussolini. As Ludwig von Mises shows, fascism is a type of socialism, so essentially, Israel was founded out of competition between two socialist parties, without any non-socialist competition. The political culture of Israel evolved accordingly. Thankfully, we have libertarian Moshe Feiglin, the Israeli Ron Paul, so maybe things will change. Also notice that Feiglin is not only libertarian, but also one of the most outspokenly religious politicians in Israel.)
Right now, I've got two women on the table. The first is in America, and she is simply utterly unconcerned with politics. It's beautiful: in the mental world she inhabits, politics practically doesn't exist, which is precisely the world I hope to create by radically downsizing government (as a prelude to abolishing it; yes, I am an anarchist). I even coined a term to describe people like her, viz. "messianic libertarian", so termed because people who are not concerned with politics at all, already mentally inhabit the world I believe the Messianic era will someday be.
The second woman is a libertarian woman in Australia, and I must say, we get along fabulously! I don't have to hide anything from her; I can spout all my anarchist musings without inhibition, and she is actually excited by and approving of all my insanity! She has even said she wants to marry Ron Paul, and she's spontaneously quoting Murray Rothbard!!! 😀
The only problem is that America and Australia are rather far from where I am in Israel…sigh…
Michael, I find this super-interesting. Thanks. The interplay between politics and religion in Israel is radically different from that interplay in the states.
Sorry I couldn't publish the other comment; I was concerned some of my readers might find their ideologies offended as I have a very wide readership (not huge, just wide 🙂 and strive mightily to provide a space here where no segment of humanity feels put down, although I doubt that was your intention.
…and here is the other part of Michael's comment:
"Anyway, as an aside, I find it frustrating that many of my "liberal" friends – especially the Jews among them – refuse to honestly take my libertarianism for what it is. That is, as a libertarian, I find Democrats and Republicans equally abhorrent, and I oppose Republican bailout of businesses (crony-capitalism) as much as I oppose Democratic welfare for the poor (socialism). And yet, many of my "liberal" friends – again, especially the Jews – keep painting me as a Neoconservative Republican lover. For example, if I declare that Obama is a cold-blooded murderer due to his remorseless massacring of Pakistani children, they might respond, "I bet you wouldn't condemn Santorum or Gingrich as harshly as you do Obama." No, I would and I do condemn those Republicans! I honestly despise those Republicans every bit as much as I do those Democrats. But they continue to believe that I prefer Republicans to Democrats and that I prefer crony-capitalism to socialism, even though I have given them every indication that their impression of me is false. They cannot seem to break out of the mold of the two-party system; like the two-dimensional inhabitants of Flatland, they simply refuse to believe that there is a third dimension, and when I, a libertarian sphere, invade their two-dimensional world of Democrats and Republicans, they, being Democrats, assume I must be a Republican. "
No problem. 🙂
I might note that once I became a libertarian in Israel, it was very easy for me to apply my new convictions to American politics. And it works the other way as well; the more I listen to Ron Paul about America's foreign policy, the more I am convinced that Israel's policies vis a vis the Palestinians are fundamentally similar to America's vis a vis the Shah of Iran. (See, for example, http://www.jpost.com/ArtsAndCulture/Books/Article.aspx?id=170285, and compare what Rabin says of himself there, to what America did with the Shah.) Once one learns the fundamental principles, they are universally applicable.
Interestingly, my brother simultaneously but totally independently became a libertarian too, and the two of us were able to convert our mother to libertarianism in the blink of an eye. Our father remains a Democrat, however. I have wondered whether the three of us – me, my brother, and my mother – were all so easily and quickly converted to libertarians because of common genetics inherited from her (which my father lacks), or because of education (sons are closer to their mothers than to their fathers).
May I just say that I'm somehow delighted that for once, Ruchi makes a pop-culture reference and I have to look it up–never had heard of Dennis Prager!
I fall into the group of people who could never marry a Republican, but could (and did) marry a non-Jew. I could add to the autobiog descriptions here–we all celebrate any holiday that any one of us pulls together, and the pulling-it-together is the only obstacle. My husband is usually the one to remember to pick up a challah on Friday afternoon, some Fridays, not all. He is a devoted cook and so after we got together he bought some Jewish cookbooks and makes easily the best brisket I've ever had. We send the kids to Jewish day camp, partially because I like the Jewish exposure. We also celebrate some of 'his' holidays, but I try to emphasize to the kids that we are a family, so we all share all the holidays. I realize this puts me in a very different demographic than most of the readers here. Anyway, we share values, so mostly it is easy–gratitude, kindness, generosity, trying to do the right thing. I have occasional ambivalence about sometimes wanting more Judaism, and sometimes not.
