The Reconstructionist Volume 67, Number 1, Fall 2002 Table of Contents

12 From the Editor In Dialogue with World Religions 14 Rebecca T. Alpert, Teaching in Indonesia: Some Reflections 10 Lewis John Eron, Speaking From, Not For, Judaism: Reconstructionism and Interreligious Dialogue 17 Barbara Eve Breitman, “Tehom El Tehom Koreh/Deep Calls to Deep” — Contemplative Christianity and the Emerging Practice of Jewish Spiritual Direction 27 Richard Hirsh, Beyond the Noahide Laws 32 Nancy Fuchs-Kreimer, Dabru Emet — A Reconstructionist Perspective Viewpoint 41 Margaret Moers Wenig, Sacred Speech. — Sacred Communities Book Reviews 58 Joel Hecker, Gateways to Hasidism, a review of The Hasidic Parable: An Anthology with Commentary, edited and translated by Aryeh Wineman 69 Yael Ridberg, Journeys in Judaism, a review of The Way Into . . . series from Jewish Lights Publishing FROM THE EDITOR

When the Reconstructionist Rabbinical College was founded in 1968, the program of training for the modern was envisioned as a parallel course of study in which rabbinical students studied Judaism at RRC and simultaneously pursued a Ph.D in religious studies in Temple University’s Department of Religion. That department, in those days, was a pioneer in the area of interreligious dialogue, with faculty members from every major faith tradition. Rabbini- cal students were in daily contact with people whose religious communities were different from their own, whose texts and traditions were distinct, and whose faiths were in some cases related to Judaism (Christianity and Islam) and in other cases had developed with little or no historical interaction with Jewish tradition (Taoism, Hinduism, Buddhism). In such a context, it was impossible to take one’s own tradition for granted, or to dismiss another’s tradition as irrelevant. Curiously, if not providentially, the Reconstructionist approach to the understanding of religion was both an asset and an obstacle. Insofar as Re- constructionism began with the affirmation that Judaism was the histori- cally developed natural product of the Jewish people, it was not difficult to understand other religious traditions as similarly developed historical expe- riences generated by their respective communities. Reconstructionism al- lowed one to respect one’s own tradition as well as the traditions of others. The obstacle was that other faith groups did not always begin from the same set of assumptions. Many of those who, in the spirit of ecumenism and liberalism, sought out with whom to enter into interreligious dialogue also affirmed, to a greater or lesser degree, a supernatural God whose work- ings in history included the forming of a covenant with the “chosen people.” Reconstructionist Jews thus stood in a curious place with regard to other religions, on the one hand seeing them all as common expressions (through distinctive refractions) of the human quest for meaning and for the sacred, and on the other hand, holding a very different understanding of religion than many of those with whom we entered into dialogue. Rabbi Ira Eisenstein anticipated many of the issues that we would face in the second half of the 20th century when he wrote his doctoral dissertation in 1939 entitled “The Ethics of Tolerance,” a study of the issues involved when (Western) religions encountered each other in the spirit of democracy, tolerance and pluralism that was found in America. In that work, Rabbi Eisenstein suggested that among the challenges facing religion in the mod- ern period, perhaps the most important was whether religions could learn to relinquish their divisive claims to authority and truth in favor of more mod-

2 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist est affirmations that would allow for mutual respect and affirmation. If that issue was critical on the eve of the Second World War, it remains imperative now, in the early years of the 21st century. In this issue, we ex- amine some of the tensions as well as the opportunities that continue to arise when Judaism looks at other religions. — Richard Hirsh

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 3 Teaching Judaism in Indonesia: Some Reflections

BY REBECCA T. A LPERT

efore Arthur Waskow began the run Gadjah Mada University. The par- process of bringing the liturgi- ticipants were thirty master’s level stu- B cal calendar into conversation dents in a comparative religion pro- with politics, I never gave any thought gram. All but four were Muslim (the whatsoever to the story of the exile of non-Muslims were Christian and Hagar that we read every Rosh Ha- Hindu); all but seven were men. shanah. In recent years, however, that What I learned from their perspec- story has become a poignant reminder tive was that the story in Genesis 21 for me, for us, of the enmity that ex- was indeed the beginning of the heri- isted at the very beginning between the tage of Abraham, but they, the ances- Muslim and Jewish traditions. tors of Hagar and Ishmael, were equally Now when we read the story, it convinced that they were the true heirs makes me uneasy to think that Hagar of Abraham. From their perspective, and Ishmael were sent off to the desert, they were the lucky winners of the con- and perplexed about having as my an- test for Abraham’s lineage, and they felt cestors the “winners” of the contest for sorry for the people of Israel, who be- Abraham’s lineage. And I struggle with lieved the misguided story in the To- Sarah’s cruelty toward Hagar, and rah. That story cannot, after all, reflect puzzle over what — if any — positive the truth, since it contradicts the story values I can glean from the encounter, as it is told in their sacred scripture, beyond the warning about this rift. the Qur’an. (Who, after all, was Abra- ham’s firstborn, and therefore legiti- New Perspectives mate heir, they would ask; certainly not Isaac.) At least that was the perspective I brought to Yogyakarta (not Jakarta; Living Upside Down Yogya is a city of 3 million in the east- ern part of the island of Java) in Indo- That disjuncture was emblematic of nesia this past summer, where I taught my experience, which had the impact “Introduction to Judaism” at the state- of stripping away many of my assump-

Rabbi Rebecca T. Alpert is the Co-Director of the Women’s Studies Program and Assistant Professor of Religion and Women’s Studies at Temple University.

4 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist tions. How could it not, when I was and active dislike of, groups like Laskar literally living upside down; it was, af- Jihad (which do exist there), who wish ter all, night for me when it was day- to make Indonesia into an Islamic state. time back home. Women indeed wear some form of And when I looked to the summer head covering (at least all of my stu- sky, I saw the North Star and Big Dip- dents did, and probably about 25 per- per, not part of my own world’s sky ex- cent of the women I saw in the street cept, of course, in winter. And when I did, too), but they also ride motorcycles explained that Jews pray facing Jerusa- and are committed to working toward lem (as Muslims do toward Mecca), I gender equity. They are quite firm in realized that Tevye’s seat “by the east- their assertion that Mohammed fa- ern wall” was nothing if not relative, vored women’s equality and that later since prayers in Indonesia are said not texts just misinterpreted his teachings, looking east, but west. something I have heard only from the While fascinating for anyone trav- strongest of Muslim feminists I know eling to Asia for the first time, these in the United States. disorientations are nothing in compari- son to the one I experienced as I be- Opening Communication gan, with the help of my students, to see Judaism through Muslim eyes. The first democratically elected president of Indonesia, known as Gus Islam in Indonesia Dur (who was himself a Muslim cleric), supported links with Israel. Although Islam in Indonesia is not the same Gus Dur was ousted by the current rul- as Islam in America, and not the same ing party, his students and followers as Islam in the Middle East. Of course, were some of the people I got to know that should not surprise us: Judaism in and meet, and they were passionately Asia, North America and the Middle interested in dialogue and learning East also differs. But we do tend to more about Judaism. Some of them make the “other” into something took my course so they could teach monolithic, a very dangerous thing to about Judaism at their own high do. schools and universities; others were So what is Islam like in Indonesia? working on translations of books by The Muslims I met were genuinely in- authors like Louis Jacobs and A.J. terested in learning about other reli- Heschel. gions in general, and Judaism in par- Did they represent the majority of ticular. Indonesia is not an Islamic state; Indonesians? The concept of a major- it recognizes five official religions: ity in that context is itself laughable. Muslim, Protestant Christian, Roman Indonesia is comprised of 1,700 islands Catholic, Buddhist and Hindu, al- and many millions of individuals; it is though Muslims are the vast majority. the largest majority Muslim country in There seemed to be little interest in, the world, and it would be folly to draw

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 5 conclusions based on my limited evi- tics, thanks to their skillful lob- dence. bying, especially over the rulers of But I also cannot discount the ex- such superpower actors as USA perience I had. Several of my students and certain European countries; were deeply interested in Jewish-Mus- in business, thanks to their sophis- lim dialogue and in building under- ticated and massive network of standing, because the world they live banking system, media and enter- in is full of ignorance and misunder- tainment . . . They are always in standing when it comes to Jews and agreement with whatever policy is Judaism. So they invited me to give made by the Israeli government speeches and have informal conversa- . . . moreover, the Jews are sus- tions at several Muslim universities in pected to have long-run sophisti- Yogya and in the neighboring city, Solo. cated plan to destroy Muslim I was welcomed warmly, although community and any Islamic the conversations were also at times manifestation through its interna- painful and emotionally draining. And tional conspiracy spread all over though I promised myself I would the world . . .1 avoid political conversations about Is- rael, it was obvious from the first day Jews, in other words, run the world that this was not going to be possible, in support of Israel. And because Ju- since the information they had about daism is not a missionizing religion, my Jews was, in fact, almost exclusively students understood it to be “exclusiv- about Israel. ist,” closed and unwelcoming of out- siders. They interpreted my emphasis Frightening Stereotypes on peoplehood and community as evi- dence in support of this belief. They My students and the other faculty also did not believe that Jews are the and students I met shared notions pure monotheists we claim to be, about Jews that were positively fright- (Munjit described it as “an Abrahamic ening. The following quotations, from tradition gone astray”) since the Qur’an a paper by one of my students, describ- says that Jews believed that Ezra was ing the stereotypes that Indonesians be- the son of God. lieve about Jews, are typical: Changing Perceptions Jews, by definition, are stubborn, tricky, egoistic, troublesome, but Over the course of six weeks, I was also smart and therefore danger- able to get my students to understand ous. In connection with these ste- that the Judaism they were learning reotypes, a common accepted about from their environment was not opinion about the Jews is another Judaism; that only some Jews at the assumption that they are very time of Mohammed believed Ezra was powerful internationally in poli- the son of God; that Jews have power

6 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist disproportionate to our numbers, but in the world, and have a defining ef- not to the extent they imagine; that not fect on Jewish life and culture. (I being a missionary religion does not thought, for the first time, how differ- make us exclusivist, just small; and that ent might have been if our tragic history can explain a lot of we’d stayed in the Southern Hemi- the passion we feel about the State of sphere.) Israel. And there is also no underestimat- I also was able to use the similarities ing how important it is that Jesus was in our traditions — the roots in a , a fact I saw more clearly when Abraham, the nature of the revelation confronted with the realization that at the core of both religions, their simi- Mohammed was not. Despite the deep lar emphasis on legal tradition and lin- similarities between Islam and Judaism, guistic cognates of Hebrew and Arabic that is a profound difference. terminology — to enable students to I also learned that it was acceptable feel more connected to Judaism. to admit that I was critical of the poli- They were very pleased to learn cies of the government of Israel. More about the interplay between Jewish and than acceptable, actually, it lent my Muslim mystics, philosophers and le- Jewishness credibility, because I was not galists in the Middle Ages, and about just touting the party line. I wasn’t sure the general decency with which Jews that I would be able to be open in dis- were treated when we lived in Muslim cussing politics. But I found that it societies. worked and was appreciated, and that While I contributed much to their it opened doors to conversation. It also education, I learned more from my stu- left my students room to be critical of dents, which, as the suggests, Islam as well. is often the case. At our last session when they told me how much they had Lasting Challenges learned and how much they appreci- ated our experience together, I reflected It is not easy to prove that Jews don’t back to them that I had received thirty run the world, and I would appreciate times what I was able to give. any and all help in figuring out how to do that. My best answer was when New Perspectives someone asked me if Americans believe that all Muslims are terrorists. I re- What I also gained from teaching sponded that about as many Americans them was a new perspective about Ju- believe that as there are Indonesians daism in the United States. I never re- who believe that Jews run the world; alized the extent to which Christianity both are unfounded stereotypes. has defined Judaism in the world to- While I spent much of my time try- day. Ashkenazic Jews, whose Judaism ing to convince my students that Jews was nourished in Christian soil, make are not to blame for the problems we up 80 percent of the 15 million Jews have experienced (exile, genocide), I

