m0n1ka05

Hello group,

I am looking for some thoughts on religion and restrictions on foods.

We are a muslim family and pork is 'forbidden' for us. A few days ago my husband was shopping with my daughter. She requested some mashmallows, my husband checked the pack it contains pork gelatine so he said ' we cant buy this as it has pork, I will buy you some pork free mashmallows tomorrow. My daughter then started to cry as she wanted them at that time.

I have personally never checked the pack as I believe that when she is oldershe can make the choice herself. My husband however things as it is such ano important part of religion that we should be guiding her now.

I guess I want to also know what role religion has in unschooling, especially when there are so many restrictions.

Monika

Sandra Dodd

I think your husband could say, "I'm sorry, but this is not for Muslims."

A few months ago I created a group just for discussing religion. If you (or others) would like to join, I'd be happy to have the discussions stirred up some more. It was begun because of some Hindu questions, and there are several Catholic members.

The principles of living within dietary and behavioral restrictions and finding ways to still give the children a large range of choices can be discussed here or there, or both places.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Religion_and_Unschooling/

Sometimes a family's religious beliefs can keep them from even considering unschooling, if part of their core set of beliefs is that children are sinful and must learn unquestioning obedience. If parents can be open to respecting their children as people and still maintain their own religious integrity, unschooling has a great chance of working out for them.

Sandra

Aisha Alkhani

Salaam walekum Monika,

I am really sad to hear about the marshmallows! We are a Muslim family
too, and encounter this all too often. However, what I have done to make
sure they dont feel left out is provide alternatives to the marshmallows.
In addition I have even found vegan marshmallows and kosher marshmallows
and here in the US there used to be a halal marshmallow site where you
could order a case at a time.

Let your daughter know there will be more, and I hear that she threw a huge
temper tantrum, that happens. Islam doesnt keep us from enjoying life and
it shouldnt hers, and it will take quite a bit of time to let her
understand that this life isnt for us. I have explained to my children
that there are a few things in this life that arent for us, but so much
more things that are. Not all children get it.

The other thing I give my children is the understanding of consequences,
both in this life and the next. If you choose to eat the marshmallow it is
sinful and will not make you straight with God. If you choose not to eat
it then you will have many rewards. And I let it be. Children have to
understand the good and bad in every situation and let them decide. And
dont forget the golden rule in this: If it is forbidden it is that much
more appealing.

Islam to me is part of why I decided to unschool, it is the way of the
Prophet. Our children deserve to learn the way he did, and the way our
scholars did. They deserve the freedom to choose their paths in this life,
and I believe strongly given the right tools our children will make the
right decisions.


Aisha

On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 6:18 AM, m0n1ka05 <mama.monika@...> wrote:

> **
>
>
> Hello group,
>
> I am looking for some thoughts on religion and restrictions on foods.
>
> We are a muslim family and pork is 'forbidden' for us. A few days ago my
> husband was shopping with my daughter. She requested some mashmallows, my
> husband checked the pack it contains pork gelatine so he said ' we cant buy
> this as it has pork, I will buy you some pork free mashmallows tomorrow. My
> daughter then started to cry as she wanted them at that time.
>
> I have personally never checked the pack as I believe that when she is
> oldershe can make the choice herself. My husband however things as it is
> such ano important part of religion that we should be guiding her now.
>
> I guess I want to also know what role religion has in unschooling,
> especially when there are so many restrictions.
>
> Monika
>
>
>



--
https://deals.mamapedia.com/seattle?ref_id=283100
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
There is no flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Learning can only happen when a child is interested. If he's not
interested it's like throwing marshmallows at his head and calling it
eating." - Anonymous


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Joyce Fetteroll

On Jan 15, 2012, at 9:18 AM, m0n1ka05 wrote:

> I guess I want to also know what role religion has in unschooling,
> especially when there are so many restrictions.


It doesn't. Religion is a separate philosophy. And it's up to each family to figure out how to mesh the two. Since there will be times when they conflict, it's a personal choice on which to put first.

> we cant buy this as it has pork, I will buy you some pork free marshmallows
> tomorrow. My daughter then started to cry as she wanted them at that time.

