DOCSLIB.ORG

Samuel Hirsch, Hegel, and the Legacy of Ethical Monotheism*

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Samuel Hirsch, Hegel, and the Legacy of Ethical Monotheism* Samuel Hirsch, Hegel, and the Legacy of Ethical Monotheism* Robert Erlewine Illinois Wesleyan University; [email protected] ■ Abstract This essay examines Samuel Hirsch’s Religious Philosophy of the Jews as a forerunner of twentieth-century works of ethical monotheism in modern Jewish thought. In particular, it explores Hirsch’s use of the dichotomy between monotheism and idolatry as a way to resist Hegel’s attempts to incorporate Judaism into his developmental history of religion. Hirsch frames his opposition to the Hegelian account of religion by means of providing a rival interpretation of Genesis 3 to that offered by Hegel in the Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion. After juxtaposing Hegel’s and Hirsch’s respective interpretations of Genesis 3, I explore Hirsch’s account of religion, which, unlike Hegel’s, is presented in terms of the dichotomy of true and false religion. Finally, I will briefly highlight how Hirsch’s basic strategy for understanding Judaism vis-à-vis other religions—namely, casting the dichotomy between monotheism and idolatry in starkly ethical terms—is taken up and utilized by Hermann Cohen and Emmanuel Levinas in the twentieth century. ■ Keywords Die Religionsphilosophie der Juden/The Religious Philosophy of the Jews, Samuel Hirsch, G. W. F. Hegel, Franz Rosenzweig, Hermann Cohen, Emmanuel Levinas, Genesis 3, ethical monotheism * I would like to thank Illinois Wesleyan University for supporting me with an Artistic and Scholarly Development Grant in the Fall 2016. This grant provided me with the resources and time necessary to undertake this project. I would also like to thank Jacqueline Paskow, Dustin N. Atlas, and Martin Kavka for their thoughtful comments and suggestions at different stages of the formulation and revision of this paper. HTR 113:1 (2020) 89–110 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 170.106.40.139, on 27 Sep 2021 at 18:20:16, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0017816019000361 90 HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW ■ Introduction In recent years, the question of the nature and character of modern Jewish thought has been actively debated by scholars.1 Jewish thought has customarily been understood as an activity internal to Jews and Judaism, where thinkers seek to reconcile traditional Jewish theology with modern, scientific sensibilities.2 However, as the study of modern Jewish thought has increasingly migrated out of philosophy departments into those of religion and history,3 scholars increasingly attend to the manner in which Jewish thought has been situated, and works to situate itself, with respect to major theological and cultural discourses in Europe and the United States.4 This latter approach accords well with recent characterizations of the world religions discourse as a site for establishing European identity.5 It also complements recent work in the study of German Jewish history that has treated the emergence of modern Jewish studies as a response to the exclusion of Jews from theology departments.6 In approaching modern Jewish thought in this manner, the concern 1 See, for example: Steven Schwarzschild, “Modern Jewish Philosophy,” in Pursuit of the Ideal: Jewish Writings of Steven Schwarzschild (ed. Menachem Kellner; SUNY Series in Jewish Philosophy; Albany: State University of New York Press: 1990) 229–35; Norbert Samuelson, “Is Jewish Philosophy Either Philosophy or Jewish?” in La Storia della Filosofia Ebraica (ed. Irene Kajon; Biblioteca dell’Archivio di filosofia 9; Padua: CEDAM, 1993) 463–85; Michael L. Morgan and Peter Eli Gordon, “Introduction: Modern Jewish Philosophy, Modern Philosophy, and Modern Judaism,” in The Cambridge Companion to Modern Jewish Philosophy (ed. Michael L. Morgan and Peter Eli Gordon; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007) 1–13; Michael Zank, “Zwischen Den Stühlen? On the Taxonomic Anxieties of Modern Jewish Philosophy,” European Journal for Jewish Studies 1 (2007) 105–34; Aaron W. Hughes and Elliot R. Wolfson, “Introduction: Charting an Alternative