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 7 also had to acknowledge to myself (and of the most important sessions we had, we as a Jewish community need to since Jews stopped being abstract “oth- think about) how little attention we ers” for my students and became real pay to others, how high we build the Indonesians who lived in their world, wall surrounding the Jewish commu- and worried, as they did, about gov- nity, how carefully we police its bor- ernmental repression. ders, and how that contributes to the When Jess showed slides depicting sense that people have (even in Indo- posters with anti-Israel propaganda, nesia) that Jews care only about other and spoke about the fears of Laskar Jews. Jihad and a fundamentalist takeover, My students were astonished to learn the class laughed nervously. She and I about any universalist tendencies in our were stunned, since we ourselves expe- tradition. Yet there are many, and we rienced a sense of fear when we saw do not let others know enough about posters from this movement that in- them, or about us. This isolation and cluded the words, “Israel and America: internal focus is not good for us, and Axis of Evil.” we might think about ways to create It was fascinating to see how uncom- opportunities, like the one I experi- fortable our fears made my students, enced, to “get the word out” that Jews and how much they wanted to disal- are interested in making connections low what a threat that group is and to the outside world and helping oth- should seem to us. Afterward, many of ers to learn about us. them talked to me about that tense moment in class. One student’s re- Needing Community sponse was the most poignant: “What are we to do when we are caught be- I also had the lesson reinforced that tween the current military regime and it is almost impossible to be a Jew with- those who want an Islamic state?” What out a Jewish community. I bonded choice is that, exactly? deeply with the one Jewish woman who was in Yogya on a year-long Fulbright Reaffirmations scholarship to study student demo- cratic movements there. We had much Before I went, many people told me else in common, but the Jewish con- I was crazy to make the trip. I am glad nection was crucial. Luckily for me, I did not listen. This experience opened Jessica lived out some of her interest in my eyes to worlds I did not know ex- the subject by going to meet with the isted. And it reinforced for me some of twenty or so Jews of Surabaya, the only my most deeply held beliefs: about the Jewish community left in Indonesia. importance of teaching Judaism to She came to my class and presented non-Jews — and of being honest about her findings about the group, and your own interpretation of Judaism showed the class images of the people when you do so. And about challeng- and of the there. It was one ing the insularity of the Jewish com-

8 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist munity — demanding of us that we haps, if they’d been able to listen to each stay open and ready to listen to and other, the story would have had a dif- learn from those whom we too often ferent ending. discount and ignore. Maybe that is the lesson imbedded 1. As quoted in a student paper by Achmad in the story of Sarah and Hagar. Per- Munjid, by permission of the author.

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 9 Speaking From, Not For, Judaism: Reconstructionism and Interreligious Dialogue

BY LEWIS JOHN ERON

nterreligious dialogue has played Truth, Honesty and Openness a central role in my spiritual and I theological growth. I have eagerly Interreligious dialogue depends on sought out dialogue as a way of learn- trust, honesty and openness. Dialogue ing more about myself and those is more than a one-time experience. around me. I have been thrilled by the The insights and skills needed to build opportunity to look at the world from the interpersonal relationships to allow another's perspective, and moved by a dialogue to happen between individu- what I have discovered about myself as als of differing faiths develop over time a result of that privilege. and through experience. Dialogue is Interreligious dialogue is a process part of a lifelong approach to spiritual in which people of diverse religious and and religious issues. spiritual backgrounds and commit- One enters into dialogue with the ments address fundamental issues of assumption that he or she has some- meaning, identity and faith. Unlike thing to learn from his or her partner other encounters between people of dif- and also that one has something to of- fering religious and spiritual commit- fer. Dialogue is reciprocal. Its purpose ments, dialogue goes beyond the simple is not to convert or convince the other exchange of information. In dialogue, but to open up hearts and minds to the participants hope to strengthen the wisdom of others. their understanding of themselves, their Dialogue is a continuing exchange partners and their deep faith commit- of ideas and feelings as people’s under- ments to their religious /ethnic/cultural standing of each other unfolds over heritages through the sharing of ideas, time. Dialogue takes place between hopes, dreams and practices. people and not between the commu-

Rabbi Lewis John Eron is Director of Religious Services at the Jewish Geriatric Home and Jewish Community Chaplain of the Jewish Family and Children’s Service in Cherry Hill, N.J.

10 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist nities, organizations, institutions, so- the comparative study of religions in cial and ethnic groups from which they that its primary concern is not with the come. customs, doctrines and structures of Yet dialogue differs from other in- faith traditions, but rather with how teractions that may also involve people individuals develop spiritual lives of varying backgrounds, such as ath- within their own religious contexts. letic competition, business enterprise, The exploration of worship, spiritual- political activity and social action, in ity, theology, ecclesiology, history and which the success of the enterprise takes culture can play an important role precedent over the indi-vidual’s social, within interreligious dialogue, but is religious, ethnic and cultural roots. not its goal. Dialogue, on the other hand, ad- dresses itself primarily to the individual Self-Assessment Is Crucial participant’s sense of rootedness within a specific context. Dialogue’s success is Thus, like all others who enter into found not in the achievement of an dialogue, I face the same fundamental objective goal, but in the deep and of- challenge: How do we honestly present ten subtle changes that take place our own faith tradition and our own within the hearts and minds of the par- unique relationship to it so that the ticipants. dialogue partners can understand each of us as living representatives of living Speaking From, Not For traditions? I enter interreligious dialogue as a In a successful interreligious dia- Jew. Yet, because of training, lifestyle logue, each participant must find a way and profession, I have a very particu- to speak out of but not for his or her lar Jewish identity. My resumé places specific religious context. The deeper me within a very specific context in the the participants are immersed in their Jewish world and in Jewish history. I faith traditions the richer the dialogue am an American Jew born in the latter can be; but as I have found out, also half of the 20th century. I am a rabbi. the more confusing. Through my ex- I studied at the Reconstructionist Rab- perience in dialogue, I have become binical College and I identify with the more aware of the subtle gaps as well Reconstructionist movement. I have a as hidden connections between my doctorate in religious studies and an personal expression of Jewish beliefs interest in history and theology. I have and practices and those more generally served the Jewish community for more expressed. To present who I am spiri- than twenty years as a pulpit rabbi, a tually and where I stand religiously, I university professor and, currently, as often feel the need to present a great the community chaplain for a local deal of information as to the range of Jewish federation. I need to be aware Jewish opinions across time and place. of all this so that I do not forget how Interreligious dialogue goes beyond distinctive and idiosyncratic my ap-

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 11 proach to Judaism may be, and how the forces of assimilation from the secu- equally deeply rooted it is in the faith lar world and by missionary efforts of and traditions of the Jewish people. other religious traditions. We still re- main a largely unknown minority If I Am Not for Myself, group even to those who seek us out in Who Am I? dialogue. Hillel’s well-known challenge, “If I Personal and Corporate Voices am not for myself, who am I? If I am just for myself, what am I? If not now, Often, my initial impulse in dia- when?” (Pirkei Avot 1:14), resonates logue is to speak for “the Jews.” At deeply within me, whenever I enter times, the issues raised in dialogue re- dialogue. That is the moment when I flect the participants’ deep lack of need to be both honest to myself and knowledge of each other’s traditions so honest to the faith and traditions of my that the pressing need is to share basic people. information. Other times, I may per- It is doubtful that Hillel could have ceive a statement made by my dialogue conceived of interreligious dialogue in partner as antagonistic, disrespectful or its contemporary sense. After all, dia- insulting to the Jews in general so that logue as we practice it today developed I feel that I must defend the Jewish slowly during the past century. Hillel’s people. I can easily lose my personal world provided few if any opportuni- voice speaking for my people. ties for people from different religious In these situations, I need to find backgrounds to meet in an atmosphere myself. I need to focus on myself as an of mutual respect. When they did meet, individual Jew and on my partner as the most likely result of the encounter an individual Christian, Muslim, Bud- was polemics and/or apologetics. Even dhist, or Hindu. Before I proceed to within the more limited context of the respond to his or her statement “on be- Jewish community, it seemed almost half of the Jews,” I need to know the miraculous when the sages of various specific, personal context out of which schools could say that both this opin- the statement grows. I also need to ion and that opinion represent the au- share with my dialogue partner the thentic words of the Living God. manner in which I heard the statement. One can imagine the difficulty of It is important for me to understand expressing one’s own opinion in such a my partner’s words as an individual’s world. Even today, the need to express statement and not as the proclamation solidarity with our fellow Jews still re- of his or her religious tradition. I need mains strong. The tragic events of the to remind myself that I am an indi- Shoah still cast a powerful shadow over vidual Jew, not the Jewish people, and our lives. Israel remains beleaguered. my task within the context of dialogue Anti-Semitism is still a significant pres- is to respond as an individual to an- ence. We continue to feel pressured by other individual’s statement.

12 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist It is often helpful in such a situa- are not values. They are, however, part tion to ask my partner to reflect what of the real world with which dialogue is has been said, so that together we may concerned. In dialogue, however, we are discover why he or she has framed the not called upon to rehearse the past, but issue in such a way. Together, as indi- to share with each other its present sig- viduals, we need to explore our spiri- nificance for each of us in our own lives. tual, emotional, and intellectual re- We also need to understand that sponses to our own traditions, and to there may be limits to our dialogue. At examine our need to speak universally any one point, it may be best to step for our faiths rather than as individual back from an issue for a time. There is adherents. no need to go directly to the hard and painful issues. A Muslim-Jewish dia- Perils of Expertise logue need not go immediately to the conflicts in the Middle East. A Jewish- The paradox at this point in dialogue Roman Catholic dialogue need not fo- is that the deeper one is involved in cus on abortion or the role of the one’s faith tradition and the more about Church during the Holocaust. A Chris- it one knows, the greater the tempta- tian-Muslim dialogue need not imme- tion is to speak for it in its entirety. diately focus on Western imperialism Since being Jewish forms such an im- or the fate of Eastern churches. portant part of my personal identity, I We need to be aware of what issues need to be aware to what extent I may are going to put us in a defensive mode perceive an “attack” on Judaism or the and approach them with care. Our per- Jewish people or Israel as an attack on sonal sense of comfort concerning a topic my sense of self. A defensive response, and our level of trust in the other will though personally satisfying, will not help define the range and depth of our advance the dialogue. In the context dialogue. There can be no dialogue about of dialogue, we need to turn conflict an area in which one or more of the par- into conversation. I would expect no ticipants are afraid to be fully themselves. less from my dialogue partner. In interreligious dialogue, we need If I Am Just for Myself, to remember that competition and What Am I? conflict have and continue to be part of the interrelationship between our vari- But I come to interreligious dialogue ous faith communities. When Chris- not merely as an individual, but also as tians and Muslims enter into dialogue a Jew — a member of the Jewish with Jews, all need to know how current people. If I just speak for myself, what events in the Middle East as well as the am I? historical relationships among the three What is my identity beyond my cultural and faith communities influence purely autonomous self? What can I our appreciation of each other. bring to the dialogue besides my per- In dialogue, competition and conflict sonal collection of beliefs and opinions?

