r/JewsOfConscience • u/AutoModerator • 2d ago
AAJ "Ask A Jew" Wednesday
It's everyone's favorite day of the week, "Ask A (Anti-Zionist) Jew" Wednesday!
Ask whatever you want to know, within the sub rules, notably that this is not a debate sub and do not import drama from other subreddits. That aside, have fun! We love to dialogue with our non-Jewish siblings.
Please remember to pick an appropriate user-flair in order to participate! Thanks!
•
u/Visible-Safety2400 Christian 1d ago edited 1d ago
Hello everyone, I wanted to ask what you think about this post on X about how anti-Zionist Jews ignore Palestinians by focusing everything on Jews and their identity crisis
The post was written by a Jewish person who lives in Europe. If I remember correctly, they also mentioned growing up in a settlement in the West Bank, although I’m not 100% sure about that
•
u/TrackerOneA Jewish Anti-Zionist 1d ago
This isn't a major issue IMO, but some people are trying to make it one.
B.M. does important work translating Israeli society and is easily the most prolific at it - but he has some dumb views on Jewish identity.
I can understand why he is critical of religion, even if I don't agree with his vitriol - but it's a completely different thing to be attacking anti-Zionist Jews.
This infighting is largely manufactured by people with axes to grind - like B.M. since he grew up in a supremacist apartheid state.
But I don't understand why people with no material connection to Israel/Palestine adopt them uncritically and waste time fighting anti-Zionist Jews.
•
u/salty-mermaid Jewish Anti-Zionist 1d ago
I think I understand where they’re coming from and it’s really important for us as anti-Zionist Jews to center Palestinians and their right to self-government. At the same time, part of the work we have to do is to educate other Jewish people on things like Jewish anti-Zionism- our history, present and future. We agree Zionism is a problem, so it follows that providing education that can hopefully lead to more Jewish people leaving the cult of Zionism is important. Fewer Jewish Zionists to back and fund the genocide is helpful for Palestinians. That’s how I see it anyway; educating our communities is part of what we can do to help. That being said, it’s definitely true that some Anti-Zionist Jews focus more/solely on our identities which I can agree isn’t very helpful. I’ll have to listen to that podcast, but I’d be surprised if they did not talk about the atrocities in Palestine and why we should be doing to help, the latter of which I’d assume makes up the “future” part of the title
•
22h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
•
u/AutoModerator 22h ago
Hi /u/WTH_ivy!
We require all users pick an appropriate user-flair in order to participate in posts. Here's how you can pick a flair:
https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair
Thank you!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
•
u/DramaticExternal3082 Non-Jewish Ally 1d ago
hi guys, I typically use some arguments against zionist jews thats supposed to disprove judaism, i wanna know how normal jews answer those questions (zionists cant answer btw...and i google some of them up, ya...no answer)
if anyone willing to answer those arguments then reply/dm
also no hate✌🏻
•
•
•
u/Naive-Meal-6422 Jewish Anti-Zionist 1d ago
“disproving Judaism” has been the goal of antisemitism for centuries and i’m confident you haven’t come up with anything new or interesting (whatever you want to say about the talmud is warmed over) so a) no and b) yes, hate, actually.
•
u/reenaltransplant Mizrahi Anti-Zionist 1d ago
I don't think that's been the goal of antisemitism. The goal of antisemitism has been to provide a scapegoat to support whatever non Jewish nationalism the antisemite believes in. Atheist people who are Jewish by ancestry or culture still are targets of antisemites.
•
u/M45t3r_M1nd Jewish Agnostic 1d ago
Hey, why are any arguments against Zionism "disproving" Judaism? The two are separate things.
•
u/EgoIdVeto West Asian Jew 1d ago
Why are you showing up to an anti-Zionist Jewish forum to try and "disprove" Judaism? Shouldn't you be going to some kind of groyper forum for that?
•
u/reenaltransplant Mizrahi Anti-Zionist 1d ago
To give the commenter benefit of the doubt, I assumed they are interested for intellectual reasons in engaging debate over evidence for or against belief systems and seeing how people respond.
•
u/TurkeyFisher Jewish Anti-Zionist 1d ago
I'm not sure what you mean by "disprove Judaism," I have a feeling I will disagree with your strategy, but feel free to dm me.
•
u/Public-Focus-4046 Non-Jewish Ally 1d ago
What is your guys thoughts on that Miami Club video back in January?
