Non-Orthodox Burial In Israel: Is It A Joke?

Imagine this. You are a Reform Jew living in America. You have met the love of your life while traveling abroad in Israel and decide to settle down. You and your partner are married in the United States, because you want your family to attend your wedding, and then you move to Israel. The land is beautiful, and your new house in Tel Aviv is perfect for you and your new husband. You attend synagogue regularly, keep kosher and celebrate all Jewish holidays. While going about your morning routine, you kiss your children goodbye and head to work. You read the newspaper as the bus makes its way through the city. The bus slows down at a bus stop and a suicide bomber steps inside. 3…2…1. His bomb goes off and your mangled body lies on the street, sirens wailing around you. Your husband attempts to bury you in the local Orthodox cemetery, knowing you wanted a Jewish burial. He is told that you are not Jewish enough because you are a Reform Jew and that he should try a Catholic cemetery nearby.



Situations happen like this in Israel all the time. In The Israelis, there is a woman named Tamar who attends her grandfather’s funeral. She complains that if you want a Jewish funeral in Israel, there is only the Orthodox cemetery option. There are a few secular cemeteries and kibbutzim as well, but space is limited and it is just not the same. The Orthodox cemetery would not allow her Rabbi to do the funeral service for her grandfather. He, like the story in the beginning, was not Jewish enough to conduct the service. Even though her family was not super religious, the service had to be. In the Jewish religion, there are a few things we do when someone we know dies. The Mourners Kaddish is a prayer that we say and taking a shovel and placing dirt on the casket is another ritual. In Orthodox Judaism, the shoveling is only for males and men and women cannot pray together. When Tamar recited the prayer in from of men and shoveled the dirt, she received dirty looks and was told to stop. She does not feel that she did something wrong. She states that, “I also wanted people to realize that they shouldn’t have a monopoly on Judaism. Who says our way of death has to be Orthodox? We should have the right to decide how we can bury our relatives.”



There is a problem in Israel. There is a lack of cemeteries that are not Orthodox based for those that want or need another kind of funeral. In Orthodox cemetaries, sometimes there is a section that is set aside for “people whose Jewishness is in question.” Although they might be Jewish, have a Jewish mother and abide by Jewish law, something is wrong and it is not permitted for them to be buried in a Jewish cemetery. When Yitzhak Rabin was Prime Minister, there was a controversy over a soldier being buried in an Orthodox cemetery because he was not Jewish according to Jewish law. Rabin made the decision to allow him to be buried in the cemetery, but there are many Jewish families who have encountered the same problem.



In 1996, the Knesset passed a law that asked for the making of cemeteries that were not Orthodox based. Getting this to happen is still a battle. An association called Menucha Nechona, which means Rest In Peace, was established in 1986 and has tried to create alternate cemeteries for the Jews who do not/cannot be buried in Orthodox cemeteries. They have created one cemetery in Beer Sheva in March of 1999, but their other cemeteries have been put on hold. Since created, the cemetery in Beer Sheva has held over 300 funerals, including those in suicide bombings. The process of starting cemeteries in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem has been an ongoing battle and they are still facing issues. Some Orthodox Jews believe that these alternative cemeteries are a good idea, while others like Knesset member Avraham Ravitz believe that the way it is set up for the doubtfully Jewish people as “a generous solution.”

The article from JWeekly sounds like it is a progressive writer. They make the Reform and Conservative Jews look good and the Orthodox Jews look bad. Although there are facts, the author uses the death of suicide bombers to bring emotion to the table. This causes the reader to favor the Non-Orthodox Jews when it comes to the issue of Jewish burial. It was a good article, but it seemed biased.