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 13 A dialogue merely between individu- Jewish partner, a broad but honest pre- als with no strong connection to a faith sentation of Judaism. tradition cannot be an interreligious Reconstructionists understand that dialogue. We need to speak from our the term “Judaism” is ultimately an faith traditions. I come to a dialogue intellectual construct. It is a quick and to hear a Christian speak as a Chris- easy way of summarizing our people’s tian, a Muslim as a Muslim. I want to 4,000 years of cultural and religious know what their faith and religious discovery. We know that Judaism, as a community means to them. In dia- construct, says nothing, and that only logue, we can learn from each other the individual Jews speak. When I speak various ways in which we can express about “Judaism,” I try to avoid the our own religious traditions in the expression, “Judaism says.” It is my world we all share. task to express the voices of the Jewish By training and experience as a people, including my own, by talking Reconstructionist rabbi, I am particu- about majority and minority positions larly aware of how we can behave and within the Jewish tradition, by trying speak out of Judaism without claim- to place ideas and opinions within a ing to speak for Judaism. On the one historical context, and by describing hand, the study of Judaism as an un- ideas and concepts that have found folding religious civilization has shown resonance in the Jewish community — me how inadequate any theological and those that have not. standpoint or movement’s ideology are In the context of a true dialogue, at capturing the full expanse of the Jew- one’s behavior is as significant as one’s ish experience. On the other hand, I words. One cannot honestly talk about have also learned how theological re- prayer in Jewish life if one does not flections and movement ideologies are model it. One cannot explain one’s re- grounded in and reflect that experience. lationship to Shabbat or , for They grew out of a specific Jewish con- example, if one does not enable one’s text and respond to the Jewish world dialogue partner to experience them in which they live. through one’s own engagement with them. For me, this means that to ex- Representing More Than Self press the expanse of the Jewish experi- ence and to show respect to more tra- This insight enables me to speak for ditional Jews, in the course of a dia- the Jews as an individual Jew. To do logue it is often helpful to be mindful so, I need to be aware of my ground- of traditional ritual practices. ing in the Jewish tradition and, at least within the context of dialogue, be Internal and External Dialogue mindful that what I say and what I do need to reflect that tradition. For my dia- In a way, this, too, is part of the dia- logue partner to understand me as a Jew, logue experience. “Dialogue” does not he or she needs to see through me, the mean to hold a conversation with an-

14 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist other but to work through something mation of basic sancta of Jewish life, of importance. It comes from two in the context of interreligious dialogue Greek words: dia, meaning “through,” it is not difficult to ground my personal and logos, meaning “word,” but with a ritual practice in the Jewish tradition. similar range of meaning as the Hebrew Obviously, the subtleties of Jewish re- word davar. In dialogue, the inner con- ligious practice, which play such an versation between oneself and one’s tra- important role in intra-Jewish dialogue, dition is as significant as the conversa- are far less important in our dialogue tion one has with one’s dialogue part- with members of other faith commu- ner. In dialogue, one engages one’s own nities. tradition not to teach the other, but to This is not the case, however, when learn about oneself in the presence of it comes to theological positions and another. Dialogue should evoke a re- ideological commitments. I would mis- examination of one’s own tradition lead my dialogue partners if I claimed in response to the insights and concerns that Reconstructionist approaches to of the others in the dialogue. God, revelation and chosenness were This is not always easy. In May of normative Jewish beliefs — that is, that 2002, I participated in an international they reflect the beliefs held by most Jewish-Christian-Muslim dialogue in Jews over most of Jewish history. On Skopje, the capital of the newly inde- the other hand, I would disqualify pendent Republic of Macedonia. I was myself from the dialogue if I could not asked to respond to a paper I had not articulate the ways in which these con- yet read that was to be delivered by a cepts are rooted in Jewish tradition and Turkish-Muslim professor during a Sat- the reasons why I identify with a reli- urday afternoon session. Although my gious movement that supports a seem- personal practice is not so strict as to ingly untraditional interpretation. preclude writing in private on Shabbat, I felt it would be inappropriate to write If Not Now, When? in public on the Sabbath before Chris- tians and Muslims who came to learn The skill we exhibit when we are able about Judaism and Jewish life. The re- to connect our distinctive theological sult was that I had to listen more at- message — based as it is in philosophi- tentively to the paper than I would have cal pragmatism, sociological under- done otherwise, and respond out of my standings of religion and a post-mod- heart as much as out of my mind. I be- ern reading of texts — to the living lieve that it was, ultimately, a more au- religious tradition of the Jewish people, thentically Jewish response to the paper. is the most important contribution we Reconstructionists can make to con- Connecting With Tradition temporary interreligious dialogue. It also presents the greatest challenge we As a result of the Reconstructionist bring to the dialogue. focus on religious practice as the affir- Our embrace of modernist and post-

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 15 modernist tools of interpretation chal- credness of all the individual voices lenge those committed to a traditional within the community of discussion, reading of their texts and their past. debate, controversy and conversation, Our commitment to peoplehood and the community we call the people of our embrace of a communitarian vi- Israel. We understand that showing up sion stands against those dedicated to and participating in Israel’s dialogue a radical individualism in spiritual and listening to other voices is far more matters. Our abstract but immanent important than whatever understand- view of God confuses those who asso- ing might make sense to us today. ciate divine immanence with descrip- As Reconstructionist Jews, we bring tions of God as a personality and di- that sensitivity to interreligious dialogue. vine transcendence with a more ab- At our best, we come to dialogue already stract and philosophical view of God. committed to its basic principles. We We should not step away from dia- want to be with other people of faith who logue or from an honest presentation are willing to speak with us out of their of our spiritual world-view because of faith traditions and deeply held religious others’ confusion or discomfort. One commitments about their lives, their be- enters dialogue to meet the other and liefs, their hopes, and their fears and who to the extent that we are other, we have are equally willing to listen to us. We un- a place in dialogue. We need to be there derstand that religious and cultural sys- for them and for ourselves. tems grow best when they interact with other religions and cultures. Judaism Without Supernaturalism It is our commitment to Judaism as the living and unfolding religious- More than that, we represent a view based culture of the Jewish people that of religion as the product of a commu- brings us to dialogue with other faiths nity of people in dialogue with them- and keeps us in dialogue with other selves over a very long period of time. faiths as together we discover more Judaism for us is not a revealed set of about the blessings we can offer each doctrines or laws but the active log of other and, in that way, more about the the Jewish people’s continuing voyage Divine Other, the Holy One, the of spiritual discovery. We stress the sa- source of all our blessings.

16 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist “Tehom El Tehom Koreh/ Deep Calls to Deep” – Contemplative Christianity and the Emerging Practice of Jewish Spiritual Direction

BY BARBARA EVE BREITMAN

n the first day of Rosh Ha- logic of the unconscious, the new lis- Shanah, two years after my tening was more intuitive. Not only did O husband died suddenly, I gave I hear connections between peoples’ a dvar reflecting on Hagar’s past relationships and their behavior in theophany in the wilderness. I identi- the present, but I began to sense a te- fied strongly with this single mother, leological unfolding in their narratives, cast into the desert, her relationship some drawing toward the future, often with home and family shattered. Like as compelling as the urge to repeat or Hagar, feeling abandoned by, but still react to the past. crying out to God in distress, I some- how entered a deeper relationship with Patterns of Connection the mystery we call God. With no human partner to accompany me on There were moments in peoples’ the journey through the desert, I expe- narratives in which the energy of life, rienced intimacy with a sensed Pres- of love, of creativity, of the call for jus- ence. tice seemed to be drawing people for- In my psychotherapy practice, I ward with more intentionality than started hearing differently. Although could be explained by the ongoing much intuition is required to glimpse thrust of maturation and development, how the narrative of someone’s life fits or even by self-willed moral conviction. together according to the paradoxical I also glimpsed patterns of connec-

Barbara Eve Breitman is a psychotherapist in private practice and an instructor at the University of Pennsylvania School of Social Work and at the Recon- structionist Rabbinical College, where she also serves as a Spiritual Director.

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 17 tion within multiple layers of narrative denominations. that shimmered with meaning and As it is currently understood, spiri- symbolism greater than could be ex- tual direction involves a relationship plained by simply connecting events in among two or more people who meet the stories. People were talking with me regularly for the purpose of deepening more about their spiritual yearnings their spiritual life and relationship with and about God. After I shared some God, whoever or however they under- of this with a minister friend in my stand God to Be. Clinical Pastoral Education group, she brought me a brochure from the Contemplative Practice Shalem Institute for Spiritual Forma- tion, an “ecumenical Christian organi- As a contemplative practice and not zation calling the people of God to a counseling relationship, spiritual di- deeper spiritual life for the world.”1 rection involves periods of resting in “Here; you might be interested in silence, reflecting on how the Source spiritual direction.” of Life, Being, the Holy One, Holiness, is experienced day to day, and how to What Is Spiritual Direction? be more attentive, aware, available and responsive to that Presence. Spiritual direction, about which I Because the Source of Life does not knew little, is a spiritual practice communicate as human beings do, one grounded in the Christian contempla- needs to cultivate the ability to discern tive tradition. It draws historically on how God’s Presence is manifest in the the practices of the early (third to fifth ordinary moments of life that can be century) desert fathers and mothers; traced through one’s narrative over integrates the spiritual insights of great time. The premise of spiritual direc- 16th century contemplatives like St. tion is that, as with davening, Torah Teresa of Avila and St. John of the study, meditation or other spiritual dis- Cross; employs the exercises in spiri- ciplines, it is possible to become more tual discernment of St. Ignatius of adept at “hearing the still, small voice” Loyola; and includes as well the wis- through reflection, contemplation and dom of other illumined teachers practice. throughout church history. Becoming a student in Shalem’s two- The practice of spiritual direction year training program in individual has traditionally been identified with spiritual direction meant immersing Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, myself in the Christian contemplative and has continued to be practiced tradition, not as a scholar or academic, through the centuries in various Catho- but as a person of faith. It meant open- lic orders. In contemporary American ing myself to be touched by the spiri- Christian communities, spiritual direc- tual wisdom of a tradition toward tion is being renewed for today’s seek- which I, as a Jew, had inherited a his- ers, and has spread to many Protestant torical allergy, if not a phobia. Although

18 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist I have long been interested in the study ativity, my authenticity or my integ- of comparative religion, I initially had rity. I had not previously thought of to struggle to enter the symbol system these as “callings” from God. and mythos of Christianity. Having this language enabled me to For Christians, spiritual direction is name ineffable experiences that had grounded in an incarnational, Trini- profoundly impacted and shaped my tarian theology that understands hu- choices and the direction of my life. man beings to be capable both of be- The idea that in these moments of “call- ing in direct relationship with and of ing” was evidence of a personal rela- receiving guidance from the Holy tionship with God was extremely com- Spirit, the third person of the Trinity. pelling. It also enabled a deeper sense This formulation is not only theologi- of identification with biblical figures cally challenging to Jews, it raises the portrayed as having been called by question: Can a contemporary Jew ex- God. The concept of a personal rela- perience or believe in the possibility of tionship with God began to come into a personal relationship with God? focus. As a liberal Jew, I have never ac- cepted the medieval idea of hashgacha “Holy Listening” and the Shema pratit, Divine concern for individual human events. I have, however, experi- In spiritual direction, one learns to enced life crises occasioned by circum- practice “holy listening.” This is listen- stances beyond my control and felt an ing as a contemplative discipline. As inner call to which I needed to respond, distinct from active listening or even “Hineni, Here I am.” When the children empathic listening, we are not trying of my first cousin were orphaned by the to figure anything out, or even to em- murder of their mother, I felt in the depth pathize with a person’s feelings, al- of my being that one of the reasons I had though that might inevitably occur be- been put on this earth was to say, “Here I cause our minds and emotional hearts am,” by assuming responsibility for the are open. care of her daughters. Holy listening means cultivating an added dimension: listening with an in- Hearing Callings ner attitude of receptivity, with relaxed attentiveness rather than focused con- As my life has unfolded, I have been centration, with what Carol Ochs calls presented with many opportunities, a stance of “attentive waiting.”2 It in- invitations — even demands — to use volves listening with the ear of our heart my unique abilities, talents, and gifts for intimations of divine presence, lis- in service to others. I have experienced tening for how God’s call might be many treacherous junctures when I had emerging within the being and narra- to decide to “choose life” rather than tive of the other person and within proceed down a path that would lead ourselves as we listen to the other. to the deadening of my self, my cre- The central statement of the Jewish