He sounded very understanding and respectful of her desire for marshmallows.

Not everything is available all the time. In those cases sympathy and understanding is the best recourse. With a focus on avoiding "But ...," as in "I'm sorry you can't have it today, but we can't can't buy these." Just "I'm sorry. I know they'd taste good today."

She will eventually understand. She may even understand now. And would really appreciate someone understanding her disappointment.

BUT, different parents will make different decisions about what they'll say yes and no to. It needn't be the same for you and your husband. (Unless he really needs you to not allow her pork to feel comfortable with the partnership between you.)

The principle involved is trust: The more the child trusts the parent takes her needs seriously, the more the child will be understanding when the parent can't say yes. Which doesn't mean the child won't be disappointed! Feelings don't always conform to logic!

And that's why it's important to understand the principles, how it works and why we suggest what we do. They aren't rules to be followed and never broken, e.g., never say no. It's about making thoughtful decisions.


> I have personally never checked the pack as I believe that when she
> is oldershe can make the choice herself. My husband however
> things as it is such ano important part of religion that we should be
> guiding her now.

You're both right and both wrong ;-)

You're right she can choose when she's older. But you're wrong in thinking the whole decision is for when she's older. She can make choices all along, deciding each time as she explores what feels right and wrong for her. The principle of not eating pork can swirl around her. It can be part of what guides you and your husband in the choices you make for your family. When it comes up, you can talk about why you make that choice and show her the ingredient list and other ways you gather information to help you decide. She may not make The Choice to avoid all pork products right now, but she can think each time and decide.

Your husband is right in that she can benefit from your wisdom right now. But he's wrong in thinking she must be guided toward something in order to embrace it. She can live with you and the choices you make, absorb what you do. The more positive, the happier her experience with the restrictions you choose to live by, the less she feels those restrictions as doors that prevent her from choosing, the more likely she'll adopt the principles that have felt meaningful in her life for herself.

Will your husband not buying her treats that contain pork mess up all the benefits of unschooling? If he's supportive of her in many many other ways, no. She'll come to understand that not giving her pork is an important aspect of the religion to him.

Joyce

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Joyce Fetteroll

On Jan 15, 2012, at 11:52 AM, Aisha Alkhani wrote:

> If you choose to eat the marshmallow it is
> sinful and will not make you straight with God. If you choose not to eat
> it then you will have many rewards.

This can be phrased more sensitively for kids who tend to think in terms of all or nothing, black and white. In the mind of a child, one pork-containing marshmallow can leave them tainted for life.

I've read of Christian fundamentalist children telling other children they're going to hell for reading Harry Potter or doing other things they've been told is sinful.

It can be phrased as honoring God's wishes for those who follow his words. I'm guessing children under a certain age aren't seen as responsible for being keepers of the faith.

Joyce

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

emstrength3

--- In [email protected], "m0n1ka05" <mama.monika@...> wrote:

>
> I guess I want to also know what role religion has in unschooling, especially when there are so many restrictions.



We have had the exact same experience here with the marshmellows, because we are Messianic (Torah observant believers in Yeshua/Jesus) and keep Biblically kosher. I have explained to my kids that there are some animals that God created to be food and some that he did not create to be food, and that part of loving ourselves is to not eat things that he did not design to be eaten. I don't make it about their relationship with him or make it out to be a big deal. It's just matter of fact- We don't eat dog, we don't eat horse, we don't eat pig. I sympathize with them that it is frustrating to live in a culture that does eat pork and then focus on finding alternatives. My oldest is only 6, but once they are old enough that they are going places by themselves and buying and eating food without my input, it will be their choice. My job is to provide them with the information, introduce them to a relationship with God, and support them as they study and learn for themselves- NOT to try to make them perfect or be the voice of God to them.

Emily

Joyce Fetteroll

On Jan 16, 2012, at 2:58 AM, emstrength3 wrote:

> there are some animals that God created to be food and
> some that he did not create to be food, and that part of l
> oving ourselves is to not eat things that he did not design to be eaten.