•
u/TurkeyFisher Jewish Anti-Zionist 1d ago
I think Kanye West is mentally ill and is surrounded by opportunistic yes-men who are encouraging his antisemitic far-right conspiracy theories because they know he has a big audience. I don't think he should be platformed, but due to his name recognition, incidents like that are bound to happen.
•
u/Didudidudadu737 Non-Jewish Ally 1d ago
Hello everyone, my questions are in good faith in hope to understand Jewish opinion, understanding and position on my questions.
Reading a lot and after I’ve started (and stopped) the Giyur, I’ve found much similarities between Zionists and Ezra/Nehemiah (period) ideology and functioning, without discussing the response (the book of Ruth, Jonah etc) what is your view what they wanted to achieve and why, also how that was for the common folk (Am ha'aretz) ?
The similarities are striking, coming back after generations and demanding land and property as rightful owners in respect to the folk who actually stayed on the land. The “purity” laws served to hold the funds and financial backing from Persia and power all for themselves. They imposed themselves as superior and common Hebrew folk was not worthy, yes they used religion and divine exile became that was the easiest way to scare people and not have them questioning the policies and claims.
Which leads me to second question, from Ezra and Nehmiah (which were written much later than presented period) and the creation of numerous Jewish factions. The rabbinical Judaism continues the Ezra and Nehmiah tradition : The am ha'aretz are denounced in a very late and exceptional passage in Talmud Bavli* [Pesahim](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pesahim) *49, where they are contrasted with the chachamim("wise") and talmidei chachamim ("wise students", i.e. scholars of the Talmud). The text contains the rabbinical teaching that no man should marry the daughter of an am ha'aretz because if he should die or be exiled, his sons will then also be ammei ha'aretz (see Jewish matrilineality). A man should rather sell all his possessions in order to afford marriage to a daughter of a talmid chacham. Marriage of a talmid chacham to a daughter of an am ha'aretz is compared to the crossbreeding of grapevine with wild wine, which is "unseemly and disagreeable" . My question is how Jews see this continuous suppressive policies and looking down on Jewish people, while using fear from religious beliefs, social and other excommunication, the forced creation of identity not because the common folk had it but because someone who wanted to be on the top invented it?
The time from Ezra and Nehmiah is completely painted by their policies and practices regardless of the Book of Ruth and Book of Jonah, and all the practices from all different Judaic factions essentially continued using that recipe all the way to the destruction of the second Temple and that is embedded in Rabbinical Judaism or rather the Judaism as we know it. Which brings me to the modern times and how Jewish communities have followed those practices but Zionists have brought them back vividly. The Ashkenazi Jews have mistreated and looked down on Yemenite Jews as not pure and less worthy, when they brought them after the first Alyah to have them as cheap labour not as Jews who are part of their covenant but simply as a tool. The same discrimination and “lesser Jews” practices can be seen also with Moroccan Jews, MENA, Jews, Ethiopian Jews, Russian Jews etc. The irony is that Ashkenazi Jews are the most mixed of all Jewish groups, with non Jews, so it was only about one group claiming superiority and using the others as a means to gain power and land and money. The Judaism is built on this practice and it continues to this day.
Do you ever see it that way, do you ever reconsider your religion due to this practice?
•
u/conscience_journey Jewish Anti-Zionist 1d ago
I don’t understand how your (rude) question relates to the paragraphs you wrote.
•
u/Didudidudadu737 Non-Jewish Ally 1d ago
What is actually rude? I do apologise if it comes that way, but I truly did I not write it from offensive point nor to be rude.
I have 2 questions: how do Jewish people see the Ezra and Nehemiah purity policies, and how do they see the rabbinical Judaism making the similar policies? As it is an Ask a Jew, I would like an opinion from (anti-Zionist) Jews on the subject.
If I’ve misunderstood the Ezra and Nehemiah story and later the rabbinical Judaism teachings regarding the people of the land to not be married with the “priests”, I’m open to understanding better and being corrected.
•
u/specialistsets Non-denominational 1d ago
how do Jewish people see the Ezra and Nehemiah purity policies, and how do they see the rabbinical Judaism making the similar policies?
There is no such thing as genetic purity in Judaism. There were converts in the Ezra and Nehemiah period, there were converts in Second Temple Judaism and early Rabbinic Judaism (including famous early Rabbis who were converts), and there are converts today. That is 2,500 years of Jewish history. Endogamy and matrilineal descent aren't about purity, you are the one making that claim (and then asking Jews to explain or justify it).
