Winter 2015Choref 5775

118 Kerckho� Hall308 Westwood PlazaLos Angeles, CA 90024

www.haam.org

Contact Us At:haam@media.ucla.edu

Apply Online At:www.apply.uclastudentmedia.com/applications/haam/

Media:

@haamnewsHa’Am iPhone App

Diversity inJudaism

I have served as Ha’Am’s editor-in-chief for the past three years, and never have I felt inclined to write a ‘Letter from the Editor,’ believing that the pages of our publication speak for themselves.

After having seen the lack of tolerance on the

UCLA campus over the past few months, however, I have rediscovered the need to strongly project my voice — and the voices of those on whose behalf I speak. Diversity is UCLA’s greatest asset, but also an area in which we can profoundly grow. When our own student government creates an environment in which a candidate’s ethnicity is questioned, that is not diversity. When students are afraid to openly voice their religion or political affiliations, that is not diversity. Diversity is what you will find in the pages of this issue: diversity of opinion, of religious observance, and of homeland.

I encourage you to pick up an issue and experience the myriad of opinions shared by the Ha’Am staff as we explore what it means to be a Jewish Bruin, a Jewish American, and a Jewish citizen of any country.

[Opening]Page 2Winter 2015

Table of Contents

Jewish Society20-21

Israel4-5The empathy gap .......................................................... 4

by Yaacov Tarko

My grandfather’s uniform ............................................... 5by Rivka Cohen

Aliyah throughout the ages .......................................... 21by Rachel Moreh

Kosher newspapers? Sticks & stones & words .......... 20by Briana Begelfer

by Jasmin HiekaliThe Shabbos App: pro-Shabbos? .................................. 8

by Moshe Kahn

Seville and Civility: The necessity of reforming Jewish-Muslim relations on campus ........................... 6-7

Opinion6-13

by Sepehr HakakianInstant gratification .................................................... 9

by Arielle MokhtarzadehJewish Humans of UCLA: United in our differences ......... 10

by Sarit KashanianThe harm of “innocent” generalizations ........................ 11

by Noah Wallace

Debate Table: The absurdity of kashrut in the contemporary world ...12, 23

by Devorah Friedman

Debate Table: You are why you eat; or why I keep kosher ............... 13, 23

by Tessa Nath

Is it time to move to Israel already? And other questions about the future of Diaspora Judaism ....... 16-17

by Max Nath

“Accepted” outsiders: the Jewish people in Germany today ................................................ 14-15

Feature14-19

by Jasmin BoodaieInternational Jews of UCLA ................................... 18-19

by Ellie FridmanJews Across-the-word ............................................... 17

Purim: did the party really end? ..................................... 22by Alexandra Marvizi

Politics & Other22-24

by Daniel PeikesQuiz: Which Jewish holiday are you? ............................ 24

Cover art by Amir Naveh

The fingers smearing the painted flags represents the intersection of different cultures across the world.

Letter from the Editor

With much love,

[Opening] Page 3Winter 2015

Can’t get enough of Ha’Am?

Download our FREE iPhone app, and visit us

online at haam.org

Ha’AmWinter 2015Choref 5775

© 2014 UCLA Communications Board. Published with support from Generation Progress, a project of the Center for American Progress (online at GenProgress.org) The UCLA Communications Board has a media grievance procedure for resolving grievances against any of its publications. For a copy of the complete procedure, contact Student Media UCLA at 118 Kerckhoff Hall, 310 825-2787, or director@media.ucla.edu.

The UCLA Communications Board fully supports the University of California’s policy on non-discrimination. The student media reserves the right to reject or modify advertising portraying disability, age, sex, or sexual orientation. It is the expectation of the Communications Board that the student media will exercise the right fairly and with sensitivity. Any person believing that any advertising in the student media violates the Board’s policy on non-discrimination should communicate his or her complaints in writing to the Business Manager, Ha’Am, 118 Kerckhoff Hall, Westwood Plaza, Los Angeles, CA 90024. For assistance with housing discrimination problems, call: UCLA Housing Office (310) 825-4491, or the Housing Rights Center (213) 387-8400.

All opinions expressed in this newsmagazine are solely that of the author, not of the Ha’Am Editorial Board or the UCLA Communications Board. Letters to the editor should be directed to haam@media.ucla.edu

Ha’Am is the official student-run Jewish newsmagazine at UCLA. We cater to a mainly college-age audience, with the distinct goal of uniting diverse Jewish communities through intelligent debate, maintaining the Talmudic tradition that has sustained our people throughout the millennia. We seek the unique Jewish voice in age-old arguments and perspectives, highlighting what makes the Jews of today exceptional through our articles, personality profiles, and pro-con discussions. We celebrate the intersections of religious and secular life that exist within each Jewish student and writer.

This isn’t your grandmother’s Judaism — this is Ha’Am today.

(Please note that individual opinions expressed by the authors do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of Ha’Am as a whole.)

About Ha’Am

Ha’Am is always looking for talented writers, editors, designers, photographers, illustrators, sales representatives, creative

thinkers, and skilled debaters. Look us up on Facebook, Twitter, or e-mail haam@media.ucla.edu to give us your feedback or to get more involved. Or visit our website at www.haam.org for

even more articles.

For a look at this issue in full color, visit www.haam.com/print-issues/

EDITOR-IN-CHIEFTessa Nath

MANAGING EDITORSDevorah Friedman (Internal)Elyssa Schlossberg (External)

CONTENT EDITORSAngelina Ellyason (Head)

Jasmin BoodaieMax Nath

Noah Wallace

COPY EDITORSSimone Dvoskin (Head)

Ellie FridmanArielle Mokhtarzadeh

Nicole Rudolph

LAYOUT & DESIGN EDITORNicole Rudolph

APP MANAGER Nicole Rudolph

SOCIAL MEDIA MANAGERSAngelina Ellyason

Alexandra Marvizi (Intern)Arielle Mokhtarzadeh (Intern)

Rachel Moreh (Intern)

MARKETING MANAGERAlexandra Marvizi

BUSINESS MANAGERSJasmin Boodaie (Manager)Sarit Kashanian (Intern)

DISTRIBUTION MANAGERJasmin Hiekali

STAFF WRITERSBriana BegelferRivka Cohen

Sepehr HakakianJasmin HiekaliMoshe Kahn

Sarit KashanianAlexandra Marvizi

Rachel MorehYaacov Tarko

STAFF PHOTOGRAPHERRebecca Zaghi

STAFF VIDEOGRAPHERSamara Pals

STAFF ARTISTSBriana Begelfer

Angelina EllyasonAmir NavehM Moore

CRUCIVERBALISTSEllie FridmanDaniel Peikes

www.haam.org

universal human experience. Econo-mist and philosopher Adam Smith, in his classic Theory of Moral Senti-ments, asked his readers to consider a situation in which the empire of Chi-na is destroyed by a natural disaster. He suggests that a European would

react by taking a moment to reflect on the arbitrariness of life, and then moving on. By contrast, if the same European suffered a minor personal misfortune, he or she would be far more troubled.

Similarly, America’s wars over the last decade have caused far more ci-vilian suffering than Israel’s, and re-ceived far less criticism. This is part-ly because Americans empathized

with the American civilians killed in 9/11 and other terrorist attacks more than with the Middle Eastern civil-ians killed by American soldiers and drones.

Nevertheless, a closer connection with the people with whom we share

a homeland could be valuable. If we decide to try to build that empathy, I suggest we start close to home. A new organization on campus, called Israe-lis and Palestinians Unite, will put on apolitical events to build friendships between UCLA students who are en-gaged in both sides of the issue. Pro-grams like these could be a good first step towards greater mutual empathy between our two peoples.

“[Israel]Page 4

Winter 2015

The tragedies of the summer of 2014 in Israel began with the abduc-tion and murder of three Israeli chil-dren, Eyal, Gilad and Naftali. Though the vast majority of Jews across the world had no direct connection to the boys, we held our collective breath, hoping for their safe return. Our com-munities banded together in prayer and then, tragically, in mourning, as the murder of our children was made known.

In its attempt to find the boys, our state’s army shut down large sections of the West Bank. Several Palestin-ian civilians were killed, more were injured, and hundreds were arrested without charge or trial. The entire perimeter around the city of Hebron was shut down, and tens of thousands of Palestinians were unable to work.

Most of our people found still un-clear whom “we” refers to. American Jews? All Jews everywhere? All Zion-ists? As Jews, we feel a deep, personal connection with those who share our national culture. We can imagine Eyal reading the Torah at his bar mitzvah, Gilad retelling the story of our people at his Passover seder, or Naftali join-ing his family for Shabbat dinner, as our families have done for millennia. Through this connection, they become human. As Jews, we share this same connection with the soldiers of the IDF and the people of Israel. We feel that they are our army, our people.

We share no such connection with the Palestinians who suffered from our efforts to find Eyal, Gilad, and

Naftali. Like any other group, we empathize more with each other than with outsiders. As a result, we don’t humanize Palestinian victims of the conflict in the way we humanize Jew-ish ones. (Obviously, I’m not argu-ing for greater empathy with proven murderers and terrorists.)

So when we see a chance to bring back our children, however slight, we take it. When we see an opportunity to slow the rockets hailing down on our families in southern Israel, we act on it. And almost any action that would protect our people from another ter-rorist attack becomes acceptable.

We know that the actions we take to ensure our security cause Pales-tinians to suffer, that thousands have died and millions live unenviable lives under the rule of our military. But we don’t feel their suffering in the same way. A family member of mine cried when Eyal, Gilad, and Naftali were found dead. When she watched the bombardment of Gaza on the news, she was uncomfortable, but her eyes remained dry.

(The Palestinian leadership, par-ticularly Hamas, greatly contributes to the difficulty of life in Palestin-ian society. Nevertheless, the state of Israel regularly makes decisions in which it has to balance the interests of Israelis and Palestinians, and these decisions sometimes cause harm to Palestinians.)

I’m not trying to suggest that Jews are unique in empathizing more with those closer to us. It seems to be a

Like any other group, we empathize more with each other than with outsiders.”

Photo by Justin McIntosh, “Abandoned shops in Hebron” (Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic License)

TUNNEL TO NOWHERE: Abandoned shops in the city of Hebron.

Yaacov TarkoStaff Writer

[Israel] Page 5Winter 2015

My grandfather’s uniformRivka CohenStaff Writer

Last week, I visited the Israeli consul-ate to renew my passport. As the lady at the desk was happily typing my informa-tion into her computer, a sense of relief quietly overcame me, knowing I would soon be one step closer to being home again after nearly a decade. The play-back of a tearful Hollywood family reunion at Ben Gurion Airport came to an immediate halt, however, when I noticed her fingers stop and her face grow concerned.

She dials a number on the phone, looks to me and asks, “You were born in ‘93?”

I quickly reply, “Yeah, why? What does that have to do with anything?”

She nods and turns back to the com-puter as a voice picks up on the other line. The voice gives instructions and she begins typing again. She nods her head, every few seconds opening up a manila folder with numbers I can’t make out. She thanks the person and hangs up the phone.

“Okay, you’re already 21. So before I can renew your passport I have to get a confirmation from the IDF offices that you no longer have to—”

“It’s already taken care of, didn’t you read that paper in my passport? I got an exemption for another year or so.”

“Maybe if you let me finish,” she gives a smile filled with apathetic sarcasm and I shut up. For once my Israeli arrogance is not offensive, just reciprocated. “You’re 21 and a female. You won’t have to be drafted to the army anymore.”

“Wait what? I thought it was... Are you sure? “

“Yeah, some ... changes happened.” She purses her lips, “You’ll be cleared once they get back to me.”

After a little research, I learned that in fact, as a child of immigrants and a female who reached 21, I won’t need to keep pushing back the call to service that’s been waiting for me since I was 16. I’m simply free from it.

As I leave the building that day and every day since (waiting for a long line of bureaucracy to grant back my little blue book), that fact sinks in. I, a born-and-raised Israeli, will never serve in the army. I should be happy, right? I’ll never

have to endure the sleepless nights, the awful food, the cleaning duties, or the Saturdays on the base. “Anyhow,” I ra-tionalize, “I’m in college. By the time I get my bachelor’s, and master’s, then doctorate… who has time for a two-year-long full-time job I can’t put on a resume?”

Eventually, the thoughts swirling in my head formed a sinking sense of loss, one I never considered before.

I won’t report to the BAKUM with mom and dad as they half-heartedly send me off, telling me what it was like when they were my age. I won’t know the bond between unit members. I won’t sa-lute and pay respects to those who have been keeping my family and people safe. I won’t learn military discipline, or be li-able for others’ triumphs and failures. I won’t have my 21-year-old-arrogance spat back at me, my will broken and reshaped in the Zionist vision. And I’ll never wear that uniform – that same ol-ive green my grandfather wore in every war from ‘56 to ‘73. The green my uncles have been wearing since being drafted in the ‘70s. The green my father wore in Lebanon in 1982. The green my cousins and childhood friends are wearing as I write this, sipping a soy chai in my cozy Los Angeles apartment on a Saturday af-ternoon.

That olive green uniform has been passed down in my family for three gen-erations, and I’m the exception. Sudden-ly, my ten-year plan seems distant, less than perfect. I’ve spent the last years of my life chasing American dreams and lost sight of my Israeli, my Jewish, my familial obligations.