That's going to be scary or confusing to them when they realize other people eat stuff not designed to be food. Or they might decide you're full of hooey. The restrictions are specifically for his chosen people, not for everyone.

Joyce

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Sandra Dodd

-=-That's going to be scary or confusing to them when they realize other people eat stuff not designed to be food. Or they might decide you're full of hooey. The restrictions are specifically for his chosen people, not for everyone.-=-

But if the parents DO believe the Bible literally, or accept their culture's restrictions as moral and based in health and safety, then whether the children eventually think it's wise or not, the restrictions have a more general validity to those people.

Christians ignored a lot of the Old Testament when Christianity was flash-spread to entire kingdoms and nations by the conversion of kings in the Middle Ages. It was deal-making, political, more than individual decision. A nation could "be Christian" for quite a while without much knowledge of what that meant. Dietary restrictions weren't a part of any of that, except fish on Fridays in some areas, and other areas were eating fish much of the time anyway.

There's a story of fish on Fridays having been solidified by the Pope at the request/pressure of fishermen in the Mediterranean. I don't know where it is right now or how valid it is, but a great deal of what is done within a large church that should perhaps have adopted more of the Old Testament (Moslems picked up the pork restriction) had to do with practicalities and realities. No printing press, few translations, untrained priests, lack of communication, fear of uprising, compromises.

There was a Saxon version of the Bible that cast Jesus as a warrior and the apostles as his sword brothers, his happy warrior companions, because the people wouldn't have been impressed or swayed At ALL by any fishermen or shepherds. I seriously doubt there was any consideration of making them warriors who wouldn't eat pork, in Germania.

It's called The Heliand, and is a really fun read. G. Ronald Murphy translated the edition I have. He's a Jesuit scholar and the notes are as wonderful as the text.

http://www.amazon.com/Heliand-Gospel-G-Ronald-Murphy/dp/0195073762
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliand
Once the Germanic tribes were Christian, though, and they were travelling into places that were also, some of the, recently Christian, it was an awkward time for anyone to come along and say "Oh, look! We just noticed this detail about pigs...."

There was no Bible as we have now, no full set of approved books in a certain order available to buy. Not even nearly. And as is common in many cultures who live near each other but kind of wish they didn't, differences were noted. And just as circumcision and non-circumcision was a huge deal, so was pork eating and not, in a way. They do this, we don't. That's how we're different.

And so even with unschooling families, sometimes that "We are different/better/cleaner/more evolved because we do this, and they do that" has a solid historical and anthropological justification.

In India there are people who don't eat any garlic. The women pierce their noses on the opposite side from the garlic eating groups, I heard.

In the U.S. in the 1960's, whether people offered strangers or new friends a share in a backroom session of marijuana smoking generally had to do with the length of their hair and what they were wearing.

I'm sure you could all think of similar stories of sorting people by clues and traits that are understandable, though not guarantees.

When Marty needed supplies for his final project in his Eastern Religions class, Holly and I went with him to the international market here. We were in the Bombay aisle, looking for sweets and powders he might use to set up an altar to Ganesha, and there was a couple there shopping. The man looked very knowledgeable and Indian. I thought briefly of asking him "So... what do you think Ganesha would like, from this limited array?" But I looked at his wife, and she had her head covered and long sleeves and a long dress, and I decided they were likely Moslem and I wouldn't ask them.

People like to be set apart, even unschoolers, even within and among other unschoolers sometimes.

Sandra



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

shirarocklin

--------
> We have had the exact same experience here with the marshmellows, because we are Messianic (Torah observant believers in Yeshua/Jesus) and keep Biblically kosher.
-----------

There are kosher marshmallows, kosher bacon bits, kosher immitation shellfish stuff for making sushi, etc. THere are wider options even within the limitations you've set. You could probably order these things from kosher grocery stores online, if you can't find them locally.