Idan Raichel and the Ethiopian Jews

Quick! Think of Jewish people! What do you see? Black hats? Black coats? Curly cues on the side of their heads? Wrong. There are many different kinds of Jews found all over the world. In Israel, there over 120,000 Jews that emigrated from Ethiopia. The Jews in Ethiopia had practiced Judaism and practiced the laws of the religion, thinking they were the only ones in the world to do this. They had no idea that others in the world practiced Judaism. At the same time, no one knew that there were these Jews in Ethiopia. Scottish explorer James Bruce mentioned these Ethiopian Jews in a book that he wrote in 1790. Even this knowledge of the Jews in Ethiopia did not convince people to bring them to Israel. After seventy seven years, Christian missionaries were attempting to convert the Ethiopian Jews, and the Alliance Israelite Universelle decided to make their move. Since they suspected that these Jews were from the tribe of Dan, and there was the Law of Return, these Ethiopian Jews needed to be brought to Israel. At first, the Ethiopians were hesitant. They had grown up around Christians who were always trying to convert them, but after they realized the Semitic scholar and linguist Joseph Halevy was from Jerusalem, they agreed to go to Israel.



Solomon Ezra, an Ethiopian Jew was given a scholarship in 1975 and went to Israel. After moving to Israel and being in the Israeli army, he wanted to help the rest of the Ethiopian Jews to Israel. On May 23, 1991, unmarked planes came to Ethiopia to transport Jews to Israel. The Ethiopians fled into these planes and after crowded planes travelled about 1,600 miles, 14,324 Ethiopians were brought to Israel over the course of thirty six hours. This operation was called Operation Solomon after King Solomon and Solomon Ezra. These Ethiopians were given resources to start their lives in Israel. They were taught about Mishnah and the newer ways of Judaism like lighting Shabbat candles and wearing t’fillin.



Eleven years down the road, The Idan Raichel Project came into Israel’s music scene. It was to bring a message of hope and love to an area that was surrounded in conflict. The creator of this project, Idan Raichel was quoted saying, “I think the fact that I didn’t have strong family musical roots is what made me be very open to music from all over the world.” After completing his time in the army as an Israeli, he worked as a counselor for troubled youth and become familiar with Ethiopian children. This is when he began to learn about the Ethiopian culture and music. Idan took this culture and music and combined it with his Israeli music to produce a CD, which was an automatic pop hit. The album sold over 150,000 copies and was a huge success. The Idan Raichel Project traveled to Ethiopia in 2006 and performed at the Fifth Ethiopian Music Festival in Addis Abada and tried to give back to those who originally influenced the success of the group. The Idan Raichel project combines the culture and music of Ethiopia and brings it to Israel, where there are already emigrated Ethiopian Jews.



The Web information I discovered was the Idan Raichel website. I gives music videos and backround information on the project and gives information of how some Israelis are not happy about his music, even if his first CD went triple platinum. The viewpoint of this page is to inspire people to listen to his music and emphasize love, peace, and hope in a time of fighting and war. It wants people to care for each other and to create peace not only in Israel, but everywhere.


This is a music video of Idan Raichel performing Mima'amakim, one of their well known songs.

Iran Doesn’t Have Lebanon’s Interest at Heart

The following post is relating to the article We Suspect Iran Doesn’t Have Lebanon’s Interest at Heart written by Natasha Mozgocvana and Haaretz Service

The United States, Lebanon and Iran are dealing with issues of breaking trust boundaries and how much faith to put in each other. The Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, planned a trip to visit Lebanon and the United States believes his intentions are not in good taste. The sub-state group Hezbollah is receiving military assistance from outside of Lebanon, and the fear is that Iran might strengthen the group and make them more dangerous. The State Department spokesman, Phillip Crowley, believes that Iran and Hezbollah are attempting to deal under the table and undermine the Lebanese government.

When President Ahmadinejad came for his visit to Lebanon, there was a Hezbollah-controlled rally in southern Beirut. It was reported that Ahmadinejad met with a Hezbollah leader the rally, and Hassan Nasrallah publicly thanked Ahmadinejad for his support. Many people who were at the rally were quoted in saying that this is the change they need to make a difference and finally beat Israel. It is a major victory in the eyes of Hezbollah. In another article called Hezbollah supporters: Ahmadinejad visit to Lebanon a victory over Israel, the author writer also agrees that the Iranian President was a victory for Hezbollah. One of the people that were present at the rally was quoted saying, “We and Iran are two souls in one body."