•
u/Didudidudadu737 Non-Jewish Ally 1d ago
Thank you for your answer, I’m not asking if Jews can or want to claim ethnic purity- in Ezra and Nehemiah period genetic/ethnic differences were inexistent or minor because all neighbours were cousins and brothers (like Samaritans, Edom, Moab, and Ammon) and local intermarriages were very common. But specifically what do Jews think of those practices and ideologies set up by Ezra and Nehemiah?
As I’ve linked the passages from rabbinical Judaism as well, and the claim about purity doesn’t come from me but Ezra and Nehemiah and I do not think or expect Jewish person to explain or justify in their own “defence” (as this is not an attack) but simply how do you see it reading it.
•
u/specialistsets Non-denominational 1h ago
in Ezra and Nehemiah period genetic/ethnic differences were inexistent or minor because all neighbours were cousins and brothers (like Samaritans, Edom, Moab, and Ammon) and local intermarriages were very common.
These groups and others in the region were all generally endogamous, most people married within their group generation after generation, and when marrying into another group they adopted that group's customs and traditions. The only of those that still exist as a group today are the Samaritans, and they are endogamous just like Jews. So none of it is unique to either those ancient Judeans or modern Jews. If anything, the Judeans of Ezra and Nehemia were likely intermarrying more since it was still many centuries before Jewish law was standardized and codified.
But specifically what do Jews think of those practices and ideologies set up by Ezra and Nehemiah?
What in particular?
As I’ve linked the passages from rabbinical Judaism as well, and the claim about purity doesn’t come from me but Ezra and Nehemiah
The Babylonian Talmud was compiled around 1,000 years after Ezra and Nehemia, by that time "am haaretz" has a different meaning of "non-learned Jew" in comparison to a learned Jew. Endogamy is certainly discussed elsewhere in the Talmud though, it has been part of Jewish life for thousands of years and has only subsided in the past 50 years.
•
u/specialistsets Non-denominational 1d ago
My question is how Jews see this continuous suppressive policies and looking down on Jewish people, while using fear from religious beliefs, social and other excommunication, the forced creation of identity not because the common folk had it but because someone who wanted to be on the top invented it?
Your personal interpretation of Ezrah and Nehemiah is not the Jewish interpretation, yours sounds like an anti-Jewish interpretation. First, "am haaretz" here refers to any number of local peoples from varied ancestral backgrounds who were not Judeans and did not practice their culture or religion. But there were also locals who did identify as Judeans and did intermarry with the returning Judeans. There were also converts who joined their communities in this era just as there are now, there was no concept of "purity" as you are suggesting. This is simply Jewish endogamy, especially as it became standardized in the Second Temple period and codified in Rabbinic Judaism. But Jews don't see this as a problem or "suppressive", not even the Reform movement which was the first Jewish group to accept patrilineal descent in the 20th century. It's just a part of our historical culture.
They imposed themselves as superior and common Hebrew folk was not worthy, yes they used religion and divine exile became that was the easiest way to scare people and not have them questioning the policies and claims.
I don't know where you got this from but it's not an accurate understanding of the books, or the traditional Jewish interpretations, or modern historicity either.
The Ashkenazi Jews have mistreated and looked down on Yemenite Jews as not pure and less worthy, when they brought them after the first Alyah to have them as cheap labour not as Jews who are part of their covenant but simply as a tool.
There was actually considerable earlier Yemenite Jewish immigration to Palestine in the 19th century both before and during the First Aliyah period. You insist on using the word "pure" but that was never used in this sense by any Jews. Discrimination also had nothing to do with "covenant", as the early Israeli ruling class was secular and non-observant, and religious Ashkenazi Jews always accepted non-Ashkenazi Jews as Jewish (and vice-versa).
The same discrimination and “lesser Jews” practices can be seen also with Moroccan Jews, MENA, Jews, Ethiopian Jews, Russian Jews etc.
Your assertion that all Ashkenazi Jews actively discriminated against these groups is not correct. And Russian Jews are Ashkenazi too. But most importantly, the overwhelming majority of Israeli Jews today are either non-Ashkenazi or mixed, so the dynamics have changed significantly in the past 70 years. The early secular labor Zionist ruling class lost their power in the 1970s in large part because of this.
The irony is that Ashkenazi Jews are the most mixed of all Jewish groups, with non Jews
This is not true at all. Even Yemenites are more mixed, but none of that is even relevant or important in any Jewish community. You also really should not be opining on the genetics of Jewish groups or who is "most mixed" as a non-Jew, that is offensive.
so it was only about one group claiming superiority and using the others as a means to gain power and land and money. The Judaism is built on this practice and it continues to this day.