Course for the Study of Jewish Philosophy,” in New Directions in Jewish Philosophy (ed. Aaron W. Hughes and Elliot R. Wolfson; Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2010) 1–18; Leora Batnitzky, How Judaism Became a Religion: An Introduction to Modern Jewish Thought (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2011); Michael Zank, “The Heteronomy of Modern Jewish Philosophy,” Journal of Jewish Thought and Philosophy 20 (2012) 99–124; Martin Kavka, introduction to The Modern Era (ed. Martin Kavka, Zachary Braiterman, and David Novak; The Cambridge History of Jewish Philosophy vol 2; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012) 1–31; Willi Goetschel, “Jewish Philosophy? The Discourse of a Project,” in The Discipline of Philosophy and the Invention of Modern Jewish Thought (New York: Fordham University Press, 2013) 39–57; Aaron W. Hughes, Rethinking Jewish Philosophy: Beyond Particularism and Universalism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014); and Robert Erlewine, Judaism and the West: From Hermann Cohen to Joseph Soloveitchik (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2016). 2 For such an approach, see Morgan and Gordon, introduction. 3 For a helpful overview of the history of Jewish thought in the American academy, see Kavka, introduction. On the effects of disciplinary differences in the study of modern Jewish thought and philosophy, see Hughes and Wolfson, “Introduction,” 1. 4 The respective works by Zank, Hughes, Batnitzky, and Erlewine mentioned in n. 1 are in this vein. 5 See Tomoko Masuzawa, The Invention of World Religions: Or, How European Universalism Was Preserved in the Language of Pluralism (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005). See also Timothy Fitzgerald, The Ideology of Religious Studies (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000), and Daniel Dubuisson, The Western Construction of Religion: Myths, Knowledge, and Ideology (trans. William Sayers; Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2003). 6 On this point, see Susannah Heschel, “Jewish Studies as Counterhistory,” in Insider and Outsider: American Jews and Multiculturalism (ed. David Biale, Michael Galchinsky, and Susannah Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 170.106.40.139, on 27 Sep 2021 at 18:20:16, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0017816019000361 ROBERT ERLEWINE 91 of the scholar is less with assessing the philosophical viability of claims than with examining how these claims position Judaism over against other religious traditions and as belonging, or not, to the contested, charged, and highly fraught notions of “Europe” and “the West.” One strategy for situating Judaism employed by many prominent thinkers in modern Jewish thought is the concept of ethical monotheism. In it, the radical distinction between true and false notions of God, as refracted through the prism of ethics, is utilized in order to present Judaism as possessing a unique, irreplaceable, and unsurpassed standing with regard to all other religions.7 For ethical monotheism, the distinction between monotheism and idolatry has vital relevance for modernity precisely because it understands injustice as bound up with, and ultimately stemming from, improper, idolatrous, and/or pagan conceptions of God. Judaism is then affiliated with a rationalistic theological view which pairs the distinction or difference of God from human beings, often configured in terms of God’s transcendence, with an emphasis on human responsibility, making it a—or the—religion of ethical seriousness and maturity.8 As a corollary of this view of Judaism, Christianity, presented as pagan or as partly pagan, is associated with immanent notions of the divine and the romantic celebration of the mythical and the irrational and is considered ethically suspect. Heschel; Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998) 101–16, and Heschel’s monograph from the same year, Abraham Geiger and the Jewish Jesus (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998); Christian Wiese, Challenging Colonial Discourse: Jewish Studies and Protestant Theology in Wilhelmine Germany (Leiden: Brill, 2005); and Ismar Schorsch, Leopold Zunz: Creativity in Adversity (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2018). 