The Passover Haggadah (storybook) exhorts us to view ourselves as though we were liberated from Egypt. How do we experience freedom in a society as comfortable and complacent as ours?

Since Passover is a religious holiday — it celebrates God’s deliverance of the Jewish people — we should focus on religious freedom. Since, furthermore, God delivered his people to bring them to the land “flowing with milk and honey,” it is even more appropriate to compare our religious freedoms with Israel’s, to understand what we have here.

Many pro-Israel stalwarts point to Israel’s promise of religious liberty for non-Jews. They note that Israel allows Muslims and Christians to worship, marry and practice according to the dictates of their respective religions. They also assert that Israel, as opposed to every other country in the region, affords its non-Jewish citizens equal opportunity to participate fully in political and social life.

Though they may be correct about these claims, these advocates often fail to consider the state’s particularly egregious denial of religious freedom to Jews themselves.

Some background: Israel maintains a parliamentary system which contains the ultra-religious political parties Shas, Degel HaTorah and Agudat Yisrael. More importantly, a Chief Rabbinate, composed of two Chief Rabbis, has the final word on matters of halacha, or Jewish law. Important issues include conversions, marriage, divorce and burials.

An outsider may think that this is only proper, reasoning that Israel, as a Jewish state, should maintain at least some fidelity to Jewish law.

But what is “fidelity” in this arrangement? The Chief Rabbis are ultra-Orthodox, meaning that they adhere to a strict reading of Jewish texts that allows for little adaptation to the modern world. Therefore, their understanding of the laws pertaining to conversion, marriage and divorce often (if not always) clash with those of more “liberal” streams of Judaism such as the Modern Orthodox, Reform and Conservative.

Since the Rabbinate is an arm of the government, its interpretation of the Jewish codices becomes the law of the land. Therefore, if you want a Jewish conversion, it must be done according to their strict standards; if not, the state will not recognize you or your children as Jewish. Furthermore, there is no civil marriage: If a Jew wants to get married in Israel, the proceedings must follow the dictates of Orthodox law as interpreted by the Rabbinate.

In fact, the State will only recognize civil marriages outside of Israel; therefore, at least 12 percent of Israelis in 2000-2005 flew to nearby Cyprus to conduct weddings.

Those from the more liberal camps argue that this power should be placed in the hands of Rabbis who read the law more leniently. And work is being done to this effect: Reform and Conservative groups in America and liberal Orthodox groups in Israel have been pressuring the Israeli government to adopt a more flexible approach. This, however, misses the point.

Whenever government can define who belongs in a particular group, it obviously can also define who does not belong. In this way government, rather than individuals, determines and therefore homogenizes group identity. More importantly, unlike individuals it enforces its created identity.

The attempt to ossify identity as one “thing” is always problematic, but especially so in the case of Judaism, which has never been one “thing.” Indeed, as a result of its historical dispersion, Judaism has emerged in multiple permutations, each “authentic” within its own context. However, in the State of Israel the only “authentic” Judaism, de jure, is ultra-Orthodox Judaism.  

Compare this to America, where the government has simply no say, or any vested interest, in these matters. We are all free to believe we are worshipping authentically. Only individuals can assert otherwise.

This is not to say, however, that the American government does not maintain some control over identity: Certainly, programs based on “identity politics” allow the government to define and homogenize minority identity. Therefore, there is still serious work to be done.

Perhaps, then, on this Passover we should recognize the value of our comparative freedom and acknowledge where we must go. Identity is too protean, too nuanced to give to an external power to essentialize and enforce. We must not let ourselves be defined by an entity so far removed from its realities.

We may never fully separate government and identity. However, the small steps we take towards that end will bring us closer to the freedom at the heart of the Passover story.

Judah Bellin is a sophomore in the College of Arts and Sciences. He may be reached at judahbellin@cornellsun.com. For Whom the Bellin Tolls appears alternate Mondays this semester.