קיימו וקיבלו: הרהורים ערב פורים תשע"ב

Agnon, Jewish Studies and Footnote: A Reply to Hebrew University

Over twenty years ago, on a particularly hot Summer’s afternoon, I found myself on the fabled sixth floor of Harvard’s Widener Library; home of the world’s largest collection of Judaica (excluding manuscripts) and the watering hole of academic Jewish scholars from all over the world. I was still deeply involved in writing my dissertation and had traveled to Cambridge sans famille, to complete another chapter.

Taking a break from my labors, I wandered about the stacks and struck up a conversation with Professor Shmuel Safrai ז"ל of the Hebrew University (Israel Prize 2002). I had never met him before, and found him to be an engaging person, a gracious scholar and a true תלמיד חכם. He was also a wonderful raconteur, who kept me spell-bound with tales of well-known Jerusalemites that he had known, such as his rebbe, R. Zvi Pesach Frank זצ"ל.

One story, in particular, has stayed with me, and made an ever deeper impression upon me. Safrai was a resident of the Jerusalem neighborhood of Talpiot and, as such was a neighbor of Nobel Prize winner (Literature 1966), S. Y. Agnon. Agnon, whose literary brilliance, inter-textual depth and profundity of thought were legendary, had a long history of conflicted, acerbic relations with the members of the faculty of the Hebrew University. On the day after the prize award was announced, Safrai met Agnon on the street and congratulated him on this signal, international honor. Agnon, with his renowned sense of sarcastic irony, replied: ‘Perhaps now, the Sages of Mount Scopus, will take me seriously!’ (אולי עכשיו יתחשבו בי, חכמי הר הצופים). [There is irony in the very formulation, since the Mount Scopus campus had been abandoned in 1948 and was then a small military enclave in the Jordanian-occupied Jerusalem. It would only be restored after Israel's victory in the Six Day War. a year later.]

I recall being struck by Agnon’s wry, bitter comment. Why, I asked myself, did a Nobel Laureate whose works are standard fare in every Israeli school and everywhere that modern Hebrew Literature is read and studied, care about the opinion of the Hebrew University faculty? Why did someone whose writings served as an important mediator of Jewish ideas and concepts to the broader Jewish Community, and beyond (e.g. Days of Awe); a person who was an important facilitator of the Great Jewish awakening of the 1970's and 1980's; why was such a great figure burdened by the question of his acceptance by a coterie of academics?

As the years passed, as I became acutely aware of the psycho-dynamics of Israeli academe and cultural life, I came to more clearly appreciate the source of Agnon’s angst.

Hebrew University regards itself as the only university in Israel. Historically, it fought tooth and nail to prevent the establishment of all of the other institutions of Higher Learning in this country and, generally, has controlled the Council on Higher Education, the Israel Academy of Science, the leading Hebrew Academic Jourals and the Israel Prize. The other universities (Tel Aviv, Bar Ilan, Haifa, Ben Gurion, and the Technion) are treated with a mixture of supercilious disdain, tempered with a certain pitying noblesse oblige. Sadly, these other institutions have long bought into this position and writhed in anguish as a result of their 'inferiority complex.'

Ordinarily, I would not have devoted a posting to another seamy tale of academic intrigue, if only because the viciousness of academic politics (especially its Israeli variant) is often a tribute to its inconsequentiality. However, recently matters have branched into questions of substance that require comment. Here, moreover, I must emphasize that my reason for writing is not institutionally based (even though that consideration is not irrelevant, as will soon become apparent). Rather, I am moved to write as a result of years of meditating on the specific point at issue. But, I am getting ahead of myself.

Ever since it was released, Joseph Cedar’s Oscar nominated film ‘Footnote’ (הערת שוליים) has had Israeli academe (and its Jewish Studies elements, in particular) in a tizzy. Its painfully accurate evocation of the darker side of Israeli academic life is obviously based upon composites of real figures and events. (Discussions of these are found here, here, here and especially here). One of the central themes of the film is the methodological battle between a father and son, Professors Eliezer and Uriel Shkolnick, both of whom are members of the Hebrew University Talmud Department. Shkolnick père is a classic Talmudic philologist who has devoted his life to the painstaking reconstruction of an alternate version of the Jerusalem Talmud. Shkolnick fils, on the other hand, harnesses a broad gamut of academic disciplines to understand and interpret the religious and cultural world of the Sages. The father has nothing but contempt for the broader, ostensibly more interesting, inter-disciplinary and interpretive method that his son has adopted.

Last week’s Makor Rishon had an article about the film in which a prominent member of the Hebrew University Talmud Department was interviewed. He acknowledged, and made a cogent case for, the almost exclusive focus that his department has upon Talmudic philology, viz. the careful correlation of manuscripts and testimonia, with the goal of recreating the most exact version possible of the classics of rabbinic literature, before attempting substantive textual interpretation. The speaker admitted that this focus is not very popular, or interesting. As he put it, 'Our goal is to interpret Talmudic texts in a literal manner (פשטנית).‘ We strive for truth and not necessarily for an innovative reading (חידוש).'