I don't know if this part is appropriate for this list, or too off topic. If you believe in God, he probably didn't intend petroleum by-products to be considered food either. The Torah doesn't say that pork isn't food. It says, or in the Jewish tradition, it means, that different foods affect a person differently, in a spiritual way, and so the 'holy' or 'chosen' people, are instructed to eat only those foods which will help fully develop their spiritual potential, in order to be a 'light unto the nations,' a 'nation of priests' - to lead the way in creating moral people and societies. Religion might not fit neatly into unschooling, but a lot of unschooling philosophy can be incorporated into a religious lifestyle before you hit any barriers - but it does take a very good and deep knowledge of your religion, and an ability to think creatively.

Shira

Cathy

>>>If parents can be open to respecting their children as people and still maintain their own religious integrity,unschooling has a great chance of working out for them.<<<

I like this quote a lot Sandra, and have proved its truth. So each of us gets to raise our kids within the framework of our own religious - or other - convictions, but also to respect the freedom of the children to make their own choices as they grow up.

We are Christians, so I write from this perspective....

I think matters of religion are the same as most other things... small kids tend to want to do what their parents do; as they enter the teens they start finding that they have opinions of their own and that sometimes these opinions are different. This is the stage at which parents often clamp down on the kids - and in the long run I think they then stand a higher chance of the child not following those convictions in the end, because they never got to decide for themselves if they agreed or not.

It is tough if you feel strongly about something to allow others, especially significant others, the freedom to differ.

I think fear has something to do with it too - the fear that the other person will not follow our faith, along with all the possible consequences of that, and/or reject me and not love ME anymore because I still do follow that faith.

Control is always at the cost of relationship. So the chances of the above happening are actually higher if you clamp down than if you take a 'lighter', discursive, mentoring kind of approach.

Having said all that, there is also, I think, a place for a person (any person, not just a child) in the family to say 'This is really important to me, so please do/don't do it'. And for the other person to comply even if it is not particularly important to them, for the sake of the relationship. If something is offensive to the parents, and to their way of doing things, they should be free to say so - and explain why. Same with the children.

For example, friends of ours always enjoyed Christmas and all its traditions. But their daughter, as she grew up, became convinced that the Christmas tree was a 'pagan' symbol and did not want them to have one anymore. Her parents did not agree at all, but after much conversation, agreed that they would not have a Christmas tree in their home as long as their daughter continued to live with them - because it was against her convictions. So it works both ways, not just for what the parents want.

I suppose some things are just irreconcilable though - as shown by the multitude of religious wars over the centuries. An example would be if a child in a Christian/Jewish family - ie no 'idols' - chose to follow a religion such as Hinduism, which does have 'idols'. If a family finds themselves in such a place, I don't know what they should do. Try above all things to keep the love between them anyway. See what compromises are available. If the child is old enough to leave home, then he probably should - and then he can practise his religion without either party being offended...

With younger children, I found that they are happy if they understand the 'why' of what the parents choose. So from a religious perspective, if you explain simply that we do/don't do such and such because of this belief/tradition/religious text, that usually serves to satisfy. To use Christmas again - sorry, but this example works - we chose not to celebrate Santa at Christmas, but rather to remember him on St Nicholas day and to keep Christmas as a festival focused on Jesus. Of course questions were asked by the children, as most of their friends got presents from Santa Claus. We simply explained that we wanted the focus to be on the Nativity and the gift God gave us, and so we didn't want to do things the same way as our friends. This was fine with them, and has never been an issue.
I think that often we create the problems when we don't allow the children the freedom to ask questions and to try to understand for themselves why a tradition/religious practise is important.

I don't think though, that we need to allow our children, in the name of 'freedom' to walk roughshod over convictions that we ourselves hold dear. One of the wonderful things that undergirds unschooling philosophy is the quality of mutual respect: 'I respect and value your personhood (that includes who you are, what you believe, how you feel). You do the same for me.'

In our home, anyone is free to - and does - make a call on that quality - 'When you did such and such I felt disrespected and this is why....'

