ARE HAMANTASCHEN LIKE THE COMMUNION WAFER OR CHRISTMAS COOKIES?

"INPRAXATION" AND A JEWISH TYPOLOGY FOR FOOD

Dr. Seth Ward

University of Denver

  • Comments welcomed via E-mail: sward@du.edu

    Hamantaschen are triangular cakes filled with various types of fillings: prune, poppy-seed, apricot and others. It is usually assumed that poppy seeds are original, as the name clearly is a variant of "montaschen" or "muntaschen" -- mon or muhn is Yiddish for poppy seeds (German: mohn). They are eaten by Jews on Purim, a joyous festival which occurs in late winter and celebrates the disruption of a plot by the Persian prime minister Haman to eliminate the Jewish population of the Achaemenid Empire, as recounted in the Biblical Book of Esther. Hamantaschen are said to remind Jews of Haman's hat or ears (Hebrew oznei Haman), and in any case Jews understand these cakes as recalling the downfall of Haman. They are exchanged by Jewish families as part of tradition of "mishloach manot," one of the required observances of Purim. Eating a festive meal is another requirement of Purim; eating the Hamantaschen received for mishloach manot would count towards fulfilling this obligation. This paper will present a typology of traditional and ceremonial foods according to their role in the realization of traditional religious obligations.

    At many universities, there is an "Annual Latke-Hamantasch Debate," in which the campus Hillel organization compares the Hamantasch with the potato pancake associated with Hanukkah for comic effect. This tradition goes back many years; I attended several such events in my own college days. I do not recall the specific arguments over such weighty matters as the relative benefits or detriments of the oil used in the preparation of latkes, or the virtues and vices associated with various fillings in hamantaschen. The goals of the evening were fellowship and food.

    While the current endeavor constantly reminded me of those wonderful, comic and tasty evenings, it arose from a very serious exercise. In November, 1998, I received a query about a case in which random drug testing conducted shortly after Purim yielded a positive result for someone who had eaten his grandmother’s poppy-seed hamantaschen, who lost his job as a result. Eating poppy-seed hamantaschen can easily lead to positive results on blood tests for poppy derivatives. Urine tests for opiates are more accurate, and do not show positive for poppy seeds or other non-opiate poppy products, but are considerably more expensive. Colorado is a "terminate at will" state, which means an employer can legally terminate those with positive responses to the random testing, even though they generate positive results for non-opiate poppy products. The employer is not required to offer further, more accurate testing for opiates or even to examine such tests if done at the initiative and cost of the employee. Civil rights legislation, however, requires the employer to make reasonable accommodations for religious practice. Since Jews eat hamantaschen on Purim, and hamantaschen are traditionally made with various fillings, including poppy seeds, the State argued that the employer’s dismissal of the employee infringed upon the latter’s civil rights.

    The question "Are Hamantaschen like the Communion Wafer or Christmas Cookies?" was posed to me by Jill M. Gallet, Assistant Attorney General of Colorado, Civil Litigation Section. Gallet suggested that an employer’s act which served to penalize a Christian for eating a communion wafer would clearly be an infringement of civil rights, but that this argument would be harder to make if the employer merely penalized the eating of Christmas cookies. This essay began as an attempt to provide a suitable answer to Gallet'’s question. (The case was settled without trial.)

     

    Inpraxation

    Judaism has no exact parallel to transubstantiation: the notion that the communion wafer becomes corpus christi "the body of Christ." Nevertheless, it seems to me that any typology of the eating of Jewish traditional foods has not to relate to the substance of the food, but to the role it plays in fulfilling the demands and obligations of Jewish practice. On this score, the hamantasch has an honorable role.

