Yesterday in class we were talking about the Holocaust and it reminded me of an incident that happened when I was at Seeds of Peace in 2007. This day was the first day there that I cried. At Seeds, there is an hour and a half designated to dialogue sessions between the Palestinians and the Israelis where they are able to share their stories with the “enemy”. I remember walking into the dining hall for lunch where my friends Maor and Sapir, both Israeli, were waiting for me at our table. Maor pulled me aside and asked if I had heard what happened in one of the dialogue sessions that day, I told him I hadn’t. “Someone drew the swastika on the floor of one of the dialogue huts in permanent marker and said it was the best thing that had ever happened,” he said. Hearing that someone believed that the Holocaust was the best thing to happen in history was not only shocking, but rather painful. I later broke down and cried to my bunk counselor because that comment made me feel as though that Palestinian child was spitting on my father’s grave. After that comment, the Jews banded together and only talked to other Jews. Despite the forced integrated seating, the tables in the dining hall divided into Arabs and Jews, and it remained this way for a few days. As it turned out, the situation was that one of the discussion leaders drew the swastika on a piece of paper, passed it around the circle and asked each person what was the first thing that came to mind. However, one of the Palestinian kids stated that he believed that it was the best thing that had ever happened.

A few weeks ago, I was talking to a friend of mine about the Holocaust and she pointed out to me that we really only learn about the Holocaust from the Jewish perspective and that often we forget that it also happened to 5 million people who weren’t Jewish…gypsies, homosexuals, the mentally and physically disabled were all persecuted as well. It seems that the Jews are trying to claim it as their own personal experience when it in a way happened to everyone. In class, we talked about how there are slogans about the holocaust like “never again”, and as we pointed out in class, “never again” to whom? “Never again” to the Jews? I’ve been studying the Palestinian-Israeli conflict for the last few years and Gaza and the West Bank look a lot like the concentration camps…now obviously there are not mass genocides or people being forced to work and being starved to death. However, Israel has restricted 1.2 million Palestinians to the Gaza Strip which is 28 miles long by 4 miles wide. They live in refugee camps, and are not permitted to leave, and then the Israeli government wonders why the intifada’s happen…I’m not trying to be anti-Semitic, it just seems hypocritical.

The first time I really learned about Lilith was in a class I took last year called Love Sex and the Hebrew Texts, during which we discussed many of the biblical Jewish tales. The story of Lilith was one of those tales. Lilith is a significant figure within the Judaic, Islamic and Christian religions. She was Adam’s first wife. She and Adam were created from the clay of the earth at the same time and because of this Lilith felt that she was equal to Adam. Adam disagreed. He felt that despite the fact that they were created at the same time, he was superior to her. The problem between them began when Lilith wanted to be on top during intercourse. Adam refused; he felt that because he was superior to her, he should lie on top. Because of Adam’s refusal, Lilith left. Lilith’s continued refusal to return to Adam, she was labeled as a demon.

The portrayal of Lilith depends entirely upon the context in which one learns about her. Over time, Lilith has been portrayed as a demon, the first feminist, a “bitch”, or a baby killer. After Eve was created, Lilith’s sole demonic purpose was to kill newborn babies. I have an issue with the fact that solely because Lilith didn’t want to deal with Adam’s crap (essentially) she was turned into something that symbolized a threat to human society and future generations all together. Women today are constantly threatened by strong, confident, and self-sufficient women like Lilith. Women continually feel like they need to protect and defend what’s theirs because of this fear. By portraying Lilith as demonic, we only further the notion that women who demand equality are only trying to abate the way our society works.

This story makes it clear that the power struggle between men and women dates back to the biblical times. The patriarchal systems within Christianity, Judaism and Islam consistently give men the upper hand in this power struggle and seem to frequently ostracize women who fight for equality. Will this ever change? And if it ultimately will, the question then becomes when? When will these three religions look back to the bible and start pushing for equality?

In class last week, we discussed Jewish culture, foods, and music, and what makes something Jewish. Having grown up non-Jewish and with a very limited idea about what is actually Jewish, I had the stereotypical idea of what made something Jewish. In my mind, bagels were (somewhat) Jewish, Latkes were definitely Jewish, and Yamakas were Jewish, but much outside of that, I was clueless.

The real question isn’t what objects, are Jewish, but rather what determines their “Jewishness”? Is it the creator of the object that makes it Jewish? Is it who owns it? Is it the object’s purpose? Along those lines, what determines whether or not a food is Jewish? When I think of Jewish foods, I think of latkes, bagels, challah, gefilte fish, and matzah ball soup, which are all delicious, but who determined they were Jewish? I realized during class that bagels actually aren’t Jewish at all. Bagels are not known in all parts of the world, yet somehow wound up with a Jewish connotation. How did that happen? When thinking about Jewish music, I think of a voice that sings in an entirely different style from that of American and European singers. It has a more earthy and religious feel to it than other types of music. Every thing that is Jewish has a very distinct flavor. Jewish objects, such as the amulets are all completely unique. Jewish foods have distinct tastes, and traditional Jewish music has an interesting and intricate melodies.