We try really hard to live by these precepts; it is not always easy to do so though.... there is nothing straightforward about convictions. I used to think such problems could and should be easily solved - as I grow older I see how complex they actually are, and how much tragic division they can bring. It is a crazy thought to me to think that here, in the UK, so many people have been put to death for religious convictions, convictions which did not really differ that much from each other in the overall picture (all were Christians!), but which differed greatly in the details - which to my mind were (are) not that important at all.... more a place of 'If it seems good to you, then do it'

Anyway, I'm rambling now, so I'll stop!
Cathy

www.Christian-unschooling.com

Sandra Dodd

-=-The Torah doesn't say that pork isn't food. It says, or in the Jewish tradition, it means, that different foods affect a person differently, in a spiritual way, and so the 'holy' or 'chosen' people, are instructed to eat only those foods which will help fully develop their spiritual potential, in order to be a 'light unto the nations,' a 'nation of priests' - to lead the way in creating moral people and societies.-=-

That's interesting. When I was in India, I heard something for the first time ever. It tied in (as things do) with something I had read a year before that.

Because of Christianity being and all-or-nothing religion, when the Brits took India and started writing about it, they needed to call the religion one thing. So "Hindu" is the name of "the religion" but really, what the Brits described as a caste system within that religion might have been more a set of practices and traditions within an over-arching culture, so that it would have been more like different castes having "different religions," if the English could've seen it that way.

So "Hinduism" is a British amalgamation of what they saw that wasn't Moslem or Christian-from-the-Portuguese, maybe.

What I heard in India, then, that seemed to relate to that, was that the strict vegetarianism was for Brahmins. People who farmed or who were warriors would need a different kind of diet, because they were using their bodies differently.

Sandra

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

m0n1ka05

Thank you to everyone who has taken time to answer my question.

I discussed all the comments with my husband, we had a great chat about our religion and bashed about why we hold certain beliefs.

We are now alot clearer on this issue.

Monika

p.s Sandra thanks for the link to your unschooling/religion group

Joyce Fetteroll

On Jan 16, 2012, at 8:13 AM, Sandra Dodd wrote:

> And so even with unschooling families, sometimes that
> "We are different/better/cleaner/more evolved because we do this,
> and they do that" has a solid historical and anthropological justification.

That's what I was trying to word. I believe God said the restrictions are for the Jews, not for everyone. The Jews are bearing God's special restrictions so the rest of us don't have to ;-)

If she said to her kids what she wrote here -- "there are some animals that God created to be food and some that he did not create to be food, and that part of loving ourselves is to not eat things that he did not design to be eaten" -- it wasn't about sorting people into who can and can't eat pork (and shellfish and bugs.)

So a child who heard that would see me not loving myself by eating a non-food ham sandwich. And that's not true outside or inside the Jewish religion.

Joyce

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

BRIAN POLIKOWSKY

<<<<<<<I don't know if this part is appropriate for this list, or too off topic. If you believe in God, he probably didn't intend petroleum by-products to be considered food either. The Torah doesn't say that pork isn't food. It says, or in the Jewish tradition, it means, that different foods affect a person differently, in a spiritual way, and so the 'holy' or 'chosen' people, are instructed to eat only those foods which will help fully develop their spiritual potential, in order to be a 'light unto the nations,' a 'nation of priests' - to lead the way in creating moral people and societies. Religion might not fit neatly into unschooling, but a lot of unschooling philosophy can be incorporated into a religious lifestyle before you hit any barriers - but it does take a very good and deep knowledge of your religion, and an ability to think creatively.>>>>>>>


This may be getting a little  off the subject but it maybe an interesting subject for some.
When I was 18 and in love with a Jewish guy we got engaged and I converted to Judaism.
The process was classes about the History of the people and traditions with a lot of explanations why they believed and why they did what they did and them a bat mitzvah
I remember the reason I was told about not eating pork was because pork was considered   unclean.
The reason it was considered unclean and why there was a rule of not eating pork and shell fish was because those could make people sick as they spoiled easy.
Those type of meat did not keep and the Jewish people were living in the desert for years ( and were nomadic for many years) and to avoid disease and spoiled food they were not to eat those.
It was for safety.

Alex Polikowsky

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

emstrength3

--- In [email protected], Joyce Fetteroll <jfetteroll@...> wrote:

>
> That's going to be scary or confusing to them when they realize other people eat stuff not designed to be food. Or they might decide you're full of hooey.
> Joyce
>


They already realize it and it is not scary or confusing at all. In fact, their dad eats pork (just not in the house or at least discretely from the kids out of respect for my beliefs) and they know it. They might decide I'm "full of hooey," but hopefully they will be more respectful than that, and simply study it for themselves and either agree or disagree.


