The latest issue of Kol Hamevaser, “Judaism in America” has been published! The full issue is available in PDF format here, the individual articles are available below, and open to comments.
Continue reading to see articles in this issue: Continue reading »
BY: Shlomo Zuckier.
Reviewed Book: Jeremy Stolow, Orthodox by Design: Judaism, Print Politics, and the ArtScroll Revolution (Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press, 2010). Price: $24.95.
Known as “the people of the book,” Jews, one might say, are perhaps the religious community most connected to print culture. From the Bible to the Talmud to the writings of the medieval philosophers, Jewish texts have historically had significant contemporaneous impact on the cultures in which they were situated, and those very same texts still have lasting influence today. Which Jewishly-connected individual is unaware of the stories of the Patriarchs, the laws of the Sabbath, and notion of the unity of God? Traditional writings have had an effect both upon their immediate audiences and upon Jewish tradition in the broader sense, as well.
BY: Yitzchak Ratner.
Reviewed Book: Jeffrey S. Gurock, Orthodox Jews in America (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2009). Price: $24.95.
A primary goal of a historian is to place a subject – be it a person, event, or idea – within a chronological context. We would do well, then, to analyze Jeffrey Gurock’s Orthodox Jews in America by attempting to place his work on a historiographical spectrum.
An exacting reader could take issue with the book’s overly expansive title, as one might infer that Gurock’s tome purports to present the definitive history of American Orthodoxy, something it clearly does not do. Gurock stays far away from any form of analysis of thoughts and ideas within Orthodox Judaism (with an important exception to be discussed below) and only describes American Orthodox social, political, and religious institutions insofar as they help explain the people that created and made use of them. But the author (or perhaps his overly ambitious publisher) can be forgiven for this possible lapse in judgment, as from the book’s start its purpose is made abundantly clear. Beginning with the book’s prologue, in which he nostalgically remembers the “wide tent” of the Orthodoxy with which he grew up,[i] Gurock attempts to chronicle the fluctuating levels of halakhic observance within Orthodox Judaism as well as to illuminate the recurrent struggle encountered by generations of American Jews: in the face of modernity, how should one relate to tradition? With few exceptions, Gurock achieves his stated goals. In a word, Orthodox Jews in America is a social history of traditionally religious Jews in the United States.
BY: Jacob J. Schacter.
After having lived in the United States of America for more than three hundred and fifty years, it is fair to assert that Jews have flourished in this country. Although the religious discrimination and intolerance that faced the initial group of Sefaradim who arrived here in 1654 persisted more or less for over a century, the situation of Jews significantly improved after the founding of our country in 1776 and has only gotten better with the passage of time. Jews in the United States have achieved great heights in all areas of endeavor – socially, culturally, economically, politically, and also religiously.
But the very reality of freedom, democracy, tolerance, and pluralism that made all these achievements possible also continues to pose a significant challenge to the future of Judaism in America. Will Jews be able to maintain a meaningful fealty to their Jewish identities and commitments, or will they assimilate in large numbers into the culture around them? America has been good for Jews; will America also be good for Judaism?
An Interview with Rabbi Dr. Moshe D. Tendler
BY: Shaul Seidler-Feller.
What was Orthodox Judaism like in the early part of the 20th century in America? What were the difficulties and/or opportunities presented to Jews coming over to the U.S. from Europe?
I grew up in a small, isolated, ghettoized European town called the Lower East Side of Manhattan. All the adults were first-generation immigrants. They dressed as they had in Europe, they spoke as they had in Europe, but all lost their children to assimilation. America was a treyfer land (a country unsuited to Jewish religious life), and they knew that going in. They were dying in Europe and did not have any hope of continuing there so they came to the U.S. with the understanding that there would not be Judaism here. On Yom Kippur, people bought kibbudim (honors during the service) and came up wearing leather shoes. On Shabbos, the president of my father’s shul, Mr. Rosen, would get upset if the chazzan for Musaf was kvetching around a little bit because he had to get out of shul and go open up his store on 33rd St. They just gave up on observance. It was a complete defeat.
BY: Alex Ozar.