At this juncture, the interviewee launched a blisteringly vicious attack on Bar Ilan University's Talmud Department, and its One Year MA program. His intemperate remarks, as the official university response noted, are full of inexactitudes and distortions. His vicious comments constitute a specious and intemperate assault on the academic and intellectual integrity of another institution.

I know this to be true, because I teach in that program, as do the very best members of my department (most of whom were either trained in Hebrew University's Talmud Department, or have very close ties thereto). In fact, in this regard, I am the exception. (Harvard, apparently, is not very highly regarded in the low oxygen atmosphere of certain portions of Mount Scopus). In any event, having taught at Yale, New York University and Yeshiva University; lectured at universities throughout the United States and Europe, I can assert that the level of instruction is as high as that of any other department (including that which the interviewee represents).

Let us, however, ignore the ad institutionem aspect of these scurrilous remarks. The speaker is, likely, terrified (as were Virginians in the Age of Jackson and the Israeli WASPs, after the rise of Likud) by the potential loss of its hegemony. After all, Bar Ilan's MA attracted over 45 students this year from all over Israel, and its prospects look even better for next year. The supercilious dismissal of the program, thus, is a typical expression of Hebrew University exclusivism (of the type that worked so effectively for R. Elazar b. Arakh or the Babylonian Ga'onim after the death of Rav Hai Gaon in 1038).

There is, however, a deeper issue at stake here.

I refer to the question of a university's educational mandate, in general, and that of Israeli universities, in particular. It is this issue that lies at the core of this Hebrew University professor's attack (for academic researchers do not dispute the importance of philology for scholarship).

Bar Ilan's One Year MA program is a non-research degree. Its stated goal is to provide qualified students with a high level of literacy in the full panoply of rabbinic literature and its history. The program includes everything from the philology and taxonomy of classic Rabbinic texts, to my course on the interaction between Halakhah, Kabbalah and Philosophy. Its point is to create educated men and women, and to deepen their knowledge with a sophisticated appreciation of the main stream of Jewish Life and Creativity, viz. the Talmud and Jewish Law. It achieves that goal incomparably well, as borne out by the high enrollment and the enthusiastic responses on the students.

This MA program, so derisively dismissed by this interviewee, is an expression of the deep and abiding sense of obligation on Bar Ilan's part, to responsibly share the treasures uncovered by Jewish Studies, with the world outside of the Ivory Tower (cf. Guide for the Perplexed II, 37). Fulfilling that obligation has absolutely nothing to do with the formal research undertaken by its faculty, or with the high quality of work demanded of its research-track graduate students. Again, it betokens the deep and abiding commitment of the institution and its faculty to its role as a Jewish institution, in a Jewish State that is, at present, experiencing a thorough-going Jewish Renaissance.

Jewish Studies belong to the entire Jewish People, and fill an essential role in its ongoing development and survival in its ancestral homeland.They must be (and can be) made available to all, in an accessible idiom, without sacrificing one whit of their intellectual integrity. This was a central lesson that was imparted to me by my own teacher, Professor Isadore Twersky זצ"ל, at Harvard (who, ironically, Hebrew University claims as one of its own). (Indeed, he believed that these were, with some prominent exceptions, part of what one might term 'Torah in the wider sense.') I have absolutely no doubt that he was right, and it is that conviction that vivifies me professionally.

So, the most appropriate response to Agnon's question to Safrai, as to this more recent assault on Bar Ilan, should be: 'Who cares?' The approval or disapproval of arbiters of Truth and Integrity are only of interest if one accepts their over-weening status. Otherwise, they are mere mortals whose opinions should be evaluated, respectfully, and then either accepted or rejected on their merits (and not based upon their authors. cf. R. Avraham Maimuni's מאמר על דרשות חז"ל). Sub specie aeternitatis, in the eyes of the only real Arbiter of Truth, there is no doubt as to whose contribution was of greater worth.

In Loving Memory, Betty Birnbaum Woolf זכרונה לברכה

Tonight is my mother's twenty-first yahrzeit. She was, by all accounts, a remarkable, strong, intelligent and loving wife to my Dad and mother to three, not easy to raise, sons. The more time that passes I wonder at her strength of character and faith. She was eight years younger than I when my Dad died, and she was left to carry on alone. Very few people were there to help her, and yet she persevered and prevailed; with dignity, with presence and propriety. 'Always do the right and proper thing' was one of her central lessons. She was also a lot of fun.

God put her through many trials. She wasn't able to go to College, because she had to work to help her struggling immigrant parents. She once told me how her paycheck went straight to my Bubbe for food. She struggled with my father through good times and bad, with good humor and always shielding us from adversity. She created a Yiddishe heim, which had kashrut, Shul, Shabbat, and Yom Tov. And while we were not strictly Orthodox, I challenge any Shomer Shabbos person to match the warmth and yiddishkeit which characterized the home she made for us. When she was struck with cancer, she faced it straight on and lived to the fullest...and beat it for ten years. And then, when the disease returned, and she felt that it prevented her from having a dignified life, she was ready to return to her Creator, with dignity. As she breathed her last breath in the hospice, and I said Shema into her ear, she was calling to her mother; who I assume had come to bring her home.