===The restrictions are specifically for his chosen people, not for everyone.====

I believe that as believers in the Jewish Messiah, we are grafted into Israel. As a believer in the God of Israel, I try to live the way he has commanded. He didn't make arbitrary restrictions just for the fun of it- he has reasons and learning those reasons and applying them to my life is how I express love for him, my community, myself and the earth.

emstrength3

--- In [email protected], "shirarocklin" <shirarocklin@...> wrote:

Religion might not fit neatly into unschooling, but a lot of unschooling philosophy can be incorporated into a religious lifestyle before you hit any barriers - but it does take a very good and deep knowledge of your religion, and an ability to think creatively.
>
> Shira


It's important to actually study things for yourself and know why you believe what you believe. If a person is just going through the motions and following whatever rules she has been taught, she's not going to be able to explain it very well to her children.

An important part of my beliefs is called "midrash" and it is ongoing discussion, friendly debate and learning. I look forward to my children getting old enough that we can do this more.

Two things that I really like from the Jewish culture:

There is a saying that if you ask a question of 12 rabbis you'll get 13 answers. Unlike in Christianity, it is not the "RIGHT" answer that is so important, it's the questions and discussions and constant learning.

Also, the ancient Rabbis would not say "I'm teaching this child" they would say "we are learning together."


Emily

shirarocklin

> What I heard in India, then, that seemed to relate to that, was that the strict vegetarianism was for Brahmins. People who farmed or who were warriors would need a different kind of diet, because they were using their bodies differently.
>
> Sandra

------------------

That's interesting. There was a whole thing about the Jewish priestly group (a status handed down orally from father to son since the earliest Jewish origins), Cohen's, and a gene they share in much higher incidence than the general population that indicates they really did come from a common ancestor. And there was speculation as to that gene's role in Jews tending more toward bookish/doctor/lawyer/shepherd type occupations (not a whole lot of famous Jewish warriors, or even in modern sports). This is not really relevant to the original conversation, but its interesting to think that maybe the Jewish dietary laws have some influence over that predisposition, or is appropriate nourishment for that predisposition.

Shira

shirarocklin

> This may be getting a little  off the subject but it maybe an interesting subject for some.
> When I was 18 and in love with a Jewish guy we got engaged and I converted to Judaism.
> The process was classes about the History of the people and traditions with a lot of explanations why they believed and why they did what they did and them a bat mitzvah
> I remember the reason I was told about not eating pork was because pork was considered   unclean.
> The reason it was considered unclean and why there was a rule of not eating pork and shell fish was because those could make people sick as they spoiled easy.
> Those type of meat did not keep and the Jewish people were living in the desert for years ( and were nomadic for many years) and to avoid disease and spoiled food they were not to eat those.
> It was for safety.
>
> Alex Polikowsky
--------------------------

I think you'd probably get a different set of answers about dietary laws depending on where you had converted (which stream: reform, conservative, orthodox). For the past 20-30 years (or maybe longer or shorter) there has been an attempt to reconcile laws that don't seem to make sense and modern medicine. To show logically why xyz rules are actually healthier for us. There was a similar explanation for not eating dairy and meat together. But some of those claims have since been debunked in various ways. The ancient understanding (the oral tradition that came along with the written Torah, as it was until the advent of the newer version of Judaism) was that the dietary laws don't have a clear reason - they are an act of faith on the part of the Jews. There are some attempts to explain on a spiritual level why meat and milk or bad for Jews, and pork, and why we must shoo away a mother bird from her nest before taking her eggs to eat, etc... One of the ideas I remember hearing is that pigs are too close to human to be something to eat. They are very smart, they have skin that looks similar to ours, they have similar hearts. A lot of similarities. So, its sort of a moral reasoning for not eating pig - too close to cannibalism for holiness. Same explanation with meat and milk - don't cook a kid in its mother's milk, which was expanded to include cooking all dairy and all meats together. The original moral explanation was that it is cruel to cook a kid in its mothers milk. Shooing the mother bird away is fairly obvious. Eating shellfish... I'm not sure how morality would fit in there. But really, the Torah doesn't give an explanation, and these laws are categorized with the set that God didn't explain and that Jews are just supposed to do. Another strange one is that there is a law about not wearing garments that have wool and linen blended together. Jews have been trying to find explanations to make it a more palatable practice forever.