Meanwhile, there are Sarvanim (or

in English, Refusniks) who live in Isra-el refusing to serve. To each his or her reason – religious, political, personal – and whether they are acceptable or not is up to the IDF to decide. I, too, have my convictions about the military’s place in Palestinian territories, but is it my place to decide? Like every Israeli, I have the harshest criticisms for my country, but do they absolve me from serving for it? Is my privilege of not having to serve a blessing or a curse?

In an intimate screening of Beneath the Helmet, a coming-of-age film about the transition of five Israelis from high school and into the army, some of my confusion was alleviated on one hand, but on the other, the sense of duty owed to my country deepened.

The interactions and bonds between soldiers, commanders and the meaning of their service are colored with the many backgrounds of each, some moving from the other ends of the world to live and serve in what they call their “homeland.” All of them, united by a life-and-death duty to the Jewish heritage, feel that they are serving themselves and history in the best way possible, wearing that ol-ive green uniform. Private Oren Giladi, a lone soldier, is seen visiting his family in his home overlooking a breathtaking Swiss mountain landscape. He recounts thoughts he had before packing up and leaving for the IDF: “Switzerland doesn’t need me. Israel does.”

At the end of the screening, we heard from Lt. Aviv Regev, who came to speak

on the film and is an Israel advocator. “You don’t need a uniform to defend Is-rael,” he said. We all have the power, and duty, to defend Israel, and we can do it right here on campus. As Jews, we have the duty to challenge the voices against Israel. It’s not enough to be Jewish and proud, or even attending pro-Israel clubs and events.

To defend Israel, we must find the courage to stand up to the lies and igno-rance. To be able to do so intelligibly, we must be educated and ready to respect-fully and emphatically respond to ques-tions and concerns of others about Israel and the Middle East. Take a class about the topics interesting to you, go to talks, or read up on the quick and easy fact sheets offered by StandWithUs.

As for me, enlisting in the IDF or keeping my ten-year plan is yet another conflict that will be tackled in the years to come. While our soldiers keep our home safe, the fight for Israel is world-wide, and as Jews and Israel advocates, we are at the front of the line.

Illustration by Rivka Cohen

““I’ve spent the last years of my life chasing American dreams and lost sight of my Israeli, my Jewish, my

familial obligations.”

Moshe - op

[Opinion]Page 6Winter 2015

Seville and Civility: The necessity of reforming Jewish-

Muslim relations on campusMoshe KahnStaff Writer

A history of symbolic violence

It does not appear coincidental that a recent rise in rhetoric leveled against Jews across the world has coincided with a devaluation of the term anti-Semitism. Jews often use the term not only to describe vio-lent action motivated by extreme prejudice against Jews, but also symbolically damaging actions for which negative feelings toward the Jews is more tenuous a motivation.

One may suggest that we use a dif-ferent term for the lighter actions, and reserve the term anti-Semitism for the more serious threats. However, our strenuous exile has taught us Jews to be skeptical of making such neat distinctions. We have a two-thousand year history of being demonized and scapegoated for no substantiated rea-son other than our heritage, and these attitudes are quick to manifest them-selves in bloodshed. We are rightful-ly sensitive about any negative por-trayals of our people.

This attitude is not only a con-sequence of our past, but is also bolstered by recent developments throughout the world. In France, negative attitudes toward Israel set the stage for the acceptance of nega-tive attitudes toward Jews. Now all it takes is one wacko with a gun to hear the rhetoric and turn it into a re-sponsibility to murder Jews in their schools and supermarkets. Today, it is the misunderstanding of Israel’s actions which serves as justification for Jew-hatred, just as in the past it was a misunderstanding of how we bake our matzos. Both conspiracies evoke the most basic abhorrence by labeling us “child-killers.”

Unfortunately, non-Jews do not carry the same sensibilities as us. It is as rare for non-Jews to label something anti-Semitic as it is to

witness someone who is accused of being anti-Semitic admit his or her prejudices. To an anti-Semite, an anti-Semitic perception of Jews is not negative, it is merely “true.” I have had a few encounters which demonstrate this phenomenon. Since people are usually too afraid to talk openly about Jews, these en-counters always involved a slightly intoxicated individual.

My most jarring experience was over this past winter break. In the course of my conversation with a stu-dent, I heard every conspiracy I knew about the Jews, and then some. Hit-ler was a Jew, the Jews are the sons of Satan, the present-day Jews are frauds and are really the descendents of the Khazars, the Jews control ev-erything and are in cahoots with the Vatican, etc. After each accusation I attempted to prove that these are er-roneous conspiracies, but the student claimed that my information was no more credible than his. At some point, I called him an anti-Semite, but he had a whole list of “rationalizations” for why the term is a canard.

The political status quo on campus

While anti-Semitism has become a term which is not taken serious-ly, a similar term has gained ascen-dance: Islamophobia. While Islamo-phobia undoubtedly exists, I believe the phenomenon of Islamophobia is fundamentally different from anti-Semitism. The term Islamophobia is a relatively new term and does not carry the same historical weight of anti-Semitism. The differences are reflected most vividly in the terms themselves. Islamophobia is a com-bination of the words “Islam” and “phobia,” meaning an irrational fear of the religion of Islam, and thus tar-gets the tenants of Islam. On the other hand, anti-Semitism represents nega-tive perceptions or actions against the Jewish people, irrespective of re-ligious doctrines. Additionally, the former projects a psychological mal-ady onto the culprit, while the latter does not necessarily do so.

However, the two terms share a

common feature: they are both used to describe perceived negative actions towards a given community. Neverthe-less, the usage of these terms does not seem to prevent these negative atti-tudes and actions from persisting, and instead has the effect of furthering di-visions. The root of both of these phe-nomena is a lack of understanding of a community which is different from one’s own. Rather than labeling some-thing as unjustifiably negative, we must double our efforts at educating one another.

The ironic twist is that despite our communities being most similar to one another, on our campus it is quite often the Muslim students labeling Jews Is-lamophobic and the Jewish students la-beling Muslims anti-Semitic. I believe that this is a result of political tensions and certain false perceptions, such as that of Jews being “whites” rather than an ethnic identity of their own.

Our communities interact with one another almost exclusively through a political lens, in which we tend to dis-agree with one another, and thus only further the divide. Politics is inherently

[Opinion] Page 7Winter 2015

divisive, and there is either an unwill-ingness, antipathy, or lack of initiative to talk to those with differing political beliefs. I don’t care much for politics, but for the past year it has been impos-sible to ignore.

Since I do not have strong politi-cal affiliations, I have attended events hosted by clubs across the spectrum in an attempt to further my knowledge. While I try to set aside my emotions, it becomes impossible to do so when you feel someone is attacking your com-munity. I used to feel threatened by the “other side,” but now I am endlessly frustrated — we are simply discussing different realities.

I don’t suggest that we stop the polit-ical discourse. However, I believe that such conversation is largely futile and damaging at our level, and instead we should focus our efforts on conducting other forms of discussions between our communities.

A service to remem-ber

During my freshman year here at UCLA, I enrolled in a History of Re-ligion course. We were assigned to at-tend the service of a religion other than the one we grew up in, and write a field research report about it. At the time, I abided by Jewish law more stringently and so was prohibited from attending the services of any religion deemed idolatrous. As a strictly monotheistic religion, Islam was my best option.

My understanding of Islam was lim-ited at the time. I knew the basics of its history and its relation to Judaism, and was aware that there were certain people killing in its name today. But

other than tenuous contact while I was in Israel, I had never encountered Mus-lims firsthand in a comfortable setting. I had an abstract notion of who Mus-lims were and was curious to color the picture in, but did not know how to go about doing it.

I was sitting in my math class wait-ing for lecture to start when the boy sitting next to me asked if I’m Jewish. It must have been the large yarmulke on my head that tipped him off. I said yes, to which he replied, somewhat giddily, that he is Muslim. I think we both felt a certain satisfaction in talk-ing to one another, despite the feeling that we were “supposed to” hate each other. I told him that I needed to attend a Muslim prayer service for a class. He gladly offered to take me to the service held in the John Wooden Center on a Friday afternoon and handed me some pamphlets about Islam.

The service was a transformative experience to my understanding of Islam. Before the service, the room was being used for a yoga class. The lightly dressed girls walked out of the room with yoga mats in their arms, as the Muslims entered the room with prayer mats in theirs. It is difficult to imagine this scene playing out in most places outside the West, so this image in my head serves as a testa-ment to the adaptability of religion. As an Orthodox Jew in the modern world, I am constantly faced with the struggle of applying an ancient tradi-tion and worldview to our novel life-style. I believe that Muslims are un-dergoing a similar struggle and it is those who attend our university who are on the forefront of this battle; they do not have the luxury of those living in predominantly Muslim countries

who are able to sidestep the reality of modernity through ideological wran-gling.

A significant portion of the service was taken up by a lecture given by one of the students. I was shocked because many of the stories told were exact replicas of stories that I had heard be-fore, simply with different names. The message of the speech was that if you believe in G-d and follow his dictums, then He will “have your back.” While this is a message that I have qualms with, it is one which is prevalent in many Jewish circles, including the one that I grew up in. While I knew that there were commonalities among our religions, I did not realize how com-monplace they may be.

Towards a different type of dialogue

Rather than focusing on our political differences, or ignoring our differenc-es entirely and focusing on our social commonalities as young college stu-dents, I believe that we — Muslim and Jewish students — must begin to focus on the commonalities within our faith-communities as a basis with which to communicate our differences. We can, and perhaps must, remain divided over Israeli politics, but we must learn to come together and discuss other issues as well.

The way tensions are today, I do not imagine simply placing Jews and Muslims in a room with some Middle Eastern food and music. I do not think that we must become friends with one another. (In fact, this may be an obsta-cle to reconciliation.) Instead we must simply learn to respect one another —

not despite our differences, but for our differences.

If we can respect one another then we can begin to communicate with one another. The issues we discuss do not have to blind our differences, but have to be matters in which there is at least ample room for discourse. An obvious start would be our faith systems. Any-one who self-identifies as Muslim or Jewish has an attachment to an inter-connected faith system, whether he or she identifies as “religious” or not.

I suggest that we organize talks on various issues of contention among our religions. The talks could be giv-en by rabbis and imams, but as we are on a college campus, perhaps it would be more fitting to focus on ac-ademic talks by professors. For ex-ample, Carol Bakhos, the Director for the Center of the Study of Reli-gion, may be an invaluable resource as is evidenced by her most recent-ly published book titled The Fam-ily of Abraham: Jewish, Christian and Muslim Interpretations. There is plenty of faith-oriented work be-ing done on our campus already, but those few who are interested in learn-ing more tend to stay where they are comfortable, and in the current tense environment, comfort is synonymous with separation.

History is replete with instances of positive and negative relations between Jews and Muslims. While our campus today points to the latter, we must be-gin to transform it to the former. The city of Seville may be seen as a symbol of the possibility and benefits of do-ing so. Under the Umayyad rule in the eighth century, Seville was marked by both a thriving economy and positive relations between its Jewish and Mus-lim inhabitants.

The economy which we students participate in does not deal with the exchange of goods but rather with the exchange of ideas. Our marketplace has become overrun with competing monopolies, and it is up to us to change this, for the betterment of all. In com-municating what we take for granted to those who are different from us, we may come to learn not only about one another but also about our own faiths. We will grow as individuals and as communities, and replace the idola-trous caricatures we hold of one anoth-er with fleshed-out realities. Doing so will not only benefit our communities, but will provide a glimmer of hope for more positive relations between all of our various campus communities. Giv-en the shape the world is in today, this is not only important, but necessary.

Illustrations by Rivka Cohen

Generation Progress funds, trains, and mentors students running a diverse and

growing group of progressive campus media organizations. For more, visit GenProgress.org/

about/journalism-network/jn-overview/

In the world of ever-evolving con-sumer high tech, it should come as no surprise that an app has been created to assist Shabbat-observant Jews. There are other apps to assist Jews out there, like Rustybrick’s Minyan app or G-dscast’s Wake Up World app, which is narrated by Randi Zuckerburg, but the current talk of the town is the Shabbos App, developed by Yossi Goldstein and designed by Yitz Appel. Despite the excitement of the in-novation, the emergence of this Shabbos App is a direct attack on the traditional Jewish character of Shabbat.

The Shabbos App claims to allow all Shabbat observers to text and stay con-nected with their families and friends without violating the rules of Shabbat. Goldstein and Appel aim to “let people who are already texting on Shabbos know that they can text on Shabbos and not completely fall off the path,” as they said in an article published by vosizneias.com, a website which describes itself as the “voice of the Orthodox Jewish com-munity.” Even before the release of the Shabbos App, controversy as to whether or not observant Jews can and should use the app has begun to emerge.

The creators made the app in such a way that would allow Jews who observe Shab-bat to exploit loopholes supposedly locat-ed within the laws of Shabbat derived from the Torah. When a user activates the app, the screen flips upside down. The speaker is on the bottom while the microphone is on the top. The phone immediately locks in that mode, so when a user holds the phone at a different angle, he or she supposedly uses it differently than the way he or she would on regular basis. This reflects the halachic concept of shinui, which refers to a situation in which something is done in a way that is unusual compared to the norm.

In the Orthodox Jewish tradition, there are thirty-nine Melachot, which are cate-gories of labor that traditional Jewish law forbids Jewish people from performing on Shabbat. Kotev, which means “writing” in

Hebrew, is one of the Melachot. However, the creators of the app claim that when the user wants to type on the Shabbos app, the keyboard appears in a different way than it does usually. Instead of the letters showing up individually, they are shown as com-plete words. There are a total of 150 com-monly used words for the user to choose from. This allows the user to take words that are already created and form a sen-tence, rather than assembling the words themselves from the individual letters.