    The Christian tradition talks about "incarnation:" the word of God made flesh. Harry A. Wolfson wrote of a Muslim parallel, "inlibration"—the "embookment" of the eternal Word of God. (H.A. Wolfson, The Philosophy of the Kalam, Harvard, 1976, 244.) The Jewish tradition exhibits phenomena which are somewhat parallel, although, the Jewish people, as Maimonides put it, "generally believe in the createdness of the Torah" (Guide 1:65). As such this issue was not germane to Wolfson’s discussion, which was about an eternal Word appearing in the finite form of flesh or book. Wolfson’s coinage allowed him to follow Muslim and Christian parallels in the debate over whether and how the eternal Word of God became flesh or book at a certain mo ment in history or prehistory, and the relationship of the incarnate/inlibrated Word to the Eternal Word. For the Muslims involved in this debate, the Jews were the source of the idea that Scriptures were created and not eternal. Nevertheless, it is useful to propose a Jewish parallel to the Wolfsonian inlibration: "inlexation:" the word of God, in this case revealed scripture, made into Law, both in the sense of expounding the Oral Law and deriving halacha. This concept could be broadened to "inpr axation," as Biblical texts and Jewish history are recalled in every-day life both by specific laws and traditional practices. Indeed, some practices have legal standing, as the Jewish jurists say: Minhag Yisrael ka-din hu: "A tradition of Israel h as the status of law." Jewish tradition examined statements such as the one quoted below from the Book of Esther, in order to translate them into law and practice. It may thus be suggested that the proper Jewish parallel to a Christian typology based on the incarnation would be one based on the translation of scriptural references into law, ceremony, and traditions: inpraxation.

     

    The Laws of Purim

    In preparing these notes, I have looked at discussions of Mishloach Manot and Seudat Purim in Orach Chayyim 695:1-4 in the Shulchan Arukh by Joseph Karo, still considered to be the authoritative text for Jewish law; the comments to the Shulchan Aruch in the Mishneh Berurah by Yisrael Meir Kagan, usually known as the Chafetz Chayyim; traditional commentaries included in editions of the Shulchan Arukh and the Mishnah Berurah; and the co mments of the Aruch ha-Shulchan, Abudarham and Sefer Taamei Ha-Minhagim. English-language sources checked included the Encyclopedia Judaica (EJ), the Jewish Encyclopedia (1904; JE), Isaac Klein’s Guide to Jewish Practice, Phillip Goodman'’s I>Purim Anthology, and various guides to Jewish practice.

    Purim is celebrated by Jews every year on the 14th day of the Jewish month of Adar (on the 15th in some locations). This occurs in late winter, usually February or March.

    According to Jewish Law, all Jews are obliged to perform the following precepts on Purim:

    1. Read or hear the reading of Book of Esther, evening and morning (miqra megila)

    2. Distribute gifts to the poor (matanot la-evyonim)

    3. Send "portions" of food to others (mishloach manot)

    4. Eat a festive meal (Se‘udat Purim).

    The last three are based on a passage in the Book of Esther which provides that the Jews were obliged "to keep the fourteenth day of the month of Adar and the fifteenth day of the same....making them days of feasting and gladness, of sending portions to one another and gifts to the poor" (Esther 9:20-22).

    Another religious requirement associated with the Purim season is "Remembering Amalek." The Amalekites attacked the Israelites soon after they left Egypt; the Bible orders that their memory be erased, and commands both "remember" and "do not forget" (Exodus 17:14-16 and Deuteronomy 25:19). This precept is applicable year round, and some Jewish prayer books include it in a list for daily remembrance. Sifrei ad locem explains "’Remember’ in the mouth; ‘do not forget’ in your heart" (Zakhor bapeh, al tishkach balev. Piska 296, ed. Finkelstein p. 314.) In contemporary practice, this directive is closely associated with Purim; indeed the Biblical command to remember is read in synagogues the Sabbath prior to this holiday. Haman the Agagite was, according to tradition, a descendant of Agag the Amalekite (1 Samuel 15:8), and various methods of erasing his name and mention fulfill the spirit of this command. Children sound noisemakers to erase the sound of his name when the Scroll of Esther is read; over the course of Jewish history there have been other practices performed on and around Purim which also reflect this directive: burning Haman in effigy, for example. (Cecil Roth’s article on this was reprinted in Dundes, The Blood Libel Legend, Wisconsin Univ. Press, 1991). By eating Hamantaschen, one is ceremonially destroying Haman’s memory—perhaps also "recalling in the mouth" –and doing so in any case in a manner which clearly is appropriate to the eating and sharing of food which is specifically mandated for Purim. (See an interesting contemporary discussion of Amalekites by Daniel Gordis, Does the World need the Jews?, p. 167.)