Today, parts of my own life are extremely difficult, while others are wonderful. I struggle with the question why evil people are allowed to prosper, and derive courage and inspiration, perspective and strength from my mother's life and example to appreciate the blessings God has given me, and not to empower the bad things that come my way. In the long run, they matter not. She used to say that evil can only hurt you if you let it. She never let it, and blessed everyone whom she touched with her example.

תהי נשמתה צרורה בצרור החיים ותהי מנוחתה כבוד.

על הדרת נשים: ראיון שלי ברשת ב

הערב התראיינתי לתכנית 'הערכת מצב' ברשת ב, בנושא הבוער של הדרת נשים בחברה הישראלית. הראיון במלואו נמצא כאן (בין דקה 14:53 ל22:23). אולי בגלל רגישות הנושא הייתי יותר עצבני מהרגיל ושומעים את זה בדבריי. לטעמי, העברתי את המסרים העיקריים שרציתי: 1) החילוניים תופסים טרמפ על נושא האלימות החרדית הקיצונית כדי לקדם את סדר יומם הפוסט-מודרני והאנטי-דתי. לכן, אלה מביננו שמתנגדים למחיקתן/גירושן של נשים מהציבוריות הישראלית חייבית שלא ליפול למלכודת התעמולתית שהשמאל מציב לנו. 2) אין תקדים ביהדות לגירוש הנשים מהמרחב הציבורי בצורה כה גורפת. לא הספקתי לומר שמידת מעורבותן של נשים בחיים מחוץ לבית היא פועל יוצא של תנאי החברה הכללית בכל דור ובכל מקום. 3) יש עימות חזיתית בין המתירנות המינית של העידן הנוכחי לבין יחסה היותר שמרני ומאופק של היהדות למיניות ולרצונה למנוע התנהגות לא נאותה בין אנשים. 4) הקפדה על הרהור עבירה מוטלחת על הגבר ולא על האישה. כאן, נדמה לי שדבריי בנושא קול אישה וכדו' היו שטחיים מדי, כפועל יוצא מקוצר הזמן.

למדתי שוב לקח במגבלות השיח בתקשורת. השתכנעתי עוד יותר כמה חשוב ללמוד להעביר מסרים יהודיים מורכבים בשפה המובנת לכל. לא בטוח שהפעם הצלחתי. יש עוד הרבה עבודה לעשות...

The Unknown Miracle of Hanukkah

A quick survey of the types of lectures, shiurim, articles, and various other discussions of Hanukkah that flood the internet reveals that they focus on two, eminently predictable, motifs: the victory of the Hasmoneans over the Seleucid Greeks and and the miracle of the little cruse of oil, bearing the seal of the High Priest, that lasted eight days instead of one. How do these relate to one another? Why doesn't the Talmud emphasize the military victory? Why do the First Book of Maccabees (IV, 56-59) and Josephus not mention the miracle of the cruse of oil?

All of these questions are important but, in my opinion, they miss a deeper, more central and more resonant miracle that occurred 'in those days at this time of year.' Allow me to explain.

The decrees of Antiochus IV Epiphanes were, in many ways, unparalleled in the history of civilization. Paganism, by its very nature, is extremely eclectic and, by extension, tolerant. The expectation was that everyone would worship and respect everyone else's gods. After all, there were so many gods around, what difference would one more or less make? Over time, given the phenomenological similarity between the various groups of Gods, they became identified with one another. Amun merged with Ra, Zeus merged with Jupiter, and Jupiter merged with Baal; and so on and so on. There was no push, or need, to force anyone to worship other gods. As a result, moreover, the concept of apostasy was almost non-existent. Apostasy was, by definition, non-existent. (Socrates was executed on a charge of atheism i.e. not believing in 'the gods.') The only group in the ancient world that rejected this arrangement was the Jews, who were commanded by God 'not to have any gods besides Me.'

Historians are sharply divided as to why Antiochus decided to wipe out Judaism, to forbid the worship of the One True God, and to force them to worship Zeus Olympus. Whatever his reasons, it is clear that this was the first time that Jews had encountered an out and out attack on Judaism, in its totality. (The affair described in Daniel 3 were a partial precedent, but not long lived. On that occasion, moreover, the Jews were not asked to abandon Judaism but to bow down to an idol. This was, of course, a heinous sin and constituted grounds for martyrdom. It was, however, not on the scale of things that Antiochus and his Jewish Hellenizing supporters conceived.) For the first time, the question of martyrdom arose. Just when and for what infractions was one obligated to die? (The famous determination that one is martyred only when forced to worship idols, murder or submit to sexual immorality was only made in the years before the Bar Kokhba Revolt. Cf. Sanhedrin 74a.)