7 To be sure, the dichotomy of true and false notions of God, often framed as that between monotheism and idolatry, is by no means limited to thinkers who embrace ethical monotheism, such as Hermann Cohen and Emmanuel Levinas. One also finds it in Franz Rosenzweig, Martin Buber, and Emil Fackenheim, among others. The dyad of monotheism and idolatry has also been used to structure a wide range of scholarly works within modern Jewish thought in recent years. See, for example: Elliot R. Wolfson, Giving Beyond the Gift: Apophasis and Overcoming Theomania (New York: Fordham University Press, 2014); Gideon Freudenthal, No Religion without Idolatry: Mendelssohn’s Jewish Enlightenment (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 2012); Robert Erlewine, Monotheism and Tolerance: Recovering a Religion of Reason (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2010); Leora Batnitzky, Idolatry and Representation: The Philosophy of Franz Rosenzweig Reconsidered (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000); and Moshe Halbertal and Avishai Margalit, Idolatry (trans. Naomi Goldblum; Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1994). 8 The philosophers Hermann Cohen and Emmanuel Levinas, as well as the theologians Leo Baeck
Load more

Recommended publications
  • We All Know, the Emancipation Was a Great Turning Point in the History Of
    PROGRESSIVE LITURGIES OF GERMANY AND AMERICA 585 p- John D. Rayner Introduction As we all know, the Emancipation was a great turning point in the history of Judaism, although ‘point' is hardly the right word, since it was a long-drawn- out process extending from the eighteenth century into the twentieth. Nevertheless the initial impact of it was often felt by a single generation, and in Germany by the generation of those born during the Napoleonic era. As we all know; too, the initial impact was for many of the newly emancipated German Jews a negative one so far as their Jewish religious life was concerned because the revolutionary educational, linguistic, cultural and social changes they experienced caused them to feel uncomfortable in the old- style synagogues. And as we all know as well, it is to this problem, of the alienation of emancipated Jewry from the traditional synagogue that the Reformers first and foremost addressed themselves. They believed that if only the synagogue services could be made more attractive, that would halt and perhaps reverse w the drift. 0 . _ {:1 j N In retrospect we can see that they were only partly right. There are other 8E}; factors besides the nature of synagogue worship which determine or influence the extent to which individuals will affirm their Jewish identity \ :8 " and adhere to their Jewish faith, and subsequent generations of Reformers 13E came to recognise that and to address themselves to these other issues also. (3 ‘1‘: Nevertheless the nature of synagogue worship is clearly a factor, and a big one.
    [Show full text]
  • Indische Religionen Als Gegenstand Religionsphilosophischer Entwürfe
    Indische Religionen als Gegenstand religionsphilosophischer Entwürfe. Salomon Formstecher und Samuel Hirsch über indisches „Heidentum“ von Hans-Michael Haußig Abstract During the 19th century, for the first time Jewish thinkers, influenced by philosophi- cal currents of their time, tried to give a new interpretation of Judaism by contextual- izing it in general history. Especially two representatives of Reform Judaism, Salomon Formstecher (1808–1889) and Samuel Hirsch (1815–1889) presented two works pursuing this direction. Both authors aimed for a scientific approach of Judaism and agreed that there exist only two religions in the world: Judaism and Heathenism. Both religions are in fundamental opposition to each other. Within their works, Formstecher and Hirsch dealt in a different manner with Indian religions. The paper will investigate the presenta- tion of Indian religions in both works in the frame of their conceptions on Heathenism. Zusammenfassung Im 19. Jahrhundert erschienen erstmalig grundlegende theologische bzw. religionsphi- losophische Entwürfe, die sich darum bemühten, unter dem Einfluss der maßgeblichen philosophischen Systeme ihrer Zeit das