In addition, the app causes the LED back-light of the screen to stay actively lit for the entire duration of Shabbat, which prevents the phone from turning off. This averts any potential issue of turning the screen on or off. The app also blocks all functions of the phone except for the integrated Shabbos messaging app and e-books.

Despite assurances from the app’s creators of its legality, many feel that the Shabbos App desecrates the spirit of Shabbat. In order for the app to be ac-tivated, it needs to be downloaded and used on a smartphone. The phone itself is what is traditionally referred to as muktzeh. Muktzeh is a Hebrew word that means “set aside,” and in this context connotes everyday objects that should not be handled on Shabbat. Thus, accord-ing to this principle, we are forbidden to touch, nonetheless hold and operate, the smartphone throughout Shabbat. More-over, once the user touches the screen, the brightness will change to preset the phone for use. By unintentionally adjust-ing the brightness level, the user breaks Shabbat without even realizing it.

Although the phone enables the user to form a sentence using a combination of words instead of forming them individu-ally, use of the app still counts as one of the rabbinical prohibitions against writ-ing and creating a sentence, which also goes against the statute of Shabbat. Not only are users creating a sentence, which is prohibited on Shabbat, but they also go against another of the melachot called mo-

chek — Hebrew for “deleting” — when they make a mistake typing and want to re-write a word. Additionally, the bat-tery of the phone can get extremely hot and can potentially cause the phone to overheat, which becomes an issue of an additional melachah, mavir, which refers to the creation of fire.

Besides the fact that this app goes against the entire basis of the day of rest, “people need to realize that this app should be prohibited because of the concept of uvdah d’chol,” says Rabbi Hekmatja of Mor Hatorah Synagogue in Santa Monica. Uv-dah d’chol forbids any actions that may disrupt the peaceful atmo-sphere of Shabbat.

Even though the Shabbos app allows use of the phone through the concept of shinui, it com-pletely contradicts the purpose of keeping Shabbat. During the biblical creation, G-d designat-ed Shabbat as a day of rest and abstention from creative activi-ty. Using a phone obliterates the entire pur-pose for which it was created. Shabbat rep-resents one day where people can release their worries and not have to remember to complete any difficult tasks they would perform during the week.

Regardless, the app creators maintain that the app is both legal and beneficial, adopt-ing the motto “Nisht Shver Tzu Zein A Yid,” Yiddish for “it is not hard to be a Jew.” The app is made for the convenience of people who want to keep Shabbat, but do not want to deviate from their routine lifestyles.

But this contradicts the purpose of Shab-bat, and more generally, of Judaism altogeth-er. The motto sends a false message that one can be called a Jew without committing any part of his life to God. An even bigger prob-lem with the app is that it teaches Jews to treat Judaism as a nuisance to their every day lives. Shabbat was made for our benefit and close connection with G-d. However, this app denies Jews the ability to make that con-

nection, because it essentially helps Jews not to keep Shabbat.

While the Shabbos App creators seemingly intended to make life easier for Shabbat-observant Jews, its founders have advertised how difficult Shabbat is for them and have made it seem like something they want out of their lives in its current form.

As a Jew who observes Shabbat, I know personally that the Shabbos App would not be beneficial in any way. It takes away from the atmosphere of Shabbat and the whole purpose for which Shabbat was cre-ated: to be a day of rest and to allow us to disconnect from our daily routines. As a full-time student working two jobs, being prohibited to use my phone is not a nui-sance, but a privilege. Shabbat is my day of rest and a time for me to spend with my family. It is a day like no other, and should be treated as such.

Jasmin HiekaliDistribution Manager and Staff Writer

The Shabbos App: pro-Shabbos?[Opinion]Page 8

Winter 2015

Sepehr-op

[Opinion] Page 9Winter 2015

Sepehr HakakianStaff Writer

Do we have it too easy?I woke up this morning with a song stuck

in my head. It took me less than a minute to log onto iTunes and purchase it, enjoying it while I made some instant coffee before I went to class. When I got to class, I realized that I had forgotten my textbook at home. With a few clicks of the mouse, I purchased the e-book from Amazon. For lunch and din-ner, I visited a fast-food restaurant, and before bed, I watched a movie – instantly streaming it on Netflix, of course.

We live in a generation where we’ve be-come accustomed to our every wish and whim being instantaneously fulfilled. High-end elec-tronics become ours with “no money down” and luxury cars are handed to us with “just a signature.” But what effect does this culture of instant gratification have on us in the long term? What happens when we’re used to get-ting what we want the easy way, but are told we must put in hard work and be extremely pa-tient to acquire the truly important things in life?

Although the desire for instant gratifi-cation has become an epidemic in recent times, the impulse is nothing new. The To-rah is replete with examples of instant grat-ification and the consequences it entails. Perhaps the most well-known example is the case in Genesis 25:29-34, of Jacob buy-ing the rights of the firstborn, pertaining to inheritance and (at the time) service in the Holy Temple, from his older brother Esau. Esau trades his firstborn rights, the keys to his eternal reward and personal fulfill-ment in this world, for a bowl of lentils and a few coins. After he later finds out what those momentary pleasures have cost him, he “bursts out with a loud and bitter cry,” lamenting his long-term loss. The Torah is teaching us to emulate Jacob, who used his foresight to acquire the right of the first-born and guarantee his legacy, and not to fall into the trap Esau fell into when he let short-term pleasure blind him from seeing the long-term loss he was causing for him-self and his descendants.

While not promoting asceticism, Jewish law is also brimming with regulations that encourage a delay of pleasure in order to pro-mote a more meaningful life experience. In practicing the laws of family purity, as one of the foundations of the Jewish family, a mar-ried couple refrains from engaging in any in-timate activity for a set period of time every month in order to maintain the specialness of

marital relations and family unity. In a mod-ern generation, where all too often we hear about relationships and marriages “losing their spark” and falling apart after short peri-ods of courtship, this 3,300-year-old law can be the key to a healthy and successful mar-riage.

This concept is not exclusive to funda-mental halachot. Many everyday practices in Judaism illustrate the importance of self-con-

trol through a delaying of gratification. The well-known custom of waiting between con-sumption of meat and dairy, the mandatory washing of hands before eating bread, and the concept of saying a brachah (blessing) before indulging in any food are all examples of the mechanisms Judaism employs to re-mind its adherents about the importance of reflecting on all actions, even the most min-ute and seemingly insignificant daily ones.

But what is the point of delaying gratifi-cation? If I want something, why shouldn’t I have it right now? Even though some of us might think that that the rules of the Torah are outdated and not applicable to our mod-ern lives, modern research can give us space for pause, especially in this area. A very well-known study that illustrates the impor-tance of delaying gratification is the Stanford “marshmallow experiment,” a research trial

conducted by Professor Walter Mischel at Stanford University in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Four-to-six-year-old children were each given two options: to receive a marshmallow and immediately eat it, or to wait 15 minutes and receive an additional marshmallow. Some children were able to wait the fifteen minutes, whilst others were not able to and soon had eaten their marsh-mallows. Researchers continued to monitor

these toddlers into childhood and adoles-cence. They discovered that the children who were able to delay gratification grew up to be psychologically better adjusted, more moti-vated, dependable and academically success-ful, compared with their less-patient counter-parts. The latest studies on the participants have found that these traits have stayed with the participants for life. This study shows that making the choice to delay gratification can train a person to have stronger willpower, which will ultimately allow him or her to ful-fill long-term goals faster.

Delaying gratification can also bring nu-merous benefits to our day-to-day lives. Let’s say you are hungry right now (which you probably are). What are you going to choose to eat? Many will go the route of instant grat-ification and choose a snack that tastes really good, highly processed and filled with simple sugars and trans fats. This choice might help explain the obesity epidemic that has plagued the Western world in recent times. By delay-ing gratification and continually choosing the healthier option -- the glass of water over the glass of soda -- you will probably enjoy the long-term benefits of your wise decision by leading a healthier life, avoiding multiple diet-based illnesses and having more energy to live your life to its fullest. Similarly, many people do not like to go through slight dis-comforts, such as exercising or visiting the dentist, even though they know of the ben-efits these small discomforts ultimately have and the serious consequences that avoiding these discomforts can entail. We must train ourselves to accept small pains and discom-forts in order to achieve the greater benefits that eventually come.

The amazing technological advances that the world has seen in the last two centuries have revolutionized every aspect of life and improved our lives beyond measure. This revolution has not been without its side ef-fects, however. The easiness of tasks that used to be arduous not too long ago, such as doing laundry or long-distance travel, have become routine for us, and we have come to expect everything to be given to us with little or no effort. This mentality is to our detriment as it cheapens the life experience and can have adverse effects on all areas of life, including health and relationships. In order to live life to the fullest, we must sometimes choose to do things the hard way, because the easy way is not always the right way.

Illustrations by Amir Naveh

MARSHMALLOW EXPERIMENT: A study conducted at Stanford in the 1960s about delayed gratification. In the studies, a child was offered a choice between a small, immediate reward or two small rewards if he or she waited a short period of time.

““

[Opinion]Page 10Winter 2015

Growing up, I was always fascinated by the diversity of Judaism. I loved the idea that the religion was portable and adaptable; that each person could make it his or her own, yet feel one hundred percent assured of the fact that he or she was a link in the intricate chain of the Jewish people. How are we able to be so deeply connected with one another, yet share such different beliefs and interpre-tations of the same values and ideals?

In order to better understand the di-versity of Judaism on campus and what it means to be Jewish at UCLA, I inter-viewed those who know it best: the lead-ing Jewish Humans of UCLA.

The mission of Hillel at UCLA is to “enrich the lives of Jewish students so that they may enrich the Jewish people and the world.” Without committing itself to any one denomination, Hillel champi-ons the pluralistic approach to Judaism. Hillel prides itself on offering Jewish Bruins of all walks of life a “collective Jewish experience.” Rabbi Chaim said, “Our role is to open Jewish students up to the possibility that there are a variety of ways in which to express their Jew-

ishness, in hope that they will be able to embrace a rich, Jewish life. And to give students the capacity to be able to under-stand and articulate, in a world of choice where they no longer must be Jewish, why they should choose to be Jewish.”

Natalie Charney, Hillel student presi-dent, says she believes her role at Hillel is to be that of a “connector,” saying, “I aim to spark curiosity amongst Jewish students to explore the different facets of what Judaism means to that individ-ual. I aim to connect Jewish students to other Jewish students to create a more welcoming Jewish community. I hope that through connection, I can help to further empower Jewish students here at

UCLA.”Also housed in the Hillel House is

the Jewish Learning Initiative on Cam-pus, or “JLIC” for short. According to Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, the goal of JLIC is to “demonstrate the reciprocally-enrich-ing nature of university academics and true Torah living — through teaching, modeling and constructive conversa-tions.” JLIC works within Hillel to “en-able [Hillel] to better serve the Orthodox populations on campus.” Rabbi Kaplan believes the two more important facets of Orthodox Judaism to be “the binding nature of Talmudic law as seen through the Halachik authority of Orthodox Rab-bis” and “loyalty and fidelity to text and tradition.”

Naomi Esserman, a student leader of JLIC, believes that her job is to spread awareness and engage students of the learning opportunities available through Hillel and JLIC. “Many students don’t realize how many classes are happening on a weekly basis at Hillel, and I try to help make students more aware of these incredible opportunities.”

Chabad at UCLA aims to provide all

Jewish students with “social, education-al, recreational and spiritual program-ming.” In its mission, Chabad makes clear that “all Jews are welcome, regard-less of affiliation, denomination, or level of observance.” Chabad seeks to provide students with a “comfortable, home-like setting” where they can socialize, “ques-tion [their] faith without fear of judg-ment,” and where every student can find a “friend to lean on.” Rebbetzin Elisa Gurevich says she feels her “role as an Orthodox Jew is to represent the Torah way of life and its inherent beauty to the best of [her] ability, to be a resource for those with questions about Judaism, and to be available for members of the Jew-

JEWISH HUMANS OF UCLAunited in our differences

ish community when they are in need physically or spiritually.”

Student president Emmanuelle Hoda-ra says, “Chabad is meant for students of all backgrounds, secular and religious…most of our students are actually not re-ligious, but they are here because they feel connected to Judaism somehow and they either want to learn or be in a Jew-ish environment.”

Jewish Awareness Movement, or “JAM” for short, is an off-campus club with the goal of “providing a framework

for young Jews to meet each other, be inspired about their Judaism, and ex-plore their heritage.” Rabbi Jacob Rupp believes that “[his] job, specifically, in terms of [his] capacity at JAM, is to teach” and “to be a resource for Jewish students for whatever they want,” say-ing, “I utilize the Jewish schooling that I have to put a Jewish spin on whatever I do teach.”

Student president Michael Basin be-lieves it is important “to be able to go to various Jewish organizations on campus to meet new people and participate in different activities because each organi-zation provides a unique Jewish experi-ence. JAM, as an organization, wants to be another tool for students to connect to Judaism and is supportive of all organi-zations because in the end, the goal is the same, a fantastic Jewish experience.”

So how do these groups all fit into the intricate puzzle that is the Jewish college experience? Rabbi Kaplan believes that “each organization is critical in contrib-uting to the rich mosaic of Jewish Bruin life that UCLA is blessed with.”