A. The Beginnings of Kiddush HaShem

There appears to have been little, or no, unanimity on this question. And the initial responses (if we are to trust the stories in I Maccabees) came first from the people:

Ch. 1, 41-50: Moreover king Antiochus wrote to his whole kingdom, that all should be one people, And every one should leave his laws: so all the heathen agreed according to the commandment of the king. Yea, many also of the Israelites consented to his religion, and sacrificed unto idols, and profaned the sabbath. For the king had sent letters by messengers unto Jerusalem and the cities of Juda that they should follow the strange laws of the land,And forbid burnt offerings, and sacrifice, and drink offerings, in the temple; and that they should profane the sabbaths and festival days: And pollute the sanctuary and holy people: Set up altars, and groves, and chapels of idols, and sacrifice swine's flesh, and unclean beasts: That they should also leave their children uncircumcised, and make their souls abominable with all manner of uncleanness and profanation: To the end they might forget the law, and change all the ordinances. And whosoever would not do according to the commandment of the king, he said, he should die.

57-63: And whosoever was found with any the book of the testament, or if any committed to the law, the king's commandment was, that they should put him to death. Thus did they by their authority unto the Israelites every month, to as many as were found in the cities. Now the five and twentieth day of the month they did sacrifice upon the idol altar, which was upon the altar of God. At which time according to the commandment they put to death certain women, that had caused their children to be circumcised. And they hanged the infants about their necks, and rifled their houses, and slew them that had circumcised them.Howbeit many in Israel were fully resolved and confirmed in themselves not to eat any unclean thing. Wherefore the rather to die, that they might not be defiled with meats, and that they might not profane the holy covenant: so then they died.

2Maccabees 6,7-19: And in the day of the king's birth every month they were brought by bitter constraint to eat of the sacrifices; and when the fast of Bacchus was kept, the Jews were compelled to go in procession to Bacchus, carrying ivy. Moreover there went out a decree to the neighbour cities of the heathen, by the suggestion of Ptolemy, against the Jews, that they should observe the same fashions, and be partakers of their sacrifices: And whoso would not conform themselves to the manners of the Gentiles should be put to death. Then might a man have seen the present misery.For there were two women brought, who had circumcised their children; whom when they had openly led round about the city, the babes handing at their breasts, they cast them down headlong from the wall. And others, that had run together into caves near by, to keep the sabbath day secretly, being discovered by Philip, were all burnt together, because they made a conscience to help themselves for the honour of the most sacred day. Now I beseech those that read this book, that they be not discouraged for these calamities, but that they judge those punishments not to be for destruction, but for a chastening of our nation. For it is a token of his great goodness, when wicked doers are not suffered any long time, but forthwith punished. For not as with other nations, whom the Lord patiently forbeareth to punish, till they be come to the fulness of their sins, so dealeth he with us, Lest that, being come to the height of sin, afterwards he should take vengeance of us. And therefore he never withdraweth his mercy from us: and though he punish with adversity, yet doth he never forsake his people. But let this that we at spoken be for a warning unto us. And now will we come to the declaring of the matter in a few words. Eleazar, one of the principal scribes, an aged man, and of a well favoured countenance, was constrained to open his mouth, and to eat swine's flesh. But he, choosing rather to die gloriously, than to live stained with such an abomination, spit it forth, and came of his own accord to the torment.

B. Warfare on Shabbat

The challenge of religious persecution was not the only unparalleled challenge that faced the Jews of Eretz Yisrael. An even more striking example is described in I Maccabees, 2: 31-38:

Now when it was told the king's servants, and the host that was at Jerusalem, in the city of David, that certain men, who had broken the king's commandment, were gone down into the secret places in the wilderness, They pursued after them a great number, and having overtaken them, they camped against them, and made war against them on the Sabbath day. And they said unto them, Let that which ye have done hitherto suffice; come forth, and do according to the commandment of the king, and ye shall live. But they said, We will not come forth, neither will we do the king's commandment, to profane the Sabbath day. So then they gave them the battle with all speed. Howbeit they answered them not, neither cast they a stone at them, nor stopped the places where they lay hid; But said, Let us die all in our innocence: heaven and earth will testify for us, that ye put us to death wrongfully. So they rose up against them in battle on the Sabbath, and they slew them, with their wives and children and their cattle, to the number of a thousand people.

This behavior is problematic, to say the least. What happened to the iron-clad rule that פיקוח נפש דוחה שבת, that saving a human life trumps Sabbath observance? Did the Jews, at the time, think that Kiddush HaShem required dying and not fighting? Did they think that there was a difference between saving a life medically and fighting? Did they think (as one scholar has suggested) that using weapons was forbidden on Shabbat? Or, had it never happened that Jews fought on Shabbat? (This is not so far fetched since, until the nineteenth century, wars were formal affairs carried out in set piece battles by relatively small armies.)

Whatever the explanation, it is clear that many pious people (including rabbis) thought that fighting on Shabbat was forbidden. Something had to be done, and Mattathias acted:

39-42: Now when Mattathias and his friends understood hereof, they mourned for them right sore. And one of them said to another, If we all do as our brethren have done, and fight not for our lives and laws against the heathen, they will now quickly root us out of the earth. At that time therefore they decreed, saying, Whosoever shall come to make battle with us on the Sabbath day, we will fight against him; neither will we die all, as our brethren that were murdered in the secret places. Then came there unto him a company of Hassidim who were mighty men of Israel, even all such as were voluntarily devoted unto the law.

