My Jewish Studies Essay

Mark Goldstein
JUD 2134
Reaction Paper One

There are very few works that are more frequently cited as a source of absolute truth than the Hebrew Tanakh. The Tanakh is composed of the five books of Moses (most frequently referred to as Torah or Teachings), the books of the Prophets, and the Writings. These books have all been ascribed a canonical status. In other words, the texts themselves have become sources of authority. Moshe Halbertal describes many different properties of canonization in his work: People of the Book. He defines a “normative” canon as one that establishes rules and laws by which a person or society lives. The Tanakh most certainly falls under this category, as it comes to be looked upon as a divinely inspired framework by which society should function. Rabbis endlessly debate the meaning of the texts, but the one thing that they can all agree on is that the Tanakh is the source which they should be working from. Halbertal further draws a distinction between open and sealed canons. A sealed canon is one which nothing can be added to, because it is definitive. The Tanakh is the perfect example of a sealed canon. If one even tries to add anything to it, it would be a futile attempt because it would not hold the same divine status as the current three components. By comparison, an open canon is one by which new elements can be added and have the same status as the preceding texts. An illustration of an open canon is the United States Constitution. The Constitution can be continually amended; and the amendments are able to cancel each other out (such as the eighteenth and twenty-first amendments). Any new addition to the Constitution is just as important as previous amendments. What should be noted is that while both open and sealed canons are considered authoritative, they can both be subjected to interpretations which lead to different practical applications of the same normative canons. For example, the United States Supreme Court settles disputes in interpretations of the Constitution, and Rabbis constantly argue about interpretations of the Tanakh. Therefore, just because a text is canonized, does not mean that everybody will view it the same way. The importance of a canon is that the source material is agreed upon.

One of the prominent features of the Tanakh is the writings of the Hebrew Prophets. The reason for their Canonization comes from the belief that they are divinely inspired. Perhaps the most quoted and well-known book is the Book of Isaiah. In the book, Isaiah makes reference to new era where everybody follows the word of the Lord, and war becomes non-existent (Isaiah 2:2-4). The passage is repeated almost verbatim in the book of Micah (Micah 4:1-4). The concept illustrated in these two passages becomes known as the Messianic Era, and is the basis for the belief in a Messiah that will lead the house of Israel into its golden age. An interesting point to be made, though, is that while the books of the prophets are currently sealed canons, they were obviously open at one point. The fact that the language and word-choice is almost the same suggests that one prophet cited the other. Similarly, the themes of both books are the same. The major motif in the first part of Micah is divine judgment as a result of conquest and godlessness. From this, it is likely to be inferred that both Micah 4 and Isaiah 2 were written in similar historical and political contexts.

Conversely, both passages are referenced in Isaiah 51:1-6. Many critics hold the belief that the book of Isaiah actually had multiple authors, and that Chapter 51 was composed by an unknown prophet who was dubbed “Deutero-Isaiah” around the end of the Babylonian exile. Because of this, the concerns of the Israelites have changed. Whereas early Isaiah seems to have been written during a time when the Kingdoms of Judah and Israel were constantly engaged in warfare (something the author deeply opposed as can be seen in 2:4), Isaiah 51 was written in a post-exilic Israel where restoration is a major concern. What that means is the overall intents of the authors are different. In early Isaiah, the author is anticipating the end of Israel and Judah as a result of war, conquest, and godlessness. In Isaiah 39 and beyond, the focus is more on “comforting” the people of Israel, and letting them know that the cause of restoration is not an impossible one. Isaiah 51:4 almost directly echoes the earlier passages’ message of G-d establishing His kingdom and conveying his teachings to the nation of Israel. However, now the intent is to comfort a despairing people, rather than to convey a message of divine justice. Essentially, the author takes an earlier canonized text, and reinterprets it. Even within the Bible itself, earlier canons are reinterpreted into a different context! Further, Christians also reference the book of Isaiah (which was a closed canon at that point) to affirm their belief that Jesus is the Messiah. In effect, the same canon was reinterpreted multiple times depending on the context.

The irony of canonization is that although a canonized text is authoritative in itself, the ways that it can be interpreted depends entirely on who is doing it and what context it is in. As is seen with Isaiah and Micah, canonical texts can cite each other. Along with that, canonical texts can reinterpret themselves depending on the historical context, as happened in Isaiah 51. This is not to mention the fact that even after a canon is sealed; it can still be reinterpreted, just as Christian scholars have done with the book of Isaiah. While canonized texts are more-or-less static, how people view them is completely fluid.

