Conference taveng::bagels

    It was a first page story in the "Jewish Advocate" two weeks ago
    and the subject of a couple of very heated "letters to the Editor"
    in this past week's issue.
    
    It seems that the Brandeis Administration doesn't want the school
    to appear "too" Jewish, so they have added an "international cuisine"
    to the cafeterias (all but the Kosher line) and have tried to down-play
    the Jewishness of the calendar. Most of the reaction in the letters
    to the editor page was to Brandeis President Handler's comments
    about being "passionately Jewish" but that Kashruth (and other rituals)
    were not that important and not really practiced by a significant
    number of Jews anymore, anyway....and why don't people complain
    about the cheeseburgers!
    
    It will be interesting to see what happens.
    
    ---Av 

    As an  alum, I don't like it. When I was there the kosher line was
    kosher,  and  none  of  the  cafeterias  served pork or shellfish,
    though  they  did serve cheeseburgers, pizzas with meat and so on.
    It  seemed  like  a good compromise, as somehow the prohibition on
    pork  and shellfish seems more important to many than keeping meat
    and  milk  seperate.  It  is  also  easy  for the school to do, as
    shellfish isn't cheap, so the cafeteria wouldn't be likely to have
    it  anyway,  and  there  are enough other meats that I don't think
    anybody  really  missed  pork  (but  at  all costs avoid the fried
    mystery  meat that was supposed to look like bacon at breakfast.)

--David

As another Brandeis alumnus, I was also quite surprised and upset about the
recent decision to include shellfish and pork on the school menus. Having
graduated in 1984, I experienced, firsthand, some of the initial changes
that Ms. Handler brought to Brandeis.

I read the article in the Jewish Advocate (Sept. 17th), as well as the letters
to the editor which appeared in the following week's paper - I have been unable
to locate a copy of the article that appeared in the New York Times.

I can honestly say that I don't understand Ms. Handler's logic.  I don't think
that such a decision is going to sway potential non-Jewish students to consider
Brandeis and I don't think that it will in anyway make the non-Jewish students
who are currently attending Brandeis feel any more comfortable.  In my four 
years at Brandeis, I never heard anyone, (Jew or Non-Jew), complain about the
lack of pork or shellfish in the cafeterias.  Furthermore, I believe that this
action will cause more problems than it will solve within the Brandeis
community.

Ms. Handler said that she is trying to make the school more appealing to
non-Jewish students  - that's fine, but changing the cafeteria menus to include
pork and shellfish is not the answer nor is removing the holiday notations from
the school calendar.  After all was said and done, the school was still closed
both days Rosh Hashana and would have been Yom Kippur had it fallen during the
week rather than this Saturday.

In short, Pres. Handler's actions will probably cause more problems within the
school as well as among the many Jewish benefactors who support the Brandeis
community, that it will solve.

Andrew J. Davis

    I wonder if anybody asked Ms. Handler why BC, Holy Cross, Notre
    Dame, Georgetown, etc. don't alter their philosophies to accomodate
    non-Catholics?  Why is it that that Jews always have to accomodate
    secular culture and not the other way around?
    
    David

reply to: < Note 377.4 by FSLENG::CHERSON "uh-uh-uh, Don't touch that dial!" >

>>    I wonder if anybody asked Ms. Handler why BC, Holy Cross, Notre
>>    Dame, Georgetown, etc. don't alter their philosophies to accomodate
>>    non-Catholics?  Why is it that that Jews always have to accomodate
>>    secular culture and not the other way around?

$set/flame=on

	It seems a cultural habit of ours. And it's not just for
	"secular" cultures; cynically, I would read "any non-Jewish culture".

	Example:  The Israelis defeated the Arabs in Hebron, and accepted
	their formal surrender. 

	In Hebron, there is the Cave of Machpelah. It is a holy
	place to both Muslims and Jews.  After the surender, the Israelis
	allowed the Arabs to maintain control over Machpelah, as long 
	as Jews would be allowed to pray there.

	Now, the Muslims allow no one to go down into the Cave itself.  
	Why?  Because of it's extreme sanctity to the Muslims. Fine! I have no 
	problem with that.

	But: what about Har HaBayit (the Temple Mount, in Jerusalem)?
	This is the holiest site for Jews.  People should not be allowed
	on it, for _exactly the same reasons_ the Muslims cite about
	Machpelah. (And that's the ruling of the Rabbinut.)

	Unfortunately, that's where it ends.  Everyone - most Jews
	included -- ignore the ruling. The sign there, stating this, gets
	torn down regularly.
	
	Similar thing at Brandeis.  Pres. Handler said that she 
	wanted to make things "more comfortable" for the "general
	community".

	Why should we?

