Instructor`s name

Instructor’sname:

Leviticus16 deals with the Yom Kippur ritual which is a customary Torahreading. Customary Jewish individuals read portions of the Parashahas Torah for Yom Kippur ritual. Hebrew or rather, &quotafter thedeath&quot is the 29th weekly portion of the yearly Jewish series ofTorah readings as well as the sixth in Leviticus. It comprises ofLeviticus 16:1-18:30. Generally, Parashah comprises of 4,294 Hebrewletters. It also has 1,170 words from Hebrew as well as 80 verses. It covers roughly 154 lines in the Torah Scroll. In general, the Jewsread it during April or at the beginning of May. According to theJews, the Luni-solar Hebrew calendar consists of 55 weeks with theprecise figure varying from 50 in ordinary years and 54 or 55 duringleap years. During leap years, for instance 2019, 2022 and 2024,Parashah Acharei is separately read during the 29thSabbath after the Simchat Torah. In ordinary years such as 2017, 2018and 2020, Parashah Acharei is read in combination with the subsequentParashah, Kedoshim to assist in achieving the required figure ofweekly reading.

Leviticus16 that also deals with the Yom Kippur service is the customary Torahreading for the morning ritual whereas Leviticus 18 is for theafternoon ritual. Some conservative personalities interchangeLeviticus 19 readings with the Leviticus 18 customary readings.During holidays, normal prayer book entails Deuteronomy 29:9-14 aswell as Deuteronomy 30:11-20 the morning service, in lieu of thecustomary Leviticus 16. The Parashah puts down the laws of the YomKippur service, sexual practices, blood and centralized offerings.This paper will look to critically analyze the events describedwithin the tractate of Yoma. It will outline the relation betweenLeviticus 16 and Yoma. To critically analyze the relation, it ismandatory to understand the faithfulness of rabbis towards thebiblical rituals and what they bring about to the biblicaldescriptions. Additionally, it is vital to understand theirnecessity in the biblical perspective. Additionally, what the rabbissay about the bible i.e. whether they mention anything within thebible will also be a major undertaking within this paper.

Therabbis do not entirely rely on the biblical ritual laws. According tothe Jewish courts, a family not having peace within the house coulddivorce without prohibition. Accordingly, one could switch spousewithout refuse of consent form one spouse. They do not render secondmarriages as invalid according to the biblical law. However, thecriminal law does not agree to individuals getting into othermarriages without the consent from rabbinical courts.

TheRabbinical culture is far more complex than just plainly pursuingwhat the Bible states. According to Leviticus 16, there areceremonial laws on preparation, slaughtering, and separation that arenot explained within the Bible. The rabbinical rules imploreunnecessary restrictions that are hard to follow. In accordance tothem, dietary restrictions were started far back. In that case thedifference between clean and unclean animals as well as birds ispertained to contamination of foods to be consumed. One is notconsidered ritually unclean when he/she does not wash hands. However,the filth that comes from someone’s heart typifies his/hercleanliness. The rabbis are quite observant on where to purchasetheir meats. They believe meat from a Kosher is better since they aretrained on how to slaughter animals in a humane manner.

Therabbis believe in burnt sacrifices and offerings just live in thebiblical laws. They therefore render the biblical rituals within thebible as a basic block useful in their current beliefs.

Therabbinic cultures are also overly excessive on matters regardingutilization of different utensils, cookery, dishes which are notexpresses within the biblical ritual laws. Though the rabbinical lawsdiffer from the biblical laws to a certain degree, the individualsfollowing them are motivated by God’s word within the Torah. Theystill thrive to do what is pleasant within His sight. The rabbis havefaith in God and His word and generally have the same attitudetowards the moral aspects.

TheBible makes a list of relations that are not allowed but ratherconsidered incestuous the rabbis have subsequently added a few. TheBible also forbids work on Shabbat the rabbis say, &quotIf it hasno use on Shabbat, don`t even handle it! The same applies with manyother laws that provide prohibitions

Nachmanideshas provided out that fences have been made which are very good andnecessary, as long as we understand that this is a fence, and notabsolutely from God in His Bible. In other words the Bible hasprohibited the changing of its content but what the Rabbis have addedis for the good of the Bible by creating fences that guide the Law [ CITATION Tzv09 l 2057 ].