Judentum neu zu deuten und in den Rahmen der allgemeinen Menschheitsgeschichte einzuordnen. Es waren insbesondere zwei Ver- treter des Reformjudentums, Salomon Formstecher (1808–1889) und Samuel Hirsch (1815–1889), die im Abstand von nur einem Jahr (1841 bzw. 1842) zwei dementsprechen- de Entwürfe vorlegten. Beide Autoren streben eine wissenschaftliche Sichtweise auf das Judentum an und weisen darin eine Gemeinsamkeit auf, dass es ihrer Ansicht nach neben diesem als einzige Religion praktisch nur das Heidentum gibt. Judentum und Heidentum stehen in einem grundlegenden Gegensatz zueinander. Im Rahmen der Ausführung ihrer These gehen sowohl Formstecher als auch Hirsch in unterschiedlichem Maße auf die indischen Religionen ein.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction 
    © Copyright, Princeton University Press. No part of this book may be distributed, posted, or reproduced in any form by digital or mechanical means without prior written permission of the publisher. INTRODUCTION It belongs to the cherished traditions of Western civilization that Judaism “invented” monotheism. In the eyes of most Jews and Christians, as well as numerous scholars of religion, the “monotheistic revolution” of the Hebrew Bible represents a radi- cal break with the backward and underdeveloped abominations of the polytheistic cultures that surrounded—and continuously threatened—ancient Israel. As such, Jewish monotheism is con- sidered to be a decisive step in the development of humanity to- wards ever higher forms of religion. According to the triumphal- istic Christian view of history and its progress-oriented academic counterparts, this “evolution” reached its climax in Christianity (more precisely, in nineteenth-century Protestantism). Just as poly- theism inevitably lead to monotheism, so the remote and stern God of Judaism had to be replaced by the loving God of Chris- tianity. When Christianity adopted Jewish monotheism, it simul- taneously softened it by including the idea of God’s Trinity and his son’s incarnation on earth. Only through this “extension” of strict monotheism, it is argued, could Christianity liberate true faith from Jewish ossification and guarantee its survival and perfection. The notion of the necessary evolution of monotheism out of polytheism is as stereotyped as the conceit of its successful fulfill- ment in Christianity. Regarding the latter, the Christian doctrine of the Trinity can hardly claim, despite the efforts of the church fathers, to manifest the apex of monotheism.
    [Show full text]
  • A Biographical Sketch POPULAR Imagination Often Creates Legends
    CYRUS ADLER A Biographical Sketch By ABRAHAM A. NEUMAN I POPULAR imagination often creates legends about the lives of great personalities. These legends are not whimsical fancies. They are the language of folk psychology. They reveal the traits of character in the heroes which fascinated the popular mind. In Jewish literature the legends usually cluster around the birth of its great characters. Strange omens or miracles are associated with the time or place of the hero's birth that seem to forecast the destiny of the life that follows. At times, Fate anticipates legend. It operates with true facts to produce the effect of legendary symbolism. Such is the impression created by the simple record that Cyrus Adler was born in Van Buren, Arkansas, on September 13, 1863. A small town in a border-line state between the North and the South, Van Buren, Adler's birthplace, may be said to have typified a normal American community. During the Civil War, it formed a battleground for the opposing armies. It experienced in full measure the tragic sacrifices of the struggle which was destined to end in a new cove- nant of union and freedom in America. The time and place were ideally propitious for the rise of a character to whom patriotism and freedom were the essence of religion, to whom the ideal of union had a profoundly mystic appeal, whether it was political union to preserve the republic or religious unity to preserve the faith into which he was born. A restless spirit and a mood of adventure impelled Samuel Adler, the father of Cyrus, as a young immigrant lad from Mannheim, Germany, to strike out for far-off Van Buren in Arkansas.