	Why can't many of us accept our values as Jews? We have such
	a high need for "acceptance", "okay-ness", and "nice-person-ness"
	that many of us try to demonstrate how "We're really like
	everyone else, we really, really, really are. It's just that
	we don't have Xmas trees (and some of us do). Otherwise we're
	just like you."

	And in doing so, we demolish other's respect for us.

	Anyone ever care to look at where and how the process of 
	assimilation starts? Look here!

	It all comes down to a question of our self-respect, I think.

$set/flame=off

/don feinberg

What, if anything, is the Halachic difference between cheesburgers
(apparently acceptable to the community) and shellfish (which the
community doesn't seem to accept *at Brandeis*)?

Martin.

    Shalom Martin,

>	What, if anything, is the Halachic difference between cheesburgers
>	(apparently acceptable to the community) and shellfish (which the
>	community doesn't seem to accept *at Brandeis*)?

    None as far as I know.  It's all treif.  However, to the modern
    secular Jewish mentality there is a big difference.  A hamburger is
    not inherantly treif, neither is cheese.  So if those who aren't Jewish
    or who aren't observant want to put them together that's their problem.
    Shellfish and pork on the other hand are inherently treif.  Therefore,
    many people object to having them at such an institution.

    Strange idea.  I can understand it.  I don't subscribe to it.  And I
    wonder about those who do.		8^{)

    Shanah Tovah,
    Gavriel

    Shellfish and Pork are clearly defined as not kosher in the Torah...the
    prohibition of admixtures of milk and meat is a Rabbinic interpretation
    of the thrice mentioned "thou shalt not seeth a calf in its mother's
    milk" negative commandment.  There is NO practical difference for
    the observant Jew of these prohibitions.  Less observant Jews may
    have Pork/shellfish prohibitions higher on their "Jew-meter" than
    cheeseburgers and chicken kiev.  Also their "pintele yid" may rebel
    against transgression of a "min ha'Torah" ;^}.
    
    ---Av
    
      

re: .5 by CURIE::FEINBERG


>	Pres. Handler said that she wanted to make things "more
>	comfortable" for the "general community". 
>
>	Why should we?


I was assuming that a higher level of comfort for the "general
community" could lead to a higher fiscal comfort at the Bursar's
office. Thus, Prof. Handler's motivation could be purely financial. 

If you know that it isn't, I would be interested to learn what it
really is. 

-- Ron 

>I was assuming that a higher level of comfort for the "general
>community" could lead to a higher fiscal comfort at the Bursar's
>office. Thus, Prof. Handler's motivation could be purely financial. 

I think you've hit the nail right on the head here.

David

    re .a few back
    
    I know someone who is definitly non-observant (she was uncomfortable
    at first when one of her sons became observant) but who still has
    an aversion to pork products.
    
    PS She has come to enjoy the family rituals again through her son's
    family.
    

RE .9,.10

>>I was assuming that a higher level of comfort for the "general
>>community" could lead to a higher fiscal comfort at the Bursar's
>>office. Thus, Prof. Handler's motivation could be purely financial. 
>
>I think you've hit the nail right on the head here.

    I agree that the motivation was probably financial.  However, such things
    usually backfire.  Will the potential gain from additional non-Jewish
    (or non-observant) students offset the potential lost from disgruntled
    benefactors?

    After all this talk about food, I wish all of you an easy fast  8^{).

    L'hit,
    Gavriel

    I don't understand the thrust of the move anyway because I read
    that only about 30% of the students are Jewish anyway. My hunch
    is that the Jewish students who go are not deeply orthodox but are
    among the liberal/reform/secular version. The Hillel hires an orthodox
    rabbit for some Shabbats and Rabbi Axelrod is the author of a book
    on being a renigade rabbi who wants peace with the Palestinians,
    talks with the PLO, and has a variety of innovative political
    approaches to ritual and life.  
    
    B.U. on the other hand attracts the very frum Jews, has an orthodox
    rabbi (Joe Pollack) as the official Hillel rabbi, runs a kosher
    kitcher, and, for those who are want Lubavitcher Judaism there is
    a Chabad house as well. I do not believe this exists at Brandeis;
    my experience with the services there are usually conservative (men
    and women sitting together) but at B.U. there is the separation
    of men and women during prayer ( the curtain is down the middle,
    however, to give women separate but equal standing before the Torah).
    
    This seems ironic because Brandeis, I suppose, came to be know as
    the "Jewish" university and B.U. is the secular university with
    a large Jewish enrollment.  In fact, orthodox parents used to point
    their children to B.U. as the place to go and still be frum.
    
    Many people, I suppose, don't realize the variety of meanings that
    "Jewish" has to the Jews themselves and that a lot of different
    practices are included under this umbrella. Most reform Jews would
    not blink at the "changes" in the school menu, while conservative
    and orthodox Jews probably wouldn't go to Brandeis.
    
    Regards,

    RE: .13
    
    There are several misconceptions in the previous note which I would
    like to clear up.  
    