I believe that Mattathias' action was quite extraordinary. In order to understand why, we need to turn to yet another religious challenge that was posed by a happy occasion, the re-dedication of the Temple.

C. The Defiled Stones of the Altar

After the conquest of Jerusalem in Kislev, 165 B.C.E., the author of I Maccabees reports (42-47):

So he chose priests of blameless conversation, such as had pleasure in the law: Who cleansed the sanctuary, and bare out the defiled stones into an unclean place. And when as they consulted what to do with the altar of burnt offerings, which was profaned; They thought it best to pull it down, lest it should be a reproach to them, because the heathen had defiled it: wherefore they pulled it down, And laid up the stones in the mountain of the temple in a convenient place, until there should come a prophet to show what should be done with them. Then they took whole stones according to the law, and built a new altar according to the former.

The altar had, albeit, been destroyed by the Babylonians but it had never been profaned. Two questions had arisen: 1) Can one continue to use the original altar, built in the Days of the Return to Zion? 2) Did the defiled stones retain any sanctity, and thus require respectful disposal, or not? The decision was to rebuild the altar with new stones. However, they could not decide what to do with the old ones. So they put them aside 'until there should come a prophet to show what should be done with them.' If they decided the one question, why not the second? And why wait for a true prophet? (Most of the Talmudic questions that are left over for Elijah's coming are theoretical.)

One could object that the question of the final disposition of the old altar was not a burning concern, so that it could be delayed. Later in I Maccabees, however, we find a passage that sheds a different light on the desire for a 'true prophet.'

After finally defeating the Greeks, and attaining national autonomy as a client state of the Seleucid Empire, I Maccabees 14, 35-41) reports:

The people therefore sang the acts of Simon, and unto what glory he thought to bring his nation, made him their governor and chief priest, because he had done all these things, and for the justice and faith which he kept to his nation, and for that he sought by all means to exalt his people....Also that the Jews and priests were well pleased that Simon should be their governor and high priest for ever, until there should arise a faithful prophet;

The combined role of rule (ethnarchos) and High Priest was unprecedented, and controversial (cf. Kiddushin 66a and Ramban, Gen. 49, 10 s.v. וזה היה). Notice, though, that the Jews were unsure of their actions and made them conditional upon the arrival of a true prophet, who would decide whether their action was legitimate, or not.

D. The Miracle of תורה שבעל פה

The Hanukkah story occurred less than three hundred years after the cessation of prophecy, in the time of Malakhi. Up to that time, it appears that (with all due respect to the Rambam) prophets played an integral role in interpreting the Torah, and did not confine themselves to exhortations and predictions. Consider, when the Jews wanted to know whether they should continue to fast on the Tenth of Tevet, the Ninth of Tammuz, the Ninth of Av and the Third of Tishrei, they asked the prophet Zekhariah (Zekh. 8, 19). Once prophecy ceased, Judaism became totally a religion devoted to the interpretation of the record of Revelation, i.e. the Torah, as a way of knowing what God desires of man. This worked well during the fourth and third centuries.

In the second century, however, questions arose and decisions had to be made for which there was no precedent, no obvious verse, and no Divine guidance. Mattathias and his generation had to courageously step forward and take responsibility to try to discern what the Torah teaches when one is required to eat non-kosher food, desecrate the Sabbath, delay circumcision, dispose of the sacred stones of the altar, create a form of government never seen in Israel prior to that time, and yes, to create a new holiday with absolutely no Divine mandate (direct or indirect).

They were well aware of the risks involved. They yearned for the appearance of a true prophet in those unparalleled, troubled times. Yet, they knew they must be courageous and act for Torah, out of the conviction that the Torah must have an answer for each new circumstance. To deny that would be blasphemy.

The unknown miracle of Hanukkah, then, is the spiritual courage of the Sages of that generation to stand up and be counted. They didn't cower in the Battei Midrash and say that they can't, they aren't worthy and so on. The times demanded heroism. God and His Torah demanded heroism. So the stood up and acted heroically, all the while aware that the True Prophet might disagree. In his absence, though, they would do their best for Fear of God and Love of God.

The Rav זצ"ל used to say that Hanukkah is the holiday of Torah she-b'al Peh. I never really understood why.

I think that now I do.

חג אורים שמח!!!

But Israel is Home: A Guest Response to Jeffrey Goldberg

The Jewish World is all aghast at Israel's aggressive campaign to get Israeli expatriates to return home. The lead has been taken by Atlantic reporter and blogger, Jeffrey Goldberg. I am, personally, conflicted about the campaign. One, impassioned and thoughtful response is by a young friend whose blog posting I repost here:

Dear Mr. Goldberg, That's Right. America IS No Place For A Proper Jew

by Chana Rivka Poupko

I have 2 great passions in life and hope to one day develop a career in both fields.

The first is advertising, the second, Jewish identity. So when I came across the latest campaigns targeted towards Israelis in the U.S. telling them to come home, I could not ignore it, and I definitely could not ignore it after the uproar which it created amongst American Jewry. There is an on going argument amongst advertisers- is all publicity good? Some believe that even bad publicity is good, since it gets the company's name out in the public. I am glad this campaign is creating such an uproar. This gives us a chance to finally discuss this important topic that has been relevant for the past 2,000 years.

