Secular Judaism

OK. This is a topic that has been on my mind for quite some time--ever since we first started talking about it in class within the first few weeks of the semester. Secular Judaism, from what I understand, is pretty much the part of Judaism that is not religious in nature. If I understand it, Cultural Judaism is very similar, if not the exact same thing as Secular Judaism.

What is so baffling to me is the fact that some people take on an identity that is based on a purely religious and spiritual occurrences (Noah, Abraham, etc...) and take out the spiritual aspect of it. Is this even possible? Well, of course it is possible, people do it. Yet still, I am not satisfied as an outsider of Judaism with the whole concept of Secular Judaism. In my experience at Indiana University, I have had the opportunity to come across many Secular Jews--those who do not exactly keep Kosher, attend Shabbat services, participate during the High Holy days, etc... Yet, despite their lack of participation in the traditions and beliefs of Judaism, they still choose to identify with and call themselves Jewish. Others I know, including a good friend of mine actually, celebrate Passover along with other traditions but do not even believe in God. Some of these examples it seems identify with Judaism because thats what one or both of their parents were. Jews may or may not be a race of people. If they are, I can understand the concept of one identifying with Judaism because it is literally in their veins. But, what of an example of someone whose parents were (or at least one of them was) converts to Judaism. Let's say that person does not practice or believe anything that has to do with Judaism, but still identifies as a full-fledged Jew. Is this fair? Does simply where you grew up make us what we are? I argue that it does not. So, the question still remains, WHAT MAKES ONE JEWISH?? Does Judaism even exist? I believe that it does, but how can we prove it? Is it simply a collection of traditions, holidays, and a past? While I feel that these elements are crucial elements to it, I feel that it is so much more. To someone like me who is from the outside, it seems that there has to be that monotheistic element around which everything else revolves. Judaism was founded on belief in One God, and the love that that God has for those people. I feel that for one who considers themselves a Jew to take that out of the equation and say that it (God) was just made up or just exists to give people some direction in how to live their lives, than their actions as far as keeping the religious traditions of the Jewish people are in vain.

I apologize if this entry was seemingly judgmental. I am not judging anyone. I am simply trying to understand and deal with a concept that is so counter-intuitive to me, and attempting to challenge those who identify with Secular Judaism.

Who is a Jew? Are You?

What a crazy class F359 has been to me. Judaism. It has turned out to be one of the most complex and confusing topics that I have ever come across in my life. Before I took this class at IU, I was extremely naive on the subject. I just assumed that Judaism was one of the oldest monotheistic religions in the world and that while all of its "members" may practice to various degrees, they all basically believed the same thing. I found out that I could not have been more off track. Over the past few months, I would find myself asking, "Who is a Jew?" and genuinely trying to answer it. I have not even come close to beginning to answer it. With a lot of the arguments and scenarios that we have been given in class, it almost seems like anyone can call themselves Jewish or be allowed to identify with Judaism and nobody can really say that they are not. Even among the Jewish people, members of the Orthodox sect do not see Reform Jews as being Jews at all. Some people who identify with Judaism do not even believe in God. Others practice the religious-based traditions but only do so because of the traditional and cultural aspect of the ritual. This whole concept was especially foreign to me

In the end, I do believe that there are definitely Jews and non-Jews, but there is a line so blurry between the two that it is almost hard to see that there is one. Is Jewishness inherited from ones parents (or at least one of them)? Looking at my own life, does being born from Catholic parents make me a Catholic no matter what? In the spiritual sense of identity, we all come to a crossroads in out lives when we decide on who we are spiritually. For example, I cannot just call myself Catholic because my parents were and not believe in God or the Real Presence in the Eucharist. To violate those central beliefs is to deny what a Catholic is. I feel that this is the case in all spiritual sides of religion. What makes the issue of Judaism even more complex though is the whole issue of the Jewish heritage and the biological factors that take place. Here the questions get brought in about race and Judaism. Despite everything though, I think the idea of Jewishness and how much one has within them to a large extent comes down to where the heart is of each individual. Who am I to say whether something is Jewish or not? In then end, I believe that who we are can only fully be known by the One who made us and our mature selves.

The Jew Gene...