    [Show full text]
  • Reevaluating the Interaction Between Ancient Israel and Greece Mike Tolliver University of Missouri-St
    University of Missouri, St. Louis IRL @ UMSL Theses Graduate Works 3-7-2014 The aS ges and Philosophers: Reevaluating the Interaction Between Ancient Israel and Greece Mike Tolliver University of Missouri-St. Louis, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://irl.umsl.edu/thesis Recommended Citation Tolliver, Mike, "The aS ges and Philosophers: Reevaluating the Interaction Between Ancient Israel and Greece" (2014). Theses. 257. http://irl.umsl.edu/thesis/257 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Works at IRL @ UMSL. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses by an authorized administrator of IRL @ UMSL. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Sages and Philosophers: Reevaluating the Interaction Between Ancient Israel and Greece Michael M. Tolliver Th.M., Covenant Theological Seminary, 2013 M.Div., Covenant Theological Seminary, 2010 B.S., Business Administration, Truman State University, 2005 A Thesis Submitted to The Graduate School at the University of Missouri – St. Louis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Masters in Philosophy August 2014 Advisory Committee Jon D. McGinnis, Ph.D. Chairperson David Griesedieck, Ph.D. C. John Collins, Ph.D. Copyright, Michael M. Tolliver, 2014 Abstract: The previously assumed late development of the Jewish sacred writings led many to conclude that the Hellenistic world greatly influenced both the content and worldview of the Hebrew authors. Though the evidence for the historical reconstruction that required the Jewish texts to develop late has been called into question, scholars have yet to reconsider the implications this has for the antiquity of the ideas contained within the Jewish writings and their influence on surrounding cultures.
    [Show full text]
  • Two Models of Jewish Philosophy Submitted for the Degree of Phd in Philosophy at the London School
    Justifying One’s Practices: Two Models of Jewish Philosophy Submitted for the degree of PhD in Philosophy At the London School of Economics and Political Science Daniel Rynhold 2000 1 UMI Number: U120701 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U120701 Published by ProQuest LLC 2014. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 773 ) Thesis Abstract Judaism is a religion that emphasises the importance of a set of practical commandments and in the history of Jewish philosophy various attempts have been made to rationalise or justify these commandments. In this thesis I try to establish a general model for the justification of practices through a critical examination of two such attempted rationalisations. However, the study is framed within the more general question of whether or not there can be such a thing as Jewish Philosophy as a genuinely substantive discipline. Thus, I take the particular topic of rationalising the commandments as a ‘case study’ in order to see whether we can do substantive Jewish philosophy at least in the practical sphere. In the main body of the thesis I look at the methods of rationalisation of Moses Maimonides and Joseph Soloveitchik and argue that despite being based on very different scientific models they share a central methodological presumption that I term the Priority of Theory (PoT).
    [Show full text]
  • Revelation Preprint
    Norman Solomon Revelation in the Jewish Tradition Revelation in the Jewish Tradition Norman Solomon The Hebrew Scriptures relate that God reveals His Presence through personal experience (as frequently in Psalms) or through control of history (the Exodus from Egypt, the fall of Babylon). Alternatively, He may issue instructions or laws, whether through a dream, in a vision, through an intermediary such as an angel or a prophet. Occasionally the Presence and the Command are combined: at Sinai (Exod. 19-20) or Horeb (Deut. 4-5), Israel experienced God’s Presence, and at the same time were apprised of His Will, through the Ten Words (‘Commandments’). Philo When Jews encountered Hellenistic culture they felt a need to justify revelation as a source of knowledge; Philo of Alexandria (d. c. 30 CE) is the first Jew whose speculations have been extensively preserved. In Book 2 of De Vita Mosis (VM) Philo expounds at length Moses’ excellence as philosopher-king, law-giver, high priest and prophet. For instance, ‘The next step needed was that the most suitable persons should be chosen as priests … Accordingly, he selected out of the whole number his brother as high priest on his merits and appointed his brother’s sons as priests …’ (VM 2:141-2: Loeb edition, trans. H. Colson) Philo does not claim that Moses chose Aaron, or instituted laws, on his own initiative. Rather, God revealed to Moses, through prophecy, what by reasoning he could not grasp (VM 2:6). All things written in the sacred books are divine oracles delivered through Moses (VM 2:188).