Orthodox rabbi and Jewish-American scholar, Rabbi Irving Yitz Greenberg, said, “I don’t care what denomination you belong to, as long as you’re embar-rassed by it.” What did Rabbi Greenberg mean by this?

Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan of JLIC respond-ed, “it doesn’t resonate with me at all…I believe people should be passionate, proud and own such a critically defying part of their lives.”

Hodara of Chabad said, “I grew up in

a traditional home and never really felt a sense of a belonging for any single de-nomination. Thus, I never really felt em-barrassed by belonging to a group that did not exactly align with my philosophy and practice of Judaism. I think Chabad at UCLA is a bit like this - students with no distinct denominational affiliations who are here to adopt the ‘good’ that they can find.”

Charney said, “I’m not quite sure by

what he means for ‘embarrassed,’ but I think it is a necessary introspective act to probe into one’s own identity, religion, and denomination. Curiosity, question-ing, and even criticism of the ideas and beliefs that one holds provides a stron-ger foundational basis and ultimately a greater understanding.”

Basin responded that, “you shouldn’t be restricted by a single denomination because the point of Judaism is spiritual growth… By saying you’re part of a sin-gle group, you’re not allowing yourself to open your mind to more and develop yourself, and therefore should be embar-rassed by it.”

Rabbi Rupp responded saying, “I don’t like people who are apologetic for their beliefs, because if they are apolo-getic for their beliefs, they shouldn’t have them.” He added that he “do[es] care what denomination you belong to because denominations in Judaism, from a traditional, historical and philosophical standpoint, aren’t things you just arrive at. You have to know why you’re part of it…people are so quick to jump into a category and not have any idea what the category says… As soon as you fall into [one], you think you are exempt from thinking. Across the board, [he] think[s] labels are completely destructive; they divide.”

While the quote didn’t leave a lasting impression on Esserman, she responded by saying, “as a Jewish leader on campus, I feel it is important to be involved in all aspects of Jewish life on campus… Unity among all the different Jewish groups on

Arielle MokhtarzadehCopy Editor and Social Media Intern

Our role is to open Jewish students up to the possibility that there are a variety of ways in which to express their Jewishness in hope that they will be able to embrace a rich, Jewish life. And to give students the capacity to be able to understand and articulate, in a world of choice where they no longer must be Jewish, why they should

choose to be Jewish.”— Rabbi Chaim Seidler-Feller, Hillel at UCLA

Each organization is critical in contributing to the rich mosaic of Jewish Bruin life that UCLA is blessed with.”

— Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, Jewish Learning Initiative on Campus

“

[Opinion] Page 11Winter 2015

Think twice before you say you want to date a “nice Jewish boy.”

Jewish gender stereotypes, whether flattering or pejorative, are harmful to the survival of our people. Not only do they express inaccuracies about Jews, but they affect how the outside world perceives us. Before delving into the reasons for this, let’s examine some of the common stereotypes of Jewish men and women.

According to a Huffington Post ar-ticle by Howard Meyer titled “Enough of the Jewish Stereotypes,” caricatures of Jewish people persist due to their portrayal in popular media. While the media continues to depict Jewish men as hard-working, sensitive “mama’s boys,” they simultaneously paint Jew-ish women as domestic mothers and materialistic “princesses.” Some may find these stereotypes funny or harm-less, but in a country where only 2.2% of Jews make up the total popula-tion, these generalizations can heavily

shape a non-Jew’s perception of Amer-ican Jewry.

However, gendered stereotypes are not the only problematic generaliza-tions that Jews constantly put up with. Jews of every culture are under the at-tack of the ignorant who feel the need to designate Jews into a neat category, or otherwise caricature.

This categorization often crosses the line of humor and leads to misunder-standing and even discrimination, as Jews are prejudged before being con-sidered as business partners, politi-

cians or other positions of leadership.The misleading characteristics of

Jewish men and women have been pervasive enough to lead to intermar-riage between Jews and non-Jews, as “shiksas” find themselves yearning for a “nice Jewish boy,” while Jewish men steer clear of demanding “JAPs.” Ac-cording to Elinor Samuel, a second-year UCLA student, these stereotypes “encourage assimilation, making the Jewish man seem desirable and the Jewish woman not.”

In fact, according to a 2013 Pew survey observing Jewish intermarriage and assimilation, the intermarriage rate is at 58%, up from 43% in 1990 and 17% in 1970.

This means there are less Jewish children to propagate the existence of an already-diminishing population.

“There’s going to be some truth to [these stereotypes],” continued Sam-uel, “but they’re taking the negatives of one and the positives of another. I

The harm of “innocent” generalizations

...in a country where only 2.2% of Jews make up the total population, these generalizations can heavily shape a gentile’s perception of American Jewry.”

think that’s the nature of stereotypes.”Our Jewish population may be small,

but it is certainly not powerless. As long as Jews stand by and let non-Jews spread improper representations of our community, the effects of the message will only grow worse.

This is just one of many issues, in which the Jewish people cannot stay silent on. It is time for our voices to be heard, starting with denunciations of labels such as “nice Jewish boy” and “Jewish-American princess.” Do it for the children.

Sarit KashanianStaff Writer and Business Intern

campus is vital to a strong community.”Rebbetzin Gurevich said, “I real-

ly, strongly disagree with this quote. If someone is a member of a group or de-nomination, he or she should be aware of and comfortable with the tenets of that group. This is not to say that individual members of the group should be immune to criticism, or that unacceptable behav-ior from adherents should be overlooked, but that the basic philosophy and world view of the denomination to which you adhere should be in sync with your per-sonal values.”

And lastly, Rabbi Chaim said, “Peo-ple who grow up with a particular vi-sion, a particular tradition, and a par-ticular denomination or commitment [should] recognize that they can learn something from people who grew up with another perspective.” He then added,“I want to be open to others be-cause in my openness I sometimes can learn something [from them], and hope-fully they’re open so that they might learn something from me, as well. But if I just keep to myself… that becomes self-cycling and it diminishes the ca-

pacity for renewal. In order to have re-newal and for new ideas to take place, I have to hear the critique, the reaction, the response, the other perspective that enriches my own understanding.”

We are united in our differences. The Jewish community at UCLA is blessed by its diversity. The endless flow of re-sources and opportunities offered to and by the Jewish community at UCLA is endless. While each of us has a certain community that makes us feel most at home, it is important that we take the op-portunity to step outside of our comfort

zones and try new things in the hopes of better understanding our Jewish iden-tities. So if you’re a “Hillel person,” check out Chabad! If you’re doing the Maimonides program this year, try out the Sinai Scholars program next! Take the time to sit down with other Jewish students, ask each other the difficult questions. Each of these interactions, each experience, each exchange helps us better understand ourselves in rela-tion to our Jewish identities, and in turn, helps us find a better understanding of ourselves.

Jewish Stereotypes by Culture

German Jews (“Yekkes”) — characterized by their obsessive meticulousness and joyless demeanor

Lithuanian Jews — most notably fat, lazy and dim thieves

Polish Jews — oftentimes conniving, manipulative and homely in appearance

Moroccan Jews — disturbingly bad-tempered, overly emotional and loud

Israeli Jews — widely observed as hot-tempered, passionate and rude, yet in some cases generous

Persian Jews — commonly known for being cheap, obnoxious, prudish and exceedingly family-dependent

Russian Jews — particularly nationalistic, wealthy and aggressive, even the babushkas

Illustration by Briana Begelfer

I’ve never eaten the much vaunted In-N-Out hamburger; I’ve never tasted the rumored deliciousness of a sizzling slice of bacon; and I’ve certainly never bit into a savory ribeye steak at an upscale res-taurant. As a product of a conservative Jewish household and extensive Jewish education, I have for my entire life joined with my family in keeping kashrut (to the commonly accepted conservative stan-dard). Paradoxically, as a product of that same education, I have come to question why it is that I keep it.

By this understanding of kashrut — part of whose problem lies in its lack of uniform definition — I mean the follow-ing: I refrain from eating meat products and dairy products in the same meal. I wait three hours after eating a meat prod-uct before I will eat a dairy product, and wait thirty minutes after consuming a dairy product before I will consume a meat product. I will only eat land animals with split hooves that chew their cuds and marine animals with fins and scales. I will only eat these animals if they have been certified as kosher by a mashgiach, or a Jewish person who has been trained to verify that the animal, its slaughter and its preparation all abide by the orthodox movement’s standard of kashrut. I will, however, eat both dairy and parve (non-dairy and non-meat items) at restaurants without a kosher certificate.

Most of the customs I’ve espoused in keeping kashrut align with those pre-scribed by the United Synagogue of Con-servative Judaism, which contends that the purpose of kashrut is to “bring holiness into our lives” by considering the “ethical concerns for all of G-d’s creatures.” In a similar vein, Chabad notes that the Torah “expressly forbid[s]” cruelty to animals, and that treating animals “as compassion-ately as possible” is a paramount concern of kashrut.

And yet, sadly, kosher food provid-ers are sometimes the worst offenders

of the ethical violations they profess to abhor. A 2004 PETA investigation, with follow-ups in 2007 and 2008, revealed that Agriprocessors, “the world’s larg-est glatt kosher slaughterhouse,” has perpetrated egregious animal rights abuses in violation of federal law, which proponents of kashrut frequent-ly argue holds slaughterers to more le-nient standards than does Jewish law. Indeed, even though kashrut suppos-edly aims to exceed ethical standards of the non-kosher food industry, this slaughterhouse actually failed to meet even the lower standards. According to PETA’s report, workers at the facility flouted the kosher standard of slaugh-ter — which in principle should kill the animal quickly and painlessly — and instead took to such repugnant practices as removing the tracheas from live and conscious cows with meat hooks and leaving them to “writhe in pools of their own blood, trying desperately to stand for up to three minutes as blood poured from their throats.” PETA found simi-lar conditions at other slaughterhouses, like the Local Pride kosher slaughter-house in Nebraska.

The gross maltreatment did not stop there. According to the same PETA re-port, these same slaughterhouses plead-ed guilty to child labor allegations in 2008 and were revealed to have verbally abused and underpaid workers. They also failed to provide employees with proper training with and adequate protections from the dangerous machinery they op-erated as part of their jobs. If kashrut is concerned with ethical treatment, then surely ethical treatment of the workers slaughtering the animals is important. Yet in direct defiance of their governing prin-ciples, administrators willfully neglected their workers’ well-being and casually dismissed the value thereof.

If these unethical violations seem too anomalous an occurrence to judge the

entirety of kashrut on, though, consider the fact that within the sys-tem itself there abound examples of unethical practices. For example, veal is a common kosher dish served on Jewish dinner tables across the country, but its produc-tion is anything but hu-mane. According to the American Humane So-ciety, hundreds of thou-sands of calves raised for veal are confined in cages so compact that they cannot move their bodies for their entire sixteen-week lives. While this is the case for both kosher and non-kosher veal pro-duction, if there is no distinction between the ways in which kosher and non-kosher factory farms raise veal, what other factors distinguish kosher veal from non-kosher veal? In what sense is it more moral to eat kosher veal?

Unfortunately, plen-ty of other recent in-cidents have rocked the kosher food in-dustry, perhaps none more notorious than the Doheny Glatt Kosher Meats scandal in March of 2013. The drama unfolded when a private investigator revealed that the owner of Doheny Glatt Kosher Meats in Los Angeles had intentionally waited for the supervising mashgiach to leave the premises before mandating that work-ers bring in boxes of apparently unko-sher food from his SUV. The investigator claimed that the owner had been acting behind the back of the presiding mashgi-ach for some time, and accordingly, had deceived hundreds if not thousands of unsuspecting customers into buying un-kosher food. To those who may not un-derstand the gravity of this action, the

reveal of the owner’s deception literally sickened customers from the knowledge that they had unwittingly eaten unkosher food, and in their minds, desecrated their religion and their God.

On a related note, those customers had also paid more for the meat they bought over the years — even though it was not actually kosher — because kosher meat is significantly more expensive than its non-kosher ... (continued on page 23)

Ethical Violations of Kashrut

Ethical Violations Within Kashrut

The absurdity of kashrut in the contemporary world

Noah WallaceContent Editor

Debate Tablevs.

Religious Ritual or Opportunity for Profit?

Devorah - op

Personal responsibility is rather like the pet tarantula you might have begged your parents for when you were little: it sounded like so much fun until you got it, but then you realized that aside from being fuzzy and hairy, it doesn’t do much besides scuttle towards (or away from) you. However, unlike tarantulas, person-al responsibility isn’t something you can avoid simply by steering clear of certain geographic areas; it comes with growing up and maturing into an adult.

In Judaism, personal responsibility and

the preliminary concept of free will are ax-iomatic ideas. The Torah explicitly states (Deuteronomy 30:19) that people have the ability to choose their paths and actions in life, along with the responsibility to choose to do good. There are no concepts of original sin, predestination or damna-tion; rather, every person is born with the power to determine his or her own fate. This is where the personal responsibility comes in: since all are endowed with self-determination, every person can choose whether to be compassionate or apathetic; kind or cruel; angry or calm; good or bad. With this choice comes the responsibil-ity of choosing well and elevating oneself spiritually and morally, rather than skat-ing and declining.