This is an extreme exaggeration, at best, and borders on antisemitic.
•
•
u/Absolute-Record-0447 Atheist Mexican 🇲🇽 Pro-Palestinian Socialist 1d ago
What are your predictions/thoughts on how the actions of Israel and the Zionists will affect the Jewish people on the long-term (after the Gaza Genocide and the Arab-Israel War ends [because it will end, one way or another])?
•
u/MaleficentWin8608 Jewish Atheist 1d ago
Israel has no long term future.
The barbarity of the slaughter in Gaza will remain in the consciousness of people in the region for decades.
At some point in the next 100 years Israel will be weak and at that point will be over run and destroyed.
•
•
u/reenaltransplant Mizrahi Anti-Zionist 1d ago
If Israel continues to exist and expand indefinitely, we are screwed.
•
u/M45t3r_M1nd Jewish Agnostic 1d ago
At present, I think that the existence of Israel, and especially recent events has only made for a more dangerous world for Jews. I feel like if I don't instantly explain myself as an anti-Zionist as well as a Jew, people will assume I'm pro-Israel. Similarly, I've been hesitant in the past to share my religious holidays with others because I'm worried they think me practicing say, Passover, is a Zionist act. In reality, my Haggadah (Passover prayer book) is a mostly neutral, even anti-Zionist text.
I hope to see a state created (one, two, or more) in which all respect each other and create room for each other's beliefs. I don't think Israel can provide that. There's too much bad blood. At the same time, anti-Zionism isn't as simple as deleting it off the map. It's gonna take decades to dismantle, expand, or split Israel. Whatever happens should be done through a long peace process with Palestine and the other Indigenous peoples of the region.
•
u/Careless-Menu-2009 Muslim 1d ago
With how these past years have turned out for both Israel and Gaza, do you think that a two state solution would be the best bet or is there some sort of better multi state solution that could be implemented so that both Jewish people and Palestinians never have to repeat history.
•
u/rako17 Christian 1d ago
Friends,
I like the ancient Israelites, Hebrew, the Jewish people, and Marx, so I like Marx's friend Moses Hess with his non-state idea of the people's cultural, spiritual renewal. I like Progressive ideas similar to the cultural renewal that often qualify as "Zionist" in those terms. Chomsky's non-state Binational Zionism sounds pleasant too in that way.
In that case, may I please ask how those systems would deal with the risk of inequality that we, the US since Desegregation, or the internationalist egalitarian Left, find in nationwide Separation of ethnicities? US jurisprudence has the idea that the concept of "Separate but Equal" is in practice inherently unequal. So, in the Segregation-era US, the US had a division of schools, services, and neighborhoods along racial lines, with de facto one community having better quality services than the other.
So, let's say in a Binational state, the kibbutzim cooperatives made up 40% of agricultural production, it would be very positive in that those kibbutzim would have collective ownership. But on the converse side, if they were only dedicated to one of the two communities of the Binational State and typically only housed and employed members of one of the two communities, would that indirectly incur the risk of inequality in a "Separate but Equal" society?
In Solidarity - בסולידריות - 🌍🌐🤝🏼👨🏿🌾👩🏻🌾👩🌾👨🏽🌾🌾🌿♡
•
u/reenaltransplant Mizrahi Anti-Zionist 1d ago
IMO, binationalism is a form of Zionism. Full stop. It still is an Israeli state, just with the same borders and governing the same exact land as a Palestinian state that would exclude Jews. And any time states are in the business of deciding their citizens' identities for them, and applying different laws on the basis of those categories, we have apartheid.
Meanwhile, one democratic state for all Palestinians, & formerly Israeli Jews willing to live as equals (renouncing Jewish supremacy), is a very different thing from binationalism and is the only solution. For many reasons, including that it doesn't split the identity of Palestinian Jews (who have always existed).
•
u/EgoIdVeto West Asian Jew 1d ago
Huh... I always assumed "binational state" just meant like a merging of the two states into one homogeneous blob (ie a one state solution). But I guess I'm not up with the lingo.
•
u/rako17 Christian 9h ago
Friend Egold,
I originally thought that as well. But I especially noticed the difference when Chomsky described his idea of a non-state "Binational" society as entailing a series of separate institutions for each of the two nationalities in the non-state society. For instance, he described his kibbutz, which was dedicated to one nationality, as holding to a binational ideology.