Here was a topic that I was not sure that we would cover. But, I guess it was bound to come up one of these days. Before I came to college, I was never really around many Jews (that I knew of) and nobody really ever talked about Jews as a group of people or race. I was never around any kind of stereotype or anything like that. The point of this is to say that I before college had no idea what a Jew was supposed to look like. Why is it that these kinds of stereotypes exist? Stereotypes are dangerous because of their overly-general natures. But, as much as we hate to admit it, stereotypes are often based on a SLIGHT shred of truth. If there is any truth to stereotypes and the physical characteristics describe are applicable to a majority of the group described, than this would imply that there may be some genetic traits that bind an entire group of people. The whole point of this would be to say that the whole argument of the Jews being a race of people may in fact be based in some kind of truth.

Much of the discussion in my Jewish Identities class this day was centered around "Jewish diseases" and used this as an argument for the possible race factor that could bind Jews together. Among the evidence was the whole issue of Tay-Sachs disease, which is an illness prevalent among the Ashkenazi Jews (because they are a group who on a large scale allow themselves to be research participants).

Interesting questions could derive from this whole issue of race and Judaism. One that I have is that, if a man who, having no Jewish blood within his family line, converts to Judaism and marries a non-Jewish woman and they have a daughter, does she now have Jewish blood flowing in her veins? What makes this such a tough area of debate is the whole dichotomy of Judaism as a spiritual identity as well as a physical/cultural identity.

Kabbalah

Kabbalah was a particularly interesting topic to me whenever we discussed it in class today. Whenever I think of it, my first thought goes to either Madonna or people who choose to tie a red string around their wrists. Until today, I just assumed that Kabbala was a Jewish form of philosophy or mysticism. I then learned that (like most of the topics I have had preconceptions about in this class) I was mistaken, at least according to Kabbalah.com. They described it as being more like a way of life (I think) through learning to pretty much conquer the negativity within ourselves and that comes to us from outside of us, and is not any kind of philosophy or theosophy.

I do question how much it is separated from Judaism. Those who practice Kabbalah use many forms of Jewish terms, such as Rabbi, as well as use Jewish customs such as keeping Kosher.

The important thing is the fact that the schools of thought within the Kabbalah spiritual practices is highly influenced by Jewish thought. This is highly evident in the different ways that Kabbalah has adapted Judaism. The whole idea of Kabbalah is also a strong argument as to the relevance and validity of the Jewish religion in that Kabbalah claims to be used and accepted by the major world religions such as Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, and of course, Judaism. This could also be an argument as to the amount of potential interconnectedness that many different types of faiths share as far as philosophy and theology are concerned.

Jews in the Evangelical Imagination

It is fascinating the relationships that Evangelical Christians feel that they have with the Jewish people. In fundamentalist thought, the Jews play a huge role in their spirituality for several reasons. First off, the center of Christianity, Jesus Christ, was himself a Jewish man. He participated in Jewish rituals and traditions, and obeyed Jewish law. Because of this connection, I think that most Christians, including myself, feel a very strong connection to the Jewish people. The second main part Jews have in the imagination of Evangelicals is the Jews role in the "End Times." Since the institution of Israel as a geographical location on the face of the earth, there has been a huge focus on the End Times and its manifestation. In the book of Revelation, the second coming of Christ is said to be characterized by the Jewish people returning to the same place. It is this very book that Evangelicals base a substantial amount of apocalyptic theology upon. It seems as though many Evangelicals place importance on helping the Jews through supporting Israel (as well as supporting a number of other Jewish causes) because they feel that mobilizing the Jews is helping to accelerate the Second Coming of Christ. There is also a bible passage that basically states that God will bless those who bless Israel.

As we discussed this topic in class today, I was wondering how it was that Evangelicals might see the Jewish people. I think that it may be that Evangelicals see the Jews as, well, not necessarily one dimensional, but rather as a united and universal group of people that basically believe the same things. The whole concept of Identity plays an enormous role in this whole topic. What Evangelicals see Jews as and what Jews think a Christian is is an intersection that makes the whole topic of Jewish-Christian relationship an extremely complex and foggy issue.

Intermarriage

The idea of intermarriage has the potential of being a touchy subject. Religious identity (for most people) is an extremely large piece of the person. Because of this, the idea of intermarriage has the potential of being a very difficult and sensitive issue when it comes to the couple and their family life. As I was listening to the discussion about intermarriage from a Jewish perspective, I found it especially more complex than other religions--in particular Christianity (because that is what I know best!). What makes it more complex in my eyes is the fact that Judaism has the potential as being looked at from both secular and religious points of view. The fact that Judaism can be looked at as a culture and even a race of people makes the idea of intermarriage a lot more sensitive. If a family members that derives pure Jewish bloodline (if that even exists) marries someone of another faith tradition or race, does that in some way compromise the Jewishness of a person? Does that in some way tarnish or decrease the value of the blood that runs through the child's veins?