Back to Ruchi's main question–so what IS the reason to avoid intermarriage? Why would it be 'unwise'? I am someone who is less invested in Judaism as a nation. I understand that people might be opposed to intermarriage, but what is this 'nation'? My view of Judaism is more of a messy Venn diagram including people who are born Jewish, practice whatever degree of Judaism regardless of parentage, have a Jewish parent or grandparent, and probably several other loose criteria.
My parents, and especially my grandmother, didn't want to like my husband because he's not Jewish. But even my grandmother couldn't resist, he is so sweet and charming. Also as I grew older, and none of my siblings looked to be getting partnered anytime soon, everyone got less picky–so for instance when I lived with a non-Jewish guy at age 22 my parents were not thrilled. When I brought my husband-to-be home at the ripe old age of 33 they were apparently thrilled and the criteria had definitely been relaxed–he was nice and had a JOB, so fine, let's have some grandchildren already.
Heh heh. Ever the surpriser, me. Thanks for sharing your experience. I think you're trying to say that you don't necessarily consider it unwise. How would you guide your kids in this arena? Do you feel that in your situation it "worked" despite the differences, or that it's fine even as a plan A?
You are correct, I do not consider interfaith marriage 'unwise'. To be fair, if I have any wisdom at all to speak of, this is definitely not the area in which it is to be found. And I can only hope my kids will accept any guidance from me at all in the areas I think I do have some tiny wisdom. I try.
I am more concerned that the kids find partners, when they are mature enough for it, who are good-humored and good communicators. It is of course also easier to accept people into a family who are more 'like us', which means educated, left-wing, and so forth. I would have more difficulty accepting someone who is different from us in those ways than in terms of religion.
I am trying to figure out what keeps me from being the perfectly stereotypical liberal Reform Jew. I think there is not much in this case, to make that distinction. Hmmm, it makes me want to reclaim that stereotype in some positive ways. If anything, this discussion and the blog have made me want to know more about Reform Judaism in its specific German Enlightenment legacy–i.e. to think more about how 'Reform' is not just 'less' but is its own Jewish identity, even though compared to Orthodox it might seem wishy-washy, a Protestant copycat, lax, uninformed and so forth. (I of course do not mean this to insult Reform Jews, of which I am one; I am referring to things I have read in some Orthodox sources.)
SBW once again I am blow away by your openness and general awesomeness 😉 For me, intermarriage was never an option because for me Judaism and being a Jew is all about peoplehood and being a "nation". And I do think it's different from, say, an American marrying a Frenchman. For me, religion, nation, and peoplehood are tied together – it would be like a dog marrying a cat. Which isn't the greatest analogy, but that is sort of how I feel – different species. No one better or worse than the other, but in order to perpetuate the dog population, dogs must partner with dogs, etc. I know, horrible analogy but that's what I could come up with on not much sleep today 🙂
Also RE Reform roots in the German Enlightenment – shoot me your email and I'll send you some links mine is lrwcaruso at gmail dot com
Hi LJ,
I didn't publish your comment although I agreed with much of it. I just felt it could easily have been construed as judgmental and insulting, and I didn't want that to happen.
I agree with what you said about there really being no denominations. I disagree with your opinion on the abortion issue. I don't think that's the reason, and I believe it's an oversimplification.
Thanks for weighing in.
I figured it wouldn't be posted considering the warnings and sensitive nature of the content but took the risk anyway.
Since you described yourself as being 'apolitical', I wouldn't expect you to know the root issue keeping non-observant Jews from joining the Republican Party but Norman Podhoretz who wrote a book called 'Why are Jews Liberal' says it is and it's based on extensive research.
Then again, anyone can 'believe' what they wish…it's only politics.
😉
Going forward I'll limit my comments to "feel-good" stuff.
Keep up the good work.
LJ
I wouldn't say "apolitical"…although on second thought that may well be a good way to describe it. And, "feel-good" stuff exclusively is not necessary. I love a good dissenting view or challenging issue – so long as every human being is respected, regardless of how off their behaviors or opinions are. Thanks for coming back:)
In the course of discussion of whether to make this or that change to 'protect Jewish continuity' I have caused heads to figuratively explode when I have asserted that I had no interest in that. My position was that we had a deal with Hashem – we keep the mitzvot and he makes sure that Am Yisrael continues to exist. So my sole contribution to the issue of Jewish continuity was to suggest we figure out more ways for Jews to keep the mitzvot.
