An American Jewish woman and a Chickasaw Indian woman, what could they possibly have in common? While there are clear differences, they also share some similarities. Elizabeth Ehrlich, in her book Miriam’s Kitchen, recounts her journey through the Jewish faith and her life as she struggles through keeping kosher. Linda Hogan, in her book Dwellings, shares her spiritual experience as Chickasaw Indian and her love and connection with the earth and all that inhabit it. While they differ on many things such as, time, structure, the language in which they tell their stories, and who are the most profound element, they share a deep understanding of spiritual life, tradition, and history. Elizabeth Ehrlich has an interesting way of structuring
…show more content…
While the language they use is quite the opposite, it doesn’t mean the completely stand alone. I believe both authors would agree that language is important to their traditions. It impacts the way they tell their stories, it impacts their spiritual lives and their connections to their world around them. Ehrlich says, “For as much as Judaism is a wonderful religion, it is even more thoroughly a practical one, a guide for living that touches every aspect of physical and social life” (128). Hogan, while not Jewish, believes her spiritual life could relate to Ehrlich’s statement. That her beliefs shape everything that she encounters through her physical and social life. Also on the note of spiritual life, that being the all-encompassing factor in both of their lives. Ehrlich came a long way with her spiritual life. Her parents having separated from the faith, she became lost. That was until she met her husband. Her mother-in-law was a detrimental figure in changing the tide of Ehrlich’s views on the Jewish faith, and credits her with instilling in her the practices she still keeps to this day and wishes to instill in her own children. Hogan as well had important influences that shaped her beliefs. Growing up as part of a tribe, she has a whole lineage of family members who taught her lessons in spiritual practices, also which she still believes in to this day.
While the language they use is quite the opposite, it doesn’t mean the completely stand alone. I believe both authors would agree that language is important to their traditions. It impacts the way they tell their stories, it impacts their spiritual lives and their connections to their world around them. Ehrlich says, “For as much as Judaism is a wonderful religion, it is even more thoroughly a practical one, a guide for living that touches every aspect of physical and social life” (128). Hogan, while not Jewish, believes her spiritual life could relate to Ehrlich’s statement. That her beliefs shape everything that she encounters through her physical and social life. Also on the note of spiritual life, that being the all-encompassing factor in both of their lives. Ehrlich came a long way with her spiritual life. Her parents having separated from the faith, she became lost. That was until she met her husband. Her mother-in-law was a detrimental figure in changing the tide of Ehrlich’s views on the Jewish faith, and credits her with instilling in her the practices she still keeps to this day and wishes to instill in her own children. Hogan as well had important influences that shaped her beliefs. Growing up as part of a tribe, she has a whole lineage of family members who taught her lessons in spiritual practices, also which she still believes in to this day.