I have absolutely no problem with the idea of intermarriage. Marriage is a beautiful institution in my opinion because when the marriage vows are taken seriously, they proclaim a beautiful promise of love and support for the spouse that is untouchable by whatever circumstances this world may bring up. However, that is not to say that intermarriage would not bring with it its share of difficulties and obstacles. In my own experience, it would be very difficult for me to marry outside of my faith. Not because I feel that the decision would be one step toward the fading away of Catholicism, not because I don't respect the faiths that other people find truth and a sense of identity in, but because of this. My belief in the Eucharist (bread and wine becoming the actual body and blood of Christ) is a central part of who I am as a human being. It very well may BE the central point of who I believe myself to be. If my future spouse does not share a belief in the Eucharist, than I would have a hard time feeling they really understand who I am, and thus, that would put a major obstacle in the way as far as giving myself completely over to somebody in the sacrament of marriage.

Race and Judaism

In class today, we discussed a particularly interesting topic. We were discussing what role race plays and Judaism. Are Jews even a race of people? Are there certain factors about our particular genetic makeup that constitutes what can or cannot be considered Jewish? The politically correct answer is absolutely not, yet there are still members of the Jewish community that choose to identify themselves as a particular race of people. For instance, today in class, several of the Jewish students had never heard of African-American Jews until later on in their lives (like around the time of their bar/bat mitzvah). There was also a case when a woman, when referring to a Jewish cantor with Asian facial features, asked questions about her being a convert or if she was adopted. I think that the reason that this is such a touchy subject is for the fact that Judaism is a multi-dimensional group of people that base identity factors on not just religious elements but also on cultural factors.

There was also something else that got me thinking. We had the opportunity to watch a film called Black Israel. It discussed the topic of Black Jews and what that meant in the grand scheme of the idea of Judaism and what that means. A key spokesperson on the topic of African-American Jews is Rabbi Capers Funnye, In talking about this idea, he made a pretty bold argument. He claimed that the first Jews in existence were Black. In the section of the film, he based this on evidence from the "hebraic practices" of tribes in Africa that have existed for hundreds of years before the slaves were taken from Africa. He also compares the struggles and plights of the African people with those of the Jewish people. But, does that mean that because two groups of people have had somewhat similar pasts that they are derived from the same roots? I personally do not think it does. I think that there can be a lot of grounds for having things in common and having a better understanding of one another, but I do not think that it means that they have to be the same group of people.

On the Birthright Experience.

I was given a bunch of interesting perspectives on the whole Birthright issue in class today. I was surprised to find that of all the folks in the class there was only one person who said that they would be willing to go back to Israel and spend more time over there. Others who experienced the trip had a fun time, but said that they had no desire to go back there to live. I also discovered that there was a big push on those tho experience the trip to live there. Why is this? It seems to me that there is a very strong Zionistic agenda behind the whole experience. It seems to me that there is a "retreat high" that accompanies these kind of trips. By retreat high, I mean the amazing feeling that comes with the experience. You feel like you can set the world on fire by yourself or are consumed with the experience. It always happens that the high eventually goes away. The high is an extremely good thing because it always magnifies the passions and most of the time yields constructive results. It seems to me that the experience was more like a vacation though because just about everyone who went to Israel for a Birthright trip or tour walked away WITHOUT a concrete, transforming experience. At least none that lasted anyway. I actually think that most experiences in life are like this. Religious, community building, retreats, conferences, everything. I wish I knew more about what exactly it is that goes on at these things. I actually checked out the main website for the Taglit-Birthright Israel and saw a page completely dedicated to the young adult demographic. I even watched the little video that promotes it, and the first thing I observed was the bright, seemingly tropical colors. Clean cut, young guys and girls with sunglasses only added to the vacation image of the website and thus, the whole Birthright experience. Could a vacation type atmosphere be one of the reasons for the lack of lasting impressions for those who participate in the Trip?

Jewish Sounds?

