Rabbi Landsberg's Blog

4 out of 5 Theologians Recommend

If a wave of theologians in the 1950s, post-Shoah world proclaimed the death of God, then it is only fitting that theology too would soon receive its own eulogy.  This week in the Forward there was a provocative piece by Rabbi Elliot Cosgrove entitled, "Where Have All the Theologians Gone?"  He argues that, "We are so focused on Israel, antisemitism and intermarriage that we have come to ignore the linchpin for all discussions on Jewish continuity — namely, a compelling case for Jewish belief."

Personally, I was struck by the list of theologians whose passing [or whose prime has passed] Cosgrove mourns:  Eugene Borowitz, Neil Gillman, Yitz Greenberg, David Hartman, Harold Kushner.  In the 16 years since I entered rabbinic school, I have had the pleasure of studying with all but one [Harold Kushner].  Each has had great influence on my own thinking--though I certainly have not seen eye to eye with them all.   I am returning this summer to begin again a 3 year cycle of study at The Shalom Hartman Institute in Jerusalem [The Rabbinic Leadership Initiative]; though I will be studying more with David Hartman's son Donniel, David's influence is still greatly felt. 

Is Jewish theology dead?  I hope not.  Yet this may not be the time of its blossoming.  Cosgrove is correct; we are as a community distracted by immediate needs and threats, often unable or unwilling to pause and reflect on the larger picture.  Will the Jewish people be able to survive the challenges and assimilatory power of diaspora without a return to theology?  Probably not as we know it.  The purpose of Jews is not just to exist or survive, but to be an instrument of the divine will as refracted through Torah as best we can understand/interpret it.  The more secular version of this can be seen in the moves towards tikkun olam - recasting Jews as an essential agent in the struggle for social change in our world. Whichever way you cut it there is always a need to understand the role of Jews in the diaspora as more than just an ethnicity. We make demands of ourselves and other Jews that will only be valid if they can be traced back to a coherent world view. 

The challenges of our age, therefore, are very different to those faced by the post war generation. For the Jew today the question is not one of secularism versus faith.  Rather, it is one of finding a coherent and compelling Jewish identity within this world in which global concerns are paramount (hunger, HIV ) and other faith traditions are sometimes felt to speak more directly to the heart/soul (thus, the rise of the so-called "Bu-Jew," the Buddhist Jew).   I hope Cosgrove's pessimism proves to be misplaced.

BTW, read the comments on his article; many points are well taken. 

No More "Love You Forever"--Jewish Mothers and Jewish Books

I have nothing against Robert Munsch per se, but my children will not be listening to his story of eternal maternal love as a bedtime book if I can help it.  The "why?" (or, the "why ever not!?!" that I've already heard from a few) is not especially pertinent to this posting...though I'd be happy to rail against this and Shel Silverstein's The Giving Tree should you truly want to know.  But there are two links about mothers and books that I did want to direct your way.

The first is a short piece by new mom Emily Bazelon (senior editor of Slate.com and contributing editor of Legal Affairs) about a recently published book, You Never Call! You Never Write! A History of the Jewish Mother, by Joyce Antler.  While Bazelon does not make much comment, her piece includes an informative, funny and (at least on one occasion) lewd slide show about various portrayals of Jewish mothers.  While I regularly had glitches and could not see slides 8-10, it is still worthwhile.  You can access it here.

The second is something I only recently came across--the podcast edition of London's 2007 Jewish Book Week.  You can listen to fascinating conversations between Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks and famed intellectual Leon Wieseltier, Martin Amis and Christopher Hitchens, and many others.  You can either access it via your iTunes store (search "London Jewish Book Week") or the online Jewish Book Week programme. 

And with that said, I better get back to "Hop on Pop"--Noa is waiting!

Reductio ad Hitlerum, Testimony of a Non-Zionist (and other such stuff)

Shavua tov! Time to start a new week and no better way to do so than by spending some time at Jewcy, currently chock full of interesting pieces.  There is one by Michael Weiss berating historian and journalist Ian Buruma. It is hard to miss it: besides calling Buruma's recent writing "full-tilt stupid," it is entitled, The Decline and Fall of Ian Buruma. 