The Bible and much of Jewish litera-ture are dedicated to the topic of spiritu-al and moral elevation along the lines of imitatio Dei, or the imitation of G-d. An entire chapter (Ethics of the Fathers) of the Talmud is dedicated to ethics, and tomes such as The Way of the Just, Ku-zari (“The Khazar”), The Way of G-d, Ethical Discourses, The Paths of the Righteous and Tanya are commonly found in Jewish libraries. Among oth-er topics, these books all discuss the importance of positive intentions and thoughts, in addition to constructive behavior, as methods of spiritual el-evation. Positive intentions, specifically those regarding one’s physical actions, al-low one to transform mundane items and activities — eating, sleeping, exercising, doing organic chemistry homework — into spiritual and character-building ones. According to Rabbi Yitzchak Luria, a six-teenth-century kabbalist, the world is im-bued with divine potential; when a person makes use of something toward a G-dly end, he or she elevates it and realizes the purpose for its creation (Etz Chaim 39:2). Eating a steak, for example, can be done simply for the purpose of satiation or for the purpose of recharging one’s energy to be able to build a relationship with G-d and better the world. Elevating the po-tential of food means that you don’t just eat because the cake looks good and your lower blood glucose levels have stimulat-ed your lateral hypothalamus — you eat it because you need the strength to continue to better yourself and the world.

Many of the mitzvot in the Torah are meant to accomplish this elevation. The very word mitzvah, or “commandment” (from tzav, “command”), is related to the word tzevet (“connected group, team”), as their fulfillment is a method, by which human beings can elevate themselves by connecting to their Creator. A number of the mitzvot involve eating certain foods, such as matzah, at certain times; others involve not eating certain foods or sub-stances, like blood, pork and crawling arthropods (such as thrips and those ta-rantulas), at all. These carry over into preparation of permitted foods, such as

meat, which must be thoroughly salted and then exsanguinated after slaughter in order to avoid any consumption of blood, and leafy vegetables, which must be checked for infestation. These mitz-vot regarding food and its elevation into spiritual matter are collectively known as the laws of kashrut.

Kashrut may be one of the prime ex-amples of elevating the mundane and leading a lifestyle based on thoughtful, directed action, but it’s not the only one in Judaism. Jewish law also directs people to thank G-d for their food before and after eating in the form of blessings and Grace After Meals, and to be careful about their speech, which is described as one of the most powerful tools people possess. Gos-sip and slander are considered a degrada-tion of speech, while encouraging another with kind words or a funny joke, or learn-ing aloud, especially with others, elevates it.

A person’s potential to choose good and elevate the world stems from the Torah’s emphasis on the divinity within every human being. Genesis (1:27) describes how man was made “in the image of G-d,” meaning that people can also ele-vate themselves to become holy. The final chapter of The Way of the Just explains that “holiness” refers to a state in which a person becomes close to G-d to the point of elevating all physical actions and ob-jects used from being mundane to being ethereal. Holiness involves exercising free will to use one’s own inclinations, tendencies and actions, along with the resources of the natural world, for pur-poses other than simple metabolism and pleasure, as important as those are. Ac-cording to Jewish thought, being holy involves seeing a higher purpose to life and directing every act toward ac-complishing that purpose. Being holy means that you perceive and claim a meaning to life, something with which many college undergraduates ... (continued on page 23)

The Holiness Factor

You are why you eat; or why I keep kosher

Devorah FriedmanInternal Managing Editor

vs.

Illustration by Amir Naveh

Free Will and Spiritual Elevation

Illustration by Amir Naveh

[Feature]Page 14Winter 2015

This was spat during one of my ten trips to Germany throughout my life-time — each of which was accompanied by my family’s mini travel Shabbat set. The quote is a declaration of hatred that was earnestly felt by millions some 70 years ago, and one that is wholeheart-edly feared to be true by many more today. The question of whether or not Germans and Jews “mix well” is omni-present; it looms over the shoulder of

Germany as the country seeks to make reparations for its past atrocities, and over the shoulders of Jews around the world who feel Europe’s walls of hos-tility closing in.

So, do they? Hillel at UCLA set out to answer this question with Jan. 21st’s “Jewish Life in Germany To-day,” a 25-photo gallery depicting past and present Jews living in Germany. Hillel’s second-floor lobby was filled with everything I had expected of an event geared towards German guests — a constant hum of murmured Ger-man, formal and frequent introduc-tions (none of which were directed at

me, since none of the black-tie-attired guests seemed to be interested in the 18-year-old with the washed-out ma-roon pullover from a thrift store, worn black Adidas classics, and a notepad), and a tub filled to the brim with ice and Beck’s beer.

The exhibit celebrated the success of Jewish individuals in Germany — rang-ing from the turn of the 18th to the 19th century until modern day — and high-lighted the accomplishments of rabbis, musicians and playwrights. Following the presentation of the photo gallery, guests were welcomed upstairs for the opening remarks from Rabbi Chaim

Seidler-Feller, executive director of Hillel at UCLA. Rabbi Chaim praised his personal experiences in Germany, and later went on to introduce the main speaker for the evening, German Con-sul General Dr. Bernd Fischer.

Amid the uproarious applause for Rabbi Chaim, Fischer settled in front of the microphone. In short, Fischer’s main points emphasized the massive steps that the German government has taken to protect Jewish culture, citing the coun-try’s legislature — specifically the free speech claus, which permits all forms of expression except for denying the Holo-caust. He also stressed the emphasis that

“Germans and Jews never mixed well.”

“Accepted” outsiders: the Jewish people in Germany today

Photos by Max Nath

PHOTOS OF A WORLD UNSEEN: Students and community members gather for “Jewish Life in Germany Today,” a 25-photo gallery depicting past and present Jews living in Germany. Executive Director of Hillel at UCLA Rabbi Chaim Seidler-Feller addresses crowd (left), attendee gazes at photo gallery (top right), and German Consul General Dr. Bernd Fischer delivers keynote speech (bottom right).

Max NathContent Editor

[Feature] Page 15Winter 2015

the German educational system places on teaching about the Holocaust. While his speech garnered an overwhelming-ly positive reaction from the audience, Fischer’s points seemed generic and lacked the nuance needed to truly delve into the subject. In order to question him further after the presentation, I elected to endure the German Kulturgut (some-thing defined as having cultural value), which included 25 grueling minutes that can only be bluntly described as operatic torture.

In a one-on-one interview after his speech, Fischer said, “Comparatively, the life of a Jewish person and a young Jew in Germany, especially in big cit-ies like Berlin, is very good.”

While the official German perspec-tive would agree with Fischer — and as the Jewish Virtual Library cites, there is a 118,000 person-strong Jewish pop-ulation in Germany today — person-al experience and anecdotal evidence lend themselves to a different conclu-sion. While the German government has been taking clear and progressive steps toward improving the quality of life for Jews within the country (as seen in German Judge Gauri Sastry conviction of 24-year-old Taylan Can for incitement against an ethnic minor-ity, effectively ruling that anti-Zionism is a form of anti-Semitism), the Ger-man population as a whole is leaps and bounds behind.

Perhaps the most worrisome dis-crepancy between the government’s perception and reality lies in what the officials pride themselves most on: Ho-locaust education. While Fischer made sure to heap praise unto the nation’s quality in this field, personal experi-ences with German youth and scholars tell a tale that serves as more of an em-barrassment to the education system.

When prompted for an explanation as to a lack of knowledge in the youth — namely university-age students — Fischer said, “Well definitely there needs to be done a lot more, and we almost do the utmost.” The interview was then cut short with a curt “thank you” and a reluctant handshake.

I exited the room and trotted down the stairs, wandering by the now emp-ty tub of Beck’s — which had only untouched bottles of red wine and another tub of non-German Heinek-en for company — and out into Hil-gard’s light-polution-laden-starless dynamo. I was transfixed by my con-templations of Fischer’s analysis and how it intersected with that of Jews in Germany, including that of my own.

According to a study by the BBC World Service, the percentage of Ger-mans that view Israel in a positive light has dropped from 16% to 11% in the last three years alone. Clearly, despite the German government’s best efforts — as evidenced by the constant reiteration of the mutually beneficial relationship between Ger-many and Israel — the majority of the people do not share the same empa-thetic feelings towards Jews and the only Jewish state. The BBC World Service reports that the percentage of Germans that view Israel in a nega-tive light has stayed relatively con-sistent at 67% as of last year.

Walde, the exception to this sta-

tistic, sat down with German early-morning news show Sat.1 Frühstücks-fernsehen in order to relay the hatred and bigotry he encountered simply by driving through the nation’s capi-tal with an Israeli flag. Walde’s wind-shield was spit on by pedestrians. He was threatened with lethal violence. And eventually, the flowing flag of the Jewish State was stolen from his car.

When asked by the interviewer if he was embarrassed of his hometown of Berlin, “the capital of a nation with free speech,” Walde said, “it does not have much to do with em-barrassment, but it rather emphasizes what is necessary. Namely clarifying the conflict in Israel, especially in a city like Berlin.”

Walde went on, “I am not dumb for what I did. It is not as if I went to a Palestinian rally or an Arab bar, just like I wouldn’t go to a Nazi demon-stration with a [Socialist Democratic Party of Germany] flag. The idea that in my own country, a free democra-cy, that I am allowed to identify my-self with another country [Israel] or another religion [Judaism] is under-standable, and it must be defended.”

The quote which began my article, and which was spoken by my grand-mother some 15 years ago, seems to be steadfastly affirmed by the Ger-man people — and while many right-fully remain optimistic of the nation’s future, I urge readers to consider this question:

Are Germans and Jews mixing well?__________

*Unless otherwise noted, featured quotes were taken from personal experiences.

“The SS was voluntary?” said a prospective German

university student.

“Had I been alive during WWII, I would have been in the SS. After all, for a

time I was an unemployed university student,”

said a former German university professor,

misunderstanding the purpose and intentions of

the SS.

“You are dead!” a German youth in Berlin screamed at a car sporting an Israeli flag. Andrew Walde, the

non-Jewish German driver of the car, filmed himself driving through the city

during Israel’s Operation “Protective Edge” in Gaza

over the summer.

“Oh G-d, what are these psychotic Jews doing here?” said a German observer (and Berlin

resident) at a 4th of July parade. Her comments

were directed at the float on which the local Chabad

danced.

“Yesterday the victims, today the perpetrators,” read a photo gallery at a German gymnasium

(equivalent of high school). The display was in reference to the Jewish people’s suffering during

the Holocaust and the alleged actions of the IDF

today.

[Feature]Page 16Winter 2015

As most of the world is abundantly aware, on Jan. 7, two radical Muslim ter-rorists charged the offices of the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, killing 12 journalists whom they held respon-sible for depicting the prophet Moham-med. The following day, a policewoman was gunned down by the same attack-ers. And on the third day, after the ini-tial two attackers had been apprehended, another radical Muslim terrorist killed four Jews shopping at the kosher Hyper Cacher supermarket, threatening to take the lives of the remaining hostages if the two brothers responsible for the Charlie Hebdo attacks were not released. What began with an attack on insensitive de-pictions of Mohammed ended with vio-lence against the Jews.

To many, the attack is indicative of rising anti-Semitic trends in Europe and the need to flee before France descends into a replica of pre-World War II Ger-many. Others argue that the French Jew-ish identity represents much more than these attacks and the anti-Semitism driv-ing them, and that the meaning of said attacks should not be sensationalized. However, one thing that most agree on is that the status quo must change; either the French government must take more actions to protect its citizens, or the en-tire dynamic in France must fundamen-tally shift.

Unfortunately, this event is by no means an anomaly. Europe has seen a rise of anti-Semitism in recent years. To cite a few examples (which constitute nowhere near an exhaustive list), there

were the shootings in Toulouse and Montauban in 2012 and outside of the Jewish Muse-um of Belgium in May 2014, as well as countless attacks on and vandalization of schools and synagogues throughout Eu-rope. Although many Jews stay — due to the economic impossibility of leaving or a lack of desire to do so — even those who champion Diaspora Judaism (like the founder of French anti-Semitism watchdog organization, Sammy Gho-zlan) are increasingly moving to Israel.

According to Ynet News, the year 2014 “saw a dramatic increase in aliyah from France with the arrival of 7,000 new immigrants, more than double the 3,400 who arrived in 2013 and triple the 1,900 who came in 2012.” These 7,000 immigrants constitute the largest num-ber of French immigrants in Israel’s his-tory, and mark the first time that French immigrants outnumbered those from any other country.

Following the killings at the super-market, Jewish Agency Chairman Natan Sharansky told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency that “Before the attack, our esti-mates spoke of 10,000 new olim [Jewish immigrants to Israel] in 2015. In two weeks time we will reexamine this estimate in light of the current developments.”

The day following the attack on the Parisian kosher supermarket, Israeli

Prime Min-ister Benjamin Netanyahu announced in Jerusalem, “To all the Jews of France, all the Jews of Europe, I would like to say that Israel is not just the place in whose direction you pray; the State of Israel is your home.”

He continued, “This week, a special team of ministers will convene to ad-vance steps to increase immigration from France and other countries in Europe that are suffering from terrible anti-Sem-itism. All Jews who want to immigrate to Israel will be welcomed here warmly and with open arms.”

Instead of falling on bended knee to thank Netanyahu for his hospitality, many French Jews rose to combat Ne-tanyahu’s implication that French Jewry was incapable of subsisting.