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 19 faith, the Shema (Hear Israel, YHVH the sense that giving voice to women’s Elohenu, YHVH Ehad), declares that spiritual experiences was to “let more hearing is the quintessentially sacred act of God”5 into the world. for Jews. Spiritual direction is a disci- I have found spiritual direction as a pline through which we cultivate the practice to be consistent with the femi- kind of listening asked of us by the nist principle of giving primacy to Shema. The director listens for how the peoples’ direct encounters with the Source of Life, Ayn HaHayim, is beck- Holy, rather than ignoring or marginal- oning, drawing, inviting this person izing experiences that do not conform into deeper connection with herself, to received tradition. People sometimes with others, with Creation; how Life enter spiritual direction explaining that is inviting this person into service. they have turned away from tradition because their experiences of the Holy Encounters with the Holy are too different from the images of God they find in the Bible and prayer- Because God is One and inheres in book. everything, the director can listen to Spiritual direction not only supports the total life field of a person for how, people to give voice to their lived ex- through whom or through which ex- periences of the Holy, but also enables periences and circumstances the invi- them, with a Jewishly knowledgeable tation is coming; the director can lis- director, to connect these experiences ten for where, how, when, through to a richer Jewish language than they whom or through what experiences might previously have known to exist. wisdom is being offered in response to that question. The director opens and Identifying Spiritual Types listens for how Being is pressing for full presence, aliveness, expression in this Those who practice spiritual direc- person’s life, how Being is moving this tion know that each individual will person at her depths. experience and name the Holy differ- In my earlier years of involvement ently. A spiritual director needs aware- in Jewish feminist communities, I had ness and sensitivity to different spiri- spoken of “our lives as Torah,” under- tual types: for some, God may be the standing the stories of women’s current One who urges them to work for so- encounters with the Holy to be as sa- cial justice and tikkun olam; for oth- cred as the journeys of our ancestors ers, God may be the Beloved who in- recorded in the Bible. I had not un- spires devotion: for still others, God derstood myself to be individually ad- may be the Source of Creativity in na- dressed by God, but I had experienced ture, art or healing: for others, God being part of a collective that was may be most available through the ex- “standing again at Sinai,”3 responding ercise of the intellect and the process to a powerful urging to “go forth to a of study, or through direct perception place we did not know,”4 propelled by and intuition: and for still others, any

20 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist talk of God or naming of God may feel Direct Apprehension idolatrous, though they may have had vs. Mediation experiences of ineffable holiness.6 I therefore found the practice of Through my studies at Shalem, I came spiritual direction to be consistent with to see how important spiritual direction the Jewish tradition of God’s multi- could become as a practice for contem- vocality at Sinai. If, as a on porary Jews. However, I knew there was Psalm 29:4 states, each Israelite and and continues to be, both historically every Jew to be born heard God at Sinai and theologically, enormous tension according to his/her own strength – within Judaism about whether human “Kol Adonai Ba-Koah. " – then spiritual beings can commune directly with the direction is a discipline that enables mystery we call God, and more cru- people to develop the ability to hear cially, whether Jews will grant religious how God might be communicating authority to such apprehensions. uniquely to them. There is, in fact, much that and Jewish scholars have to say on this Partners in Seeking subject. In a provocative essay in the “Special Issue on Theology” published In introducing spiritual direction to in the journal , Jewish seekers, it is important to note Martin Samuel Cohen demonstrates that the custom of spiritual friendship that this tension actually begins in the is not new to Judaism. The rabbis tells Bible: us in Pirke Avot 1:6 to “get yourself a friend” as a companion in religious The Torah repeatedly makes the matters. Hasidic rebbes advise that point that seeing God is a fatal “You should see to it that you have a experience for human beings in good friend with whom you can talk all but the most extraordinary cir- regularly about the service of God.”7 cumstances . . . [however] at the We are also heir to the legacy of rebbes core of the spirituality of the Psal- who used their charismatic, esoteric ter is the idea, openly and una- capacities to discern the soul journeys pologetically presented, that sen- of their Hasidim. sual communion with God is What is new to Judaism is a struc- available to every pious Jew, to tured, contemplative discipline every seeker, who devotes his or through which lay people (one need her spiritual efforts to the quest not be clergy to be a spiritual director) for contact with the divine realm.8 who seek a regular discipline of discern- ing God’s presence in their lives can Cohen demonstrates that “Ta Na K H , meet together and cultivate greater although indeed monolithic in its as- awareness and willingness on the spiri- sumptions about the existence of God, tual path. presents anything but a unified con- cept of how human beings can know,

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 21 serve and commune with the divine Debate Over Revelation realm."9 In Talmud, the tension is expressed Priests and Prophets in terms of whether divine revelation stopped at Sinai or continues in the But Cohen goes further. He theo- present. In the very aggadah (TB Baba rizes that the “spiritual program” of the Metzía 59b) that vouchsafes to the rab- Torah is the program of the priests who bis ultimate religious authority, and were hostile to the institution of proph- that is a prooftext declaring that for ecy and the sensual perception of God. Jews revelation ceased at Sinai, there is It is the priests and the prophets “who still evidence of tension. together formed the twin poles of an- In a matter of halakhic dispute, cient Israelite spirituality,” and “Juda- Rabbi Eliezar invokes the intervention ism followed a specific path: the way of Heaven to decide an issue of dis- of the priest.”10 agreement between himself and the However, Cohen asserts, we have other rabbis. In response to this invo- reached a moment in history when Jews cation, God performs miracles and a “might do well to consider the path not Bat Kol, Heavenly Voice, is heard. taken and to consider the spirituality Rabbi Jeremiah nevertheless concludes of the Psalter as a reasonable approach with the famous dictum: “ . . . the To- to developing the kind of faith in God rah had already been given at Mount they wish to motivate and lend mean- Sinai; we pay no attention to a Heav- ing to their ritual observance.”11 enly Voice because You have long since In a response to Cohen, Howard written in the Torah at Mount Sinai Addison further questions “whether the . . . After the majority must one in- visual and aural presence of God is cline.” God is then imagined to laugh quite as absent in the Torah as Rabbi joyously at being defeated by His sons. Cohen contends . . . although our tra- Although Rabbi Eliezer is excommu- dition asserts that ‘the spirit of proph- nicated for invoking God directly, the ecy departed from Israel after Malakhi,’ very presence of this story in the canon there have been no lack of visions or indicates the existence of tension about visionaries among the Jewish people.”12 sources of religious authority even Addison reformulates the question within the rabbinic academy. Although about direct experience vs. normative the rabbis definitively arrogate religious tradition: “For me, the question is not authority to themselves and the talmudic whether such experiences exist legiti- process, the tension as to whether spiri- mately within Judaism, but rather tual wisdom comes through direct con- ‘What is the nature of such experiences? tact with the divine or solely through the How do you know that it is God that mediation of normative religious insti- is addressing you, and how within the tutions continues in later eras of Jew- bounds of normative Judaism should ish history. 13 you respond?’ ”

22 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist Apprehending God’s Presence much less our willingness to entertain the notion that communication from In a brilliant but brief study entitled the Source of Life might be available “Devotion and Commandment,” in any discernable form to human be- Arthur Green demonstrates how “a ings has been strained beyond belief. large number of Hasidic sources use Our skepticism can only be intensi- Abraham . . . as a . . . way of discussing fied as God’s name is invoked to jus- the tension they feel around the issue tify terrorism on many sides of the of commandment and spirit,”14 be- Middle East conflict. And yet, contem- tween the primacy of and porary Jews continue to yearn for and observance as the way of divine service experience connection with YHVH, vs. seeking direct apprehension of the Source of All Life. Many of the Jews God’s presence as the more important who have such personal experiences spiritual path. with the Mystery we call God seek ways Because Abraham is the exemplar of of communing with the divine, both the pious man who heard and followed within Jewish contexts and through the God’s call prior to the Sinaitic revela- wisdom of other spiritual paths. tion, he is a figure through whom Hasidic writers could express the ten- Can We Learn from Christianity? sion they felt between accepting the classical authority of For centuries, Jews have learned (which recast Abraham as a Torah from and integrated the wisdom of scholar) and their energetic, mystical other philosophical and faith tradi- yearning for devekut, utter attachment tions. Jewish mystics and mysticism, in to God. particular, have been deeply impacted by diverse forms of thought as Juda- Divine Service ism has developed “as a minority reli- gion in a variety of cultural environ- According to Green, this tension ments.”16 finds its most dramatic expression in It is probably inevitable, however, the thought of Rabbi Levi Yitzchak of that any contemporary borrowing from Berdichev, who “compares two sorts of Christianity might seem particularly divine service, that of the command- anathema. In learning from a Chris- ments, or Judaism as we know it, and tian spiritual tradition, we not only the service of God through devotion have to face the resistance and theo- (mesirut nefesh) alone,” concluding that logical problems generated by 2,000 “service through devotion alone is in years of Christian anti-Judaism and the fact superior.”15 more recent history of racial anti-Sem- It is clear that for post-Holocaust itism, we must also confront our fears and post-modern Jews, our belief in the of assimilation in the uniquely chal- existence of God, our capacity to trust lenging Christian milieu of the Ameri- any direct experience of the Holy, cas.