I do not, in fact, agree with much of Weiss' critique of Buruma, and I question his understanding of the history of Jews within the Austro-Hungarian empire.  He seems quick to deny Jews' affection for Franz Joseph - read this article in the NYRB for a more nuanced view of the Jews' relationship to Franz Joseph (subscription required though if you would like to read it I will have copies available in the office).  In part he bases his view on the support of some Bolshevik Jews for the communist Bela Kun.  Kun certainly had Jewish support, but that is a far cry from proving that all Jews were supporters of Kun.  That is a syllogism.

Further, calling old Jews who had affection for Franz Joseph--who thrice rejected the appointment of the blatantly anti-semitic mayor Karl Lueger--"quislings" is a little strong. Quisling was a Norwegian fascist leader who, through his collaboration with the Nazis, has become a byword for collaborators and traitors. I would be loathe to use this accusation so casually.   

Yet it all makes for interesting read and--as a small treat on top of that--it introduced me to Leo Strauss' concept of reductio ad Hitlerum. 

Also on Jewcy you can read David Klinghoffer's rejection of Zionism in his piece, Why I am not a Zionist (But Christians Should Be).  His words challenge Jews to clarify their stance on Zionism as opposed to a support of Israel based on the reality of so many Jews living there.  Again, read this for yourself and decide; I will simply make a note or two here.  Klinghoffer's particular understanding of tikkun olam, which he ascribes to Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch, is one which is dependent upon Jews living amongst the nations, rather than in a state of their own.  He states:

This is the famous idea of tikun olam, repairing the world. In the traditional understanding, tikun olam means acting to lead humanity toward a deeper understanding of God and His laws. Hirsch argued that this is “a God-given destiny which…overshadows the existence of a state.”

The concept is central to Judaism. It is embodied in the famous instruction God gave to the Jews upon their arrival at Mt. Sinai, where they would receive the Ten Commandments: “You shall be to me a kingdom of priests” (Exodus 19:6). Jews are literally intended to minister to the world as priests, teaching and inspiring humanity. Merely to have a state, to be like other peoples, is not our destiny.

One does not have to be especially Torah-literate to know that "the famous instruction" was given to the Jews together with the command to enter the land and live apart from other peoples.  Therefore, one can reasonably assume that God did not see an inherent contradiction between Jews living apart with national autonomy and being a kingdom of priests.  The question, then, is how one views history, the relationship between Zionism and the messianic promise of return to the land, and the Zionist belief that the authority of the state is necessary for the current well-being of the Jewish people.

Hope you enjoy the read and have a great week. 

Six-Day War roundup

There have been a few articles marking the 40th anniversary of The Six Day War that I want to share, in case you haven't had an opportunity to see them.

In no particular order is the Economist's briefing on 40 years since Israel's astonishing victory. You can read it here -  It's a succinct but painful read. For a contrary view to the Economist read Steve Plocker of Yediot Ahronoth (Ynetnews) on how The Economist is wrong.  In The New Yorker, David Reminck reviews Tom Segev's latest book "1967" and explains "Why the Six-Day War is still being fought". The article is as much a meditation on Israeli revisionist historians and is fascinating.  To wrap up, in case you haven't had your fill, read this op-ed by Tom Segev in the New York Times here.

There is so much more to say, and we should/shall discuss it.  But it is approaching Shabbat, so I will simply close by inviting you to join us on Thursday June 21st for a meeting of Po'alei Tzion, Emanu-El's Israel Task Force at Temple Emanu-El.  However we asses Israel's current state of affairs (I trust by now my perspective is clear), let no one doubt, whatever the challenges, that the future of the Jews and Judaism runs through Israel.

Are Those Tzitzit Ralph Lauren?

I was reading one of my favourite online magazines (Slate) when I stumbled on this article about Fashion and the Jews, called Shmatte Chic.  The article gives a loving synopsis of the history of fashion and the Jews, in light of the success of the Brazilian Jewish designer Alexandre Hershcovitch.  The quote that made me smile:

The 35-year-old, whose Jewish grandparents immigrated to Brazil from Poland in the early 1900s, attended a yeshiva and enthusiastically points to his religious background as an inspiration. "I was influenced by the modest Jewish attitude of dress, of not showing the body."

My grandfather (z'l), who was a shoe manufacturer, a proud Conservadox Jew and a man who wore his hat with a rakish European style, is--I am sure--smiling as well.