    "From the time Adar begins, we increase happiness" (Ta‘anit 29a). The season in which Purim falls is associated in Jewish tradition with happiness; the exchanging and partaking of festive foods adds to this spirit.

     

    The sending of portions is defined as, minimally, the sending of two types of food to at least one person, although the tradition also encourages going beyond that. Sending portions before Purim to reach recipients in time for the portions to be eaten on Purim is allowable.

    Portions should be "ready to eat," and legal texts recognize that these "portions" should be appropriate for inclusion in the festive meal. Jewish legal authorities have indicated that the "portions" and the meal should include "important" foods, a somewhat nebulous category which nevertheless would include pastries, especially ones which include different types of foods. There is also a tradition of including foods which require various types of blessings; the blessing said before traditional Jews eat pastry is the most important, after the blessing said before eating bread. The traditional order is given by the mnemonic "mimaga‘ esh" : the blessings for bread (motzi), non-bread items made with flour, e.g., pastry (mezonot), wine (gefen), fruits (‘etz), vegetables (adama) and other items (shehakol).

    Various sources describe foods considered to be traditional on Purim. The English-language sources surveyed are pretty much unanimous in describing the hamantasch as the main food for the holiday. Rabbi Isaac Klein says "The only special food for Purim is hamantaschen, a three-cornered pastry filled with poppy seed (the original name was muntaschen--mun being the Yiddish word for 'poppyseeds')." (p. 239). The JE also mentions only hamantaschen as an example of special baking traditions (p. 277). The Encyclopedia Judaica (s.v. "Purim") talks about hamantaschen and a bean-and-pea mixture.

    The Hebrew legal sources surveyed –older for the most part than the English ones—typically refer to the legume mixture and to another type of baked product, a "levivah" in which pastry dough wraps a piece of meat (e.g. Sefer Taamei Haminhagim). This delicacy is often called kreplach in Yiddish. Goodman's Purim Anthology mentions kreplach and hamantaschen. Some of these sources also indicate reasons why meat portions might not be appropriate for mishloach manot; it is not surprising that kreplach are rarely mentioned today in American usage as one of the "portions" for mishloach manot. (Curiously, in modern Hebrew, "levivah" means "latke".)

    It seems to me that hamantaschen may also continue earlier food traditions on Purim. The "levivah" is similar to the Hamantasch: a filling wrapped in dough; perhaps the sharing of Hamantaschen reflects a non-meat continuation of this traditional food. Eating beans and peas is said to recall Esther’s attempts to refrain from non-kosher meat in the court of Ahasuerus; following the practice of Daniel (1:16) she ate "zer‘onim" there. Translations of the Bible give this in English as "legumes," but the word also means "seeds." It is not impossible to assume that poppy-seed fillings recall Esther’s ingestion of zer‘onim. The practice of exchanging cakes in honor of Ashtarte, the "Queen of Heaven," is recorded in the times of Jeremiah, almost 2600 years ago (Jer. 7:18, 44:17-19). This goddess was called Ishtar by the Mesopotamians, and many modern scholars believe that "Esther" is a permutation of her name (just as Mordechai, Esther’s uncle, reflects "Marduk," Ishtar’s consort in theesopotamian stories). Thus, contemporary food observances adopted on Purim may represent a continuation of religious practices going back to the book of Daniel and indeed to pre-exilic times, reinterpreted as necessary and codified into practice.