One cannot find on YouTube the ad with the child saying it's Christmas, when he actually should be saying it's Channuka. It seems that the ad had hit an exposed nerve in the body of American Jewry.
Jeffrey Goldberg at his blog writes ("Netanyahu Government Suggests Israelis Avoid Marrying American Jews"):

The idea, communicated in these ads, that America is no place for a proper Jew, and that a Jew who is concerned about the Jewish future should live in Israel, is archaic, and also chutzpadik

I would like to tell Mr. Goldberg, “That's right. America IS no place for a proper Jew. And any Jew who is concerned about the Jewish future should not be living abroad. And, by the way, chutzpah in Israel is not a negative term. It’s having the nerve to say what needs to be said, no matter how unpleasant, in this case to tell Israelis who have gone to American for the “good life,” that they may have sold their birthright for a mess of lentil soup.”

Other bloggers have written about the scare tactic in this campaign. The question arises: “why hasn't the campaign gone down a calmer road, convincing these Israelis to come back home for reasons like, sunshine, a low unemployment rate, real felaflels? Using fear in a campaign is a very strong tactic, but most- sometimes it's all that works. Sunshine, good food and a steady economy, may not be cards strong enough to play.

I was talking to a relative who moved to Israel a few years ago. We spoke after she had some trouble in a few stores that day and of course she began the classic "Oh, in the states that would never had happened". But then she paused and said "it’s moments like this that remind you that you move to Israel for spiritual reasons, not materialistic reasons." Anyone who’s been following the Israeli news over the last 6 months knows that financially life in Israel is not simple for many of us.

During college I've heard my friends saying that in a few years they hoped to live somewhere outside the land of Israel. Some of my friends found out that I'm an American citizen and I can get up and leave anytime I wish to do so. They've told me I'm crazy for staying here when I have an opportunity to just get on a plane and not live here anymore. But those are just some of my friends.

On the other hand, I have a fair number of friends who've made aliya. These friends have chosen to voluntarily join the army and start a life here without their family. I greatly admire these friends. Truth be told, if you look at their actions through materialistic eyes – then yes, they are crazy. But when you know that moving to Israel is not immigrating to another country, but something much deeper than that, the Jews who live out of this great country, may be the crazy ones.

One does not immigrate to Israel, one makes aliya, and one is not an immigrant in Israel, one is an Oleh. Aliya, and Oleh come from a root that means "going up". Moving to Israel is a difficult but an uplifting experience for your soul, from what I've heard. I myself cannot share my experience of making aliya, I was lucky enough to be born here. But my parents have made aliya 30 years ago and everyday I thank God for that.

Not too long ago, a friend who made aliya asked what my favorite thing about Israel is. I had no answer. Later that night I went to bed asking myself that question over and over again. I realized I don’t have a favorite thing about life in Israel. Life in Israel is my favorite thing. Knowing that I am lucky enough to be living in the land that has been promised to my forefathers thousands of years ago is an astonishing thought to me. But living here is not amazing just because of historical reasons. A Jew's spirituality is not whole while living out of the Land of Israel. Although G-d dwells everywhere, his presence is strongest in the land of Israel. A Jew is closest to G-d while being in the Land of Israel. Making aliya is not just for religious people. Aliya is for anyone who understands the importance of Jews living in their home land.

Julie Wiener ("Israel To Ex-Pats: Come Home Before Your Kids Start Celebrating Xmas") suggests that a parody campaign should be done, presenting the "dangers" of aliya Americans making aliya and producing "bizarre" offspring who will call their mother "Ima". Wiener is afraid that God forbid, these offspring will cut in line in the super market. In life one should keep a sense of proportion. On the micro level, cutting in line is disturbing to me; on the macro level – Jews living outside of Israel is much more disturbing to me. I feel sorry for Jews whose ancestors prayed for two thousand years to be able to return to the Land, and now that we can, they don’t. I try to imagine to what these people's ancestors would say if 200 years ago they'd been told their grandchildren would have the possibility to live in Israel, yet chose to ignore it.

It seems that those frightened by this campaign are threatened by the thought that someone actually is telling them that living out of Israel undermines Jewish and Israeli identity. You do not have to be a professor of sociology to know that immigration creates a new identity for immigrants and if not for them, then for their off spring. The percent of Jewish assimilation is incredibly high. The number of Jews in the world today is the same as it's been in 1980, which means, we're still having children, but were disappearing too. One can say they will make the effort in order to keep his/ hers Jewish identity, but our forefathers said the same thing when they moved out of the shtetel. We all know that did not last for long.

Every day I pray for all Jews to realize the importance of life in Israel. How can we claim this land is ours while we're still living all over the world? Why should the common Joe Smith believe in the Jew's right to the land of Israel, while half of his colleagues are Jews, not living in the Promised Land?

Living in this great country may be a crazy thing to do, but still, I know this is where I'm suppose to be, and that's what keeps here.