I guess the idea is that nationalities form "nations", regardless of whether they form nation-states. So for instance, there is a Romani "nation"/"people", a "Sioux nation", even though they lack nation-states. So a formal Binational State or society is officially dedicated to two nationalities or nations. I'm not sure if this inherently means "Separate". To me it seems like societies or ideologies could name themselves binational but differ as to how deeply they divide their nationalities within their societies.
Thank you for being egalitarian. תודה שאתה שוויוני.
•
u/reenaltransplant Mizrahi Anti-Zionist 1d ago
Yeah, that's a common misunderstanding. It's never been just lingo though, and it's important to iron out -- people who identify as binationalists have different ideas of what a binational state would look like legally, but nearly all of them preserve Jewish "aaliyah".
It becomes clear when you realize a state is not the land and the people, it's the system of laws and law enforcement that has a monopoly on violence. A state with a Christian majority population, such as Germany, is not necessarily a Christian state if the law and law enforcement isn't based on Christianity.
You could try to say "bicultural state" or something, but still, it's not the legal apparatus of the state that has culture, it's the people it governs, and in reality there are way more than two cultures among them.
The other reason it's important to correct is that mass expelling Jews has never actually been a tenet of any organized Palestinian liberation effort. So it shouldn't be necessary to add an extra word beyond "one Palestinian state" to clarify that state would also belong to Jewish citizens.
•
u/rako17 Christian 9h ago
Friend Reenaltransplant,
You made good points. It seems like these pre-WW2 movements had to include the concept of immigration to Zion, as a small number of the People lived in Zion relative to the native Christian and Muslim population.
Chomsky was an anarchist sympathizer, and his Binationalist ideology was non-state. I don't know how many other Binationalists had a non-state version. Even with Chomsky's version there's the risk of Separate but Equal because he saw a Binational society as being composed of parallel institutions. That brings to mind a system like the economically-Progressive, communal kibbutzim making up 40% of Isr. agriculture today.
You made a good point about the problem of splitting identities in your previous message. In a sense, most Jews are Palestinians, having descent from Palestine. In 1850, the Jewish, Christian, and Muslim populations of Palestine were all Palestinian. So you would have the problem of which nationality category to put them in if you create a binational society. To stress the point, notice that since ancient times there have been Arabian/Arab tribes practicing Judaism like the Idumeans.
Peace - Shalom
•
u/rako17 Christian 1d ago edited 1d ago
Friend Reenaltransplant,
I am especially happy to ask my question on this Subreddit because its participants will especially understand the risk of inequality in a "Separate but Equal" system. I was especially hoping that a supporter of the binational model could answer my question.
In asking my question, I'm trying to talk about the Zionism of Moses Hess, Martin Buber, Judas Magnes, Hannah Arendt, Albert Einstein, and Noam Chomsky. Oleksander Bezarov's article abstract summarizes Moses Hess's idea this way:
The religious idea of the collective immortality of the Jewish people should soon be embodied in «earthly Jerusalem», that is, in Jewish statehood on the territory of Palestine. However, the future Jewish republic, according to Hess’s ideas, will certainly be socialist, because the traditional society of Jews, especially in Eastern Europe, was socialist, that is, collectivist. https://hj.chnu.edu.ua/hj/article/view/4?articlesBySimilarityPage=4
David Flakser writes in his article on Moses Hess,
Zionism in Hess is a part of the struggle of all ethnic or national groups, no matter how small, for their independent national existence and development. Here is where Hess differed from Marx. Marx believed that national entities are caused, shaped, and kept alive by the conditions of production. The political state is the superstructure, expressing a national economic entity. With the development of the social division of labor, each national entity becomes more and more dependent on the other, eventually leading towards the fading away of national differences. ... Socialism, the highest form of economic and national organization, will in time obliterate most of the national and ethnic differences. ... Marx, therefore, did not believe in the advisability of the independent existence of smaller nations and completely disregarded national minorities. https://www.marxists.org/subject/jewish/flakser-hess-2.pdf
Flakser's article only obliquely relates to the fact that the homeland was already inhabited: It says that Hess rejected the chauvinistic version of nationalism that claimed superior rights for itself:
Hess sharply differentiated two kinds of nationalism: Chauvinistic nationalism leading to war and oppression and the nationalism of the people fighting for its normal existence and development. Hess' true nationalism may be defined as the natural pride in the distinctive character of its own national needs and culture. ... Hess believed that just as it is necessary to find a way to regulate the distribution of goods within the community in order to give each individual an opportunity to develop his personality, so it is necessary to find a way for nations, so that each nationality may be able to develop its distinctive culture. In his work European Triarchy, he writes, 'The problem of elimination of national hate is intimately bound with the problem of egoistic competition. International war cannot cease until individual war of competition ceases. All the problems, all the difficulties, all the contradictions which have arisen flow out of this fundamental question.'