    The foods sent for mishloach manot are not necessarily consumed in toto at the Purim Feast, although the foods sent should be appropriate for this purpose and the sharing of these portions is part of the feasting and gladness which is a religious requirement on Purim.

    A typology of food and drinks in Jewish tradition

    Let us now turn to a typology of ceremonial foods. We will do so by noting the food’s involvement in the "inpraxation" of Torah and commandments. This typology recognizes the centrality of the concept of "mitzvah" are bound by, say, eating matzah on Passover. In addition to the fulfillment of mitzvot, other parameters include the specific recollection of a religious message; the usage of the food to generate specific holiday blessings, and the degree to which the food reflects the requirements of Jewish law in terms of dietary restrictions, Sabbath regulations and so forth. It should be noted that the role of eating and traditional foods is intrinsic to Judaism. This was noted, for example, by a well-known Arabic proverb which says in part: "The Jew takes pride in his belly." (Yedidah Stillman, "Attitudes towards women in Near Eastern Societies," Studies in Judaism and Islam presented to S.D. Goitein, Jerusalem, 1981, p. 350.) Forbidden and required foods, required sacramental and celebratory meals, sanctification of holidays performed over meals, all make food a particularly important element for Judaism.

     

    1. Foods eaten at a specific time or occasion because it is a commandment (mitzva) to do so

    2. Foods used in fulfilling the obligations of Jewish law.

    3. Traditional or Ceremonial Foods which reflect or occasion specific observances, and

    4. Foods which recall legal, historical or other conceptual elements of Judaism.

     

    Levels 1 and 2 are involved with inlexation: converting the Word of God into halacha.

    1. Foods eaten at a specific time or occasion because it is a commandment (mitzva) to do so

    In any typology of Jewish food practices, the top category would have to be items explicitly required to be eaten at certain, specific times. The most prominent examples are matzah and some of the other foods on Passover. The Passover Seder is a ceremonial "order" for eating and drinking the wine, matzah, and other items which are required by Jewish tradition to be eaten on this occasion. Matzah is not merely a "part of the Seder," rather, Jews follow the "Seder leyl ha-Pesach" –‘"Order for [fulfilling the mitzvot] of Passover Night" to ensure that this and other obligations are properly fulfilled.

    Jewish law considers eating matzah on Passover to be a fulfillment of a religious precept, encumbent upon all, and not normally replaceable by any other substance (those who cannot eat plain Matzah are allowed to eat egg matzah, but those who can are forbidden from doing so). Prior to the destruction of the Temple, over 1900 years ago, performing some of the Passover requirements on Passover were conditional on being in a state of purity; for close to two millenia, the requirement to eat the Passover foods is unconditional. In the Jewish hierarchy, gadol hametzuveh veoseh, "greater is one who is obligated and performs a commandment than one who is not obligated and performs a commandment." In any typology which reflects Jewish tradition, a food which must be eaten by everyone for its own, intrinsic sake to fulfill a commandment must outrank food which it is a privilege or tradition to eat. Within this category, one may discuss the difference between commandments considered to be Biblical (e.g., matzah on the first evening of Passover) and Rabbinic (e.g., drinking four cups of wine on the same occasion).

    Hamantaschen are clearly not in this category.

    It may be useful to compare with Christian traditions. The eucharist wine and wafer are specific foods which must be offered by priests at specific times, but are received by Catholics as a privilege, or as a part of the Sacrament of Reconciliation, not as a specific command to eat it at a specific time. It is a law of the Church that Catholics must perform the Sacrament of Reconciliation at Eastertime; the Eucharist must be received as part of this Sacrament as a consequence of effecting what used to be called Penance or Confession. From the standpoint of eating traditions based on Biblical imperatives, the Eucharist of Reconciliation does not fall into the same category as matzah on Passover night. Possibly it might be in the same category as the four cups of wine on Passover night which, as mentioned above, is a Rabbinic enactment. Yet the reasoning behind the Eucharist of Reconciliation is that it is a consequence of effecting Penance; this would make it more like some of the items described in level two. (Remember that this is a typology based on Jewish tradition—not Christian—for whom the mystery of transubstantiation is replaced by the "inpraxation"). At any other time, the Eucharist would clearly belong to the second level of this typology.

