Snark from imamother on niddah idiocy

[itsnikki05]

I would think a birth-in-car situation would override any rules, as I put that in the category of major emergencies, without getting anywhere near my opinion of such rules.

Well... yeah. You would think so! :shock: :roll:

[DistantStar]

If this didn't actually happen this way it's only another example of how nutty fundies of any faith can get and how you can't tell parody from reality with stuff they do.

[thoughtful]

It isn't extreme. It's right there in the Old Testament. I'm getting a little tired of people referring to ancient religious practices as "extreme". Sure, they're terrible. But that makes the system itself terrible. More liberal denominations are just pretending the nasty parts of the religion don't exist, in my opinion.

(When I've figured out a nicer way to say all this, I'll start a thread about it.)

I just saw this.

If it was a direct answer to my post, let me see if I can be clearer.

My statement:

I'm so glad I was raised in a kind of Judaism that didn't teach this shit. That's just disgusting.

We've said it here many times -- regardless of which religion has been taken to this silly extreme, the fundamentalism, crazy rule-making and general "women are weak/icky/temptresses" crap is so obnoxious.

The first part was just pure honest emotion -- I can't imagine my father surviving a few days without being able to hold my mother's hand, and I am glad that I don't have to struggle to overcome a crazy fundamentalist, sexist upbringing.

It breaks my heart to read some of the histories of people who have struggled with that life, and with learning a new way of seeing the world. My leaving the fold consisted of accepting the fact that I just don't believe in anything supernatural, including gods and miracles -- no religion-related ugly memories to battle at all.

I know I am very, very lucky in that.

As for the second -- I'm not sure how to address your strong feelings about that, but I'll try.

Anyone, anywhere, is welcome to say "we are forming a version of this religion that does things slightly differently" And, of course, someone else has a right to say "then it really isn't the true form of that religion." :D

Heck, before it all got written down, perhaps things were different -- we may never know. I remember reading, years ago -- in Harold Kushner's To Life, I think -- that the life of an ancient Jew was probably more like that of a Conservative Jew than A Hasid or Orthodox Jew these days. I don't remember why he thought that.

I freely admit to not being an expert Biblical scholar. I am not denying that there is lots of horror in the Torah, and lots of rigid rules that are older than the gentle, open-minded Conservative Judaism in which I was raised. And I know that accepting the oldest known version of something as the original, and therefore official, form, is something people often do.

So maybe the fundamentalist nuts are going back to an original crazy extreme, rather than taking it to an extreme. I don't know and don't care. As an atheist, none of it is all that important to me personally any more.

But, if people insist that they believe in a God, and want to practice a religion, I am always grateful to see more of that common-sense flavor of faith, and less of the restrict-women-and-beat-babies type.

And I remain grateful that I wasn't raised in a rigid, vicious tradition. That's all I was trying to say.

[Sarah]

Generally, niddah doesn't apply when there's a life threatening situation or the spouse is very sick. When I was in AWFUL back labor, my husband pushed on my back (only thing that helped), helped me get into the car, etc. It was only once our doula got to the hospital that we made sure to step back. While this certainly isn't the reason for niddah, I found it helpful emotionally--it let me focus on birth, postpartum recovery, my baby, etc, and put aside my marital intimacy until I was excited and ready for it again. But end of the day with these things you just "buy in" to the system or you don't. For me, being able to overall live my life the way I want to trumps the commandments that can be difficult for me.

[bananacat]

Generally, niddah doesn't apply when there's a life threatening situation or the spouse is very sick. When I was in AWFUL back labor, my husband pushed on my back (only thing that helped), helped me get into the car, etc. It was only once our doula got to the hospital that we made sure to step back. While this certainly isn't the reason for niddah, I found it helpful emotionally--it let me focus on birth, postpartum recovery, my baby, etc, and put aside my marital intimacy until I was excited and ready for it again. But end of the day with these things you just "buy in" to the system or you don't. For me, being able to overall live my life the way I want to trumps the commandments that can be difficult for me.

I don't buy into at all. If you didn't want your husband around, then why not just tell him that? Why do you need some religious command to make him do what's best for you? Two grown-ups should be able to decide for themselves what works best.