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 23 I was therefore particularly moved of interreligious encounter through to discover a model for interreligious which human consciousness could learning that preserves the distinctive- evolve to a higher stage of spiritual de- ness of each tradition while enabling a velopment, complexity and awareness deep and transformative encounter of God. with the other. The intellectual origins of the model can be found in the work Social Constructivism of Jesuit scientist, theologian and vi- sionary Pierre Teilhard de Chardin. While de Chardin wrote prior to the post-modern critique of grand evolu- “Center to Center Union” tionary schemas, Leonard Swidler, a professor in the religion department of According to his famous formula- Temple University, incorporates the tion, “In any domain, whether it be crucial insights of social constructivism cells of a body, the members of a soci- into a contemporary reformulation of ety or the elements of spiritual synthe- de Chardin: sis, union differentiates.”17 What de Chardin observed was that as forms of With the growing understanding life unite in what he calls “center to that all perceptions of and state- center union,” they do not dissolve, ments about reality were — even disintegrate or metamorphose into the if true — necessarily limited (the other, they actually become more richly opposite of absolute, that is liter- and uniquely themselves. ally unlimited), the permission, This is the mystery of love between and even the necessity, for dialogue human beings, as it is the mystery of with those who thought differ- how increasingly complex life forms ently from us became increasingly evolve biologically. apparent . . . But if we can no longer hold to an absolutist view By touching each other at the cre- of the truth . . . we must take cer- ative core of their being, [indi- tain steps so as not to be logically vidual elements] release new en- forced into the silence of total rela- ergy which leads to more complex tivism . . . That is we need to en- units. Greater complexity leads to gage in dialogue with those who greater interiority, which, in turn, have differing cultural, philosophi- leads to more creative unions. cal, social, religious viewpoints so Throughout the process, the in- as to strive toward an ever fuller per- dividual elements do not lose their ception of the truth of the meaning identity, but rather deepen and of things.19 fulfill it through union.18 At this point in history . . . the De Chardin believed that “center to forces of planetization are bring- center union” was a model for the kind ing about an unprecedented com-

24 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist plexification of consciousness Rabbinical College and at a program through the convergence of cul- called Lev Shomea (The Listening tures and religions. . . . However, Heart) offered under the auspices of now that the forces of divergence Elat Chayyim, I have discovered not have shifted to convergence, the only how desirous many Jews are to religions must meet each other in have a structured context for talking center to center unions, discover- about their direct experiences of the ing what is most authentic in each Holy, but also how this practice has other, thereby releasing creative enabled rabbis and knowledgeable energy toward a more complex- Jews, as well as unschooled seekers, to ified form of religious conscious- deepen their relationship with Judaism. ness.20 As I have been engaged in bringing the practice of spiritual direction into Such interreligious exchanges can contemporary Jewish communities and enable a new global consciousness to articulating a Jewish theology in which emerge that “will not level all differ- to ground it, I find that classical Jew- ences among peoples; rather it will gen- ish sources and texts feel more alive to erate . . . creative unions in which di- me. Though spiritual direction, as a versity is not erased but intensified.”21 specific form of spiritual practice, is being borrowed from the Christian Learning and Enriching contemplative tradition, the practice of keeping God before us always is cen- This is precisely the kind of encoun- tral to Judaism.22 ter I experienced at Shalem. I went to Any practice that enables us to Shalem to learn from Christians about deepen our connection with the living their contemplative tradition, but in God deepens our relationship with the the process, I reengaged Judaism with Source of Revelation in Judaism. renewed energy, commitment and cre- ativity. I also did not intend or expect to do any teaching about Judaism while at Shalem; however, I was strongly en- 1. From the Shalem Institute’s mission couraged by Shalem’s faculty and stu- statement. dents to share my Jewish knowledge. 2. Carol Ochs and Kerry Olitzky, Jewish Spiritual Guidance (Jossey-Bass Publishers: I discovered that many contempo- San Francisco, 1997). rary Christians suffer because access to 3. This is an allusion to Judith Plaskow’s the roots of their own faith have been groundbreaking book of Jewish feminist severed by 2,000 years of traumatic re- theology, Standing Again at Sinai (Harper lationship between Christians and & Row, Publishers: San Francisco, 1990). Jews. Their encounter with me as a Jew 4. This experience was captured for con- temporary seekers in Debbie Friedman’s enriched their own Christian faith. song “Lechi Lach.” In the process of training spiritual 5. The Kotzker Rebbe says: God is present directors both at the Reconstructionist where we let God in.

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 25 6. Tilden Edwards, Spiritual Friend: Re- Mysticism” in Doors of Understanding, Steven claiming the Gift of Spiritual Direction Chase, ed. (Franciscan Press, 1997), 321. (Paulist Press: New York 1980), 112-116. 17. Teilhard de Chardin, The Phenomenon 7. Yitzchak Buxbaum, Jewish Spiritual of Man (Harper & Row: New York, 1961), Practices (Jason Aronson, Inc.: New Jer- 262. sey, 1990), 669. 18. Ibid. 8. Martin Samuel Cohen, “Seeking God 19. Leonard Swidler, “The Age of Global in the Bible,” Conservative Judaism, Vol. Dialogue,” in Doors of Understanding, op. LI, Number 2, Winter, 1999, 27. cit., 17. 9. Ibid. 20. Ibid,. 20-22. 10. Ibid., 30. 21. Ibid., 16-17. 11. Ibid. 22. “Shiviti YHVH lenegdi tamid; Place 12. Howard A. Addison, Response to Mar- YHVH before you always” (Ps. 16:8) be- tin Cohen, Ibid., 35. came the central verse in Jewish devotional 14. Arthur Green, “Devotion and Com- art in the 18th and 19th centuries, up to mandment: The Faith of Abraham in the the present. It forms the centerpiece of Hasidic Imagination” (Hebrew Union Col- many synagogue plaques, as well as Jewish lege Press: Cincinnati 1989), 19-20. meditation objects, votive tablets and amu- 15. Ibid. lets that are named after the first word of 16. Moshe Idel, “‘Unio Mystica’ as a Crite- the verse. rion: Hegelian Phenomenologies of Jewish

26 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist Beyond the Noahide Laws

BY RICHARD HIRSH

his second Torah portion of the ment of Rabbi Yitzhak’s question of year, Noah, like the first, Genesis 1:1: Why does the Torah start T Bereshit, is quite long; one here instead of at Exodus 12, hahodesh. might even say that the story of the flood hazeh lachem rosh hodashim. , “this sea- covers a lot of ground. And like the first son [of the leaving of Egypt] is where chapters of the Torah, the story is excep- your story begins.” The answer offered tional in its absence of connection to the is: lest the other nations come along primary concern of the Torah, namely, later on and dispute the Israelite claim the story of the Jewish people, with the to the land of Canaan; God made the tiny exception of the mention of Abra- world and apportions the territory as God ham at the very end of Genesis 11. It of- wishes. And in exactly this type of inter- ten seems that the rabbis who devised the pretation, we see a traditional under- division of the Torah into weekly por- standing that the universal aspect of the tions seemed intent on getting beyond Torah takes on meaning only in rela- the universal history of the first eleven tionship to the particular story of the chapters as quickly as possible, and so Jewish people. An analogy is Rosh crammed them into two long liturgical HaShanah as Yom Harat Olam, the day assignments. the world is created — which just hap- Perhaps they meant to be protective, pens to fall on the first day of the Jew- trying to deflect Jews from excessive re- ish year. flection on the mystical meanings of Ma’- But these early stories, and especially aseh Bereshit, the wonders of creation. Per- the story of the flood and its aftermath, haps they were embarrassed by the sense cannot be so easily neutralized or of myth that is woven through the exag- marginalized. If perhaps for no other gerated narratives of the antedilu-vians. reason than that Adam and Eve, Cain Or perhaps they simply thought that the and Abel, and Noah are better known sooner one got through this cosmic over- than Aaron and Miriam, Nadav and ture, the sooner one could get to the real Avihu, and, l’havdil, Korah,. Dathan story — the story of the Jewish people. and Aviram — to name but a few of the key characters in “our” part of the Where the Torah Begins Torah — we are annually called back to the humbling realization that the We are familiar with ’s restate- whole world is not, in fact, Jewish.

Rabbi Richard Hirsh is Editor of The Reconstructionist and Executive Director of the Reconstructionist Rabbinical Association.

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 27 The Noahide Laws the gentile population is obligated to: 1. establish a legal system (dinim) The story of Noah is the primary 2. reject idolatry (avodah zarah) text from and through which classical 3. reject blasphemy (gilelat Hashem) Jewish tradition sought to understand 4. reject sexual immorality (giluy arayot) the relationship of humanity at large 5. reject bloodshed/murder (shefichut to the God of Israel — and vice versa. damim) This God also just happens to be, cour- 6. reject stealing (ha-gezel) tesy of the conundrum of monotheism, 7. not consume meat torn from a live the one God of all creation, and by animal (ever min ha-hai) implication, the one God who must In the Babylonian Talmud (San- stand in some form of relationship to hedrin 56 AB) prohibitions on castra- the other peoples of the earth. tion, sorcery, and mingling of plant/ To help mediate some of the tension animal species are added to these seven. inherent in this audacious claim, Jew- In the non-canonical Book of Jubilees ish tradition speaks of the shevah mitz- (perhaps dated to the second century vot bnai noah,. the seven command- as well) the positive command to honor ments that are binding on humanity parents is included. But in most com- at large. (In the classical rabbinic imagi- mon as well as popular countings, the nation, the Jewish people are of course basic seven enumerated in the bound by the of are assumed.2 the Torah.) In comparison to the 613 mitzvot by Rabbinic tradition derives these which Jews are bound, the gentiles seven Noahide obligations primarily seem to get off fairly easy. And one can from Genesis 9:1-11. That text, like see the marketing wisdom of the saint Exodus 20, which does not easily or formerly known as Saul (Paul), who, clearly yield the “Ten” Command- in the years following the death of Jesus, ments, does not clearly delineate seven argued that gentiles could come into laws that can be easily identified and the “new covenant” without the bur- enumerated. But through a combina- den of the Torah commandments. tion of what the text says and what the rabbis infer, we end up with seven com- A Lot or a Little? mandments with which gentiles must comply. But while seven mitzvot may not seem like much, in that strand of rabbinic Seven Laws of Humanity tradition that has no particular fond- ness or respect for gentiles, we find “the According to David Novak,1 the ear- sages’ critical view of the pagan world liest citation of the seven Noahide laws that made them skeptical of the gen- occurs in the Tosefta, a rabbinic text tiles’ ability to fulfill even these few, dating to the late second century of the very basic obligations. . . Nevertheless, Common Era. In that text, we see that with the notion of the Noahide laws

28 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist in the background, tolerant feelings rule on their respective faiths. But it toward the non-Jewish world do does show one more step along the path emerge.”3 of Judaism coming to terms with the When Israelite religion and later possibility that other religions might Judaism’s significant others were pagan have a glimmer of truth to them. nature religions or dualistic systems such as Zoroastrianism or gnostic mys- Through a Jewish Prism tery cults, it was perhaps easier to un- derstand “that the overriding view of But even then, Jewish perspectives the non-Israelite world expressed in the refracted the gentile world through a [was] negative.”4 But Jewish prism. Thus, Maimonidies with the rise of Christianity and, sev- writes: eral centuries later, Islam, Judaism’s sig- nificant others were no longer quite A gentile who accepts the seven “them,” but in some peculiar way were commandments [of Noah] and sort of “us,” at least related in some way observes them scrupulously is a to us. righteous gentile and will have a The Christian claim of universal sal- portion in the world to come, vation required some response on the provided that he accepts them part of Judaism. One talmudic posi- and performs them because the tion is hasedei. umot haolam, yesh lahem Holy One, blessed be He, helek. l’olam haba, the righteous of the commanded them in the Torah other nations have a share in the world and made known through Moses to come. And by the middle ages, Jew- our teacher that the observance ish religious authorities, under the in- thereof had been enjoined upon fluence of universalizing philosophy, in the descendants of Noah even the context of cultural exchange, and before the Torah was given. But out of social and political necessity, if his observance is based on a found themselves engaged in debate reasoned conclusion he is not over whether Christians and Muslims deemed a resident alien, or a were idolaters (Akkum [acronym for righteous gentile, but/or one of ovdei kochavim umezalot — literally, their wise men.5 worshippers of stars and constella- tions]) or monotheists (B’nai Noah. ). As in Rashi’s commentary to Gen- While there was debate, the major- esis, we again see how gentile reality is ity view that eventually emerged among but a pale reflex of Jewish centrality: If rabbinic authorities was that Christians not for the Torah revealed to the Jews, and Muslims were not idolaters. This, gentiles would not know what they of course, would have been of little were supposed to believe and how they concern or consequence to any Chris- were supposed to act. In other words, tians or Muslims, who presumably were gentiles who reason themselves and not waiting for Jewish authorities to their society into a social compact

