Excellent thread by Rabbi Reuvane about the level (or lack thereof) of Jewish literacy amongst Progressive American Jews. It speaks directly to a conversation I was having yesterday with a congregant in his 20s. He recently started attending Chabad shiurim, and loves them. 1/10

He was baffled by his Jewish education topping out at the Babylonian and Roman exiles. He was enthralled with the lives of the early Rabbis, and how Jewish intellectual culture developed over the centuries. There was more than a little bit of anger at what he'd been deprived. 2/
I had the same experience when I did my MA in Hebrew Bible at JTS. I grew up very involved in my synagogue through high school, and went on the Alexander Muss program in Israel. I came out of all that not even knowing what the Mishna or the Talmud were, and I'm a good student. 3/
My honest appraisal is that most of our Progressive synagogues were created to be institutions that helped new Jewish immigrant families integrate into American culture, and we haven't shifted from that. My one quibble with @RabbiReuvane is with the de-assimilation piece. 4/
It's not about de-assimilation, but re-integration. Our institutions broadly accomplished the goal of helping folks like my Ashki great grandparents and their descendants gain access to mainstream acceptance just like other white European immigrant groups in America. 5/
This came with loss. As @JoyousJustice asks, “What was the price your family paid to get conditional access to whiteness?" Well, one of the prices we paid is precisely the issue @RabbiReuvane is pointing out. In order to combat this, we must shift our educational focus. 6/
The fact that childhood education still remains the focus of the "cure" for many is a big part of the problem. Childhood education is important, but there's no getting around the fact that the most compelling and useful parts of Judaism are too complex for most kids. 7/
High school kids have the capacity to understand much more, but for the most part we lose kids' interest after 13 because they and their parents see no value in devoting more of their limited time and resources to Jewish education. This means it's about convincing the parents. 8/
To end this ramble, ultimately we should be looking at orgs that have been successful in marketing Judaism as useful and relevant. Chabad has obviously done an incredible job over the past couple decades. The Kabbalah Center has too, although they are deeply problematic. 9/
Reform, Recon, Renewal, and Conservative Jewish orgs should be devoting far more resources to these kinds of initiatives than we are to re-integrate Jewish identity, history, and practice into contemporary Progressive American Jewish life. But we have to start with the adults! 10

More from Religion

"Hinduism was one of the world's most easy-going faith traditions, famed for it's non-persecutory history."

I can assure you, it is NOT.

It is neither easy-going, nor non-persecutory. In fact it is the very opposite.

Thread.


Modern Hinduism is a British colonial concept, created in concert with Brahmins, who are at the "apex" of the caste system. The word "Hindoo" in fact, is of Persian origin, meaning a person who lives in the Indus valley.

Colonialists who attempted to study Indian religion in the 18th century (NOT, at the time, Hinduism) were baffled by it. Strata of people living distinctly (the caste system) with overlapping gods didn't fit into their Judeo-Christian understanding of religion.

Which has an ecclesiastical authority, a holy book etc., which Indian religions lacked. In studying "The Hindoo", colonialists prioritized textual sources of knowledge, which is where Brahmins, the priestly caste with a monopoly over education/text come in.

Brahminism was a distinct "religion" (although i don't really want to use the term in this way) that was frankly terrorized of other castes. In fact, the very basis of Brahminism is oppression. Brahmins had scholars who recorded *Brahminical* canon textually.
#BookExcerpts #Venkateshwara #Balaji

I will write a 3 part thread series with some interesting points from this book.

Part-1 : History of Tirumala & Venkateshwara Swamy
Part-2: Rituals & Prasada Procedure
Part-3: Historical records

Part-1 thread below

1/


Venkatachala Hill

Maha Vishnu wished for the mountain Krida / Krida Parvatham / Kridhachalam from Vaikunta to be brought to the earth for his avataram.

This was brought to earth by Garuda and Ananta & placed it on banks of river Swarna Mukhi

2/


This is where current Tirumala temple is located. The fact that this was transported from Vaikunta is apparently a scientifically proven fact.

The scientific dating of the sedimentary rocks have confirmed the date to be around 120 million years ago..

3/

This timeline coincides with Swayambhu Manu manvanthara of the Sweta Varaha Kalpa which is the time when Swamy descended on earth in the form of Venkateshwara Swamy.

From a survey of flora and fauna, they have found rare species of plants & animals like golden gecko..

4/

that are exclusive to this hill range only and not found anywhere else in the world.

Tirumala hills are a range of 7 hills
1. Seshachala
2. Vedachala
3. Garudachala
4. Anjanachala
5. Vrishabhachala
6. Narayanachala
7. Venkatachala --> Where temple is present

5/

You May Also Like

This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".


The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.


Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)


There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.


At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?