Opportunity Costs, aka My Liberation

In the business world, every action is measured in terms of costs and benefits. For example, a firm does not invest in a new computer system if the cost of setting up and maintaining the system is greater than the long-term benefits. An accounting cost is the cost of pursuing a specific action. The opportunity cost is the value of the benefits that could have been earned by pursing an alternate action. For example, the opportunity cost of using a specific plot of land to build a movie theater, might have been what benefits could have been derived from using that same plot of land to build a book store. Opportunity costs are entirely theoretical. One cannot know exactly what would have happened if the alternative path was taken. One can only speculate, based on what he already knows. However, in business, the decisions are slightly easier to make, because there are numbers to work with. An owner or manager can look at statistics, or he can do market research, to determine which decision is the best. The problem is that no matter what decision is made, there is always the nagging feeling that said decision was wrong.

Outside the realm of business, though, these decisions become much more complex. The costs and the benefits are still very real; but they cannot be measured by any numerical standard. The currency is human emotion: an amount which cannot be quantified by any bank. While a person has statistics to help him make the decision whether or not to invest ¼ of the annual profit into foreign industry, all he has is his gut to tell him whether or not he should drop everything he is doing to follow his dream. Or whether he should finally try and take that extra step with someone that he has been friends with for years, at the risk of losing that friendship. Or whether he should come out of the closest and be honest with himself, despite the way he knows society will treat him. Or to end a relationship that he feels is going nowhere, with the looming possibility that all it would take to make it bloom is time. The problem with taking these risks is that there is just as much possibility that one is doing the wrong thing as it is that he is doing the right thing. There is no logical process to go through. There is no secondary data that can help, because the experience is different for every individual. This being said, both the costs and benefits are much greater. A failed business venture can very often be recovered from. A life decision is much harder to take back. If the right decision is made, the emotional rewards are astronomical. If the wrong decision is made, then one is very often miserable for the rest of his life.

Recent events have made me begin to ponder the opportunity costs that I incurred when I told her that it was over. When I decided that I could never be happy as long as I continued to allow myself to come secondary to her old flame. When I realized that when she was kissing me, all that she could think about was kissing him again. When she constantly compared my actions to his. When I decided that maybe, just maybe, I deserved better. No matter that she was the first person since my own old flame that made me feel like I could take on the world. Or that her smile had the ability to keep me blissful all day. Or that whenever I left her behind, all that I could think about was when I was going to see her again. Every day since I told her that I felt it was best if we went our separate ways; I have wondered what might have happened had I allowed the relationship to continue. Therefore, I decided to compile a list of the possible benefits and costs if I had decided to put up with the pain of feeling like a bad replacement.

Benefit: She might eventually get over him, and start to appreciate me for who I am, instead of comparing me to who I am not.
Cost: Every day that I spend with her, she might grow to resent me more and more for not being him.

Benefit: I can continue to feel uplifted by her youthful spirit. The pain of realizing that I am no longer a child is lessened while she is still there to make me feel like one.
Cost: Eventually I will realize that this is not a child’s world. As nice as it would be to keep playing games, everybody needs to grow up sooner or later. This includes her.

Benefit: I would never need to suffer the pain of seeing her in the arms of another man.
Cost: I might miss out on the opportunity to meet my true soul mate, out of false hopes of something that might never happen.

Annie Dillard once wrote “You’ve got to jump off cliffs all the time, and build your wings on the way down.” It could have been very easy for me to let this relationship continue. All I would have needed to do was not say a word. I could very easily have continued to live each day in false bliss, while she was never feeling for me what I was feeling for her. She did not want to be alone, but at the same time, he is what she wanted, and I realized that. I cannot assess for sure what would have happened if I had taken the alternative to what I did. There are no equations I could have applied to determine if I would have been X percent more or less happy. All I know is that my heart told me what to do, and I followed it, no matter how difficult it was for me to do. I made a plunge. Maybe I will be able to build some wings before it is too late and maybe I won’t. What I do know is that at least I am not stuck in the nest anymore.