    [Show full text]
  • Pansacramentalism, Interreligious Theology, and Lived Religion
    religions Article Pansacramentalism, Interreligious Theology, and Lived Religion Hans Gustafson College of Arts and Sciences, University of St. Thomas, 2115 Summit Avenue, Mail 57P, St. Paul, MN 55105, USA; [email protected] Received: 21 May 2019; Accepted: 26 June 2019; Published: 28 June 2019 Abstract: Opening with a philosophical definition of sacrament(ality) as a mediator (mediation) of the sacred in the concrete world, this article offers pansacramentalism as a promising worldview—especially for those rooted in or emerging from the Christian traditions (since, for them, the language of sacramentality may have a stronger resonance)—for bringing together interreligious theology and data mined by Lived Religion approaches to the study of religion. After articulating the concept of pansacramentalism and emphasizing interreligious theology as an emerging model for doing theology, growing trends and changing sensibilities among young people’s religious and spiritual lives (e.g., the “Nones”) is considered insofar as such trends remain relevant for making contemporary theology accessible to the next generation. The article then considers the intersection of pansacramentalism and interreligious theology, especially the issue of determining sacramental authenticity. To explain how this challenge might be met, Abraham Heschel’s theology of theomorphism is offered as but one example as a nuanced means for determining sacramental authenticity of the sacred in the world. Turning to “Lived Religion” approaches, rationale is offered for why pansacramentalism and interreligious theology ought to be taken seriously in the contemporary world, especially considering recent data about the nature of contemporary religious identities among young people living in the West. Keywords: pansacramentalism; sacramentality; interreligious; lived religion; interreligious studies 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Death and Its Beyond in Early Judaism and Medieval Jewish Philosophy
    University of Denver Digital Commons @ DU Electronic Theses and Dissertations Graduate Studies 3-1-2011 Death and Its Beyond in Early Judaism and Medieval Jewish Philosophy Adem Irmak University of Denver Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.du.edu/etd Part of the Jewish Studies Commons, and the Religion Commons Recommended Citation Irmak, Adem, "Death and Its Beyond in Early Judaism and Medieval Jewish Philosophy" (2011). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 306. https://digitalcommons.du.edu/etd/306 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Studies at Digital Commons @ DU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ DU. For more information, please contact [email protected],[email protected]. DEATH AND ITS BEYOND IN EARLY JUDAISM AND MEDIEVAL JEWISH PHILOSOPHY __________ A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of Arts and Humanities University of Denver __________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts __________ by Adem Irmak March 2011 Advisor: Dr. Alison Schofield ©Copyright by Adem Irmak 2011 All Rights Reserved Author: Adem Irmak Title: DEATH AND ITS BEYOND IN EARLY JUDAISM AND MEDIEVAL JEWISH PHILOSOPHY Advisor: Dr. Alison Schofield Degree Date: March 2011 Abstract Afterlife and the concept of soul in Judaism is one of the main subjects that are discussed in the academia. There are some misassumptions related to hereafter and the fate of the soul after departing the body in Judaism. Since the Hebrew Bible does not talk about the death and afterlife clearly, some average people and some scholars claim that there is nothing relevant to the hereafter.
    [Show full text]
  • Opening the Torah to Women: the Transformation of Tradition
    Opening the Torah to Women: The Transformation of Tradition Women are a people by themselves -Talmud: Shabbat 62a Traditional Judaism believes that both men and women have differentiated and distinct roles delegated through the Torah. A man’s role is focused on positive time-bound mitzvot (commandments), which include but are not limited to, daily praying, wrapping tefillin and putting on a tallit; whereas a women’s role and mitzvot are not time bound and include lighting Shabbat candles, separating a piece of challah for G-d on Shabbat, and the laws of Niddah (menstruation purity). 1 Orthodox Judaism views the separate roles of men and women as a valued and crucial aspect of Jewish life and law, whereas Jewish feminism and more reform branches of Judaism believe these distinctions between men and women are representative of sexual discrimination and unequal opportunity in Judaism. The creation of the Reform and Conservative movement in the late 1800s paved the way for the rise of the Jewish feminist movement in the 1970s, which re-evaluated the classical Jewish texts and halakha (Jewish law) in relation to the role of women in Judaism. Due to Judaism’s ability to evolve and change throughout time, women associated with different Jewish denominations have been able to create their own place within Judaism while also maintaining the traditional aspects of Judaism in order to find a place which connects them most to their religiosity and femininity as modern Jewish women. In Kabbalah (Jewish mysticism), there is a teaching that states that when each soul is created it contains both a female and male soul.