According to the Israeli news site NRG, the Director of the European Jew-ish Association Rabbi Menachem Mar-golin responded, “I regret that after ev-ery anti-Semitic attack in Europe, the Israeli government dispenses the same statements about the importance of ali-yah rather than take all measures … at its disposal in order to increase the safety of Jewish life in Europe. Every such Israeli campaign severely weakens and damag-es the Jewish communities that have the right to live securely wherever they are.”

The debate rages with little hope of be-ing concretely resolved, for it speaks to two distinct views about Diaspora Judaism. On the one side are those like Netanyahu (and Ariel Sharon in 2004) who believe that Ju-daism is incomplete without living in the holy land, and that outside of Israel the Jewish people are either facing anti-Sem-itism (as in Europe) or assimilating and

therefore losing their Jewish identi-

ty (as in the United States). On the other end of the spectrum are

those who believe that pushing Israel as the only feasible home for Jews undermines many people’s connection to their nations, and prevents the mingling and mutual ex-change of ideas and cultures. In fact, some argue that positioning Israel as the sole Jewish home further marks Jews as out-siders, thereby increasing anti-Semitism among the inhabitants of the host nation.

Either way, the debate can be pared down to a question of safety: are Jews safe in France? In the Diaspora at large? Can mothers kiss their children goodbye in the morning and be confident that they will see them again in the evening? And if not, then what do we do?

In order to try and answer some of these questions, Ha’Am sat down with the President of the UCLA Undergradu-ate Students Association Council, Avi-noam Baral, and Bruins for Israel Presi-dent, Eytan Davidovits.

Baral, born in Israel but spending his youth between Israel, France, and the United States, crossed his legs on the black l-shaped couch in his office in Kerckhoff Hall, contemplating the pres-ent situation. He acknowledged the anti-Semitism in France, but also explained that he never felt like his Jewish identity was under attack. His friends might have been beaten up and his school might have been the victim of arson, but none of this lessened his intensely strong connection

The Impetus: What happened?

The Conflicting Viewpoints:Do we stay or do we go?

The Question: Who are we?

And other questions about the future of

Diaspora Judaism

Tessa NathEditor-in-Chief

Illustration by Tessa Nath

[Feature] Page 17Winter 2015

to the French Jewish community.“To a certain extent, I think it’s not up

to the Jews to change the situation. [...] My feeling is that the French government should be doing the work,” Baral voiced, leaning forward in his seat.

“One of the things that France has never done a good job of is integrating its citizens.

Ever since the end of colonialism — which was only in the 50s — there have been waves of French and Muslim immigrants from North Africa, and there’s never been much work done to integrate these popu-lations. It’s especially bad on the Muslim side of the suburbs, where the unemploy-ment rate is high, it’s desolate, and there’s a lot of desperation, which together lead to social circumstances that aren’t conducive to democracy, and produce civil unrest.” Baral paused, then gestured with his hands for emphasis, “France never addressed its history of xenophobia; they hate the Mus-lims as much as they hate the Jews.”

Davidovits, whose family in France lives down the street from the Hyper Cacher supermarket, remains optimis-tic that radical change will take place in France. “This was France’s 9/11,” Da-vidovits noted, crossing his legs. “In the

same way, France knows this cannot go on. The tensions have run high, but ev-eryone has turned a blind eye to it. And following Charlie Hebdo, there was the largest protest since the 1944 liberation of Paris from Nazi occupation, which proves that people are serious about change.”

Davidovits went on to explain that there is no categoric solution for French Jews, and that each person needs to make his or her own decision based on level of comfort and means of immigrating.

In response to Netanyahu’s open invi-tation to French Jews, Davidovits said, “I thought it was beautiful. It sounded like in a time of darkness, if you don’t feel comfortable, Israel is your home — you have a home to come back to.”

When speaking about their person-al identities, both Baral and Davido-vits enumerated differences between Jewish identity in Israel, France, and the United States. Baral commented that, to a certain extent, it is easier to be Jewish in Israel, where the major-ity of the population celebrates Jewish holidays and lifecycle events together. However, Baral compares the strong

divide in Israel between secular Jews, traditional Jews, and Orthodox Jews, with little room in the middle, to the freedom of Jews in the United States to express their identity in whichever form they choose.

“For me,” Baral said, motioning to himself, “I think that I am still trying to figure out what that identity is. And that’s one of the reasons why I really like America and American Jewry — no one has figured it out!”

As reported by The Jewish Week, ac-cording to the Pew Research Center study, “Nearly 30 percent of Jews say they do not identify with any denomi-nation; this figure, perhaps surprisingly, includes 19 percent of those who define themselves as Jews by religion.”

In other words, a growing portion of Jews who define themselves as Jewish by religion do not identify with specific Jewish denominations. Baral comments,

“It’s not because they no longer consider themselves Jewish, but they no longer feel that the categories define them.”

Perhaps the struggle is futile to try and disseminate a clear definition of Ameri-

can Jewry — or Diaspora Jewry more broadly — since every individual defines it differently for themselves. One phe-nomenon that we see arise from the ter-rorist attacks surrounding Charlie Hebdo is that there is no quintessential Jewish identity; some feel comfortable living in the Diaspora, while others jump at the opportunity to make aliyah (immigrate) to Israel.

Davidovits cites advice from his men-tor, who maintains that representing a positive Jewish identity in the Diaspora is just as important as moving to Israel and fighting for the Jewish state.

“No matter what,” Baral adds, “it’s im-portant not to generalize, because that does not do justice to the people living there.”

No matter what, Jews will continue to plant their roots in whatever coun-try will have them. For some, that’s Israel, for some that’s France, and for some that’s the United States. But no

matter what, Jews should stay in their home country for as long as they feel comfortable. Gone are the days when we are forcibly expelled — at least for now.

“This was France’s 9/11. In the same way, France knows this cannot go on. The tensions have run high, but

everyone had turned a blind eye to it.”— Bruins for Israel President Eytan Davidovits

Ellie FridmanCopy Editor and Cruciverbalist

Jews Across-the-word

“For me, I think that I am still trying to figure out what that identity is. And that’s one of the reasons why I

really like America and American Jewry — no one has figured it out!”— USAC President Avinoam Baral

*This crossword was inspired by the articles found in this edition of Ha’Am. The first person to e-mail his/her completed crosswords to haam@media.ucla.edu will receive a free Ha’Am shirt, and all participants will receive a Ha’Am pen!

This could be yours!

[Feature]Page 18Winter 2015

International Jews of UCLAJasmin BoodaieContent Editor and Business Manager

UCLA’s prestige, location, and admiration for diversity within its student body has made it a highly attractive university for potential attendees around the world. In fact, international students constitute

12.6 percent of UCLA’s undergraduate program.

“I was told to pack everything I would want with me on my first day,” Elinor said defen-sively, when she explained how she packed her bags from London to Los Angeles with tea and honey.

Elinor is a second-year student with an Eco-nomics and Politics “degree” (London lingo for “major”) attending UCLA only for the quarter. Having travelled abroad to countries such as South Korea in the past, Elinor plans to contin-ue traveling the world once the quarter is over. Although she has grown fond of the campus, Elinor’s love for horseback-riding has her dis-appointed in its lack of equestrian opportuni-ties.

Elinor admires the diversity and immensity among the Jewish community in LA, as well as its strong presence. “It’s easy to be Jewish here,”Elinor explained. “I didn’t notice how few Kosher restaurants there are in London be-fore coming here.” In fact, Jewish opportuni-ties that Elinor maintains in LA such as living at the Bayit, UCLA’s Jewish Co-op, she would

not have in London: “I’ve never lived with so many people before...everyone has a very dis-tinct personality and it’s been very fun to get to know everyone.”

Moreover, Elinor explained the anti-Israel sentiment in London: “I’m involved with vari-ous pro-Israel things on campus, but I wouldn’t write that on a resume or for an application in London.” She even attends a Jewish Studies class, but is not enrolled in it so that it does not show up on her transcript.

Pointing out other differences between Lon-don and LA, Elinor recounted: “The people in London are a lot more polite...the stereotypes are right.” She also notices more language dif-ferences than she anticipated, such the word “jumper, “ which is a sweater in British Eng-lish. People habitually mimic her accent and tell her that she sounds classy, which she be-lieves is hilarious and undeserving. “People in LA are also weirdly obsessed with crumpets — they like to ask me if I drink tea with crum-pets,” she recalled.

“There are no questions about being a Jewish U.S. citizen, but if you are Jewish and German, your identity is considered something strange.”

Nina originated from Brazil but grew up in Germany, most recently residing in Ber-lin. Having a colorful background as a half-German, half-Romanian Jew who was born in Brazil, Nina finds herself way too often being pressured by others to define herself as being just one thing. “People shouldn’t have to de-cide if they would rather be considered Brazil-ian, or German or Jewish,” Nina argued. “It’s okay to be multiple things at once and people should accept that.”

Nina is a political science student with junior standing. “I decided to come to Los Angeles because it’s a major city of Jewish culture...and being part of the Jewish community, you get the opportunity to connect with people you wouldn’t have connected with otherwise,” Nina reasoned.

Staying true to her promise to get involved with Jewish life at UCLA, Nina goes to Hillel

often and recently even led an event at Hillel ti-tled “Jewish Life in Germany TODAY: Through Our Lens” — an event in which students were shown photographic panels and shared personal stories of Jewish communities in Germany in an open space.

At times, Nina struggled living in Germany as a Jew, but she was able to develop a space for herself within the Jewish community there through the years. Although her grandparents on her mom’s side left Germany before the war, Nina’s grandparents from her dad’s side are Holocaust survivors from Romania. Her grand-mother even temporarily hid in a brothel, mak-ing a deal with the prostitutes to hide there in exchange for money.

Nina loves spending time watching the sunset at her “secret spot” on the balcony at the Getty Center or going to the Griffith Observatory, and is happy to be missing the excruciatingly cold winters of Berlin this year. She is trying to take in LA as much as possible before having to go back to Germany in March.

Elinor Samuel: The Tea-Loving Hippophile from London, England

Nina Rosenstein: The Multi-Ethnic Lover of Cultures from Berlin, Germany

Photos by Rebecca Zaghi

[Feature] Page 19Winter 2015

Alan ended our interview with his favorite quote, a quote that I believe encapsulates his optimistic per-sonality perfectly: “We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.” — Oscar Wilde.

Alan is a third-year sociology major and film mi-nor originally from Sao Paulo, Brazil. His decision to attend UCLA was rooted in his interest to ultimately pursue a career in the entertainment industry, and his acknowledgment at a young age that a life in the United States would be a safer and overall better fit for him, especially coming from an American interna-tional school in Brazil.

“I made it my mission to make UCLA my own,” explained Alan as he listed the different ways in which he got involved, including becoming a new student advisor and joining the Theta Xi fraternity. Although a bit homesick his freshman year and dis-appointed in the sushi selection in Westwood com-pared to that of Brazil, Alan soon found his place at

UCLA and even plans to stay in LA after graduat-ing.

“My Jewish identity had not made a great impact on my social life at UCLA up until a few months ago,” Alan claimed. Alan’s connection to Jewish life on campus is fairly recent, stemming from his trip to Israel through Birthright with Hillel. Birthright al-lowed him to recognize a sense of community within the Jewish people and a provided a more spiritual understanding of Judaism that sparked his decision to be more active in Hillel by attending more events and possibly taking a Jewish Studies class in the future. He hopes to make his Jewish mother proud.

Looking back at his life in Brazil, Alan remembers the vibrant culture and wide range of cuisine that was available, but there’s nothing he misses more than his grandmother’s kamish broit (Ashkenazi Jewish cook-ies). “She even sent some over for my birthday,” Alan recalled with a big smile on his face.

Margie is a second-year geography student at UCLA, widely-known around campus as the “Pana-manian Princess.” Have you seen how many likes she has on her profile picture? Anyway, Margie loves “ba-sically everything that breathes and thinks” at UCLA and feels extremely lucky and happy to attend UCLA.

Considering the Jewish community in Panama compared to that of the U.S., Margie explained: “Here, Jews are dispersed geographically, while in Panama, most Jews live within a five mile radius of each other.” Therefore, her ability to find Jews wherever she travels within the United States is a foreign phenomenon to her.

Margie did not hesitate to get involved with Jewish or pro-Israel organizations on campus and take advantage of every moment she has at UCLA. She is an active member of Hillel, Chabad, the Jewish Awareness Movement and Bruins for Israel, as well as a student of the Nazarian Center for Jewish Studies, an alumna of the Sinai Scholar Society, a Hillel Esther Fellow, and a member of AIPAC on campus.

She vividly remembers struggling to find her way to

Chabad on Yom Kippur as a new student: “I arrived here not knowing anyone, anything, or anywhere [...] after three hours [of searching], while crying on my way back to my dorm room, I saw a sign that said there were ser-vices in Ackerman Grand Ballroom; I ended up hearing a cantor sing with a group of senior citizens. Once the year [school] started, Simcha Torah knocked on the door, and I had an escort walk me to Chabad on Gayley [...] That night was a game changer.”

One person who has notably influenced Margie and her appreciation for Judaism is her freshman-year dorm-mate, a religious Catholic girl named Liz. Getting to know Liz allowed Margie to cul-tivate a deep gratitude for her life and a different, more spiritual perspective of her Jewish identity.

Margie enjoys spending Shabbats at Hillel, Chabad, or the Glouberman or Javidzad residences, especially since she loves “any food made by a Jewish mom.” “Shabbat beats everything,” she explained. “There’s nothing better than good food and good company af-ter long and stressful week at UCLA.”