Reviewed Book: David Shatz, Jewish Thought in Dialogue: Essays on Thinkers, Theologies, and Moral Theories (Brighton, MA: Academic Studies Press, 2009). Price: $65.00
I am not aware of any discipline which exhibits more anxiety about whether or not it exists than does Jewish Philosophy.[i] I have it on good word, in fact, that before embarking on their careers, all professors of Jewish Philosophy take a solemn oath (with their right hand resting on a copy of The Guide, of course) that they will never begin teaching a course without first discussing the question of just what Jewish Philosophy is and whether there is any such thing at all. Like Dr. Shatz in Jewish Thought in Dialogue: Essays on Thinkers, Theologies, and Moral Theories,[ii] I will avoid addressing this issue per se; but, also like Dr. Shatz in this book, I would like to explore some closely related matters. According to Aristotle, the “good – the doing well – of a flute-player, a sculptor, or any practitioner of a skill, or generally whatever has a characteristic activity or action, is thought to lie in its characteristic activity.”[iii] If so, called upon as I am to evaluate Dr. Shatz’s work in this book, or whether that work is “good” or “done well,” it would be helpful to determine just what sort of practitioner Dr. Shatz is in regard this book, and what is his characteristic activity. And so I ask: is Dr. Shatz a Jewish philosopher? A Jewish thinker? An analytic philosopher?
In the book’s introduction, Shatz discusses the “putative dichotomy”[iv] between thinkers and philosophers, attempting to narrow the gap between the camps, at least in regard to how we relate to their usefulness. I propose that Dr. Shatz is both a philosopher and a thinker, and therein lie his uniqueness and his characteristic activity. Shatz claims that “philosophy is not the exclusive province of those who meet the alleged criteria for ‘philosophers.’”[v] In parallel, I am claiming that Thought is not the exclusive province of those who do not “show a proper level of familiarity with certain vocabularies and methods…;”[vi] I believe that even well trained, duly appointed academic philosophers can sometimes be Jewish Thinkers. Of course, if being a Jewish Thinker just means being a poor philosopher – and the term is certainly used that way – my claim seems rather dubious. So, to avoid any dispute or confusion, I will simply stipulate a definition: to be a Jewish Thinker is to engage in intelligent discourse of meaning to, and resonance with a Jewish soul.
BY: David Marks and Nathaniel Jaret.
Several years ago, one of the authors of this essay was interning for a lobbying firm in Washington, D.C. His boss, a recent convert to Orthodox Judaism, was known to wear his kippah in public. An elderly congressman with the home zip-code and distinct accent of a Bible-belt state once approached the two in the Capitol building and engaged them in small talk. When introduced to the congressman as a young Jewish intern, the congressman responded with levity, “I was just at the JCC in Savannah, and boy, those bagels and lox were authentically Jewish.” The lox was Jewish?
This past winter break, we were members of the YU Center for the Jewish Future’s delegation to the annual Limmud NY conference. The conference, set in rural Kerhonkson, NY, urged its participants to “explore all the ways [they] connect to Judaism, meet new friends, reconnect with familiar ones, and savor every moment of the temporary community [they created] together.” It is the first of these aims of Limmud NY 2010, aptly subtitled “Jewish Learning Without Limits,” that we wish to explore.
The Limmud organization, first founded in 1980 to serve Great Britain’s Jewish community, has since expanded to its current significance as an international phenomenon that assembles swarms of Jews from South Africa to Croatia, New Zealand to Israel for Jewish learning initiatives. The Limmud organization, in all of its international variegations, is non-denominational on principle, marketing itself as open to anyone interested in all forms of Jewish learning.
BY: Ayelet Mael.
Are we living during messianic times, the first inklings of Aharit ha-Yamim (the End of Days)? The Jewish people have returned to Israel and have worked to build it up, yet, at the same time, there are still countless imperfections to the modern Jewish state they established. Can Israel really be the Holy Land of which Jews have dreamed for centuries – a country that is currently rife with political corruption and is engaged in constant war? This question, which very much probes the minds of contemporary Jews, especially those who are considering making aliyyah, has a conceptual precedent in another debate that ensued a century ago: was Theodor Herzl, the father of modern political Zionism and the one who paved the way for the establishment of the Jewish state, the Messiah?