F359 has been an amazing class for me. It really has helped me to get exposed to different aspects of Judaism that I would have probably not have been exposed to otherwise. Not only have I seen different movements of Judaism, I have gotten a chance to look at everyday aspects through "Jewish eyes." One of these aspects that is incredibly important to me is music. One of the topics we discussed was the issue of Jewish music and what it is. But does it even exist? There are arguments on each side of the question that I have been exposed to. First of all, there are certain aspects of music that I think of when I think of Jewish music. From the instruments to melodic and harmonic structure, there seems to be similarities within what one might call Jewish music. When the vocals are sung in the Hebrew language, there are certain vowel and consonant sounds that stick out. Words that contain a "ch" within themselves are usually what I think of. Along with this, many forms of Jewish music were influenced from music within the middle east. To me, I hear very distinctive modal characteristics that resemble forms of the phrygian mode as well as the harmonic minor scale. The instrumentation also plays a role. The sound of clarinets, violins, and violas are usually what I think of when I think of Jewish music. On the other side of the argument says that there is no such thing as Jewish music. Some feel this because there are so many counter arguments that could be made against its existence. For example, if I learned Hebrew and decided to write a song about my favorite kind of ice cream and write it in a phrygian mode, then does that make it Jewish? Even if a Jew writes a song that sounds like Metallica or Stone Temple Pilots, does that make it Jewish because it was by a Jew? I do not feel that it does. I think what gives music Jewish characteristics comes down to the intentions and the ideologies that exist behind the music is being listened to.

"This Land is Your Land"

The concept of Jewish travel and tourism is a fascinating thing to me. Especially when it comes to taking a trip over to Israel. I think that it is such an awesome thing to have a place in the world that affects so many people in such a specific way. Looking at my own life, I guess that really the only place that could be compared to this part of the Jewish experience would be the Vatican in Rome. Many Catholics that I know have traveled there or plan to travel there because it is the center of Catholic Christianity. Thinking about it, Jerusalem or Bethlehem would be other places that would hold extreme significance in sentimental ways because of the important aspects of the life of Christ that took place there. There is a big difference between the two viewpoints though. While Jerusalem, the Vatican, and Bethlehem may be extremely important because of the events that have taken place there, Israel is important because of this factor but more importantly because of what it is. It is a state that is claimed for the Chosen people of God. The mere fact that the land is called "Israel" carries with it a lot of significant symbolism. Since it's institution, Jews of all ages are encouraged to study the meaning of this important place as well as it's history. We read a reading this past class that was addressing one of these seminars that teach young people about Israel and important places within its geography as well as symbolic locations that are discussed in the Torah. Having a state completely dedicated to one group of people, no matter how diverse they are, allows those affiliated with it to have a tangible aspect of their identity.

Don't Believe Everything You Read

The holocaust was obviously one of the most horrific events to ever happen in human history. It has affected and continues to affect, and will continue to affect humanity for the rest of time. Recently, a woman who wrote a popular holocaust memoir that has sold thousands and thousands of copies and touched many many people came out and admitted that her story was fictional. This made countless of people upset and offended, particularly some of us in my F359 class at Indiana University. But, why was this an issue what made us upset? Why, if the book still reached us in a deep personal level and promoted a feeling of respect and reverence for the gravity of the event, are we still offended by the falseness of the memoir? I do have a possible explanation. Could it be that because of our age and disconnectedness with the whole event, the stories that we hear from others recalling the holocaust are all we have to hang on to? So, if one of those stories that we have accepted are shown to be false, it causes us to rethink other things that we have accepted as truth. This is a very disturbing feeling for we as people. It feels as though the rug has been swept out from under us. Like our foundation is shaken. In the end, however, I feel that experiences like these can only in the end produce good fruits and make us more secure in the knowledge we have. These experiences teach us a valuable lesson in life: to not believe everything we read, question the information we are given, consider the point of view of the sources that give us the information, and ultimately, to think for ourselves. All this is well and good, but even so, the falseness can be offensive because the word of those who claim they have experienced such tragedies are pretty much all we have to go off of. When someone tells us that a piece of information is the truth, and then later claim that it wasn't, especially when it was a truth that affected us on a very deep level, I think that it will always hurt in some way or another.

"Funny, she doesn't LOOK Druish!"