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 29 whereby the seven Noahide laws are have carried on the conversation about foundational, still do not fulfill the what constitutes the essential and non- faith requirement, regardless of their negotiable beliefs and behaviors that comportment. They pass the sociologi- transcend tribes and bind people into cal test but not the religious one. They a common humanity. The Noahide tra- may be better to live among in this dition is on the one hand a repudia- world, but they are not going to be our tion of the exclusivity that denies that neighbors in the world to come. there can be more than one path to the same God. The Noahide tradition is Modernity and Faith thus a corrective to the fundamentalist impulse to demonize and to ostracize The advent of modernity, with its those who are “not us.” tendency to push formerly exclusive But it is equally a repudiation of rela- religious and ethnic groups into col- tivism: not all choices are equal, not laboration, conversation, cooperation all beliefs are valid, and not all actions and conflict with each other, forced the are acceptable. Beyond the distinctions issue of Judaism’s relationship with that exist between groups, we search for other faiths to evolve again. To live basic behaviors of humanity to which harmoniously in a secular society in- we can hold anyone responsible. The volved the inevitable diminution of Noahide tradition is thus a corrective claims to exclusive salvation and pos- to the relativism that would prevent us session of the one true faith. Perhaps a from affirming one belief over another price that we pay, especially in America, in a values-neutral universe. is the modest and moderate and mini- mal meaning that we have often given Beyond the Noahide Laws to religion. As Dwight Eisenhower said: “Our government makes no sense un- But the Noahide laws can only take less it is founded in a deeply felt reli- us so far on the journey toward rethink- gious faith — and I don’t care what it ing both our own religious tradition is.”6 and our relationship to those living in The struggle of one religion to un- and through other religious traditions. derstand its affirmations in conversa- As long as the supernatural assump- tion with those who, with equal integ- tions of the origins of religion, sacred rity, affirm different beliefs, is difficult. text and religious identity remain in- There is always the temptation to re- tact, we will be unable to escape the duce faith to least common denomi- grudging tolerance that often substi- nator terms. And there is always the tutes for an embrace of the opportuni- temptation to affirm one’s own tradi- ties — and risks — of religious plural- tion by denying the possibility of mean- ism. ing in another’s. The Noahide laws are not evidence The Noahide discussion throughout of a liberal appreciation of the validity Jewish history is one way in which Jews of other faiths, wrote Mordecai Kaplan:

30 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist Maimonides . . . maintained that The tradition of the Noahide laws for a gentile to conform to the suggests that the future may well de- Noahide laws was not enough. To pend on which form of religion — plu- obtain salvation he must look up- ralistic or exclusive — gains ascendancy on those laws as revealed by God. within all of the religions that seek, in Since the only evidence of any their own way, to discover God and revelation is to be found in the what God expects of us. Perhaps what Torah of Israel, the achievement matters most is not the presumption of salvation by a Gentile was thus that God has, as it were, pointed out made to depend on his recogniz- only one true religion, but that we be- ing Israel as the chosen vehicle of gin to think instead of the One True divine salvation for mankind.7 God toward which differing religions may yet learn to point. We are, the Torah suggests at the end of parashat Noah. , destined or doomed 1. Novak, David, The Image of the Non- to descend into differing tribes. Pre- Jew in Judaism (New York and Toronto, modern societies affirm that there can The Edwin Mellon Press, 1983), 3. be only One Truth among those tribes. 2. See, for example, J.H. Hertz, The Pentateuch and Haftorahs (London, The Other is not different; the Other Soncino Press, 1972) 33, n.7. is wrong. Modernity affirms that any 3. Rembaum, Joel, “Dealing With Strang- or all of those tribes may hold A Truth, ers” in Etz Hayyim Torah and Commentary but that no one holds The Truth. The (Philadelphia, 2001, The Rabbinical As- Other is not necessarily wrong; the sembly and the Jewish Publication Soci- Other may only be different. ety), 1381. 4. Ibid. The difference in outlook is not 5. Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Malachim, 8:11. without consequences. In our post- 6. Quoted in Will Herberg, Protestant- September 11 world, the implications Catholic-Jew (New York: Doubleday and of exclusivist religious faith are all too Company Inc., 1955), 84. evident. We are, Andrew Sullivan 7. Kaplan, Mordecai M., The Future of the American Jew (New York: Reconstruction- wrote, “fighting for religion against one ist Press, 1948) 223. of the deepest strains in religion there 8. Sullivan, Andrew: “This Is A Religious is. And not only our lives but our souls War,” New York Times Magazine, October are at stake.”8 7, 2001, 52.

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 31 Dabru Emet — A Reconstructionist Perspective

BY NANCY FUCHS-KREIMER

n contrast to other religious sys- Not surprisingly, the cataclysmic de- tems in the world, Judaism and struction of European Jewry in the I Christianity have much in com- heart of Western Christendom has oc- mon. Both agree, in their traditional casioned profound thinking in both forms, that God works in history and communities. that historical events reveal to us God’s intentions for God’s chosen people, the Theological Revolution Jews, and ultimately for humankind. As Richard Rubenstein1 pointed out, During the last half century, a theo- Yo-hannan ben Zakkai and Justin Mar- logical revolution has taken place with- tyr shared the view that the destruc- in Christianity. The recognition of tion of by the Romans was Christianity’s complicity in creating the part of the unfolding of a divine drama. conditions leading to the Holocaust The difference was in their understand- provoked some Christians to acknowl- ing of that drama. edge the ongoing validity of Judaism Because Christianity’s founding and the Jewish people. This has led “myth” (as Rubenstein referred to it) some to efforts at responsible rethink- emerged out of Jewish history, Jews ing of God and of Christianity. would inevitably be players in the In the interreligious world, confer- Christian view of the world. Jews, on ences and symposia, dialogues and joint the other hand, had their own “myth” publications have flourished. Theolo- of Jewish history in which Christians gians have devoted large portions of played a far less important role. their professional lives to reconstruct- Nevertheless, both Judaism and ing Christian thought in light of the Christianity have classically affirmed new awareness of the ongoing validity revelation in history and scripture as a of Judaism.2 record of that revelation. Both affirm Over the last decades, increasing God’s ongoing involvement in history. numbers of Roman Catholic and Prot-

Rabbi Nancy Fuchs-Kreimer is Director of the Religious Studies Program and Associate Professor of Religious Studies at the Reconstructionist Rabbinical College.

32 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist estant groups have published theologi- Christianity, it would be fair to say that cal statements with explicit condem- the endless fascination of Christians nations of the Catholic Church’s his- with Judaism has not been reciprocated toric teaching of contempt, and clear by most Jews.5 affirmations of Judaism and the Jew- ish people as en-duringly valid.3 It was Pluralism and Respect the courage and creativity of this work that inspired me as a graduate student We believed in pluralism and mu- to specialize in the field of Jewish- tual respect for all other faiths. We Christian Relations. hoped that Christians would not per- secute us or try to convert our children. Why No Jewish Response? Beyond that, we did not see Christian- ity as needing any special response. On Yet despite all this activity, until re- the other hand, how the Holocaust speaks cently no organized Jewish body has to our own understanding of God, of come together to issue a correspond- chosenness and of history remains an ing statement concerning Christianity important question for Jewish theol- and its place within Jewish thought. ogy. Rubenstein suggested in the 1960s Several factors contributed to this. Per- that it would lead many Jews to “de- haps most obvious, unlike the Catholic mythologize” the very world view we Church, the Jewish people lacks a Vati- share with Christians. can, and while we do have institutions Nevertheless, as Jews continued to similar to those of the Protestant appreciate the positive results of Chris- churches that drafted, voted upon and tian self-examination and to enlist re- passed the resolutions concerning Jews pentant Christians in various Jewish and Judaism, Jewish groups do not of- causes, an uncomfortable asymmetry ten engage in theological pronounce- emerged. While Christians were pro- ment. foundly interested in talking about When theological statements have God, Jews appeared content to reap the been made, such as in Emet v’Emunah, benefit from Christians’ more benign the Conservative Movement’s 1988 view of Jews — but remained reluc- declaration of Jewish doctrine, other tant to discuss theology. Jewish schol- faiths have been dealt with as a group ars who had the benefit of sustained without singling out Christianity for relations with Christians through their special treatment.4 work began to wonder if the Jewish Quite simply, the issues of Judaism community could do more. and Jews are more important theologi- cally for Christians than the issues of Origins of Dabru Emet Christianity and Christians are for Jews. Although Franz Rosenzweig and In the mid-1990s, the Baltimore-based a few other theologians have explored Institute for Jewish-Christian Studies the notion of a Jewish theology of convened a group of Jewish scholars who

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 33 believed that it was past time at least an important political gesture and that, to acknowledge the changes within subtleties of belief aside, I shared the Christianity, and to let Christians know intention of the enterprise and admired that the struggles they were going the motives and good will of the au- through to rethink their own faith were thors. not unheeded by all Jews. Beyond that, the group wondered if the time had Jews React to Dabru Emet come for a more daring step, for Jews to challenge their own thinking and to Not surprisingly, Christians who offer a thoughtful communal response care about these matters were delighted to this unprecedented change in the re- by this conciliatory and pioneering ges- lationship between the two faiths. ture. The reaction among Jews was The group conceived of a book of more varied. Irving Greenberg, writing essays and a public statement that on Beliefnet.com, called it “the most would offer an affirmation of Chris- positive affirmation of Christianity ever tianity parallel to the one Christian made by a committed Jewish group” bodies have been publishing about Ju- and praised its authors for their cour- daism. The statement that emerged — age. Other Jewish leaders, however, Dabru Emet (“Speak the Truth,” after strongly dissented. the words of Zechariah 8:16) — was The statement about the Holocaust written by four highly regarded profes- drew the most emotional responses. sors of : Tikva Frymer- Many Jews felt that Christians had been Kensky of the University of Chicago, too easily “let off the hook.” James David Novak of the University of Tor- Rudin of the American Jewish Com- onto, Peter Ochs of the University of mittee argued that the statement had Virginia, and Michael A. Signer of the been too generous in its appraisal of University of Notre Dame. It was pub- the role of Christianity in the Holo- lished in The New York Times (and sev- caust. He pointed out that it was ironic eral other newspapers) on September that while the Jewish statement said, 10, 2000 with 170 signatures of rab- “Nazism was not a Christian phenom- bis, Jewish scholars and intellectuals, enon,” the United Methodist Church including some leading Reconstruc- had recently referred to the Holocaust tionist rabbis.6 as “the catastrophic culmination of a I was an early member of the group long history of anti-Jewish attitudes (although no longer active when the and actions in which Christians, and statement idea developed), a signer of sometimes the Church itself, have been the statement, and a contributor to the deeply implicated.”8 book that was published in conjunc- Obviously, the statement reflected tion with the statement.7 I signed the the setting in which it emerged. The statement because of my respect for my Christians with whom Jews tended to colleagues, and to honor and support be in dialogue were now doing such a the venture. I understood that this was superb job of self critique that 170 Jews