The fact that Ahmadinejad came to Lebanon is definitely a threat on its own. These were not the only articles on this subject. I found many articles all relating to Ahmadinejad being visiting the country, and how people are becoming worried. Netanyahu in Israel is worried and is trying to comfort Israelis when he stated, “We will continue to build and protect ourselves as best we can” from the article Netanyahu: Lebanon is becoming an extension of Iran’s regime. He believes that although this might seem like a crisis, Israel has defended itself before, and should be able to defend itself in the future as well. All of the authors from the articles I found believe that Ahmadinejad has bad intentions and they are not too happy with the situation. They feel that he cheated the Lebanese government into letting him come and now is fraternizing with Hezbollah.



Israel has always been in the middle of many other countries. Most of them want to seize the land or get rid of its inhabitants. With President Ahmadinejad and Hezbollah joining forces, Israel could be up for some major trouble. More weapons can be shipped to countries that quite frankly do not want Israel to exist. Ahmadinejad traveled to the southernmost part of Lebanon and basically teased Israel that there was nothing they can do. I believe that Israel has been through so much already that it will be able to withstand the forces of Iran and Lebanon teaming up to destroy the land. Although some people have seen this as a major change and a good thing, it is not good and Israel will need to protect itself to survive in the future.



The main article is reliable because it was written by Natasha Mozgovaya, who has been the chief U.S. correspondent for Haaretz since 2008. She currently resides in the United States, but Mozgovaya immigrated to Israel from Russia. By the age of 18 had become editor of two supplements for "Vesty," the Russian newspaper in Israel. She also went on to report from Gaza during the disengagement in 2005, and from the Lebanese border during the war with Hezbollah in 2006.

Are Israelis Following Netanyahu Into The Dark?

The following blog is about the article Peace talks cannot take place in the dark written by Moshe Arens.



Democracy, according to dictionary.com, is government by the people. This means that the citizens decide how they want their country to be run and how things are handled in politics. They elect someone who is best fir to run their city, state, or country and that person is responsible for a larger area of people. Moshe Arens argues that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is handling politics in the dark of the people and is not informing them of what deals are being made. Netanyahu is trying to make a deal with Mahmoud Abbas, and he is not letting his board or the people of Israel know what is happening in the negotiations.

When opening up his article, Arens states a quote from President Woodrow Wilson that says that peace talks and all international diplomacy should be seen in the public view. He then mentions times in the past that leaders have kept their people in the dark. One of the people he compares Netanyahu to is Adolf Hitler. This comparison sparked a sense of hurt when reading the article. The author was trying to show that although the deals might not seem like a big deal at first, people’s lives do depend on the agreement.



When you are a child, it is easier to get forgiveness from your parents after you do something bad than to ask for permission. Getting permission for eating a cookie before dinner never happens, but getting away with it is a lot easier. Arens uses the same kind of analogy to explain how Netanyahu is approaching the state of Israel. Arens feels that the reason that Netanyahu is making deals in private is because it would be easier to get people to agree with a deal that is already made than one that has not been finalized yet.

Arens writes about Ehud Barak and the negations he attempted to make in 2000. He kept the information from the public and the views on him plummeted. His ratings went down, and he lost in the election in February 2001. Arens is making another comparison and clearly showing that he believes that Netanyahu should not keep his people in the dark and inform them of the deals that are being made.



At the end of his article, Arens stats that, “Some would say that the end justifies the means. But that is a principle applied in totalitarian regimes. It is not fit for a democracy.” He believes that not allowing the public to help make decisions is not democracy at all. Although I agree that the public should be able to see what is going on, the citizens of a county elect a President, Prime Minister, or other political figures because they believe they are competent enough to make decisions for them and help better their country. Netanyahu might be capable, but the fact that he is making deals in secret is what is making him look bad. Netanyahu is making poor decisions on not allowing Israel to see what decisions he is making, but I have faith that he will make a good deal and everything will calm down in short time.