    [Show full text]
  • Jewish Mourning Traditions
    JEWISH MOURNING TRADITIONS Shmira / The Vigil (From Chevra Kadisha) When a person dies, the soul or neshama hovers around the body. This neshama is the essence of the person, the consciousness and totality, the thoughts, deeds, experiences and relationships. The body was its container and the neshama, now on the way to the Eternal World, refuses to leave until the body is buried. In effect, the totality of the person who died continues to exist for a while in the vicinity of the body. Jewish mourning ritual is therefore most concerned with the feelings of the deceased, not only the feelings of the mourners. How we treat the body and how we behave around the body must reflect how we would act around the very person himself. IMMEDIATELY AFTER DEATH Jacob is promised that when he dies, “Joseph’s hand shall close your eyes.” (Genesis 46:4). The 16th century “Code of Jewish Law” dictated that the eyes should be closed, arms and hands extended and brought close to the body and the lower jaw closed and bound. The body was placed on the floor, with the feet towards the door. The body was covered with a sheet and a lit candle placed near the head. The Midrash states that on Shabbat one does not close the eyes, bind the jaw or light a candle. Some Jewish communities would place potsherds on the eyes; Russians placed coins. Ancient superstitions in many cultures held that if the eyes were opened, the ghost of the deceased would return to fetch away another of the household.
    [Show full text]
  • PHILOSOPHIZING MONOTHEISM a Workshop in Philosophy and Theology ABSTRACTS
    SCHOOL OF PHILOSOPHY – UNIVERSITY COLLEGE DUBLIN PHILOSOPHIZING MONOTHEISM A Workshop in Philosophy and Theology ABSTRACTS Wednesday, 10th May 2017 10h – 18h SPEAKERS Itzhak Benyamini Ward Blanton Joseph Cohen Aubrey Glazer Maureen Junker-Kenny Elad Lapidot Mahdi Tourage Raphael Zagury-Orly Coordinated by Itzhak Benyamini and Joseph Cohen 1 ABSTRACTS Three Modalities of Philosophizing Monotheism: Sacrifice, Election, Justice Joseph Cohen, University College Dublin, Ireland Raphael Zagury-Orly, Bezalel Academy of Arts and Design, Jerusalem, Israel Our first question shall be: according to which modality are we to think the rapport between philosophy and monotheism? Indeed, this rapport has always been, in and throughout the history of Western thought, a complex one. From mutual exclusion to the efforts of synthesizing or conciliating both in one unifying discourse, to the numerous projects where one seeks to subjugate or contain the other, the alliance between philosophy and monotheism has never ceased to trouble philosophers and theologians alike. According to which idea and from which place can one maintain the singularities of both philosophical logos and monotheism whilst assuring the incontestable effects they both cause on each other? Undoubtedly, and in order to deploy our interpretative hypothesis, we will focus on the intricate dynamic between Judaism and Christianity and how this dynamic has surged in the history of philosophical thought. Consequently, our interpretative gesture will consist in developing three ideas – sacrifice, election, justice – by which is opened a certain address of both philosophical logos and monotheism. This address will show how and why both philosophical logos and monotheism incessantly read one into the other, inform and awaken each other whilst, at the same time, always fail to seize, comprehend or understand the singularity of the other.
    [Show full text]