Chana Rivka Poupko is a 24 year old Jerusalemite; she is a PR intern and hopes to see the day when all Jews move to Israel. Besides that she has lots of love of world Jewry and cares about their future. She'd love it if her kids will have Israeli chutzpa instead of having no Jewish identity.

My Latest Article: The Devil's Hoofs

Everyone's heard of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, though most people haven't read the actual book (it's actually quite boring). It has become a symbol of the primal dread of a Jewish cabal ( a word derive from Kabbalah) scheming to take over the world.

Recently, Boston University's Center for Jewish Studies and Center for Millennial Studies published a collection of articles addressing the origins, use and contemporary valence of the Protocols.

My contribution (available here) examines the diabolization of Jewish Literature, especially the Talmud in Christian Europe (and now in the Muslim Word).

The Rav Soloveitchik Siddur: Some Conflicted Reflections

This week the OU and Koren Press launched the The Koren Mesorat HaRav Siddur . I have yet to see the volume. However, if it is anything like it predecessors (the Yamim Noraim Mahzorim and the Kinnot), then I am sure it is a work of aesthetic beauty and spiritual power. It could hardly be otherwise, as it presents us with the inestimable interpretations and insights of מורי ורבי, Rav Soloveitchik זצ"ל on the liturgy. Prayer, the unmediated encounter with the Master of the Universe, was a central theme of the Rav's writings, and lies at the core of his understanding of the religious experience. This fact should not be under estimated. The Rav revolutionized our understanding and appreciation of prayer.

First, he restored prayer to the world of Yeshiva spirituality. Davening in Volozhin was notable for the brevity with which it was marked. There, the Study of Torah reigned supreme and the time allotted there to was maximized. The Rav, whose all encompassing involvement in Talmud Torah was no less intense than that of his forebears in Volozhin and Brisk, made extraordinary efforts to sensitize his disciples to the text of the siddur and the riches it contains. By so doing, he balanced out the perennial tension between Prayer and Talmud Torah as competing spiritual activities, a tension that marks Judaism from the beginning.

The Rav also made prayer both accessible and desirable for the intelligent modern whose daily life mires him in quotidian trifles, and renders him obtuse to Eternity, and to his Creator. He did this in his inimitable way by harnessing the totality of Torah and Western Culture to explicate both Halakhic discussions concerning the commandment to pray, and the text of the prayers themselves (and Worship of the Heart is but a foretaste of a much larger discussion).

So, the publication of this Siddur should be greeted with enthusiasm and gratitude to the many people involved in its production.

However.....

I am concerned that in all of the blessed publication of this material, תורת הרב הכלכך קרובה ללבי, a central part of his teachings will get lost: study.

The Rav did not write a commentary to the liturgy. He studied, very closely and creatively, the mahzor and the siddur, piyyut and tefillah. It was in the interaction between mind and heart, in the stretching of the mind and the invocation of interpretive creativity that the Rav was in his metier. He demanded not only results but process, from both himself and his students. I do not believe he was interested in a Soloveitchik canon for Divrei Torah and ווארטלטך, but rather to show the way to ever deeper understanding of the words of the liturgy, which will resound in the heart of the Jew as he/she undertakes the challenge of prayer.

So, in the end, whether this prayerbook (as with other collections of the Rav's interpretations) is truly Massoret ha-Rav (ie in the tradition of Rav Soloveitchik) will be determined not by its publication but by how it is used.

Dabber Ivrit ve-Hivreta

This week's Makor Rishon had an article about an organization called ESRA, which helps Olim from English speaking countries to acclimatize in Israel (aka קליטה). The article highlighted an aspect of contemporary Aliyah from English-speaking countries, namely the tendency of Anglos to live in hermetically sealed English-speaking ghettoes, and to socialize solely with other Anglos. The result is that an ever growing Oleh population never becomes part of Israeli society.

Personally, I find the phenomenon both curious and painful. When we moved here in 1993, we worked very hard to become part of Israel. True, we spoke English at home and in no way severed our awareness of an involvement in American culture. Still, we have always had both Israeli and non-Israeli friends. We learned about Israeli culture and politics. My wife studied in Israeli schools and training programs. She volunteered for years in various connections and always worked in Hebrew speaking environments. As a university lecturer, I was immersed in the broader society from Day One (or actually, day 265 because I landed into the biggest academic strike in two decades). More than that, because I was too old to be drafted I spent ten years as a volunteer on the Jerusalem Police Force (מתמי"ד) both to make up for my not serving in the army and to taste something of the melting pot experience that army service provides. The children, despite being raised in an American environment, are integral, caring parts of the fabric of Israeli society. I take tremendous pride in that fact.

Indeed, I cannot imagine doing otherwise. My life is so much richer for being part of this tapestry. I have here a sense of Klal Yisrael, of belonging to the multi-variegated body politic of the Jewish People that cannot be fully expressed in words. The fact that we all speak the same language, understand the same codes, reference the same cultural and religious moments (even among many Secular Jews) is, for me, a profoundly spiritual experience. If you don't crack the language and the semiotic, you deny yourself of that moment of total lack of self-consciousness when something dramatic (good or bad) happens and your Israeli brother or sister says one word (or you do) and you implicitly, intuitively understand and share the experience. The Anglo Olim who, in their fear and/or their arrogance, keep to themselves, deny themselves of all of that.