Shira

shirarocklin

> Religion might not fit neatly into unschooling, but a lot of unschooling philosophy can be incorporated into a religious lifestyle before you hit any barriers - but it does take a very good and deep knowledge of your religion, and an ability to think creatively.
> >
> > Shira
-----------------
> It's important to actually study things for yourself and know why you believe what you believe. If a person is just going through the motions and following whatever rules she has been taught, she's not going to be able to explain it very well to her children.
>
> An important part of my beliefs is called "midrash" and it is ongoing discussion, friendly debate and learning. I look forward to my children getting old enough that we can do this more.
>
> Two things that I really like from the Jewish culture:
>
> There is a saying that if you ask a question of 12 rabbis you'll get 13 answers. Unlike in Christianity, it is not the "RIGHT" answer that is so important, it's the questions and discussions and constant learning.
>
> Also, the ancient Rabbis would not say "I'm teaching this child" they would say "we are learning together."
>
>
> Emily
----------------------------

The ancient system of passing down the tradition was oral. Father to son, in song, they taught their sons an extensive amount of materials. Then they would learn together - going over the material, and arguing over its meaning. That tradition continued when this knowledge was being lost and it was all written down - with the rabbis deciding that learning should be done in the context of partnership. Two men would sit together and debate the texts. In modern Yeshivahs (orthodox Jewish day schools) they still learn in this manner, pairing the boys (and girls) up and dissecting the text and commentaries together. Its a really interesting model.

"Midrash" is actually an ancient form of illustrating a meaning in the Torah. The Rabbis who wrote the Gemarah (the written version of the oral law that came with the Torah) created or were passed down stories that elucidated the plain text of the Torah (in places where the Torah seems unclear or contradictory), or the stories were used to explain very confusing mystical concepts. These were the original Midrashes - literally, stories. In case the information is helpful to anyone. I don't actually know anything about messianic Judaism (as Emily practices), but I thought it might be interesting to hear the origins of some of what she is mentioning.

Shira

karen king

________________________________
From: shirarocklin <shirarocklin@...>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 8:32 AM
Subject: [AlwaysLearning] Re: Religion and food choices


 
> This may be getting a little  off the subject but it maybe an interesting subject for some.
> When I was 18 and in love with a Jewish guy we got engaged and I converted to Judaism.
> The process was classes about the History of the people and traditions with a lot of explanations why they believed and why they did what they did and them a bat mitzvah
> I remember the reason I was told about not eating pork was because pork was considered   unclean.
> The reason it was considered unclean and why there was a rule of not eating pork and shell fish was because those could make people sick as they spoiled easy.
> Those type of meat did not keep and the Jewish people were living in the desert for years ( and were nomadic for many years) and to avoid disease and spoiled food they were not to eat those.
> It was for safety.
>
> Alex Polikowsky
--------------------------

I think you'd probably get a different set of answers about dietary laws depending on where you had converted (which stream: reform, conservative, orthodox). For the past 20-30 years (or maybe longer or shorter) there has been an attempt to reconcile laws that don't seem to make sense and modern medicine. To show logically why xyz rules are actually healthier for us. There was a similar explanation for not eating dairy and meat together. But some of those claims have since been debunked in various ways. The ancient understanding (the oral tradition that came along with the written Torah, as it was until the advent of the newer version of Judaism) was that the dietary laws don't have a clear reason - they are an act of faith on the part of the Jews. There are some attempts to explain on a spiritual level why meat and milk or bad for Jews, and pork, and why we must shoo away a mother bird from her nest before taking her eggs to eat, etc... One of
the ideas I remember hearing is that pigs are too close to human to be something to eat. They are very smart, they have skin that looks similar to ours, they have similar hearts. A lot of similarities. So, its sort of a moral reasoning for not eating pig - too close to cannibalism for holiness. Same explanation with meat and milk - don't cook a kid in its mother's milk, which was expanded to include cooking all dairy and all meats together. The original moral explanation was that it is cruel to cook a kid in its mothers milk. Shooing the mother bird away is fairly obvious. Eating shellfish... I'm not sure how morality would fit in there. But really, the Torah doesn't give an explanation, and these laws are categorized with the set that God didn't explain and that Jews are just supposed to do. Another strange one is that there is a law about not wearing garments that have wool and linen blended together. Jews have been trying to find
explanations to make it a more palatable practice forever.