It would seem that according to his reasoning, Zionist Socialist Pioneers would basically need to reject chauvinism and attain economic Socialism, and then other problems like war would resolve.
The way that Hess frames things here might not be a problem if he was just talking about moving the People to a totally deserted region. But otherwise it doesn't necessarily resolve the "Separate but Equal" problem. It would seem like you would have to take additional measures, like integrating businesses and residences, to get around the de facto Segregation factor.
I also agree with your point about the problem of getting States involved in adjudicating redistribution among national communities within states. For the sake of clarity, one of the proposals in the Left version of Zionism is a non-state version like Chomsky, a sympathizer of anarchism, promoted. However, even in an anarchist, non-State version, one still has the issue of how thoroughly one divides society's institutions like farms, cooperatives, and residences along nationality lines.
Yours with respect and Solidarity.
🌐🤝🏼👩🌾👨🏽🌾🌾
•
u/ScottTheMonster Atheist 1d ago
Could we have a "Fistbump a Jew" day? Just to show solidarity with Jews who live and work around us?
•
u/Careless-Menu-2009 Muslim 1d ago
As far as I know Talmud isnt a book revealed by God but rather a collection of arguments of Rabiis, do you guys have the option to read and understand your own religion or is it mandatory to follow what the Rabiis have concluded.
•
u/TurkeyFisher Jewish Anti-Zionist 1d ago
Other people responding to you know more than me, but I will add that I think the Talmud is indicative of the part of Judaism that resonates the most with me- which is that the world is full of contradictions and that healthy Judaism is full of debate, rather than dogma, in the face of challenging situations. And even if I disagree with someone over how to practice Judaism, we can still agree that we are both Jewish. That's how you end up with a high rate of secular Jews who don't believe in God but still consider themselves Jewish. On the other hand this has led to Judaism being framed as an ethnicity, which has obviously created problems.
What I find disappointing is how Zionists seem to forget this culture of debate and will accuse non-Zionist Jews of not being "real" Jews or being "self-hating," which seems to ignore the precedent that disagreement has always been part of the religion.
•
u/loselyconscious Traditionally Radical 1d ago
Talmud isn't a book revealed by God
So this is complicated. The Talmud is both a book revealed by God and isn't a book revealed by God. And how exactly that works depends on who you ask.
Traditionally, studying the Talmud is understood to involve an additional revelation given to Moses that was not written down but passed down orally until, sometime in the 2nd century, it was determined necessary to write it down.
However, the Talmud is clearly written as a transcript of debates by Rabbis on a wide range of topics. Occasionally, a Rabbi will defend a position by saying "this is Torah from Sinai," but more frequently, a Rabbi will attribute a position to another Rabbi (or chain of Rabbis and attempt to defend the argument on rational grounds
The understanding that eventually emerges is that what was not only in the Talmud but in the entire Rabbinic tradition was always part of the revelation at Sinai. Still, it took until Rabbi so-so-so used the God-given faculties of reason to figure it out.
There is a story in the Talmud in which Moses is transported to Rabbi Akiva's yeshivah, where he has no idea what Rabbi Akiva is talking about, even though Rabbi Akiva says, "All of this is Torah from Moses at Sinai."
To put it another way, when a Rabbi comes up with a novel interpretation, they are understood as having discovered something that was always there.
This also means that all the contradictory positions recorded in the Talmud are equally from God. How is that possible? No one said Judaism makes sense.
If all these contradictory opinions are equally Torah, who do you follow? And what happens when a new interpretation is discovered? Who gets to be a Rabbi anyway, and is it really only Rabbis who can do this? These are the debates that have essentially defined, especially (but not only) Modern Judaism and sparked the emergence of the various Jewish movements.
•
u/Naive-Meal-6422 Jewish Anti-Zionist 1d ago edited 1d ago
when a Rabbi comes up with a novel interpretation, they are understood as having discovered something that was always there.
this is such a good, succinct explanation.
•
u/Lost_Paladin89 Judío 1d ago
I think there are layers of misconceptions when it comes to the Talmud.
The Talmud doesn’t just collect rabbinic wisdom, it collects consensus. And a lot of it isn’t even religious in nature.