    Also not part of this category are the most familiar ceremonial foods in Judaism: wine and challah on the Sabbath. They are eaten at a very specific time, but not as a result of a specific command to eat these specific items —rather, tey are instrumental to the fulfillment of other mitzvot specific to the Sabbath.

    2. Foods uniformly used in fulfilling the obligations of Jewish law.

    A second category are foods which are traditionally used in performing a mitzvah. Wine and Challah are the most visible elements of this class: the mitzvah is sanctification of the day, traditionally performed over a cup of wine, and the requirement to have three meals on the Sabbath; the formal meal commencing with the sharing of bread. There is no commandment to eat bread on the Sabbath or to drink wine; consequently, Jews do not recite a blessing which ends with ... "who has commanded us to eat bread" similar to the one recited on Passover "... who has commanded us to eat matzah." Nevertheless, the Bible text "remember the Sabbath Day to keep it holy" is understood to mean: "sanctify it over wine (Pesachim 106a)." Challah is traditional for the blessing over bread—the grace before meals—on the Sabbath. "Challah" refers to the fulfillment of a particular mitzvah involved in the baking of the bread--setting aside a portion of the dough in memory of a tax paid to the Temple in ancient days. But the meal begins with bread because the Rabbis understand that Sabbath must be celebrated by Jews by eating three meals, and the Grace before Meals, as it were, is the blessing over bread. This is so because bread was considered to be the main element of the meal, not because it was considered to be required in and of itself to fulfill the mitzvah—again, note that there is no blessing al achilat lechem "concerning the eating of bread" paralleling that on the matzah.

    The degree of substitution allowed here is more than in level one, which, it may be recalled, includes specific substances at specific times. In the Kiddush ushering in the Sabbath, wine may be replaced not only by grape juice (ritually the same as wine) or by bread. (Most people think of the twisted egg-bread when they use the term "challah" but in fact any type of bread may be substituted.)

    Challah and Wine both involve further elements of mitzvot. Wine is and has been used by many non-Jewish rites and wine considered suitable for kosher use is not rendered so by the super-sweet Concord Grape flavor we associate with "kosher wine," but by the certification that it has been properly made by Jews. Challah gets its name not from its shape but from the removal of the small piece of dough mentioned above. This has an additional link to the Sabbath, as the removal of the dough is mentioned together with the lighting of the Sabbath lamps in the Mishna Shabbat 2:6. These types of considerations, however, less relevant in this category, but are central to one of the following categories.

    Hamantaschen clearly fall into the second category, as they are used in the performance of not one but at least two of the distinct mitzvot associated with Purim: the sending of portions and the eating of a festive meal. Although they are not specifically required, almost all the sources surveyed mention traditional foods, and hamantaschen are indisputably the major traditional Purim food in North America. They also fulfill other functions: by not being made of meat, they reflect care about kashrut laws (the sources I surveyed which urge the avoidance of sending of "levivot" made of meat did not mention the meat spoiling, but only concern about kashrut). Moreover, they serve the heuristic purpose of reminding Jews of the holiday. By, in a sense, destroying Haman "in the mouth", they participate in the commandments to remember what the Amalekites did, and to eliminate them. Hamantaschen may be seen as continuing ancient traditions which predate Purim: the food of Daniel and even the "cakes to the Queen of Heaven," remade into an unambiguously Jewish treat. And they reflect the general directive to be happy in this season. Of all of these, the most important is this: hamantaschen are traditionally involved in the fulfilling several obligations of Purim and of the season.