Why I Am No Longer an Atheist

“The most beautiful experience we can have is the mysterious - the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science.”
-Albert Einstein

For most of my high school years, I was a self-proclaimed atheist. While I considered myself a Jew culturally, after spending years in Hebrew School learning what felt like little more than ritual chants, I very quickly became disillusioned with the spiritual aspect of my culture. I was further impacted by the world political climate. When I saw how much Evangelical Christians impacted George Bush’s reelection in 2004, my anger towards all organized religions (as irrational as it seems in hindsight) grew tremendously. I also noted how so many of the world’s conflicts have been religiously motivated. The combination of all these things made me feel resentful towards religion as a whole. When one looks at the state of the world now, it is very easy to feel this way; especially when he is young. Lastly, I was under the impression that scientific evidence was in direct contradiction with scripture. I tended to look upon religious people as superstitious and foolish. My philosophy was that man just happened to be on Earth without purpose or meaning. However, this bleak outlook on life was pretty understandable considering the lack of motivation I had in my life to be spiritual.

I feel that spirituality is not something that can be truly taught; only experienced. In religious school, one can learn the stories of the Bible, how to pray, the laws and morals of his respective faith; but he cannot learn God. He can go through the motions his entire life, pray every night, go to Church or Synagogue, donate his money to his religious institution; but routine is not the same as spirituality. A spiritual experience comes from a connection with whatever higher power you perceive. I believe this higher power to be a single omnipotent God, but how you view this power is unimportant. When Siddhartha Gautama meditated under the Bodhi tree, and achieved nirvana after forty-nine days, that was a spiritual experience. While some might not connect with their spiritual selves in the same way that I do, it is better to make those connections in their own ways than to just practice a routine. I am not going to criticize the doctrines of faiths that say otherwise, but I believe that how a person connects with God is personal; not dogmatic.

My own spiritual experience occurred this past winter when I went to Israel. I had originally gone on the trip to learn more about the history and culture of my people. Since the trip I had decided to go on was decidedly secular, I did not come seeking any sort of spiritual fulfillment. In the final part of the excursion my group traveled to Jerusalem. This inevitably brought us to the Western Wall; the holiest site in Judaism. We were given half an hour at the wall to do as we pleased. As I entered the main area, the site was astounding. Jews from all over the world were gathered at the wall, deep in prayer. While I had not originally intended to pray at the wall, I suddenly had an overwhelming urge to do so. I do not know what my motivation was, but I needed to pray. One of the customs at the wall is to write a prayer on a slip of paper, and slip it through one of the cracks in the wall, so I decided to follow suit. On my slip of paper, I scribbled down the first prayer that came to mind. One that every Jew who has ever been through Hebrew School has said so many times it is second nature: “Shema Yisrael. Adonai Eloheinu. Adonai Echad. Hear O Israel! The Lord is God! The Lord is One!” However, there was a difference. When I used to say that prayer in Synagogue, it was because we were at the part of the service where you are supposed to chant it. When I was writing it out at the wall, I felt every word, and I knew it was true. After I slipped my paper through a crack in the wall, I put my head against the wall in silent prayer. My surroundings seemed to fade away. An incredible power coursed through my body. There was nobody there except for me and God. He was all around me, but part of me at the same time. It felt like an eternity, but was probably less than a minute. When I ceased prayer, I felt weak but cleansed. I noticed there were tears running down my cheeks. The whole rest of the day, I was dazed, and everything seemed surreal to me.

I am sure some people are going to read this and believe that I am either lying, certifiably insane, or actually describing an acid trip (hopefully not the third. I would like to think that my readers have a little bit more faith in me than that). I assure you that I am in no way exaggerating my experience to make it sound more dramatic than it actually was. As for me being insane, I used to think that people who described experiences like this were insane too. However, everybody that I talked to directly afterwards described a similar experience. Unless there was some sort of psychedelic drug permeating from the cracks in the wall, I cannot think of how else something like that could happen. I finally understood how so many people find solace and strength in prayer or meditation. Once one has had that first spiritual experience, the way that he perceives the world is forever changed. After my experience, I could go on pretending that I believe the world is meaningless, but then I would be denying something that I know deep down must be true. If our lives are meaningless, then why do we bother living at all?

Intentional Ignorance of Reality

As I was headed back to school yesterday after a much-needed week off, we stopped for gas near Roanoke. In the restroom, there was one of those one-dollar condom dispensers. It got me wondering: why would anybody spend a dollar on an unknown brand of condom in a convenience store bathroom in rural Virginia, when he could buy a whole pack of Trojan or Magnum condoms for about seven dollars in that same store? The only possibly reason I could fathom as to why somebody would buy a condom in the bathroom like that, is if he intends to have sex right there in the bathroom! I know, it sounds disgusting, but in some ways it is perfectly logical. Obviously gas stations do not promote their bathrooms as miniature hotel rooms. However they know that people will use them for that purpose, anyways. Therefore, if they make condoms readily available in the restrooms, they could use this unspoken taboo as a source of revenue.