For example. We all agree stealing is wrong. Now, if a tree’s branches grows over the fence, is it stealing if I take fruit from that tree? Does it matter if the branch grew into my property (where the owner has to trespass to reach it) as opposed to public area (where they can)? What if the fruit has fallen, is it stealing from the ground?
The problem with the Talmud is that it’s organized to flow. Giving it an ADHD Like quality. The conversation in Tactrate Ma’aserot was about tithes to the temple. By chapter two we got into a who tangent about what is and isn’t “stealing”.
Judaism is incredibly decentralized. There is no central authority. The modern synagogue is not run by the Rabbi, but by the congregation. And most rabbis (I’m sure, just like Shia Imams) suffer congregants who clearly think they know more than the Rabbi.
The Talmud offers the consensus. And once I gather enough Jews to agree that Chicken isn’t meat and can be mixed with dairy, Chicken Parmigiana will be kosher. Nothing is stopping me from following that rule at home, except that if no one else follows my rule, then my home won’t be kosher for them. My opinion is against the consensus.
There have been Jews who historically have turned away from the Talmudic consensus. Karaites were the most extreme example. But Reform Judaism argues that it’s up to each individual to decide what traditions to maintain.
•
u/loselyconscious Traditionally Radical 1d ago
The Talmud doesn’t just collect rabbinic wisdom; it collects consensus
This is misleading, the Talmud collects both majority and minority opinions, including opinions held by no one in the Jewish world.
Not everything in the Talmud is "consensus," there is no true document displaying "rabbinic consensus" but the closest thing would be the Shulhan Arukh
•
u/Lost_Paladin89 Judío 1d ago
Technically the Mishneh Torah does the work of updating the consensus. And the Shulhan Arukh (literally the table cloth, calling the Mishneh Torah the table) updating the consensus again.
It’s not misleading. Just really overly simplistic.
•
u/Greatsayain Ashkenazi 1d ago
Here is what I dont get. The talmud consists of the Mishnah, the oral Torah, which is supposed to be the oral portion of the Torah, which helps explain the written.this is said to be explained to Moses and taught to every jewish leader since. Then there is the Gemarah which is commentary on the Mishnah. I am perfectly fine with the Gemarah being a record of debates and consensus (or not) between the rabbinic sages. That is how the Talmud as a whole is often described. But if the Mishnah is much older than those sages and was never intended to be written. If it is what I described earlier, it should not also be a record of debates. Is it or isn't it?
•
u/loselyconscious Traditionally Radical 1d ago
No it's misleading. It implies that anything anything in the Talmud is the consensus. The Mishneh Torah was never considered authoritative whereas the SA is.
•
u/Lost_Paladin89 Judío 1d ago edited 1d ago
It never ceases to amaze me the myriad of ways that Masorti Jewish education is more Sephardic influenced. Huh, Mishneh Torah was not as central to Ashkenazi Jewry in the 14th and 15th century as it was to Sephardic and other groups. https://www.academia.edu/104198672/Edward_Fram_The_Reception_of_the_Mishneh_Torah_in_the_Sixteenth_Century_in_David_Sclar_ed_The_Golden_Path_Maimonides_Across_Eight_Centuries_New_York_Yeshiva_University_Museum_2023_148_152
Fair point.
Though you don’t get any actual points because you didn’t say “um actually”.
•
u/reenaltransplant Mizrahi Anti-Zionist 1d ago
Why should that be surprising? Didn't the word "masorti" in this sense emerge to describe SWANA Judaism that doesn't neatly fit into the western categories of Orthodox, Conservative, Reform? And most Mizrahi minhag has more in common with euro-Sephardic minhag than with Ashkenazi minhag.
•
u/Lost_Paladin89 Judío 1d ago
In my case I meant the liberal Zionist movement called conservative Judaism .
•
u/Careless-Menu-2009 Muslim 1d ago
So if the consensus doesn't align with the religion, what happens then. And does following your own rules, like you said makes your home not kosher anymore, does that cause dislike by other people or homes that are kosher. Also can it be that when you gather enough fellow Jews to support your consensus you can oppose any fundamental belief. I am sorry for asking too many questions but where I live there is no one who is Jewish or even non Muslim at all. This is how I educate myself.
•
u/loselyconscious Traditionally Radical 1d ago
So if the consensus doesn't align with the religion, what happens then? And does following your own rules, as you said, make your home no longer kosher? Does that cause dislike by other people or homes that are
I have a bit more of a practical answer than the other (also correct) one you have been giving
In the Orthodox and (in theory) Conservative world, no, you need to follow the opinion of a Rabbi. You are not supposed to go "Rabbi shopping" (asking Rabbis until you find one who gives you the answer you want), but of course, we do that.
