Friday, November 6, 1998
Letters
True Judaism found
in rituals, sacred texts
As a Jew, I was deeply disturbed by Lev Ginsburg’s portrayal of
Judaism as an open-ended intellectual enterprise which requires
very little in the way of ritual on the part of its practitioner
("Judaism solves challenges through religious, cultural awareness"
Oct. 30). While Judaism has a strong tradition of intellectual
debate about many deep theological and philosophical issues, it is
primarily a religion of action.
The Torah, when recounting the establishment of the covenant
between the Jews and God at Mount Sinai, records the Jewish
attitude towards the Torah, which is primarily a book of laws
regarding our behavior as Jews, as "Na-Aseh V’Nishma." In English,
that translates to "We will observe, and then we will understand."
That is, the Jewish view of serving God that we must observe the
covenant in its fullness regardless of our level of understanding
of the ritual.
Ginsburg touches on some beautiful aspects of Judaism such as
Tikkun Olam (bettering the world), various forms of Tzedakah
(charity) and so forth. While these are critically important
aspects of Judaism, they are but a fraction of what Judaism really
is: an all-encompassing life-style in which not a moment of the day
goes by without an acknowledgment of God’s role in our lives.
Judaism, in its two primary holy texts, the Torah and the
Mishna-Talmud (the latter two make up a unit known collectively as
the Oral Torah, due to the fact that it was transmitted from
teacher to student until being put into writing around the second
century CE), sets forth the limits to which a person can stray
philosophically from the basic theological precepts of Judaism
while still calling his views "Jewish." So a free exchange of ideas
is allowed within limits. For example, a denial of the existence of
God or a denial of the Torah as the word of God is clearly outside
the bounds of Jewish thought.
Ginsburg’s ideology, it seems to me, stems more from
enlightenment ideals than from any Jewish precedent in our 3,300
year history. The equal validity of all points of view is not a
Jewish ideal nor one of any major religion in the world.
A distinction needs to made before I go on about the difference
between being Jewish and espousing Jewish belief. A Jew is anyone
who was born to a Jewish mother or converted to Judaism according
to Halachah (Jewish Law). A Jewish thought is one that has its
basis in 3,300 years of Jewish learning and thinking. One can be
Jewish and still express an opinion that is not Jewish.
True understanding of what Judaism is all about is rarely, if
ever, achieved  but we can inch toward such an understanding
by learning the plethora of Jewish texts. Unfortunately, most
American Jews today are too Jewishly illiterate to truly delve into
the depth of these texts. I suggest, though, that they start
studying the sources of our religion before they publicly present
Judaism in a false light.
Netanel Livni
Fifth-year
Cybernetics
Not all rapists can be found in fraternities
In response to "Prevention campaign targets frats" (News, Oct.
28), I feel that I must react to the statements attributed to me.
The juxtaposition of what National Interfraternity Council
President Jonathan Brant was quoted as saying and my response to
his comments might have caused some confusion.
When I told the Bruin reporter that I found Brant’s speech
offensive, I was referring to his statement that fraternity men
need rape education because they don’t know any better, a statement
that was not included in Chauntelle Tibbals’ article. I was not
referring to the efforts of the National Broadcasting Company
(NBC), the Rape Treatment Center or the National Interfraternity
Conference (NIC) to help prevent one of the most awful of all
crimes. I was solely offended by Brant’s lack of faith in my
judgement and my integrity, just because I am a member of a
fraternity.
My point is that there are bad apples in every bunch. It may
come as a shock, but there are hundreds of rapes committed each day
by people who have never been in a fraternity. Obviously this new
campaign can’t hurt (actually, it will probably do a whole bunch of
good), but why not create a program that targets NCAA athletes? Or
Undergraduate Student Association Council (USAC) board members? Or
ASUCLA concessions staff? Fraternities may not be perfect, but it
is time to admit to ourselves that they are not the root of all
evil.
Scott Revlin
Fifth-year
History and psychology
Comments, feedback, problems?
© 1998 ASUCLA Communications Board[Home]