I think intentional ignorance of reality is one of the more interesting aspects of our society. People obviously know full well what happens in gas station bathrooms… at least well enough to try and profit off of it, anyways. However, it is not something that is actually acknowledged. There is not a sign posted over the door of the Men’s room that says “Please Have Sex in Here!” The accommodation is just there. It is like censorship in the media. On network television, the word “fuck” is always bleeped out. Why do they do that? Everybody knows exactly what the speaker is saying! Nobody’s mind is going to be warped for life by hearing the word “fuck” in its correct context. However, we have created these standards by which certain words and concepts become taboo to speak about, despite the fact that they undeniably exist! I believe the epitome of this culture was seen during the 2004 Super Bowl, when a huge uproar was thrown because Janet Jackson’s nipple was exposed for a few seconds. People demanded compensations for the “indecencies” they were exposed to. Excuse me, but nipples exist whether or not they get airplay. The fabric of society and the basis of family life will not become undone because their child has seen a female breast. Heck, what with the internet and all, a child seeing a breast should be the least of their worries!

Why is discussion of sexuality such a taboo in American society? After all, it is the most basic of human instincts save for eating and drinking. It is how we all got here, and obviously everybody enjoys it! However, sexuality is far more taboo than something destructive, like violence. Think about it for a second: children are given G.I. Joe dolls and toy guns to play with then they are about six years old! From an early age, they are taught that it is cool to carry a gun and shoot people (but only if their nationality and belief structure is different from your nationality and belief structure.) However, there are forces at work to keep children from getting a balanced sexual education at school! Obviously I am talking about the “Abstinence-Only” crowd. I have a problem with abstinence-only education, because no matter how much emphasis you want to put on abstinence, young people are still going to have sex. It is a primal instinct! Therefore, young people should be taught about the precautions that can be made to make sex safer. This is not to say that you should not teach them about the risks involved; just teach them about ways to lower those risks. By doing this, you are saving lives! By discussing sexuality with young people in an open and non-hostile environment, you are reducing the chances that one of these young people will end up pregnant or with a sexually transmitted disease. Unfortunately, the powers that be would rather keep hush-hush on the subject so as to not be “offensive.” I honestly do not understand the logic in this, but it is so deeply engrained in American culture that nobody questions it. Opposing this type of sexual education is like ignoring the big elephant in the room!

Something else that I have noticed time and again is the willingness of people to deny the truth if it does not fit their agenda. For example, many Conservatives will deny global warming despite OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE OF ITS EXISTENCE, because accepting its existence means to accept responsibility for it. It is more convenient simply to deny it. A for more extreme example is something that hits close to my heart: Holocaust denial. Anti-Semites will try and advance their agenda by downplaying the historical persecution of the Jews. One of the ways they do this is to contest that the Holocaust was a hoax perpetrated by the Jews. This is despite the facts that the leaders of the Nazi regime admitted to committing said atrocities, there are Holocaust survivors that can confirm the stories, the physical remnants of the death camps, and other overwhelming evidence. Sadly, people will only believe what they want to believe, regardless of the evidence.

I do want to make the distinction between acknowledging the existence of truth and ignoring it, and outright denying it, though. In some ways the two ideas are very similar. In both the sexuality and Holocaust examples, one is presented with overwhelming evidence of something, but chooses to ignore it. However, they ignore the truth in different ways. In the first example, the person will accept the truth, but choose to turn it into a taboo. For example, the viewer knows that the angry redneck on the “Jerry Springer Show” said the word “fuck,” but he would prefer not to hear it. In the Holocaust example, though, the person will not accept the truth regardless of what evidence he is presented with. His mind is set on a certain belief system, and nothing is going to change that. He might know deep down that he is wrong, but he will never admit it.

I believe the both instances are dangerous in their own right. By making subjects taboo, you create a hostile environment where people do not feel safe asking questions. The only way to prevent ignorance is to make dialogue possible, which means eliminating social taboos. Obviously outright denial is even more dangerous. If everybody put his agenda before the facts, then nobody would be able to distinguish the truth from lies. Being able to be objective and look at the reality of situations is the first step to true understanding. Sometimes reality can be a scary or undesirable thing, and ignorance is bliss. However, the acceptance of the truth is the only way that we will be able to progress as a people. In the immortal words of Fox Moulder: “The truth is out there.”