    First, the majority of students at Brandeis are Jewish (I seem to
    remember it as being approximately 60% Jewish.)
    
    Secondly,  the Jewish students at Brandeis make up a very diverse
    group. As I recall, for Shabbat and most holidays there are 
    reform, egalitarian, traditional, and orthodox services.
    There is a Kosher kitchen which is under the supervision
    of an orthodox Rabbi.  It is located in one of the two cafeterias on
    campus and, as I remember, there were a fairly large number of people on
    the kosher meal plan.
    
    The Rabbi employed by Hillel is reform, however this is not indicative
    of the makeup of the entire Jewish student body.  As I recall, the
    traditional services were generally led by students, and I believe
    the same was true of the orthodox service.  The orthodox rabbi who
    supervised the kosher kitchen was very accessible, and I generally
    took my questions to him as opposed to Rabbi Axelrod since I personally
    preferred to consult an orthodox Rabbi.
    
    Based on my own experiences and those of friends of mine who were
    frum and attended Brandeis, I do not believe it is difficult
    to be an observent conservative or orthodox Jew at Brandeis.
    
    J. Rothstein (Brandeis class '83)

    I may be a little slow replying to this one, but...
    re .4
>>      I wonder if anybody asked Ms. Handler why BC, Holy Cross, Notre
>>  Dame, Georgetown, etc. don't alter their philosophies to accomodate
>>  non-Catholics?  Why is it that that Jews always have to accomodate
>>  secular culture and not the other way around?

    I believe that the reason that Jews always have to accomodate others is
    that we make up a minority of the population.  I do not expect the US
    to come to a screeching halt on our Holidays.  All I expect is that
    they respect our freedom and ability to observe.
    
    Besides, I'm not so sure that the Jews "always have to accomodate
    secular culture."  I would say that things like
        .  closing public schools on Jewish holidays
        .  letting Jewish students make up exams held on Shabbos and
           holidays
        .  Sunday SATs and ATs
    represent accomodations that the secular world has made for us.

    
    It's been over 2 years since a note was posted in this topic, but I
    feel that there's a need to clarify things for the record.  I was a
    Brandeis student from 84 through 88 (class of '88).  I am also not
    Jewish, so I got to see things from the non-Jewish perspective.
    
    I was beginning my Senior year when Brandeis introduced "International
    Cuisine" into Usdan Cafeteria.  The controversy that followed was based
    on a lot of misinformation and a small minority of Jewish students who
    were uncomfortable with the changes that were being made and were very
    vocal in their protest.  I'm not surprised that they were upset, and I
    agreed with them that the university should list the actual holidays on
    the academic calendar rather than just saying "No University
    Exercises".  I believe that was changed back the next year.  I was very
    involved in the various minority communities and the international
    student community, so I can say with confidence that it bothered no one
    that the names of holidays were listed on the academic calendar.  
    
    The pork and shellfish issue, however, was completely different.  Many
    of my Asian friends at Brandeis were used to a lot of Pork in their
    diet, and were annoyed that they had to go off-campus if they ever
    wanted to have any pork.  It was a joyful day for a lot of us when real
    bacon was served in Usdan.  Having to have fish chowder in place of
    clam chowder did not help many of the students from the Boston area
    feel at home, either.  Also, many of the Jewish students who were
    less observant were happy with the addition of these foods.  Most of the
    students who were protesting tended to be the same students who were
    on the Kosher meal plan, but they didn't have much of an argument in my
    opinion, because the Kosher line is in Sherman cafeteria, where pork
    and shellfish were never introduced, and which is half-way across
    campus from Usdan cafeteria.  I think most of the hysteria around the
    issue occured when a reporter on the Justice mistakenly wrote that pork
    and shellfish would be introduced eventually into Sherman cafeteria,
    (which even I would have objected to), and that mistake was picked up by
    newspapers in New York and Jewish newspapers around the country, which
    understandably raised a lot of ire.
    
    I think the dilemma that Brandeis faces is that it claims and strives to be a
    non-sectarian school which welcomes all students, and caters to the
    needs of all students, whether Jewish or non-Jewish, but that almost
    all money comes from the Jewish community, and a significant number of
    the contributors want Brandeis to be a University which caters
    primarily to the needs of Jewish students.  Brandeis is one-third
    non-Jewish, and there is great variety in that one-third as well as in
    the two-thirds of the student body which is Jewish.  To cater to the
    needs of all those students requires a lot of money with no strings
    attached, but unfortunately a large amount of the money Brandeis
    receives has strings attached, which is why most of the student body is
    powerless to cause change at Brandeis that would meet their needs. 
    These students will either transfer, drop-out or become unhappy alumni,
    and are not likely to contribute money to Brandeis several years down
    the road.  Thus, we see the catch-22 that Brandeis is in right now.