Theselaws are not directly from the Bible, but they are Biblenevertheless. This is because the Bible itself commands us to buildbarriers in place around its prohibitions but only when they areinevitable. It says, &quotKeep the Children of Israel away fromimpurity!” It also says, &quotGuard My guarding!&quot Thisdirectly translates to a situation whereby if the spiritualleadership realizes that the immediate or future generation hasgreater temptation and enticements than the previous generations, orthat the people in that generation simply cannot be attentive topotential danger as before, then it`s high time to include somewarnings to detain them further at bay.

Forexample when people begin to engage in business activities on Shabbatthe remedy would be to inform and affirm that money would not beexchanged for the entire day. If women are being molested or evensexually harassed then the counteractive move would be to prohibitany man to have any form of relations or private interactions withany woman to whom he is not directly related as a spouse or familymember

Prohibitionswithout barriers are likened to books that lack covers because aftera given period of time, some pages will be lost and they might becontaining the sweetest parts of the story or a garden of beautifulflowers in the town square without a fence where, people and animalscan trample upon if it’s not adequately guarded. This thereforerequires proper understanding of fences which will guide us in themaking of an important distinction on what the fence is and also whatis a garden[ CITATION Tzv09 l 2057 ].

Withregard to this, Eve was not able to make the difference. She repliedto the snake that, &quotGod says not to eat from it and not to touchit, lest we die.&quot Thereafter, the snake pestered and convincedher to go against the Law of God and yet she did not die, then herwhole argument was subdued completely. All the serpent had to do wasconvince her was that the only valid reason as to why she was not toeat from the tree was because God didn`t want her to understandthings as He did and that was enough to do the damage. As the Midrashputs it, the fence fell and the garden was crushed.

Fromthis understanding we can now be confident to agree that theadditions by the rabbis to the Biblical account was necessary tomaintain and uphold the virtues of the Torah and as long as themeaning and the purpose has not been altered by the additions thenthe same additions serve to strengthen the Bible.

TheRabbis have not failed to mention anything in the Bible. Actually,their teachings have only strengthened the Bible by additional lawsor rather clauses that locks down possible loopholes. For example inmarriages, divorce has been allowed but the rules were tightened toan extent where rabbinical courts had to be involved in thedecision-making process. Polygamy was also discouraged and monogamyinsisted upon. In addition, the Rabbis also practiced business withpeople who understood the necessary requirement such as buying meatfrom a person who understood the standard of meat that would not beconsidered as unclean or even defiled[ CITATION Tra11 l 2057 ]

References

Freeman, Tzvi. “How can Rabbis add to Torah.” 20 march 2009. Chabad.org. 26 October 2015 &lthttp://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/759699/jewish/How-Can-the-Rabbis-Add-to-Torah.htm&gt.

“Judaisim: The written Law – Torah.” 2015. Jewish Virtual Library. 26 October 2015 &lthttp://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/The_Written_Law.html&gt.

Rich, Tracey R. “Rabbis, Priests, and Other Religious Functionaries.” 2011. Judaism 101. 26 October 2015 &lthttp://www.jewfaq.org/rabbi.htm&gt.

Instructor’sname:

Deathcan be described as the act of terminating all the biological aspectsthat help in sustaining a living organism. It can be due to disease,homicide, suicide, malnutrition, biologically ageing among others. Atsome instances, individuals choose repercussions that are a matter oflife or death. Death is also perceived in other various perspectives.In the readings provided, death was given as a choice. For instance,in Abraham’s case, God was testing his faith. He was given a choiceof sacrificing his only son Isaac, which he agreed to. Antigones andSocrates also choose death though with varying reasons. This paperwill look to outline whether death can be defined in a similar mannerin the cases above. There happens to be a striking similarity betweenthe cases above. This paper therefore, looks to establish anyresemblance in the above cases as well as determine whether there areconceptions of death. Determining what lies beyond death as portrayedin the three cases above will also be a major undertaking within thispaper.

Abraham’scase

Abrahamwas told to sacrifice his only son whom Sarah had conceived at anelderly age. In this case, Abraham’s son did not make the choice ofwhether to live or die, instead it was Abraham. Because it was GodHimself Who had commanded Abraham, Abraham felt that he had nochoice. He also had the belief that since it was God who had givenhim the son, He had the powers to take him away. In accordance to theBible, there is life after death. Your life in earth determines howyour life after death will be i.e. live forever in heaven or hell.Abraham had faith in doing God’s will. Therefore, in this case,death is seen as a pathway to either heaven or hell.