At first glance, the very notion that Herzl could be the Messiah seems preposterous. How can one suggest that an assimilated, non-observant Jew like him could possibly fill the role of the Jewish Messiah, a character who usually elicits images of an old rebbe, a great talmid hakham, or a prophet? In contrast to such images, research shows that Herzl probably decorated a Christmas tree every year in his home, never circumcised his only son, urged his children to recite Christian prayers at night, and even offered the Roman ruler to convert all Jews to Christianity in exchange for an end to anti-Semitism.[i] Could this really have been the Messiah that Jews have dreamed of for centuries?
BY: Chesky Kopel.
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”[i]
BY: Ori Kanefsky.
In this article, I would like to address two phenomena that take place in our synagogues: “Kiddush Clubs” and “talking during davening.” I present these two phenomena not to evaluate them in and of themselves, but rather to examine some of the critical responses to each of them. Whether one agrees or disagrees with the conclusions of these reactions, I believe, they should be viewed as representative of a larger mode of critical response and of a wider trend, a trend that I find saddening and unfortunate.
The first phenomenon is that of “Kiddush Clubs.” As summarized on Wikipedia, “Kiddush Club” is “a slang term applied wherever an informal group of people leave a synagogue’s sanctuary during Jewish services on Shabbat (Saturday) morning to congregate, make kiddush (frequently over liquor) and socialize.”[i] One can imagine that the rise of these groups has troubled many synagogue attendees and, especially, the leaders of those synagogues. After all, this practice seems to deliver a message of disinterest in the services and disregard for the sanctity of the synagogue.
BY: Chaya Citrin.
The issue of confidentiality in American law and in Halakhah brings to the forefront a seeming clash between the freedom of religious expression and the simultaneous obligation to follow all American laws. This clash is largely reconcilable, however, since in most instances, an observer of Halakhah can adhere to this country’s laws governing confidentiality. This article surveys the basic concept of confidentiality as defined by both the American legal system and Halakhah. The survey takes into account issues such as freedom of speech, defamation, and professional confidentiality. This article then focuses on the application of these concepts to professional relationships that are subject to confidentiality, such as the physician-patient and clergy-penitent. This analysis illuminates similarities that the legal systems share regarding the divulging of confidences. At the same time, it brings to light fundamental differences that exist between the two systems in regard to spreading true, negative information and in regard to professional confidentiality.
The issue of confidentiality in Halakhah is founded upon a number of Torah laws. The Sefer Mitsvot Gadol (Semag), in its count of prohibitions, lists lashon ha-ra (gossip), rekhilut (tale-bearing), and motsi shem ra (defamation) together as one prohibition.[i] Rambam,[ii] however, distinguishes between the three and lists them as individual prohibitions.[iii] He asserts that lashon ha-ra consists of sharing true negative information about a person for no purpose, and rekhilut constitutes reporting back to a person the gossip that has been spoken about him or her. Motsi shem ra, on the other hand, is the relating of false, negative information about a person. The Hafets Hayyim develops the idea that the prohibition against lashon ha-ra, of divulging true negative information, is suspended in circumstances in which a constructive purpose (to’elet) may be served and in which the requirements of to’elet[iv] are met.[v]
BY: Shlomo Zuckier.
This tribute to R. Yehuda Amital, zts”l and his legacy will begin on a personal note. I studied in R. Amital’s yeshivah (Yeshivat Har Etzion) and heard dozens of shi’urim and sihot from him during my time there. Following his passing on July 9, I have felt compelled to further examine his writings and ideas. In this attempt to portray his most striking qualities and the character traits that made him unique, I hope to fairly present his hashkafic oeuvre and not shortchange or misconstrue his positions in any way.
R. Yehuda Amital (originally Yehuda Klein) was born in Transylvania in 1924. He studied in yeshivah for several years before being sent to a work camp during the Holocaust. After being liberated in 1944, he departed to Israel and continued learning in Yeshivat Hevron, by then located in Yerushalayim. After studying under the tutelage of R. Isser Zalman Meltzer and marrying his granddaughter, R. Amital taught for several years at Yeshivat ha-Darom. In 1969, he founded Yeshivat Har Etzion (known colloquially as “the Gush”), where he served as Rosh Yeshivah (following 1971, he was co-Rosh Yeshivah alongside R. Aharon Lichtenstein) until 2008.
| © 2010 Kol Hamevaser. | Webmaster: Ariel Krakowski (Blog, Textbook Website) | Suffusion WordPress theme by Sayontan Sinha |