“It was my mazal (“luck”) to come here,” Di-nah explained as she recalled her journey to Los Angeles.

Dinah has senior standing, and has only been here for the past 5 months. Her love for languages led her to double major in Chinese Language, Cul-ture and Civilization and Biblical Hebrew, and mi-nor in Modern Hebrew. Fascinated by ecology and the well-being of our environment, Dinah sees her-self working in China in the future in an effort to make the country more eco-friendly.

“Since the day that I got my acceptance letter to UCLA,” Dinah explained, “LA was all I talked about.” Although she misses skiing in Switzer-land, Dinah is most enamored by LA’s beaches and their close proximity to her apartment. She even expressed an interest in taking up surfing, “...but then I would have to wake up early,” she

quickly added with a chuckle.Dinah definitely didn’t hesitate to profess her

admiration for Jewish life on campus: “I really love the Jewish community here...it’s amazing! There was no Jewish community in my last uni-versity...maybe a couple of Jews, but that’s it...no kosher food, no Chabad, no synagogue, no Jewish life. What you all have here is truly amaz-ing.”

In addition to attending Sinai Scholars classes during the week, Dinah spends most of her Shab-bats at the Chabad of UCLA and feels thankful for their support and ability to make her feel at home.

Dinah would also like to advise everyone read-ing this article to remember to recycle, and to utilize their windows rather than constantly use the car air-conditioning.

Alan Golombeck: The Sushi-Obsessed Fraternity Brother from Sao Paulo, Brazil

Margie Mizrachi: The Girl Who Knows Everyone from Panama City, Panama

Dinah Lohmann: The Eco-Friendly Student of Chinese from Geneva, Switzerland

“

[Jewish Society]Page 20Winter 2015

Unlike the spoken word, which is formidable in its own right, the written word is powerfully enduring and persistent. In general, people’s perception is that the written word — having been meticulously chosen — is usually well thought-out and therefore more authorita-tive. Thus, the written word, with all its alter egos -- books, newspapers, magazines — can become a very powerful and sticky enterprise.

In a haste to sell copies, media outlets often choose to sensationalize events, adding fuel to the fire of con-troversy. Respectful discussions of issues or policies are often replaced with defacing commentary regard-ing members and leaders in our community. It’s not hard to figure that solutions aren’t always the end goal. And although we all shake our heads in disapproval when celebrity gossip makes headlines, truth be told, the science of “supply and demand” simply does not lie. If you read it, they will sell it.

There is no question that newspapers and other media outlets are significant tools in the discussion of issues af-fecting public welfare and promoting an informed, demo-cratic public. However, even with this in mind, Jewish thought still holds that not all news is fit to print.

Such an idea is not so alien in secular American society. It is not uncommon for a newspaper to seek the counsel of a lawyer before publishing an important or controver-sial story; after all, unsupported facts or misused words could land the newspaper in a lawsuit. Moreover, Ameri-can values do not promote an unimpeded right to freedom of speech. For example, threats of violence or false state-ments of fact, or substantially disruptive expression in a school environment, are not considered to be in line with the First Amendment. Freedom of speech simply does not dominate all other American social values.

But “comparing American values and Jewish ones on a matter like [freedom of speech] is a bit like comparing apples and automobiles,” says Rabbi Don Seeman, a pro-fessor at Emory University and instructor at the Jewish Learning Institute. In the United States, social liberties —including freedom of speech — were products of a wary society seeking to limit the powers of the state. Govern-

ment noninterference was the ideal that drove the forma-tion of such constitutional rights.

On the other hand, the Jewish approach to freedom of speech has its roots in Torah thought, which aims to promote the ethical development of a human being. So while both American and Jewish values acknowl-edge the importance to both bolster and limit the right to speak freely, the American concept is founded on individual liberty, while the Jewish concept centers on cultivating human virtue.

Contrary to the message imparted by the famous nurs-ery rhyme, “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me,” the Torah perspective main-tains that “Death and life are in the power of the tongue” (Proverbs 18:21). So adamant is the Torah on this idea, that if one was to hear slander, he or she is forbidden to believe it! (In certain circumstances, one may suspect it to be true in order to protect oneself. For example, if some-one was informed of a murderous plot, one is obligated to take necessary precautions.) Furthermore, the common justification, “But it’s true!” or “Even they will admit to

it!” is a misinterpretation of the concept of slander, for by its very definition, slander applies specifically to state-ments that are true. Such Jewish laws regarding speech, collectively known as the laws of shemirat ha’lashon (“guarding the tongue”), highlight the idea that although we have a right to know, we also have an equally impor-tant right not to know.

The flip side, then, is that depending on the situation, we are either required or barred from relating certain knowledge or personal sentiments. Cursing one’s par-ents, for example, is strictly prohibited — always. So is cursing G-d or a judge or even a deaf person; although the deaf cannot be affected by malicious words, the laws of shemirat ha’lashon are aimed both to protect the potential victim from suffering harm and the po-tential offender from destruction of character. Spread-ing slander, or lashon ha’ra (“evil language” or “evil tongue”), is damaging to both parties involved.

In a recent editorial released by Hamodia — an Or-thodox Jewish newspaper based in Brooklyn, New York — the staff came out with a public statement regarding their decision to refuse reporting on a well-publicized dispute within the charedi (ultra-Orthodox) political arena. They wrote, “We don’t seek to sweep relevant issues under the carpet. We report the news in an un-biased, detailed fashion. What we don’t write about — and we are proud that we don’t — are issues that would involve violating the complex halachos (laws)

of proper speech.” They strongly believe that the role of a responsible media outlet should be to clarify is-sues, not to encourage strife between people. In short, “principles before politics.”

Of course there are situations in which conveying lashon ha’ra is permissible, and even required. For exam-ple, there is a commandment in the Torah to admonish a fellow Jew if he or she has acted inappropriately, either in spiritual or mundane matters. However, the rebuke must take place privately, at least several times, before public-ly disclosing the transgression in order to encourage the person to change their behavior. (Shame goes a long way after all!) And even then, in order to ensure positive inten-tions, Chafetz Chaim (“Desirous of Life”) — the magnum opus of Rabbi Yisrael Meir Kagan, which deals with the Jewish ethics and laws of speech — outlines seven condi-tions that must be fulfilled before revealing the derogato-ry information. The same process applies to information regarding a potential business or marital partnership. If an individual is unaware of a serious deficiency regarding the person they want to marry or enter into business with, we are obligated to tell him or her about it.

The Jewish rules of speech are long, complicated, and teeming with gray areas. There are entire books dedicat-ed to dissecting various social scenarios and providing guidance regarding appropriate conduct according to the Torah perspective. But although the complexities can be extremely overwhelming, Chafetz Chaim encourages in-dividuals to read on the subject matter of lashon ha’ra, “even if the only result will be a sigh when he completes [the reading].” Simply becoming more sensitive to the power of our words is, in itself, a tremendous accomplish-ment.

But the larger goal, of course, is that this sigh will one day inspire us to think twice before submitting a punish-ing review on Yelp (did we speak to the restaurant man-ager privately first?) or posting an unfavorable jibe on Facebook (even if it is true!). Our words extend further and penetrate deeper than we often care to realize.

In many ways, the message is as pertinent to us — Ha’Am staff — as the voice of Jewish life on campus, as it is to the audiences (i.e. you!) we write for. We must keep in mind that when people pick up something to read, they have given it the right to influence their lives — to varying degrees. So when we write on be-half of the Jewish community, we choose to be a voice that penetrates thoughts, builds attitudes, and fosters action. That is quite the responsibility.

But at the end of the day, Ha’Am is only a single forum in a realm of many. And what people choose to hear and read is as much a choice as what people choose to say and write. Only we, as individuals, can filter the voices we choose to shape our lives.

The following saying of the Kotzker Rebbe, a fa-mous Chassidic rabbi and leader, reveals, in four simple lines, the profound wisdom extracted from the practice of shemirat ha’lashon:

Not all that is thought should be said;Not all that is said should be written;Not all that is written should be published;Not all that is published should be read.

Kosher newspapers? Sticks and stones and wordsBriana BegelferStaff Writer

While both American and Jewish values acknowledge the importance to both bolster and limit the right to speak freely, the American concept

is founded on individual liberty, while the Jewish concept centers on

cultivating human virtue.”

Illustration by Briana Begelfer

““

[Jewish Society] Page 21Winter 2015

Imagine you are living in a land where you must tuck away your kippah or Magen David necklace in public in fear of putting your life in danger, sim-ply because of who you are. This has been an unfortunate reality of the Jew-ish narrative. Despite establishing suc-cessful lives for themselves in foreign nations, many Jews in the diaspora have grown tired of the adversity and discrimination they face on a daily ba-sis, and have thus chosen to make ali-yah.

Aliyah is the Hebrew word for "as-cent," and it refers to the act of im-migrating to Israel. According to the Talmud, when one is in the Holy Land of Israel, one becomes elevated spiri-tually. It is said to be from this refer-ence that anyone who makes aliyah is "ascending" because they are closer to G-d.

Throughout history Jews have con-stantly attempted to be socially ac-cepted by various nations. Despite

Aliyah throughout the ages

their many efforts, Jews have repeat-edly been rejected and discriminated against. This highlights the necessity of maintaining a Jewish state where Jews may live freely and away from discrimination. The recent rise in anti-Semitic attacks, such as the shooting at the Hyper Cacher market in the heart of France's Jewish community, rein-forces the necessity of the safe haven Israel provides.

Israel is often referred to as the "land of milk and honey," a land of promise, fruitfulness, and new beginnings. This is the hope many immigrants are moti-vated by when moving to Israel.

According to Anita Shapira's book, Israel: A History, when the establish-ment of Israel was declared in 1948, there were only 806,000 residents.Today, Israel is a bountiful nation of 8.059 million people of a colorful ar-ray of various nationalities from all over the globe. According to the Jew-ish Agency for Israel, over 20,000

Jews made aliyah in 2010. Roughly eight percent "ascended" from Ethio-pia, 37 percent from the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, eight per-cent from Latin America, 14 percent from Europe and the Middle East, and 26 percent from North American and other English-speaking countries.

Aliyah trends have evolved over the years. Groups and individuals have made aliyah for varying reasons and at different times — many for reasons re-lating to anti-Semitism, but others for religious and nationalist purposes.

The First Aliyah, also referred to as the Farmer's Aliyah, began in 1882 and continued until 1903, mainly consisting of Yemenite and Russian Jews. According to the Ministry of Aliyah and Immigrant Absorption, the Yemenite aliyah was motivated by "messianic expectations," while the Russian one was a result of na-tionalism. Within this aliyah were two waves. The first was due to vio-

lence and pogroms, and the second was "a result of anti-Jewish legisla-tion and the expulsion of Jews from Moscow." Although the land was then Ottoman-owned Palestine, these Zionist Jewish immigrants were the pioneers of the nation building of Is-rael, and paved the way for Jewish settlements in Israel.

Aliyah movements continued in the same vein up until 1948. After the Ho-locaust, a number of German and Ital-ian survivors, known as "Displaced Jews" came to Israel. According to Ynet News, nearly 250,000 immigrants made aliyah in 1949 — the largest number recorded to date. Beginning in 1948, Jews from Arab lands immigrat-ed to the land of milk and honey.

The second half of the 20th cen-tury also brought about a large in-flux of Jews into Israel. Ethiopian aliyah began in the mid-1970s. Fol-lowing the 1979 Islamic Revolution, about 30,000 Iranian Jews made ali-

One may ponder, why would someone leading a comfortable and free life as a Jew in the United States

abandon all they know and and move to the Middle East, in the midst of chaos and Starbucks deficiency?”

Rachel MorehStaff Writer

yah. Latin American aliyah came about primarily from the 1999 Ar-gentine political and economic crisis, prompting 10,000 Argentine Jews to move. The beginning of the 21st cen-tury prompted about 9,000 Venezue-lan Jews to leave for Israel as a result of growing anti-Semitism.

Today there are still those who are making aliyah for their own safety —as seen with the question of French emi-gration. According to Israel National News, France leads the way, marking the highest aliyah figures in a decade.

However, aliyah trends also indi-cate Jewish immigration to Israel is a product of choice rather than necessi-

ty. Take American aliyah, for instance. Despite being a democratic country with religious tolerance, almost 20 percent of aliyah in 2010 came from North America, and 2014 saw a seven percent increase in American aliyah. Interestingly, despite the terror being inflicted on Israel by Hamas this past summer, there was a 32 percent in-crease of people making aliyah over last year — around 26,500 new immi-

Israel is the ultimate homeland of the Jewish people, the land to which the Jewish people have been long-ing to return to for 2,000 years, the Middle East’s tiny

slice of heaven”

grants arrived in Israel.One may ponder, why would some-

one leading a comfortable and free life as a Jew in the United States abandon all they know and move to the Middle East, in the midst of chaos and a Star-bucks deficiency? For many, the an-swer is simple — Israel is the ultimate homeland of the Jewish people, the land to which the Jewish people have been longing to return to for 2,000 years, the Middle East's tiny slice of heaven.

An imperative reason people make aliyah is the strong desire to maintain the Jewish identity, in spite of the ef-forts of various foreign nations to as-similate or eradicate Judaism. Accord-

ing to the Jewish Agency for Israel, today there are reported to be 14.2 mil-lion Jewish people in the world, and 43 percent of them reside in Israel. How-ever, the Jews who make aliyah are not only establishing an integral connec-tion to their past at the individual lev-el, but also contributing to the future of the Jewish people. Jews living in Israel help secure the foundation and longev-ity of Israel.