This is a quote that is in what I believe to be one of the funniest movies of all time--Mel Brooks' "Spaceballs." The movie was written and directed by a Jewish guy and I think that him placing a quote like that in the film addresses Jewish appearance stereotypes. I have been thinking a lot about our discussion over a movie we watched in class called "The Tribe." Throughout the film (which was basically a commentary on Jewish identity) was this whole issue of Barbie. The reason this was such a big deal is because people argue that Barbie is a representation of the times and portrays in a stereotypical way certain aspects of American life like lifestyles, cultures, and careers. One issue that members of the Jewish community had with Barbie was the fact that even though she was created by a Jewish woman, the doll doesn't look very Jewish. As a matter of fact, the only way I was able to tell that the inventor of Barbie was Jewish was because Dr. Cohen told us in class. I must not have any idea what a Jew is supposed to look like. I have heard about certain stereotypes about Jewish appearance but I think that they are stupid. Here's the main issue for me though. No group of people want to be stereotyped or pinned down to others expectations as far as actions or looks go, yet some people are complaining because the appearance of Barbie doesn't represent a group of people well enough. To me, this almost sounds like those concerned are kind of ASKING to be stereotyped. What does it mean to look Jewish, or Christian, or American, or Peruvian, or Alaskan, etc...? Does it mean anything?

Jewish Film?

Today in class, we viewed a film that was called "The Tribe." It had the type of feel of a documentary, but I feel that it was more of an expose' on how people understand Jewish identity from within and without the particular "tribe" of people. At the end of class we were all asked whether or not we would classify the film as Jewish or not. I believe I was the only person in the class that would not consider this movie to be Jewish. But why was it that I took this stance? Since taking this F359 class, I have been finding myself questioning if there really can be any genres of anything. In looking at Jewish film, I do not think that it exists for a few reasons. The film we watched today was about Jewish identity as well as directed by a Jewish director, Tiffany Shlain. But does the fact that a film is about a certain topic such as Jewish identity or focus mainly on Jewish characters make a film Jewish? Does the fact that a Jew directed or produced a film make it Jewish? I argue that it doesn't. If we wanted to be politically correct, I feel that the best way to classify these types of films would be to say that these are films which address certain cultural, religious, or value aspects of Judaism, or are films which have been produced or directed by a Jewish person. Can cultures classify as a genre? What about this case... would one look for a movie like Schindler's List in a Drama section or a Jewish section? Would you do the same with the Passion of the Christ, except that you would find it in a Christian section? In the case of Schindler's List, the fact that the film was made about a predominantly Jewish event and produced by a Jewish director does not, I feel make it a Jewish film.

What is Reality?

Recently, there was a class discussion that revolved around Second Life which was highly controversial. Second Life is a program that allows users from all over the world to interact with other users in all kinds of simulated environments. Some of these simulated environments are religious in nature. Such places include different kinds of temples, churches, and shrines, including the West Wall in Jerusalem. The main issue here was whether or not participating in organized online religious events would be considered valid in the "real world." The class was pretty much split down the middle as far as agreeing and disagreeing with the validity of the action. Personally, I sided with the class that said, for example, that attending a Shabbat online could be equated with attending a Shabbat at a nearby Temple. One of the main issues that I felt was permeating the conversation was the question of "what is reality?" Many people in the class against the claim of the validity of lets say an online worship service like a Shabbat was that the service was not "real." The service was in a "dream world." Others on the opposite side of the fence claimed that if you truly believe in your heart that you did something or experienced something than it was real and valid regardless of anything anyone else said. In the case of attending an online worship service like a Mass or Shabbat, I felt that many people were focusing on the idea of intent, and if you in your heart intended to go to a traditional worship service, you could just go online and be justified. I feel that there is a fallacy in this reasoning. I do not feel that there is any person on this earth who would agree with this sentence: actually getting on a plane and flying to Paris, France and touching the Eiffel Tower is the same as going online, signing on to Second Life, and having your character teleport to the "Paris Environment" and "touching" the animated tower. In the end, I feel that intent to do something can be a good thing that can lead to fruitful actions. As some have argued, having "Jewish" environments in the game can help those searching for the Truth or trying to learn more about a particular religion can be lead to it for the first time or back to it after it had been a while. But just because I have the intent of doing something and have simulated actually doing it in a fantasy world does not give me the right to say I have actually experienced it in "reality."