Judaism is a unique religion in and of itself. As I discussed in my previous blog, Judaism does not require a belief in God. It solely requires that one follow Jewish practices. There is not one other religion which does not mandate the belief in God. In Islam and Christianity, one has to believe in God as well as celebrate certain holidays during the year (Christmas and Ramadan) and pray during certain times in the day or go to church. Judaism also appears to be the most accepting of religions in terms of differences among individuals. These aspects of Judaism always intrigued me and drew me in to learn more.

I think most people can say that when they think of Jewish music, “Hava Nagila” immediately comes to mind, but Jewish music is obviously much more diverse than that. However, identifying Jewish music in the first place is complicated. Lowenstein asks “Is any music written by a Jew Jewish music? Is only synagogue music Jewish? What makes Jewish music distinctive?”  In class we established that it is nearly impossible to name any music universally Jewish since it contains influences from the period, region, culture, and aesthetic tastes of the time. Lowenstein points out that some scholars believe that there is a common root to all Jewish music but he himself seems very critical of this idea. Although he never directly answers the questions posed in the beginning of the chapter, he demonstrates that Jewish music has formed from both “borrowed” influences and original influences, that because there is such a huge range of Jewish music that consists of both religious uses and secular uses, written in Hebrew and Jewish dialects, there can be no distinctive or definitive characteristic of Jewish music but it instead depends on the individual and community perspective and how they choose to associate the music. I think that is another example of the great tradition versus the little tradition. That although Jewish music can share characteristics like theme, use, and language, it is generally greatly influenced by the folk culture surrounding it. I think studying any aspect of Judaism is this complicated because this transfusion of influences seems to always be the case.

            It was really great that in class we were able to hear specific examples of religious and secular Jewish music; it really helped to understand exactly how diverse Jewish music is. Listening to synagogue music that sounded very professional and operatic to watching a music video of a side locked kippa-wearing gangster rapper was extremely interesting. One thing I was especially intrigued about was cantillation. I actually have never heard of it before and I found it amazing that the motifs or tropes can encompass so many concepts. Lowenstein describes them as “motifs that have both grammatical and musical functions. Each motif contains a number of notes. In some ways, the cantillation signs act like the commas, colons, and periods of our writing system” (Lowenstein 179). While I still do not necessarily understand how they work because I am so used to the western style of documenting music, I find it to be one of the most interesting aspects of Jewish music.

Today’s class sparked many thoughts for me. Ilana Pardes’ discussion of the birth of Israel, as we discussed in class, attempted to view the Bible without any preconceptions of its meaning, purpose, or direction. Rather, she viewed it as a piece of literature. As a result, I was reminded of a course I took in high school, “The Bible as/in Literature.” This was a course taught in the English department and taken by students from various backgrounds. We studied the Old Testament/Hebrew Bible as well as the New Testament. But rather than learning the Bible’s Stories as factual or as God’s message to humans (this was, after all, public school), we looked at God as a character, sought meaning through literary devices like symbolism and metaphors, and, most importantly, studied the purpose of each story (for instance, what lesson was its writer attempting to impart?). This fascinating course was made all the more so when one studied the attitudes of its students, both before and after the course. For many, it confirmed their belief that religion is “made-up” for the purpose of giving people a point of reference, or to explain extraordinary phenomenon that can otherwise be explained by science. However, for many, the course served to reinforce their religious beliefs. This is somewhat surprising, because the course would seem to prove the Bible as a means to establish a secure and uniform culture, rather than to teach religion. I think that this results from the sense of community that many religions rely on. By learning about a common history and sharing knowledge of something with others (in this case, Bible stories), one is drawn into a community who shares such understandings. For many of the students, learning about the Bible as a young adult served to reinvigorate beliefs that they learned as children. When I finished reading the Pardes piece, I wrote a note to myself: “how do conservative Jews feel about such a reading of the Bible?” This question was actually rhetorical, my point being that I am sure that conservative Jews would not like such a reading. However, upon reflecting about my experiences in high school, I think that this question is a lot more complicated than I initially thought.

I was also very interested by Professor Staub’s question regarding our view of Ancient Israeli culture as being factual or as an imagined culture. Last year, I took “Nationalism, Consumerism, and Gender” with Professor Sweeney. In this course, we discussed the creation of national identities, and many academics suggested the idea of a common history or common origin was a common characteristic of nations. Many characteristics or practices that we assume to be indigenous to a given culture have actually developed from something from very different over time. Others have been consciously created in order to promote a sense of unity. My favorite example is kilts, which most of us understand as a traditional article of Scottish clothing. In reality, the kilt only became a national icon in the nineteenth century. It was worn in the sixteenth century by men and boys in the Highlands, but was popularized following Scottish Diaspora in the early nineteenth century as a symbol of national identity. Kilts serve as an example of how objects or practices that we understand as meaning something today may have had a very different meaning in the past. Although I am not familiar enough with the research performed by scholars to judge the validity of our current understanding of Ancient Israeli culture, my education has taught me to be wary of accepting our common perceptions as truth.

I also just wanted to mention The Red Tent, by Anita Diamant, an interesting novel that reexamines the story of Jacob and the life of his daughter Dinah, as well as those of Leah, Rachel, Zilpah and Bilhah. Although I read it years ago and cannot remember many details, I think it is an interesting example of how people can have different understandings of Biblical texts.