They also harm the State of Israel. For Anglo-Saxon Jewry is one that grew up under real democratic rule. It is the Jewry that developed Modern Orthodoxy. It is commercially and academically successful and sagacious. In other words, it has its own riches to contribute to the miracle of Israel by adapting its heritage to the unique dynamic of this beautiful Jewish mosaic. It's not fair to keep all of that from the rest. Who knows, perhaps that's why they were privileged to come at this time.

One thing is certain, as with anything of lasting worth in Jewish tradition...If it's not in Hebrew, it will have no future.

לא רעב ללחם ולא צמא למים

The Aramaic Targum on the Book of Ruth opens by saying that there will be ten serious famines prior to the coming of the Messiah. The last one will fulfill the vision of the prophet Amos (who lived not far from where I presently sit): הנה ימים באים נאם אדני יהוה והשלחתי רעב בארץ לא רעב ללחם ולא צמא למים כי אם לשמע את דברי ד or : 'Behold, the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but for hearing the words of God' (Amos 8, 11).

There are, I believe, two sides to this prophecy.

Amos, himself, may have been telling the Jews of his day to appreciate the fact that there is prophecy in their midst, for a time will come when it will cease to exist. The Targum, though, was writing more than half a millennium after prophecy ceased. He lived in a world in which God hid His Face (as it were), a tragic reality that was reinforced by the destruction of the Temple, the Hadrianic Persecutions and the brutal aftermath of the Bar Kokhba Revolt. He yearned for God's word to make sense of the cruel, unjust reality in which he lived. Perhaps, he hoped that he was living in the End of Days, as evidenced by his generation's desperate need for unmediated Divine guidance.

That need, that spiritual hunger, grew ever more intense as the centuries unfolded and the Jewish historical experience grew more painful and heroic. In the wake of the cataclysm's and conundra of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, it has over flowed. It is, however, solely up to God as to when He will break His silence.

There is another side of Amos' prophecy, which is both timely and which is within our power to address.

Hungering for God's Word is another way of describing an overwhelming desire for God's Presence, per se. For two thousand years, up till the Emancipation (at least), Jews sought God and found Him through Tefillah and Torah, through Mitzvot and Ma'asim Tovim. In Amos' terms, God's Word allowed the Jew to connect with his Creator and feel His Presence. That sense of propinquity is what made him feel truly alive (cf. הל' יסודי התורה פ"א ה"א) and truly happy (e.g. ושמחת לפני ד' א). In the age of secularism, aka the 'Age of Disbelief,' God has been banished from the public square, from educated discourse, and Jews can no longer connect with His Word. For a long time, it appeared that they didn't really want to connect, either.

As I've noted here on any number of occasions, the latter is no longer true, at least as far as the Jews of Eretz Yisrael are concerned. The spiritual upsurge, the Jewish Renaissance, that has marked the past decade and a half has been truly inspiring. Even the secular media has been marked by 'not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but for hearing the words of God.' The search for God and Torah are at the front and the center of contemporary cultural discourse and personal desire.

That desire, however, is all too often unrequited. The people might want God's Word, but God's Word is often inaccessible.

It is often inaccessible because large swaths of the Orthodox World are caught up in political considerations that make their own power and funding more important than spreading Torah and Sanctifying God's Name. Today's nefarious decision by the Religion Ministry to kill the Tzohar Marriage initiative is typical of this trend (as is the persistent delegitimization by the Rabbinical Courts of conversions and Divorces issued by Orthodox Battei Din both here and abroad). Couples wishing to marry כדת משה וישראל will now have to either contend with the unfeeling and gross bureaucracy that plague the established rabbinate (along with not infrequent graft), or will choose to marry in Cyprus or marry by proxy in Paraguay. These are couples who seek God's blessing on their marriages, but will have nowhere to find it.

God's Word is also inaccessible because, for the vast majority of Traditional and even Orthodox Jews, they can't understand it and there is no one to teach them. It is not of the lack of teachers or classes that I write. Rather, it is the inability of the overwhelming majority of rabbis and educators to convey the Torah in cultural terms that can command the respect and (hopefully) the assent of the inquirers after God's Word. There simply aren't enough representatives of Torah (men and women, from all types of professions) who can intelligently convey God's Word to those who hunger for it. The enormity of this tragic circumstance is difficult to convey. It is compounded by the fact that (with a few exceptions) the community prefers to ignore the severity of the situation. In the Rav's terms, the Lover is knocking on the Beloved's door (which is locked from the outside). The locksmith, however, refuses to awaken and allow her to enter.

I do not know if we are living in the end of days. Happily, I am neither a prophet nor the son of a prophet. I do know, however, that when the Day of God, the Day of Judgement arrives all of us who presume to be involved, observant Jews will be asked why we did not help the Jews of Israel (who, according to Maimonides, are the life blood of the Jewish People everywhere) to slake their thirst for God and His Word.