Illustration by Briana Begelfer

[Politics]Page 22Winter 2015

It is no secret that Persians like a great party with food, wine, dancing and mu-sic! King Ahasuerus of 4th century Persia, was no different, throwing a 180-day-long drunken festival in celebration of his vast-ly growing Persian Empire in its capital, Shushan. Iran under the Pahlavi Dynasty, beginning in 1925, mirrored the comfort-able and liberal lifestyle of Persia under Ahasuerus. Both parties, however, were cut short upon the arrival of hate-driven

politicians, challenging the status quo. Comparatively, both the story of Purim

and modern Iran share a monarch who was essentially indifferent to the Jewish people. Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, as well as his father who preceded him as Reza Shah Pahlavi, allowed Jews in Iran to own property, participate in political decisions and flourish both economically and socially. Prior to the Pahlavi reign, Iranian monarchs prohibited Jews from obtaining such power within the nation, instead restricting them to menial jobs and living in ghettos. Under King Aha-suerus, the Jewish people could practice Judaism openly and maintain a strong Jewish community. As articulated in the Book of Esther, Jews like Mordecai were also able to have close connections to the government and work in broader society.

Similarly, during the Pahlavi dynasty, Jewish people moved out of the ghettos, bought more property and built large and beautiful synagogues within their com-munities. Neither government was critical of the Jewish people within the empire or country until provoked by an outside party. In 4th century BCE Persia, it was Haman who disrupted the peaceful relationship between the Jews and Persians, which par-allels 20th century Iran, in which Ayatollah Khomeini initiated a revolution that has since destroyed the connection Iran has

with the Jewish people. Upon Haman’s promotion to prime minister of Persia, he

prompted a strong anti-Semitic policy to be

implemented by the King.

When Ha-man’s de-

mands from

the Jewish people were not met, he initi-ated his scheme to exterminate the Jew-ish people within the Persian Empire; an empire that spanned across the Middle East, North Africa and even parts of Asia. According to the Book of Esther, Haman of-fered King Ahasuerus 10,000 silver talents in exchange for permission to exterminate the Jews, as their demise would deprive the empire of taxes and other economic rev-enue. Ahasuerus refused to take the money

and granted Haman permission to carry out his plan for free. Upon hearing Haman’s de-scription of a people who kept to themselves and disobeyed laws of the empire (such as bowing down to Haman), the King did not question Haman’s plot, nor did he defend the Jewish people. Regardless of their contribu-tion to society and the economy, Ahasuerus was completely indifferent to the Jews. If not for Mordecai’s righteousness and Esther’s

bravery, the Jewish people would have been massacred.

Similarly, when Ayatollah Khomeini led the revolution to overthrow Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi in January of 1979, the progressive Iranian society came to a standstill. Not only were minorities such as the Jews targeted, but all communities who differed from the Shi’ite Ayatollahs were persecuted. Jews living in both the margin-al cities and the capital city of Tehran felt the tension and lack of protection of their rights, as Iranian citizens, by their govern-ment. Again, although the Jews were sig-nificant contributors to Iranian economy, culture and society, the new regime did not recognize them as an asset, but instead, as a hindrance.

According to The Iran Chamber So-ciety, the Shah was losing more power, as protesters challenged his authority, and governmental leaders abandoned his policies. The Ayatollahs were taking over Iranian society, promoting the need for a revolution and end to the Pahlavi Dy-nasty. When the Shah was forced out of his monarchy, Ayatollah Khomeini took

control of the nation and imme-diately began executing support-ers of the Shah and implementing Shariah law, therefore making all non-Muslims, including Jews, second-class citizens. The Iranian Jews sensed the in-stability of the newly established author-ity and fled the nation they had called home for the last 2,000 years.

Although biblical Persia and modern Iran share many similarities in their treat-ment of the Jewish people, the differences between the two governments are drastic. As the story of Purim tells us, the Jews were ultimately saved because of the righteous-ness and bravery of both Esther and Mor-decai. Of course, Ahasuerus was also an indolent king who realized the significance and loyalty of the Jewish people within his

kingdom; and so he stopped Haman from implementing his anti-Semitic plot by or-dering that Haman be hanged on the very gallows that Haman had specially built for Mordecai. Ahasuerus reversed his origi-nal decree by allowing the Jews to protect themselves and kill their attackers, and rewarded Mordecai for his loyalty. Thus, Mordecai established the 14th of Adar, a day that would have been remembered as the day Jews were massacred in the Per-

sian Empire, as a day of celebration with food, drink, dance and song, known today as Purim.

Unfortunately, the story of modern Iran does not end nearly as cheerfully as does the triumphant story of Purim. As record-ed by the Jewish Virtual Library, during the Pahlavi Dynasty, there were approxi-mately 100,000 Jews living in Iran; after the revolution and change of government

policies, there are currently about

10,000 left in the Islam-

ic Republic of Iran. Most

Jewish Iranians fled the coun- try they called home for generations out of fear of being implicated as Jews in an Islamist nation. Jews had less freedom under the Ayatollahs than under the Shah’s reign — economically, socially, and most of all, religiously.

Furthermore, since the 1979 Revolu-tion, the leaders of Iran have been anti-Se-mitic, funding terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah and Hamas, both of which have vowed to “wipe Israel off the map.” Former Iranian president Mahmoud Ah-madinejad is a prime example of a mod-ern Haman; he publicly denied the Holo-caust in 2005 and repeatedly called for the erasure of Israel and the Jewish people. Current president, Hassan Rouhani, is no different, having described Israel as an “occupier and a usurper (tyrannical) gov-ernment.” Thus, the current regime has left an indefinite Haman in office who not only thwarts the freedom of Jews, but anyone who averts from his political policies.

It may seem as though the festivities have ended, but one thing that everyone knows about Persian Jews is that we never leave a party early! The Jews who left Iran after the revolution have since established thriving communities, with the greatest

populations in Israel, Los Angeles, and New York. As Jews, we continue to cel-ebrate holidays like Purim, Passover and Shavuot, regardless of the Hamans trying to rain on our parade. This Purim, do not just remember the Jews of the Persian Em-pire (or modern Iran), but the Jews all over the world whose spirit and identity prevail through the constant challenges against their freedom.

Alexandra MarviziMarketing Manager, Social Media Intern and Staff Writer

Purim: did the party really end?

“If not for Mordecai’s righteousness and Esther’s bravery, the Jewish people would have been

massacred.”

““

Neither government was critical of the Jewish people within the empire or country until provoked

by an outside party.”

Most people fled the country they called home for generations out of fear of being implicated as Jews

in an Islamist nation.”

[Debate Table] Page 23Winter 2015

(continued from page 12) ... counter-part. The extra expense allegedly ema-nates from kosher slaughterhouses treat-ing animals and workers well, as well as the extra input costs of the supervision of the mashgiach. Whether this is true or not is impossible to verify, but it is worth noting that the kosher food indus-try is estimated to be worth more than 4 billion dollars.

I believe that workers involved in ko-sher food production ought to be paid fairly, but such exorbitant profits of the companies and producers for whom they work invites a fundamental question: aren’t these companies profiting unfairly from a religious obligation, which con-sumers would pay any price necessary to fulfill? Many observant Jews feel re-ligiously obligated to eat only kosher foods, so who is to say there is a price they would not pay to do so? Ironically, observant Jews tend to disproportionate-ly administer and own kosher food com-panies, and yet it seems they ignore the Halacha and many of its ethical obliga-tions. In so doing, they profit from people that could very well be their own neigh-bors and friends. When religious ritual — which aims to foster spiritual growth — devolves into industry — which aims to foster financial growth — there is a clear issue, and it is one the industry has not taken any steps to solve.

Even on a less contentious scale, Rabbi Andy Kastner argues in a New York Times special article on kashrut that “the core of kashrut is the idea of limiting oneself, that not everything that we can consume should be con-sumed.” By that logic, then, why may we eat fast food, or sugar-filled sodas, or even exotic fruits? Shouldn’t those be unkosher?

Evidently, I struggle tremendously with kashrut. There is an ample supply of reasons to not keep it in today’s world. And yet, as always, the next time I go to the UCLA dining halls, I will pass on that bison burger and instead opt for the tofu stacker; I will reach past the bacon strips and instead pour myself a bowl of cere-al; I will walk right by the chicken soup and instead pick up a bowl of its vegetar-ian substitute. Because, as Rabbi Moshe Rothblum of Adat Ari El Synagouge told Ha’Am, kashrut “is a means of identify-ing with [his] people.” In a world where I find myself increasingly averse to Jew-ish ritual, keeping kosher is but one of a few I still follow that connects me as a link in the chain of the Jewish tradition. And for the profundity in that, I am will-ing to sacrifice some bacon, and even some reason, too.

(continued from page 13) ... may pon-der and struggle.

Becoming close to G-d and refining one’s character, as described throughout The Way of the Just, involves, in part, de-veloping a sensitivity to others and their pain and joy. It even involves developing a sensitivity toward other life forms and not causing them unnecessary pain. With this regard, kashrut also involves slaugh-tering animals with the most expediency and least amount of pain possible, as well as the least amount of hormonal dam-age; while the Torah permits the use of and consumption of animals, it does not permit causing an animal any discomfort or pain, where possible. (While, unfor-tunately, some kosher slaughterhouses keep their animals in uncomfortable and sometimes terrible conditions, this goes against the spirit of kashrut itself, which, again, emphasizes the need to reduce an-imals’ pain and does not permit causing it.)

From a related perspective, Rabbi Sam-son Raphael Hirsch, one of the nineteenth-century German founders of the neo-Ortho-doxy movement within Judaism, explains (regarding Exodus 23:19) that the dietary laws comprising the body of kashrut are of a symbolic nature, rather than being rooted in dietetic or moralistic grounds. Limiting consumption of meat to kosher animals that have been slaughtered according to Jewish law is meant as a reminder to be careful about what we do and what we consume. Specifically, by discriminating by food choice, one is reminded of one’s free will and ability to act in ways other than inbred instinct, which animals cannot do. Even when eating animals, instead of simply being other omnivorous members of the kingdom Animalia, we are reminded that we are distinct from what we eat and

have the ability to act accordingly.Rabbi Hirsch further points out that

kashrut is one of the most comprehen-sive and catholic components of Jew-ish life. Unlike mitzvot such as making a Passover seder, blowing the shofar on Rosh Hashanah and keeping Shabbat, kashrut has no set time frame for obser-vance. You can eat as infrequently or as often as you like; you can eat whenever you choose; and you can decide whether having dinner means cooking at six p.m. or ordering greasy takeout at one a.m. No one enforces an individual’s kashrut; un-like the mitzvot of returning a lost item, not smelting idols and not attempting necromancy, no one can compel a person to eat only kosher. There is no kashrut police or anti-pork patrol. When some-one chooses to keep kashrut, he or she has chosen to create a relationship with G-d based on his or her own initiative.

While kosher meat and some cheeses are, unfortunately, very expensive due to

the higher production costs involved, as well as other factors (some of which may be attributed to middlemen), most kosher products are no more expensive than non-kosher products. Fresh produce, as well as eggs and other unprocessed items, do not need kosher supervision, in fact. Keeping kosher does not need to be a wallet-empty-ing enterprise, and, as with anything, from college tuition to manicure bills, if some-thing is important enough to you, you try to keep it in your life as much as you can.

Ultimately, though, I keep kosher for the same reason that I keep any of the mitzvot: because I believe in a G-d who cares deeply about what I do and what I eat, and because I believe that the To-rah is essentially a guide to the galaxy authored by Someone smarter than me, Someone more knowledgeable and ex-perienced about running the universe than I am.

And that’s definitely more exciting than a pet tarantula.

Final Thoughts

Mindful Awareness of Your Calorie Sources

You are why you eat; or why I keep kosher, continued

The absurdity of kashrut, continued

When I have a day o� I like to...

Which Jewish holiday are you?Daniel PeikesCruciverbalist

haam@media.ucla.edu will receive a free Ha’Am shirt, and all participants will receive a Ha’Am pen!

This could be yours!

Do something new and exciting

Which is most fun?

Party!

And whenI do...

Hangout with friends

Shopping

Easy ___?

Knowledge Success

You learn!

Learning givesyou...

You meet people!

College is great ‘cause... I like long ___ in the park.

Catch up on all my work Take it easy

I go all out I’m classy

Walks Naps

Why?

Introvert orextrovert?

DayIntro

Extro

Night

Day or night?

To relax To escape into nature

Going

Money?

Independence

Purim: Jewish St. Patrick’s Day

You are cheerful, and you have never had a problem having your voice heard because everyone likes you.

Your life is organized. You have a very developed sense of independence, and believe in having control over your life.

You are hopeful and believe in miracles. You are con�dent that some day you will be successful.

This holiday commemorates the huts of the wandering Jews in the desert. You are a free spirit, and you like to �gure things out at your own pace.

C’mon. Holiday of the trees, bro.

You know yourself very well. People sometimes think you are introverted, since you are stuck in your own head.

Your intellect is your most important asset. You don’t understand why everyone is always saying they hate school; you live for it.

Pesach: Tradition, Family, Stress

Hanukkah: Culture,

Consumerism

Sukkot: Hippie Tu B’Shvat: Holiday of the

trees, bro

Rosh Hashanah: Re�ective, Meditative

Shavuot: Intellectual

Both