    Levels 3 and 4 represent various modalities of inpraxation: converting halacha, history and tradition into contemporary practice. These levels contain foods that which, in the way that they are understood by Jews, "convert" religious idea and ideals into a consumable commodity, fixing Jewish law, history, or values into every-day practice or into the annual cycle of holidays. Such food practices recall divine interventions in history, provide occasions for blessing the Creator, articulate observances required by Jewish law, or consciously reflect the avoidance of practices which it prohibits. The difference between these levels and the first two is subtle, and depends on the specificity of the link between food and meaning, and the level of obligation involved.

    3. Foods which recall legal, historical or other conceptual elements of Judaism.

    The third category includes foods which may recall historical events on a holiday, may be associated for various reasons with life-cycle events, or may recall biblical themes or provide the occasion for a blessing. These items symbolize historical connectedness with the Jewish people—they often articulate spiritual or ethical values, tie-ins with the Bible, or other themes of Jewish religious identity. These foods would include latkes on Hanukkah, which remind Jews of the miracle of the oil; foods such as apple and honey on the High Holy Days, which occasion a blessing for a sweet year; and dairy products on Shavuot, which remind Jews of the giving of the Torah which, among other things, is compared by Jewish tradition to milk. Continuity is a major component of Judaism among American Jews today, and not surprisingly, the growing body of Jewish literature in America includes many guides to religious practice which emphasize these traditions.

    The Hanukkah latke is an excellent illustration of this level. It is not a core requirement of Hanukkah to eat latkes (level one). Nor is it an obligation to have either a "commandment meal" or a ceremony at which latkes are a traditional or usual element (level two). The Rabbis ruled that recalling, celebrating and publicizing the miracles of Hanukkah was a central element of the holiday: The blessing recited over the kindling of the Hanukkah lights recalls the miracles which happened in those days, as does the additional text added to the liturgy recited by traditional Jews three or four times each day in prayer and after meals. Yet recalling the miracle or miracles is the traditional motive for the commandment, but the commandment itself is to kindle the lights.

    According to the Talmud, (Shabbat 23a) Hanukka is in its essence about the miracle of the one remaining cruse of pure oil, which nevertheless burned for eight days. The conventional reasoning behind serving latkes is that they are cooked in oil, which serves to recall the miracle of the oil. They are thus associated with pirsumei nisa "publicizing the miracle" of Hanukkah. "Publicizing the miracle" is primarily used to justify placing the Hanukkah candelabrum in the window or doorway, and to determine the time when it should be lit. Latkes teach about the festival in a traditional Jewish way—ingestion—but are not used to effectuate observance of the precepts, rather, to celebrate one of the themes. They thus represent level three within the typology.

    This is not the place to wonder at great length about a possible internal polemic within Judaism reflected in the ceremonial foods associated with the day. Sephardim typically eat jelly doughnuts (sufganiyot)—also because they ar e fried in oil —so there is no real difference in the two. It seems to me there are tensions within Hanukkah between the notion of the military victory of the Hasmoneans (the liturgical additions which talk of "handing the strong into the hands of the weak"); their Temple rededication ceremony, which became their national holiday (the form of the candelabrum, imitating the Temple Menorah with the addition of two stems); and the miracle of the oil. The Talmud, for example, downplays the Hasmoneans and sees no reason to celebrate their rededication of the Temple. Latkes and sufganiyot clearly are associated with the oil motif; perhaps they should be read as a polemic against assessing too much importance to the military aspect or to the Hasmonean dynasty as well.