34 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist felt it was a moment in history in which Jews have not always been con- they could be the ones saying, “It was vinced that Christians worship not so bad after all.” In another time the same God. Maimonides, for or place, such a statement by Jews example, the great Sephardic le- would have been inconceivable. gal authority and philosopher of the 12th century, explicitly clas- Jewish Objections sifies Christianity as idolatry, thus forbidding contact with Chris- A longer and more sustained critique tians of the sort permitted with of Dabru Emet was launched by Jon D. practitioners of other, non-idola- Levenson, a Harvard Bible scholar writ- trous religions. Even in the medi- ing in Commentary magazine in De- eval Ashkenazic world, where a cember 2001. In April 2002, a series very different view of Christian- of letters to the editor appeared in ity obtained, some authorities in- which the thrust of Levenson’s critique terpreted the monotheistic affir- was endorsed by such scholars as mation of the Shema, the manda- Michael Wyschodrod, David Berger tory daily declaration of Jewish and Jacob Neusner, while the authors faith, as an explicit denial of the of the statement and other scholars doctrine of the Trinity.10 wrote to defend it. One of the goals of the original statement, that of provok- One could argue with Levenson on ing dialogue within the Jewish commu- his own terms that the Ashkenazi tra- nity on these matters, appears to have dition has found room for Christians been met. an non-idolaters and that Menachem Levenson began his critique by lam- HaMeiri, Moses Rivkes, Jacob Emden, pooning the “earnest and anodyne Elijah Benamozegh and Israel Lifschitz, platitude” with which the document to name the most prominent, viewed concludes, “Jews and Christians must Christianity not only as ethical mono- work together for justice and peace.” theism, but attested to the religio-ethi- Levenson had a chuckle over that, re- cal redemptive role of Christianity in marking that it “no doubt provoked human society — often in language dismay among those bent on working and ideas far more bold than those in apart in the service of injustice and Dabru Emet.11 war.”9 (Regrettably, the irenic tone, re- spectful speech and good manners Jews Reconstructionist Dissent use in interreligious dialogue are often woefully absent in intrareligious Jew- Although I signed the statement, like ish dialogue.) Levenson I am uncomfortable with the But a more serious critique followed. theology underlying the statement that Reacting to the first major dictum in the we “worship the same God.” Here, statement, “Jews and Christians worship however, Levenson — an Orthodox the same God,” Levenson wrote: Jew — and I — a Reconstructionist

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 35 — part company. In fact, our concerns is “a question of the identity of God are photographic negatives of one an- himself,”12 surely a matter about which other, diametrically opposite critiques. none of us know much at all. Levenson worried that the statement I believe what the authors were try- was too conciliatory, implying a kind ing to say (and what I, as Reconstruc- of relativism when it comes to theo- tionist would have said) is that Chris- logical truths rather than affirming tians and Jews are on historically con- Judaism’s own unique and, presumably, nected and somewhat related paths to- truer, ones. My issue is just the oppo- ward that God. What the statement in site. As a Reconstructionist, I do not fact did was to mirror what recent believe that Judaism holds special theo- Christian theological statements had logical truths that ought to be clarified, offered the Jews: we know something kept distinct from other truths and about religious truth and we are now defended. deeming your tradition to be in the Levenson is correct, of course, that inner circle of those “in the know.” his approach would certainly be more Levenson was concerned that the state- faithful to the way Jews have under- ment gives in too easily on matters of stood their relationship to Christian truth. My concern is that we are treat- beliefs throughout history. But like ing both the Christian and Jewish tra- those who wrote the statement, I do ditions as “true” in a way that I do not not agree that such “faithfulness” is understand either of them to be. desirable today. My problem with the In my view, the most we can say is statement is not that it is cedes too that historically the two spiritual tra- much in the way of truth, but rather ditions reveal close connections. I agree that it presumes to know too much. with Levenson that they also have some strong divergences. I see no compelling Religion As Human Construct reason to privilege Christianity over other faiths as a theological compatriot, I come to interreligious dialogue except in terms of historical develop- with an assumption that our theologi- ment. cal claims, just like those of Christian- ity and, for that matter, other religious Heresy in Dialogue traditions, are creative efforts on the part of men and women to express in This last statement is quite heretical human language their experience of in the Jewish-Christian dialogue world, God. So, the opening claim — “Jews where a cozy kind of compact has de- and Christians worship the same God” veloped in which we each find room — seems to me to be a strange asser- for the other in our narrative concern- tion. There is only one God and so, by ing our special place in God’s plan. At definition, all human beings worship the heart of the new mutual acceptance the “same God.” So, too, do I find pre- of Jews/Judaism and Christians/Chris- sumptuous Levenson’s claim that this tianity is a continuing interest in the

36 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist issue of the chosen people. In fact, aging the mythic language of God, Christianity makes very little sense chosenness and history, especially when apart from the “chosen people” doc- it comes to discussions of modern day trine, a challenge for those of us who Israel. This is not lost on the authors find the whole idea problematic. of the statement, who welcome Chris- Rabbi David Rosen, the Interreli- tian support for a Jewish State in what gious Affairs Director of the American the authors of the statement call “the Jewish Committee based in Jerusalem, Promised Land.” The statement goes was a supporter of the statement. He on to say: wants to go even further : Christians appreciate that Israel A serious Jewish theology of Chris- was promised — and given — to tianity will need to go further than Jews as the physical center of the simply respecting “Christians’ covenant between them and God. faithfulness to their revelation; it Many Christians support the state requires an understanding of the of Israel for reasons far more pro- significance of that revelation in found than mere politics. As Jews terms of the Divine plan for hu- we applaud this support. manity.13 Sounds good? But perhaps we are too I share the desire to be conciliatory, quick in our applause. Do we really want but honesty forces me to ask: In what support for Israel that is based on an un- sense do we mean to be using this theo- derstanding of “God’s promises to His logical language? Would it take away people,” promises that many of us have from the power of what we are engaged long since demythologized in our own in to speak more openly about the way thinking, promises that encourage what in which many of us understand this for some of us are dangerous trends language as metaphoric and mythic? within our own community ? And if it is, in fact, human stories we are spinning about an unknowable di- Philo-Semitism Ascendant vine reality, then what are the implica- tions for what we want to say to and For centuries, Jews were demonized; about one another? now, in some Christian circles, philo- Semitism reigns. Yet, what we cannot Implications for Israel be, as long as we agree with the Chris- tians on our supernatural status as a I agree with Rubenstein that the lan- people, is simply human — neither guage Jews and Christians use to talk saints nor sinners. Do we really want about God’s work in history is the lan- to continue being players in another guage of myth. Reifying these myths is community’s myth? Perhaps we have a risky enterprise. There are certain little choice, but we need not encour- obvious benefits, of course, in encour- age it.

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 37 It is understandable that at a time The implication of that statement is when the Jewish people feels increas- that it would be good for non-Jewish ingly isolated in the world, we would non-Christians to convert to Christian- be eager for support and delight in a ity. I am not sure that Jews want to of- shared religious language that appears fer that message to the various non- to motivate Christians to be our allies. Christians with whom they are in dia- On the other hand, such support may logue. I am quite sure it is not a mes- not be the most helpful to our long- sage that I can affirm. term interests. In any event, the ulti- Ironically, Dabru Emet appeared on mate issue is not strategies for support the scene at a time when the question of Israel but rather intellectual integ- of how Jews and Christians see one an- rity. Can I in good faith support Chris- other is becoming less and less central. tians in believing “Israel was promised Will Herberg’s America of Protestant- to the Jews” when I do not believe that Catholic-Jew is disappearing.14 Increas- myself? ingly, people are identifying with secu- I welcome the dialogue and I ap- larism or secular “spirituality.” plaud Christian efforts at self-analysis Perhaps it is not so ironic. As Eu- and reconstruction. Although I know gene Borowitz teaches: “Judaism has far many Christians are more comfortable more in common with Christianity speaking with me within our shared than with secularism gone pagan . . . mythic language, I need to hold fast to Judaism and Christianity are at least a broader view that is consistent with a united in having a common enemy.”15 Reconstructionist understanding of Furthermore, Muslims (who will religion. That means that despite the outnumber Jews in America in several interest in the Christian world in hav- decades) and members of Eastern reli- ing a special relationship with Jews and gions are participating in the interreli- our desire to reflect back their self-un- gious conversation, although with derstanding and to reciprocate their greater complexity since 9/11, a com- sense of intimacy with us, I believe that, plexity that should not deter us from to recast the opening statement of persevering in the much needed con- Dabru Emet, “all people worship the versation. Now that we Jews and Chris- same God.” tians are not the only players, we are drawn even closer to one another. Dialogue Beyond Christianity Concerns About Survival I am interested in dialogue with many faiths, not only Christians, and What will be the impact of Jewish- so the claim in Dabru Emet that “we Christian dialogue on Jewish continu- rejoice that, through Christianity, hun- ity? Again, Levenson’s critique is quite dreds of millions of people have entered on target, although as a Reconstruc- into a relationship with the God of Is- tionist I would come to a different con- rael” is more than I would want to say. clusion than he about what to do with

38 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist the resulting problem. Levenson took The Reconstructionist Wager issue with the pronouncement toward the end of Dabru Emet that “A new Reconstructionism is making a dif- relationship between Jews and Chris- ferent wager. In the Reconstructionist tians will not weaken Jewish practice.” community, we have abandoned claims He argued that the statement was too to being the chosen people or those in glib when it concluded that interreli- possession of special truths. We are far gious dialogue will not lead to assimi- from certain that we need not worry lation, intermarriage, etc. This we can- about assimilation. Actually, we are not know. As he points out, very concerned about the risks involved in living in an open, pluralistic society. communities that have largely We live this way not because we are overcome their animosity and sure of Jewish continuity but because moved to mutual respect, as Jews that is how we can be true to our own and Christians have done to a sig- best insights and understanding. We nificant extent in the United hope, and have some evidence to sup- States, must look elsewhere for port our optimism, that Jews will con- such reinforcements to group tinue to find Judaism meaningful and identity as existed under the worthwhile even if they do not see it as older and more contentious ar- making theological claims that are truer rangement. Under any conditions, than others. Rather, they will come to the risks are higher for the smaller love and cherish the uniquely Jewish community — that is, the Jews.16 language and traditions and sancta with which we celebrate our lives. I quite agree. But the proper response In that context, dialogue with other may not be to build higher walls and faiths enriches us, because it allows us stronger boundaries. to share with all people of faith and Strangely enough, Richard Ruben- spirit our common humanity and de- stein’s own views were not so different sire to tell meaningful stories to our- from Levenson’s on this question. selves about our sojourn on this increas- While he personally no longer believed ingly frightening earth. The maturing in the Jewish mythic understanding of conversation between Jews and Chris- the Jewish people and their history, he tians, whose traditional stories overlap concluded in such profound ways, is, in this con- text, certainly to be desired. The Jewish religious mainstream will, within the foreseeable future, consist primarily of those who af- 1. “Person and Myth in the Judaeo-Chris- tian Encounter,” in After Auschwitz: Radi- firm faith in the God of history and cal Theology and Contemporary Judaism, the election of Israel . . . covenant (Bobb-Merril, 1966). and election appear to be indis- 2. See, for example, Paul van Buren, A pensable to normative Judaism.17 Theology of the Jewish-Christian Reality