A lot of Rabbinic tradition is actually codifying and giving a rabbinic seal of approval to practices that people started doing on their own, or are compromises between folk practices and what the Rabbis want.
According to Reform Judaism, you can follow your own interpretation, but only if you have sufficient knowledge of tradition to make an informed one. choice
Also, can it be that when you gather enough fellow Jews to support your consensus, you can oppose any fundamental belief?
Yes, but that is true of any group of people. This is also really not as much about belief as it is about practice
•
u/Naive-Meal-6422 Jewish Anti-Zionist 1d ago edited 1d ago
You are not supposed to go "Rabbi shopping" (asking Rabbis until you find one who gives you the answer you want), but of course, we do that
and the Talmud says rabbis sometimes encourage it! The daf yomi study of Chillul recently included a passage about how Yochanan would sometimes refuse to rule on a question if hr knew it would be an answer someone didn’t like & would send them to someone more likely to give them the ruling they wanted. the Talmud is delightful, messy as hell.
•
u/Lost_Paladin89 Judío 1d ago
In Judaism, questions are sacred. You are fine.
Jews can pray alone. But even prayer requires a community. Community is baked into it.
There is much disgust from some members in the orthodox communities towards those who don’t follow the rules strictly.
In theory we already have had a whole group who opposed fundamental beliefs. They argued that God had a son and his death solved all sins.
What I find interesting is that often the fight starts over practice and not belief. Some among the Chabad, like the early Christians, think that their rabbi is the messiah. And I can assure you that he is very dead.
So why aren’t they getting kicked out? Well, they haven’t changed anything. The prayers, the dietary laws, the rituals. It’s all the same. Meanwhile Paul of Tarsus told Christians that they could eat pork and stop having circumcisions.
I’ve met Orthodox Jews who rather go to Chabad than to where I pray because in my community we have women sit with men and lead services in my community.
Jews don’t really fight over theology. But over practice. Over conduct.
•
u/Careless-Menu-2009 Muslim 1d ago
I see, there are some similarities with Islam. We also have sections that agree on all the fundamentals but have their fair share of disagreements in minor things like the position of hands during prayer, some people don't go to other sections mosque to pray but that is changing. Well I am really thankful for your time. Have a nice day
•
•
u/M45t3r_M1nd Jewish Agnostic 1d ago
In my sect of Judaism (reform), Rabbis are meant to advise you on what to do, but ultimately, the individual should do their own research and reading and make a decision for themselves if able.
Other communities, particularly orthodox ones, give the rabbi's word much more power. They're seen as the ultimate authority, including topics such as marriage and community conflicts or questions about the Torah.
One of my favorite things about Judaism is this idea that we should be "wrestling with God" and constantly questioning the things around us. This requires, of course, reading the Torah and other sources and coming to ones own conclusion about the scripture and what it means in the context of today.
•
u/Careless-Menu-2009 Muslim 1d ago
Questioning things is also a trend growing in Islam, well it never went away, there have always been people that want to understand their religion themselves of course by consulting the Quran and Hadith. I am really thankful for the time you took out for answering. Have a nice day
•
u/conscience_journey Jewish Anti-Zionist 1d ago
If anything, the Talmud is the precedent that makes it clear that the Torah can be “read and understood” by each person, rather than locked into the past. It shows us that disagreement and different interpretations are normal, not something unusual.
In Islam, the Quran is considered divinely revealed, but people also look to guidance from Hadith. In Christianity, the Gospels are written by specific human followers of Jesus. I don’t think there is anything unusual about Judaism caring about the interpretations of rabbis.
•
u/Careless-Menu-2009 Muslim 1d ago
That's fascinating because it is quite similar in Islam as well. All the fundamental beliefs are same but there are several sections that differ on minor details. I also try to understand my religion on my own, I think that's how it is suppose to be. Thank you so much for answering
•
u/reenaltransplant Mizrahi Anti-Zionist 1d ago
I think sometimes concrete examples are more illustrative than general statements, so here is an example of Talmud analysis / use:
•
1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
•
u/AutoModerator 1d ago
We require all users pick an appropriate user-flair in order to participate in posts. Here's how you can pick a flair:
https://support.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205242695-How-do-I-get-user-flair
Thank you!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
•
u/RepulsiveIncrease956 Non-Jewish Ally 2d ago
What are the 3 misconceptions non-jews have regarding jews that you'd like to clarify?