Shira




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Samir

>>Because of Christianity being and all-or-nothing religion, when the Brits took India and started writing about it, they needed to call the religion one thing. So "Hindu" is the name of "the religion" but really, what the Brits described as a caste system within that religion might have been more a set of practices and traditions within an over-arching culture, so that it would have been more like different castes having "different religions," if the English could've seen it that way.

So "Hinduism" is a British amalgamation of what they saw that wasn't Moslem or Christian-from-the-Portuguese, maybe.<<

I know this is going a bit off topic, but thought I'd offer what I've learned over time about "Hinduism" and India.

It's more complex than the British coming up with "Hinduism." There is a long history of violence between groups who considered themselves Muslims and Hindus for centuries before the British came so a distinct Hindu identity started forming earlier. And going way back you see Jains, Buddhists and "Hindus" (or one of the different groups that get lumped into this term) fighting one another. Difference and violence has a long history and no religion seems to be free of it.

The caste system is also quite complex and varies depending on region and religion. There is an argument that caste became more relevant because of the British and the implementation of a census: http://www.amazon.com/Castes-Mind-Colonialism-Making-Modern/dp/0691088950

The way I think about religion in India is that people believe in gods, goddesses, spirits, forces, etc or ordinary enlightened living beings. Those believers practice their "religion" in thousands of ways (who knows probably more there's a billion or so people there). These practices can overlap among groups and you even see "Hindus" and "Muslims" going to the same spiritual pilgrimage site. In the same way you see different castes going to the same sites and performing the same practices.

The "Hinduism" concept that emerged during the British colonial period was definitely created in collaboration with people living in what's South Asia. They needed these people to translate all the texts and learn about what they were doing on the ground, and those people went to British colleges and worked with the British to learn about how to assert their own power.

>>What I heard in India, then, that seemed to relate to that, was that the strict vegetarianism was for Brahmins. People who farmed or who were warriors would need a different kind of diet, because they were using their bodies differently.<<

From what I've seen most people in India are not vegetarian (although the cow is sacred for many), and many who don't eat meat only do so because they can't afford it.

To try and tie this all back to unschooling, it seems that compassion and tolerance for people's choices is most important. If I can figure out how to maintain that compassion and tolerance for when my child decides to choose what to eat and when it does not align with my own practice, then we'll hopefully have a better relationship than if I did not.

Sandra Dodd

-=I know this is going a bit off topic, but thought I'd offer what I've learned over time about "Hinduism" and India.-=-

Thanks. I enjoyed all of it, and liked the probably-ever-expanding complexity of it, too!! Thanks for writing all that up.

-=-To try and tie this all back to unschooling, it seems that compassion and tolerance for people's choices is most important. If I can figure out how to maintain that compassion and tolerance for when my child decides to choose what to eat and when it does not align with my own practice, then we'll hopefully have a better relationship than if I did not.-=-

Also complex. Thanks for that one too.

The reasons for parents wanting kids to conform has a range too. Sometimes the parents are trying to impress their own parents. Sometimes the parents have pride in the sanctity or purity of their home and family and don't want anything to screw that up. Sometimes a parent is truly afraid of sin or hell. Sometimes it's parental control (personality, or having been controlled and passing it on like hazing). The thing for parents to do is to try to work out, gradually, what fears and pressures, beliefs and wounds might be affecting the way they see and treat their children.

Sandra

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]