On a New York Times Article

Recently, there was a New York Times article published that had to do with a Vatican Cardinal defending a prayer that asked for a conversion for the hearts of Jews. Jewish Organizations like the American Jewish Committee and Anti-Defamation League were not happy at all about this because there is an underlying message that states that Jews should recognize Jesus Christ as the savior of all men, including the Jews. In this article, the dialogue gives us insight into the identity into the parties involved. Cardinal Walter Kasper defends the prayer on the grounds of he does not feel that any group of people, including the Jews, have any right to tell Catholics (in this case) what is OK to pray for, even if someone might find something offensive in it. It seems too that the Jewish Organizations who protested the prayer felt that their right to believe what they desired was being encroached upon by interpreting a prayer to mean that the Jews must consider Jesus Christ as their Savior. One of the Jewish groups that protested is the Anti-Defamation League, which was established to "secure justice and fair treatment to all citizens alike and to put an end forever to unjust and unfair discrimination against and ridicule of any sect or body of citizens." Because one of the main purposes of this group is to act out against discrimination and injustice toward Jews and human beings as a whole, they feel that they are being treated unjustly or in a discriminating way. I, however, do side with the side of the Cardinal for several reasons. First, I do not feel that anybody, secular or religious, has the right to tell any group of people what is OK and not OK to pray for. Secondly, if the ADL was being consistent in their stated philosophy, they would speak out against the rest of the same Good Friday petitions that pray for the conversion of the hearts of non-practicing Catholics, Protestants, Muslims, Buddhists, agnostic, and atheists as well as the Jewish to the Truth.

On the Cultural Jewish Movement

One of the most fascinating aspects of being enrolled in a class that focuses on Jewish Identity is just that--learning about what it means to be Jewish in todays world. Before I enrolled in this class, I was under the assumption that there was basically one Jewish faith and values system. I had heard of the main movements including reform, conservative, and orthodox, but I could not believe just how different from one another each of them were.
In life, we as humans are always comparing new, different, and unseen things and ideas to aspects of our life that we are familiar with in order to make sense of the thing we have just learned or seen. In my studies and discoveries in the realm of Judaism, I have found myself comparing the separate sections of Judaism with that of the Protestant movements or denominations of Christianity. I do this for several reasons. Just like every denomination of Protestantism identifying themselves as Christian but have major fundamental differences, I am seeing the same qualities in the realm of Judaism. For instance, a difference that absolutely blew my mind was the issue of what is central to Jewish identity. Since I have seen that in the Torah the Jewish people came into being through a covenant between God and the patriarchs. So, when I discovered that there was a movement called Cultural Judaism that did not only not have God at the center of its philosophies and teachings and as the basis on which the movement stood, it even defines God as being an "idea" that was invented by man a way to think of spiritual life. This in turn led me to other questions concerning modern Jewish movements (particularly Cultural Judaism): then what is Spiritual Life? What is the human Spirit? From where did it come? Even as an outsider of the Jewish faith (however, Christianity would not have existed if it were not for the Jewish faith), to see any facet of Judaism without God as, at least, a driving force in its existence and identity is counter-intuitive and, in my opinion, begs one to ask the question, is it even Judaism?

On Reform (without an "ed") Judaism

The very first lecture of F359 was enough to make me get a taste of just how much I DO NOT understand and how much I have to learn about Judaism. Coming from a Catholic background has given me many (positive) perceptions of the Jewish faith (as I see or should I say saw it). I saw it as a faith because the guy I do my best to follow in my physical and spiritual life was himself a religious Jew. I have since been exposed to different world-views of the Jewish people and seen that to be a Jew can possibly mean to be affiliated with a major faith, way of life, values system, or ethnicity even. The first main topic discussed in class was the idea that there are three main movements that Jews choose to identify themselves with. The Reform movement, the Conservative movement, and the Orthodox. The first fact that I was amazed to discover was that of all the movements, Reform is the oldest and closest to its roots. I always assumed that Orthodox was the eldest of the three, but it was in this class that I learned that it was Reform Judaism coming into existence that helped the Orthodox movement define what it is in the first place. There were several other elements concerning Reform Judaism that struck me as well. The first minute of discussion on the topic taught me to notice that there should be no "ED" on the end of the word "Reform". It's amazing to me just how many perceptions two little letters being stuck on the end of a word can instill or raise. Because I thought the word was "reformed", I assumed that reform Judaism was exceptionally liberal. I was also under the WRONG assumption because I thought it was a "reformed" faith or philosophy, it may take on characteristics that would thus make the Jewish lifestyle "easier" to live by. I apologize for my ignorance in the matter. I am very excited to learn more about what it means for people when they identify themselves as a Jew, as well as lifting the clouds of ignorance as it were from a faith that I have the utmost honor and respect for.