[2xx1xy1JD]

It isn't extreme. It's right there in the Old Testament. I'm getting a little tired of people referring to ancient religious practices as "extreme". Sure, they're terrible. But that makes the system itself terrible. More liberal denominations are just pretending the nasty parts of the religion don't exist, in my opinion.

(When I've figured out a nicer way to say all this, I'll start a thread about it.)

Some ancient practices are in fact the actual practices that traditionally existed, and which continue to exist. I would agree with you that the basics of niddah, or observing Shabbat, etc., is not "extreme" even if someone who didn't know about it might find it unusual or downright bizarre.

In other cases, people go to extremes which are not mandated by the religion, which is what apparently happened in this story.

Have you actually done any serious Jewish study with non-Orthodox Jews? Accusing people of "pretending" that stuff don't exist isn't really a matter of opinion - it is either dealt with, or it isn't. I can say that my first exposure to the concept of niddah came when I received a copy of "To Be a Jew" from my Conservative rabbi at my Bat Mitzvah. I will also say that prominent Reform rabbi Elyse Goldstein wasn't pretending anything didn't exist when I was a part of her Women and Judaism study group. Did you ever read The Red Tent - Anita Diamant wrote a whole book about one of the nastiest episodes in Genesis.

I don't care whether you are being "nice". I'm find if you aren't, if it reflects your true thinking, because I suspect some of that thinking is still somewhat Orthocentric.

Reform, Conservative and Reconstructionist Judaism each have their own ways of relating to the texts and to the laws, and to determining how laws apply today. They do not use the same methodologies as Orthodox Judaism, although they may be looking at the same sources. That doesn't mean that they are ignoring anything. It means that they treat the topic differently, and may come to different conclusions. "Different" does not necessarily mean "wrong" or "less than". For example, if you follow a methodology that does not regard all Talmudic discussion as a closed book, you could realize that the length of period + 7 white days formula is a stringency based upon the merger of two separate Biblical commandments, and you could also have a discussion about what "harchakot" (rules to prevent physical contact during forbidden times) actually make sense if the goal is to prevent sexual intercourse.

Furthermore, if someone is a Reform Jewish woman, for example, then HER religion is actually egalitarian. You can argue about the nature of the sources, but it seems pretty patronizing to argue that someone doesn't really believe in X and must believe in Y. Reform Judaism has no rules against touching during labor. Period. They have their own rules that they take pretty seriously. Reform (or Conservative or Reconstructionist) Jews aren't just Orthodox Jews who are too ignorant or lazy to keep the laws properly.

It would be like me arguing that Americans are simply pretending that the monarchy wasn't a part of the law, because American law is based on British common law.

[Eclipse]

This may be a rather ignorant question but in any form of Judaism, is there a time or any reasons that cause men to be considered uncleaned?

[Koala]

I don't buy into at all. If you didn't want your husband around, then why not just tell him that? Why do you need some religious command to make him do what's best for you? Two grown-ups should be able to decide for themselves what works best.

:clap:

[2xx1xy1JD]

This may be a rather ignorant question but in any form of Judaism, is there a time or any reasons that cause men to be considered uncleaned?

Yes, sort of.

The Hebrew word used is "tumah", and it is a state that can be acquired through contact with a dead body, seminal emission or other discharge from the penis. See Leviticus Chap. 15.

Most of the time, being in a state of "tumah" affected someone's ability to make and partake in sacrifices, so the laws weren't really relevant after the destruction of the Second Temple. Lev. 18:19, however, goes on to prohibit sexual relations with a woman who is in a state of "tumah" due to uterine discharge/bleeding, and that remains in effect today.

Odd remnants remain from the male law of "tumah" in the custom of men staying up all night on certain holidays (no sleep = no wet dreams), and in the custom among some groups (esp. Hasidim) of men immersing in a mikvah - some do it daily, others just before holidays. While egalitarianism usually focuses on women taking on traditionally male rituals, this is one case where men have taken on a traditionally female one. I'm not sure why it's any different from a woman wearing a (traditionally male) prayer shawl.

[B5SnowDog]

While this certainly isn't the reason for niddah, I found it helpful emotionally--it let me focus on birth, postpartum recovery, my baby, etc, and put aside my marital intimacy until I was excited and ready for it again.

You make it sound like you'd be expected to have sex before you were ready without niddah. How do you think couples who don't follow niddah handle sex after childbirth?