Thetrial and death of Socrates

Socratesis viewed to have died a martyr’s death. He was a critic of thepolitical and religious leaders. There happens to be a logic thatSocrates died and arose from the dead. This is because his teachingsand whatever he stood for ended up being more powerful and aliveafter his death than even when he was still alive. The Apologyentailsa description of Socrates` justification of himself after beingcharged of corrupting the youth. He was also charged for refusing toacknowledge the trendy beliefs regarding the gods of Athens. Socrateshad his beliefs and he was ready to die for the same cause. In theCrito,Socrates is given an option of escaping from jail or employing meansthat could see him avoid death. However, he stands firm opting to dierather than commit acts that he deems morally wrong. The fact hebelieved in life after death made it even simpler for him to face thedeath sentence.

Angtigone’scase

InAntigone’s case, there is a feeling that indeed spirits exist.Antigone makes an effort of giving Polyneices an honorable burialagainst the will of Creon. Antigone believed in appeasing the spiritssince any demeaning act towards them could lead to terrifying haunts.Following his punishment i.e. being locked in a tomb, she decides tocommit suicide. Death is what one cannot escape from. It is not justan instant when life ceases to be. It entails the end to whateverproject one is currently undertaking. Angtigone is ready to die forwhat she believes to be a holy crime. It is better to die with honorthan not. He has a belief that there is an Immortal God who is beyondhuman power. Angtigone lives by the laws of the overall King and notthe earthly king. He neither fears the King nor death. As a matter offact, she dares the King to kill her for it seemed easier than livingunder his rule. The number of people in harmony to her ideologies arealso many, but they could not utter anything due to fear. Angtigoneis hence viewed as a fearless personality who had respect for theImmortal God [ CITATION Dud l 1033 ].

Fromthe three cases

Itis evident that the reasons for death are almost similar in all thecases above. One aspect that is unique across all of them is therecognition of an utmost Being, Who has control over all earthlythings. Abraham, Angtigone and Socrates had faith in a living God whowas in charge of all earthly aspects. They respected the immortal Godabove any other gods. They found it logical to adhere to the laws ofthe immortal God rather the worldly laws. Angtigone and Socrates diefor what they believe in. According to both of them it is better todie in what you believe in than live doing what is morally wrong. Forthem, choosing death seemed much easier than choosing against death.

Allthree cases emphasize on life after death. Socrates acts were evenechoed after his death, meaning that he still lived on even after hisdeath. Death is a mandatory thing that affects all mankind and shouldnot be feared. Instead, one should be afraid of wronging the utmostBeing. Going against a mortal being is easy repercussions are alsoeasier to live with than going against an Immortal being.

Inconclusion therefore, death is mostly perceived in occurrencesleading to it rather than the action itself. The individualsmentioned above were concerned with events leading to their deaththan the action itself.

WorkCited

Fitzgerald, Dudley Fitts and Robert. &quotClassical Greek Tragedy.&quot Classical Greek Tragedy (n.d.): 1-41.

Instructor’sname:

Sonny’sBlues by Baldwin

Sonny’sblues is a short story of a youthful jazz musician who is arrestedand later released for heroin addiction. Sonny the young musiciantries to reconnect with his brother after years of tense relations.The two could not relate well mainly due to drugs issues, music, andfamily among other life struggles. The narrator further recalls howSonny and their father used to have arguments that resulted intofights. When their mother passed on, the two were having aconversation when Sonny expressed his desire to be a jazz musician, adream the narrator dismissed. Sonny had the passion for music andpracticed a lot though the rest of the family did not like it.

Atthe end of the story, the narrator realizes the real Sonny. Sonny isable to express himself in music, the struggles and past experiences.Through jazz music, Sonny expressed his past experiences andstruggles throughout his life. At first, the narrator did not have afeel of the struggles Sonny had gone through. He may have deemed himless concerned about life matters. His addiction to heroin andsubsequent imprisonment may have played a role in the narrator’sperceptions. However, during the concert, the narrator was able tosee the real Sonny. As many scholars have affirmed, music representsa vital media of expressing oneself. For instance, one is able toexpress his/her personal self better in music or other artisticmeans. In this case, Sonny expressed his struggles and how he hasovercome them. It is through this presentation that the narrator isable to recognize the real Sonny. He is able to understand Sonny wellenough. He is able to understand the different paths in life andmaybe if he had supported Sonny in his dream, the struggles couldhave been limited. At the end of it all, the narrator could somehowreconnect with his brother through the Jazz music [ CITATION Jam65 l 1033 ].

WorksCited

Baldwin, James. &quotSonny`s Blues.&quot Sonny`s Blues (1965): 1-14.