Alan Dershowitz talks about a debate he had with the late Meir Kahane:
He asked me whether I wanted my children to marry Jews. Without hesitation, I said yes. Then he asked whether my desire was based on Halachah [Jewish law]. I said no. "Then," he insisted, pointing a finger at me, "you are nothing but a racist." I was taken aback by this strident accusation, but Kahane explained: "There are plenty of wonderful non-Jewish people who would make marvelous spouses for your children. Why are you excluding them all, unless you are obligated to exclude them by religious law? If you are merely expressing an ethnic preference for one of your own kind – that is the essence of racism."
I'd be interested to hear what other people think of this assertion.
LOL!!! I cited the precise same statement of Kahane; see Ruchi's comment, "Sorry I couldn't publish the other comment". 😉
Larry: YES!! I know exactly what you mean! This is exactly what Rabbi Akiva Tatz asserts in his book Letters to a Buddhist Jew – many Jews feel Jewish survival is our responsibility, but it's not. That's a promise by God. OUR job is to see to it that we and our loved ones and individual Jews remain a part of that survival contingency. A radical and novel assertion, to be sure, and one that turns classical Jewish American post-Holocaust thought on its head.
Re: Meir Kahane. His style is a bit out there for me (I probably wouldn't have published his comments on my blog). But the underlying concept is nevertheless a very interesting one, and one that is definitely germane. I referenced it above. I, too, would be interested to hear others' opinions on this.
Michael – I'm continually amazed at how even though we almost always come up with opposing answers, we always manage to start with the same questions.
Hmmm. Interesting. I would argue that survival of our people is an end in itself regardless of theology. And I don't have a problem with the "racist" comment. I believe all people are creatures of God and every one has a piece of the Divine spark. But if someone wants to call me "racist" for a preference to marry within my own community, so be it. Plenty of other cultures and religions feel the same way, and many of us manage to get along and live side-by-side making this world a better place. Also, I'm not sure R'Kahane is the shining example of someone who is not a racist, given his feelings about other nations, or even his feelings about some of his own people.
I actually don't agree with the Kahane quote above. If I say "I think that Italian culture has something unique and special to offer the world. I think the best way to keep this special something is to limit my marriage choices to people who themselves have Italian heritage, or who are willing to immerse themselves in a process and emerge as people who now are accepted as Itailians." This makes me a racist, according to Kahane, But if I say the exact same thing, except instead of 'I think' I say "I believe Hashem commanded" I'm not a racist?
Alternatively, if I say "There is something mystical and special about Irishmen. To keep this alive, it is better for the Irish to marry one another, even if one or both partners have no interest in their Irish traditions" I'm a racist. But if I say the same thing except I say "Hashem made something mystical and special about Irishman. He commanded Irish to marry one another even if one or both both partners have no interest in their Irish traditions, and I will follow that command" I'm not racist?
I'm not convinced.
Larry, I think Rabbi Kahane is responding more to the people who believe it is an imperative to marry Jewish, and who would excoriate their children or themselves if they intermarried.
For example, a person who loves playing tennis might very strongly, even passionately, desire to marry another tennis player. But they wouldn't regard the idea of marrying a non-player with disgust.
I think Rabbi Kahane is dealing with parents who would have disown their children and run to the rabbi wailing and bawling if their children intermarried, and people who would view their own personal intermarriage similarly.
Those sorts of people, if they do not have a religious basis, they are the ones Rabbi Kahane speaks of. Not the ones who personally prefer to marry Jewish the same way they personally prefer to marry a fellow tennis player.
A friend posted this on his facebook wall recently and it's very relevant to this conversation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_IQFIDXY7g&list=UUbdRcrHmpGp7K_btT8PLSIQ&index=1&feature=plcp
It's long but worth listening to at least part of it!
That was a totally and completely worthwhile 20 minutes. Thank you so much for sharing. I'm posting that on Facebook.
Great, I'm glad you enjoyed it! Hopefully others will too.
Should've published this comment with my last one..sorry about that! Ruchi, can you weigh in on specific reasons that you believe it is important for Jews to marry Jews?
Sure (btw need time to see the video before I post).