    4. Traditional or Ceremonial Foods which reflect or occasion specific observances

    A fourth level is a special subset of the third: traditional foods which are clearly associated with particular occasions yet do not figure in ritual and religious observances, or in recalling the events or intrinsic motifs of the day in any way, but rather, they reflect modalities for performing commandments or for engendering blessings consonant with the day or with its message. Honey cake on Rosh Hashanah, Maccaroons on Passover, and Cholent on the Sabbath nevertheless reflect the strictures of Jewish law regarding permissible and impermissable foods and cooking methods, and are important holiday elements. Cholent is a slow-cooked preparation of potatoes, beans and meat, starting before the Sabbath. The allowable mode of preparation and style of oven is discussed in Jewish religious literature. Macaroons are made without flour, making them obvious choices for a Passover dessert. Honey cake is described as allowing for the baking of a dessert on a holiday where certain restrictions are in place but more importantly, it and other honey foods allow for a greeting "may you have a good and sweet new year!" They do not meet the requirements for the first three levels within the typology, as suggested above, yet given the importance of Jewish food and food-preparation restrictions, it seems to me that this may be merely a subgroup of type three.

    The typology developed here is for Jewish foodstuffs; any comparison with Christian parallels may be instructive but intrinsically artifical. Nevertheless I will attempt to do so: Eucharist wafers and wine do not fit into level one, as explained above. Perhaps they are above level one for Catholics: for those who believe in transubstantiation they are a Divine Grace, a miraculous food(not a reminder of a miracle), eaten for their own sake and not because of values they represent or because of a sacrament extrinsic to themselves. For non-transubstantiationists, however, perhaps they should be assigned to level three, and this may even be the case for some Catholics. For they are eaten, according to some, to recall the Lord's Last Supper or as a privilege to believers who take part in the Service. Even in the Sacrament of Reconciliation, they are not eaten because of an intrinsic command--they are a gift to the Church and to the believer, not an obligatory food--but, like challah and wine, consumed as a part of a sacramental act. On this very Jewish typology, the Eucharist as part of Reconciliation is clearly level two.

    Hamantaschen may not have the status of wine, challah and sacramental Eucharist within level two, although it would appear to me that they represent a traditional food associated with the performance of both the commandment of sending portions and eating on Purim. While it may be possible to distinguish between various sublevels within level two, it would appear that the fulfilment of the precepts of Jewish law is privileged in any Jewish typology.

    It does not seem to me that other traditional foods such as fruit cakes and Christmas cookies, or Easter chocolates, fit into any of the categories above; not even category four, except to the extent that they reflect ways of drawing children into the holiday observance. Easter eggs, however, may be more like one of the higher levels, at least for some traditional Christian communities, representing part of the mystery.

    If anything, perhaps a non-food parallel is relevant: one can point to the creche. One may say that Christians should—or, in the case of the Evangelist tradition—must spread the "good news" about the birth of Jesus. There are many ways of doing so, including preaching, pamphlets, and so forth; creches also serve this purpose, and indeed are traditional at Christmas time. As such, the construction of a creche has much in common with the eating of Hamantaschen: it is an absolutely traditional implementation of a positive religious command, and has a very specific referent to the theme of the religious observance.

    It is not clear that Christmas trees and lights have a specific reference to the Christmas narrative—the story of the birth of Jesus and all it entails—except to the extent, perhaps, that some decorations on the tree or formed by lights do. These may be survivals and reinterpretations of ancient customs which survived from pre-Christian Europe, although they have become absolutely traditional to Christmas observance. Perhaps society ought to have a compelling interest to limit or ban these items. Every year there are fires or other tragedies, trees illegally harvested, conspicuous over-consumption of energy resources, and so on, with concomitant expenses and strains on health insurance, costs for fire fighting, and energy and natural resource management. In 1998, Colorado’s news media widely reported the story of a boy who was nearly electrocuted helping his father to hang outdoor lights. Yet we place few limits on this practice, and do not restrict it, e.g., to individuals who are bona-fide members of a religious community endorsing these practices.

    Comparing hamantaschen to Christmas trees and lights, we note that the hamantasch is far more intrinsic: it is the most traditional component of the sharing and eating of portions; it recalls both the Purim story and the directive to destroy the memory of Amalek, as well as reflecting the traditional happiness of the Purim season.

    Seth Ward