Moshe Arens is a reliable source for this article because he lives in Israel. He is also involved in politics and was elected to the Knesset as a lawmaker for the Likud. He has need the ambassador for Israel to the United States, an Israeli Defense Minister, and also served as a Foreign Minister. All of these political ties give him the background he needs to write this educated article on one of Israel’s political leaders.

Beloved Emblem Of A Conflicted Israel

The following blog is about the article Beloved Emblem of a Conflicted Israel written by Daniel Gordis.

Gilad Schalit is an Israeli soldier who was kidnapped, along with two other soldiers, back in 2006. He was voted as the person of the year, for 5770, by The Jerusalem Post. The author of this article, Daniel Gordis, claims that Gilad “has become a metaphor for Israel, and for Israel’s condition.” Gordis begins his article by connecting with the reader, and attempting to create a sense of sympathy with Schalit’s parents and for all of Israel. Schalit’s parents are not the only ones who are suffering: we all are. The author combines all of Israel: the political left, the political right, parents, siblings, even Americans. He expresses the idea that the kidnapping has brought us all together to find one common cause, to bring Gilad Schalit home safely, unlike the outcome of the other two soldiers that were taken with him.

The author then begins to write about Schalit’s parents. He states that Israel’s media is “heartless” sometimes and his parents have not hid anything from the media. They want their son to be brought back home. They have not fought with the Israeli army. In contrast, they sent their daughter to go to the army without asking for media coverage on the issue. They are not abusing the media or using to gain fame. Gordis shows that this family has good virtue and has what most Israelis strive to have. They are good people who believe in their country, even after their son was kidnapped.

Gordis then makes a really good point. As much as we want Schalit to be brought home and many have his picture posted on Facebook and on their computer desktops, we really do not know who he really is. We might now some facts that can be found online, but his feelings, hopes and dreams are not known to the general public. Even though we know so little, we care so much about his safe bringing and the outcome of the scenario. This is how he ties together Gilad Schalit’s situation to the situation of Israel.

The inability to recover him and bring him home is eerily connected to the fact that Israel is having troubles keeping peace. Gordis states that the fact that Israel cannot find Schalit just makes it harder for Israel. He also mentions that although it would be nice to make the trade and bring Gilad home, the stakes are too high. How many more people will die from freeing the murderers that the ransom wishes? Is the death of one soldier equal to the possible deaths of many?

Gordis’ point of view is interesting. Comparing one person to the entire state of Israel is a tough job, but I think he nails it perfectly. When reading the article, I felt connects to Gilad Schalit and although I already have dog tags of the three kidnapped soldiers’ hanging in my rear view mirror, I felt more attached to the soldiers and their families. This article has so much imagery that the author really makes the reader feel that they have something to relate to the kidnapped soldier. Towards the end of the article, Gordis creates a picture of a ceremony for Schalit in Israel and explains that there were tourists present that were unaware of the situation. He shows that although they were ignorant to the kidnapping, they understood what it meant to the Israelis during the ceremony. Gordis uses Gilad Schalit to show a situation in Israel, which I believe can be solved. In the article, he claims that Israel is failing at finding peace and it might not ever happen. I do not believe in this section of his article.

I believe this article is mostly based off of opinion. There are some facts, but as the author states, they all can be found on the internet.  I believe Gordis is a reliable author because he is an Israeli who has experienced the situation of Gilad Schalit and who better to write a piece on it than someone who was affected. He also is the senior vice president of the Shalem Center in Jerusalem and he wrote a book titled Saving Israel: How the Jewish People Can Win a War that May Never End (Wiley, which won the 2009 National Jewish Book Award. He is knowledgeable in the history of Israel and also in modern day Israel and the war in the Middle East. Gordis wrote an interesting and inspiring article that connects Gilad Schalit to the conflict in Israel and brought a new viewpoint on Israelis in general.