I think that Jews should marry other Jews because marriage partners are two parts of the same soul. Many, many times in the Torah God exhorts the Jewish people to marry Jewish in order to ensure their own spirituality (and, of course, that of their children). People think it's all about the kids (on MANY issues) but in a weird way they neglect their own spirituality till it becomes about the kids.
Well, my family aren't Jewish, so if they were to marry "out," it would be just as likely that they're marrying someone Jewish as anything else. I do have an aunt by marriage who is Jewish, though very, very secular. I find it a bit sad that the kid she has with my uncle is halachically Jewish but probably doesn't identify as such at all. I've considered broaching the subject, even, but I can't think of a way to do that that wouldn't create more problems than it solves. The kid in question is also a teenager and, in all likelihood, doesn't care a whit about any religion.
Myself, I can't imagine not marrying someone Jewish. It's too big a part of who I am to do otherwise, I want to raise any children I might have Jewish, and marrying someone who's not, halachic issues aside, just wouldn't make any sense. Somewhat ironically, given my own conversion status, there are some who would consider my own (as yet nonexistent) marriage a "mixed" marriage, despite the fact that any kids I have would, in all likelihood, get a deeper and broader Jewish education with me (at least religiously speaking) than they would in a house with two halachically Jewish but completely secular parents. That said, if my kids want to be Orthodox, I would respect their decision to seek an Orthodox conversion at that time. It complicates things, but I don't think it has to be a huge problem so long as my kids understand their own statuses in various communities.
Politically, I consider myself a moderate liberal and would find it very, very difficult to date or marry someone who was an ardent conservative (and I use here the American senses of these terms- liberal and conservative look very different someplace like Europe than they do in the U.S.). I think a person's political views do reflect their values and priorities on a number of levels, and if there is fundamental disagreement, I don't see it as unreasonable to choose not to enter into a marriage with someone. I wouldn't base a decision like that on political labels, necessarily (there are plenty of people who identify as Republicans, for instance, who disagree with the current positions and priorities of the Republican party), so much as attitudes regarding particular issues and governance in general.
"It's too big a part of who I am to do otherwise" – that's it. That's the crux. When it's such a part of your identity, you can't imagine being with anyone for whom it isn't.
I think people use the heated term "mixed marriage" when they want to refer to marriage with someone who is opposed to one's core identity. In the world-wide melting pot Jews find themselves in this past 60 years, it is a reality, a sad one for committed Jews, that many Jews do not consider their Jewishness to be part of their core identity, but they will consider deeply held political affiliations to be central to who they are. I have seen the same attitude towards marriages between different cultural Jewish sub-groups, like Ashkenazim marrying Sefardim; and in the not-too-distant past, even marriages between members of different Ashkenazi sub-sub-groups, like Lithuanian Orthodox Jews marrying Polish Orthodox Jews, were considered "mixed-marriage" and almost taboo in a cultural way. As Jews have moved all over the world, those purely cultural distinctions end up mattering less and less.
Ergo, IMHO any serious discussion about the cons of mixed marriage is only a corollary of a discussion about core identity.
Hi, RD, and welcome to OOTOB.
I think you are very right. This is definitely true of the Chassidic/non-Chassidic groups. It used to definitely be a "mixed marriage." Nowadays, there's so much crossover between the groups, it's much less of a big deal. And it is exactly about core identity – that's what the video posted above describes.
I remember, when I was a child, being told by my mother that I was NOT to bring home a non-Jewish boyfriend. By the time I hit high school I had decided not to even consider dating a non-Jew. Most people my age were pretty incredulous and argued that I was highly unlikely to marry anyone I dated in high school (fast-forward fifteen years, and I'm married to the cute clarinetist I crushed on in eleventh grade. But that's besides the point.)
As a teenager, my thoughts on intermarriage were: I want to live a Jewish life and have a Jewish home, and I want to raise my children in a Jewish home. I don't want to have to do it all by myself, so I need to choose a partner who will also bring Jewish traditions, knowledge, and attitudes into our home.
Something I learned in my high school "world religions" class was that most of the other students felt that marriage was entirely about romantic love and wanting to spend your life with one person, and that religion needn't be an obstacle because each partner could practice his/her own religion and they could come back together for everything else. In contrast, my view was (and still is) that marriage is the formation of a home and a new family unit, not just a romantic pairing. For me, I could only marry someone who shared my vision for a home and family – and Judaism has always been integral to that vision.