Sorry for the long delay! Lots of questions for this week's collection of reading:
Compared to the initiatives of the Conservative Movement (Magen Tzedek) and Modern Orthodoxy (Uri L'Tzedek), the Reform Movement seems a little late to the ethical food/ethical eating party. Yet, ethical kashrut isn't really "our" issue. Or is it? *Should* it be? (One has to wonder, at least a little bit, what the Pittsburgh Platform-ers might have thought about the ethical implications of rejecting kashrut as an organizing principle of Jewish living.)
Speaking of which, what *are* the ethical implications of keeping kosher? Is adding "ethics" to kashrut an authentic expression of the biblical and rabbinic ideals or a 21st Century additive layer of concern?
Are there differences between the Tav HaYosher designation and the Magen Tzedek certification? If so, what are they? If not, do "we" need both?
What do you think about Raphael's suggestion that we look to the early Middle Ages to mine ways to create (positive) relationships between Jews and Muslims particularly when it comes to food preparation and eating? Do you find it an innovative idea or do you think food practices have changed so dramatically that any strategies would be anachronistic or antiquated?
Dr. Cutter suggests that ethical eating starts with healthy eating, that is, that the fight for ethical kashrut begins with the dictum to save a life (one's own life). Agree? Disagree?
Bal Taschit seems strikingly anthropocentric; don't destroy anything from which we (humanity) can gain benefit. How did saving the environment get to be about us?
And, finally, how can we adapt the policies articulated by Magen Tzedek's Certification Standards to our own needs to create a conscious kosher policy at HUC, LA?
It is ON!
Welch's for Pesah? " Welch's Teams With Manischewitz in Battle Over Kosher Grape Juice " (NPR, 10/10/17)
4 comments:
First thought: What does it mean when the criteria for a hekhsher is based upon federal and state standards? Is it possible the standards are not good enough, that the criteria need to be independent, based on Torah?
Side note: In trying to figure out who is head of the FDA, wikipedia tells us that Dr. Margaret Hamburg qualifies as one of the tribe under patrilineal descent...
1) Are Reformers to the table? From our reading it sure seems like it. What has the movement done. Praised the work of the Heksher Tzedek Commission and the "Green Table, Just Table" Initiative. I don't think eco-kashrut is "our issue," however, as a "prophetic" movement based in "ethical judaism" I think ethical eating IS "our Issue." I'm curious how IMW would have reacted to the argument that keeping Kosher had ethical and moral implications. Would the Treyfe banquet still have happened? Or was it just not an issue then?
2) Even though the question was put out about Biblical and Rabbinic together, I will address them separately. I don't think the Biblical injunctions can be addressed as ethical. Saving the fruit trees just seems prudent, not ethical. Expounding it further to say "drink beer instead of wine" (when it's more local) or to not waste a morsel of food expouds it beyond prudency (my computer says that's not a word, but I'm keeping it). Rabbinic seems to come from an ethical standard.
3) Tav Hayosher & Magen Tzedek, why not two? More could be better, no? Different eyes/entities evaluating, giving us options? My gut reaction is this could be beneficial.
Reading Silverman’s essay about who plays the role of gatekeeper of kosher certification reminded me of
an article I read a couple of months ago about the source Whole Foods uses for frozen organic vegetables. I was stunned to learn that many of the frozen vegetables that bear the Whole Foods market label actually come from China or Mexico. While I don’t necessarily want to get into a discussion about the personal problem I have with frozen vegetables in general, I felt betrayed by Whole Foods and the marker of what makes something actually organic.
Turns out that China also plays a lead role in making not just organic items but kosher ones as well. “China is among the largest producer of kosher ingredients, with over two thousand companies that produce kosher items.” (Sacred Table, pg 319). We are more removed from our food than we even dare to realize.
Silverman suggests that it is incumbent upon Reform Jews to “demand and support a higher standard of ethical behavior from the Jewish food industry.” (pg. 325) I’m wondering if it is just the Jewish food industry we bear responsibility for?
Okay, this is going to be a slightly disjointed post because I had many interesting thoughts while reading the "Eating Their Way into Heaven." One of the people interviewed for the piece said that Judaism is very concerned about treating animals humanely and kindly, but, if this truly were the case, wouldn't we all be vegetarians? How is killing a healthy creature ever humane? Rav Kook saw the eating of meat as a negative manifestation of humanity, rather than one of our basic needs. He argued that, one day, when we have found a way to tame our yetzer ha'rah, we will detest even the mere thought of eating another living creature. If Rav Kook is right, why would the rabbis have constructed this elaborate form of kosher slaughter rather than just mandating a vegetarian diet for all Jews?
Additionally, If the laws of kosher slaughter were really about being kind to the animal, wouldn't kashrut be ethical all the time? Why do we have to delineate ethical kashrut from regular kashrut? In this vein, I started thinking about how, in the Torah, God commands the total destruction of the inhabitants of Canaan. In several instances, the Hebrews leave no survivors, not even children. If, in some instances, the Torah does not command us to treat people humanely, then should we suppose that schitah is about compassion and kindness? What about stoning people to death? In capital punishment cases, wouldn't our ancestors have also used some form of schetah, if it truly is the most compassionate way to kill?
Post a Comment