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 39 (three volumes, New York: Harper and From Christians,” in Christianity in Jew- Row, 1983). ish Terms, eds. Frymer-Kensky, Novak, 3. The literature is vast. For a review as of Ochs, Sandmel, Signer (Colorado: West- the late 1970s, see Michael B. McGarry, view Press, 2000). Christology after Auschwitz (New York: 8. James Rudin, http://www.jcrelations. Paulist Press, 1977). net/stmnts/njsp_dabru_emet.htm. 4. “Theological humility requires us to rec- 9. Jon D. Levenson, “How Not to Con- ognize that although we have but one God, duct Jewish-Christian Dialogue,” Com- God has more than one nation. Our tra- mentary, December 2001, 33. dition explicitly recognizes that God en- 10. Ibid., 37. tered into a covenant with Adam and Eve, 11. David Rosen, in an address given at and later with Noah and his family as well the 20th anniversary celebration of the as His special covenant with Abraham and Dutch Council of Christians and Jews the great revelation to Israel at Sinai. It is (OJEC) at Tilburg, the Netherlands, No- part of our mission to understand, respect, vember 6, 2001, http://www.bc.edu/ and live with the other nations of the world, bc_org/research/cjl/articles/rosen.htm. to discern those truths in their cultures from 12. Levenson, op.cit., 33. which we can learn, and to share with them 13. David Rosen, op.cit. the truths that we have come to know.” Emet 14.Will Herberg, Protestant-Catholic-Jew, ve-Emunah (New York: Jewish Theological (New York: Doubleday, 1960). Seminary of America, 1988). 15. Eugene Borowitz, “On Theological 5. For an exposition of Rosenzweig’s the- Dialogue with Christians,” in Exploring ology of Christianity, see H.J. Schoeps, The (Detroit: Wayne State Press, Jewish-Christian Argument: A History of 1990), 394. Theologies in Conflict (London: Faber and 16. Levenson, op.cit., 37 Faber, 1963), 132 ff. 17. Richard Rubenstein, “Naming the 6. To view the statement and a list of all Unnameable; Thinking the Unthinkable” signatories, see http://www.icjs.org/what/ (a review of Arthur Cohen’s The Tremen- njsp/index.html. dum), Journal of , Spring 7. “Redemption: What I Have Learned 1984, 54.

40 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist Sacred Speech — Sacred Communities

BY MARGARET MOERS WENIG1

o the rabbis, gossip was a seri- argue with them, revise them or adapt ous crime: “One who speaks them. This process of study can help T lashon hara2 [gossip] . . . de- us use the power of speech for good and nies the fundamental principal of the not for evil, for the creation of sacred existence and authority of God” (B.T. communities rather than for their de- Arachin 15b). “God does not accept the struction. prayers of one who speaks lashon hara” (, M’tzora). “Lashon hara is the Lashon Hara Overheard cause of our exile” (B.T. Yoma 9b, Gittin 57b). • In her sermon, the rabbi is compar- In contrast, anthropologists, philoso- ing and contrasting the religious tra- phers and feminists enumerate the cru- ditions of Judaism and Islam. A cial roles that gossip plays, “conveying member of the congregation hap- information without which,” as Sisela pens to be a scholar of Islam. In his Bok has put it, “neither groups nor so- view, the rabbi’s portrait of Islam is cieties could function.”3 Who among simplistic at best, a dangerous dis- us could function without gossip? Who tortion at worst. He finds it diffi- among us would want to? And yet, cult to sit through the rest of the ser- most of us also know from experience vice, difficult to concentrate on the the serious damage gossip can cause. remaining prayers. For him, the ser- The friction between these conflict- mon has undermined the rabbi’s ing attitudes sparks a debate that sheds credibility. When, at the kiddush, an- new light upon a complicated issue and other member says, “Wasn’t that an challenges us to reconsider our ideas interesting sermon?” the scholar of and alter our behavior. It is impossible Islam blurts out exactly what he to study the laws of lashon hara with- thought. out reaching a new level of conscious- • A synagogue nominating commit- ness about our use of words. At the tee is meeting to choose a slate. When same time, it is also impossible to study one potential nominee is mentioned, the traditional prohibitions against someone says, “I’ve worked with him. lashon hara without feeling the need to He makes many promises and ful-

Rabbi Margaret Moers Wenig is Instructor of Liturgy and Homiletics at He- brew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion.

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 41 fills few. He’s disorganized and for- pipes up, “Jewish leaders are so gets deadlines. When he loses his hypocritical. That’s why I’d never temper, watch out!” The committee join a synagogue.” passes over that proposed nominee. When the slate is made public, the Laws of Lashon Hara member who was overlooked is dis- appointed. He is a longtime mem- “Who is the person who desires life ber and wanted to serve the congre- (hafetz hayim) . . . ? Guard your tongue

gation as a trustee. He mentions to from.. evil and your lips from speaking a friend, “I don’t understand what guile” (Ps. 34:13-14). The rabbis’ pro- happened. I would have made a hibitions against lashon hara were col- great trustee.” The friend, who hap- lected and expanded by Rabbi Israel pened to be on the nominating Meir Kagan, who in 1873 published committee, tells him why his can- anonymously the Sefer Chofetz Chayim. didacy was rejected. This teacher of musar (ethics) came to • A student’s paper is severely criti- be known by the title of his book. Zelig cized by a professor. “Look at this,” Pliskin, in Guard Your Tongue: A Prac- the student says to friends, show- tical Guide to the Laws of Lashon Hara ing them the professor’s comments. Based on Chofetz Chayim,4 makes the As a result, none of the friends reg- Chofetz Chayim eminently accessible isters for a course taught by that to the English reader. According to the professor. Chofetz Chayim: We are “forbidden to • Teenage girls at a sleepover get to relate anything derogatory about oth- talking about their classmates. ers. If a derogatory statement is true, it When one mentions Max, Sarah is termed lashon hara. If it is false, even and Jessica roll their eyes. Allison, partially so, it is termed motzi shem ra who is also at the sleepover, hap- (defamation of character) and the of- pens to be one of Max’s good friends. fense is more severe. . . .”5 Reporting to On Monday morning, Max says someone that another has acted or spo- something nice to Allison about Sa- ken against him, called rechilut (tale- rah and Jessica, who stopped to talk bearing), is also prohibited. When with him in the hallway. “You lashon hara (including motzi shem ra know, Max, they don’t really like and rechilut) is spoken, no fewer than you,” Allison tells him. 31 biblical commandments are vio- • The local paper carries the story of lated.6 Among them: the resignation of a rabbi accused of having an affair before he and -aDo not utter (or accept) a false re- his wife had separated. At a party, port (Ex. 23:1). a few members of the congregation -aYou shall not go about as a talebearer are discussing their rabbi’s resigna- among your people (Lev. 19:16). tion. After all, it’s in the paper, it’s -aYou shall not take vengeance nor bear common knowledge. Another guest a grudge against the children of your

42 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist people (Lev. 19:18). about our spouse to our best friend; -aCursed be one who smites his neigh- -ato make any statement, even if not bor secretly (Deut. 27:24). explicitly derogatory, that might cause financial loss, physical pain, mental an- The greater the number of people guish or any damage to reputation; who hear one’s lashon hara, the -ato make any derogatory comment, greater the sin. Those who habitu- even if it causes no harm; ally gossip (baalei lashon hara) are -ato say something derogatory about a guilty of a much graver sin . . . One person in his presence or to his face if who constantly speaks lashon hara others may hear it; commits sins greater than idolatry, -ato disparage groups, a particular com- adultery, and murder...7 munity, groups of Jews or all Jews; -ato implicate another person in order Broad Understanding to exonerate ourselves; -ato reveal any personal or professional The Chofetz Chayim defines lashon information about people that they hara broadly: We are forbidden themselves admitted to us, even if they -ato show someone’s letter or other writ- did not request confidentiality; ing to others in order to belittle the -ato speak favorably about another per- writer, even if we make no comment; son lest the hearer take advantage of the -ato convey lashon hara through hints and information and with it harm the sub- signs, hand or finger motions, facial ex- ject; pressions, coughs, winks, tone of voice; -ato praise another person excessively -ato recount derogatory information lest a listener be provoked to disagree; that is already common knowledge; -ato make a seemingly neutral comment, -ato speak lashon hara in jest; such as “Have you seen Sam lately?” if it -ato take revenge on someone by tell- may provoke others to speak ill of him; ing others that she refused to or failed -anot only to speak lashon hara but also to help us; to listen to lashon hara; -ato make derogatory remarks about -ato sit in synagogue or in class next to another person even if we do not iden- someone who speaks lashon hara; tify the subject of the remarks; -ato speak ill of a talmid chacham (a -ato discuss someone’s misdeeds even scholar), in his presence or absence. We with a person who witnessed them are forbidden to ridicule the teaching along with us; of a talmid chacham. If a talmid hacham. -ato discuss a person’s negative charac- is the practicing rabbi of a community ter traits; or a rosh , belittling him is an -ato ask for information about some- egregious sin.8 one from a enemy or competitor of The above list is daunting. Who that person; among us has not violated one or more -ato say negative things about our boss of those prohibitions? Is the list too to our spouse or to say negative things broad? Are some of the prohibitions im-

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 43 possible to observe? Do some of the “blackballing” that was characteristic of above forms of derogatory speech ac- the McCarthy era left many out of tually serve a positive social function? work. On a larger scale, lashon hara Even the Chofetz Chayim permits about an entire group of people, broad- speaking and listening to lashon hara cast from pulpits, over the radio or on under certain circumstances. Before we the Web can lead to racial/ethnic/reli- take exception to the wide-ranging pro- gious hatred and to violence. Jews have hibitions, however, we would do well often been the victims of such forms of to remember the damage lashon hara lashon hara. can cause and thus the reasons to take Even when it does not lead to dis- seriously prohibitions against it. crimination or violence against the subject of the gossip, lashon hara can Dangers of Lashon Hara do violence to values we hold dear, pri- vacy and truth among them. Rabbi Mar- At the very least, lashon hara can garet Holub writes, “When other people waste time. Teenagers may spend hours intervene by telling someone informa- each day gossiping with friends, in per- tion about us, they are violating our con- son, on the phone or by sending “in- trol of our personal information, and stant messages” on the Internet. For some this can feel like theft . . .”9 teenagers, lashon hara may supplant Truth, too, is compromised by lashon homework, pleasure reading, music, hara. Even when the speaker is not chores, physical exercise or sleep. guilty of intentional distortion, still, he Worse than a waste of time, lashon is presenting, at best, only one side of hara may damage a growing child’s self- the story. Since standards of proof are esteem. Like teasing or taunting to a rarely met in gossip, lashon hara vio- kid’s face, lashon hara behind a child’s lates the principle: innocent until proven back, which influences the way other guilty. Moreover, even if lashon hara, kids treat him, can seriously damage a when first spoken, could be objectively child’s self-esteem. Children who do determined to be “fair,” with each retell- not match the profile of the majority ing (as anyone who has played the game of students because they are black, or of “telephone” well knows), the story be- gay, or immigrants, or short/fat/skinny comes less and less accurate. or because they don’t wear cool clothes, Lashon hara may sometimes be mo- may become prime subjects for lashon tivated by an unconscious desire to hara. In those cases, lashon hara begins avoid some truth. “It is easier to talk in prejudice and subsequently promotes about other people than to talk about and reinforces prejudice. ourselves,” writes Holub. “It is easier Adults, no less than teenagers, may to whisper, ‘I think so and so is gay . . .’ spend inordinate amounts of time than to talk about our own anxiety speaking lashon hara. Lashon hara that about gayness.” Gossiping with a good damages the reputation of an adult may friend or co-worker about painful prevent her from earning a living. The situations at home or at work may calm

44 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist us down enough to enable us to toler- ties with the non-Jewish . . .11 ate bad situations. While in some cases learning to tolerate what we can not af- Some of the most dispiriting en- ford to change may be a healthy strategy, counters were those I had as tem- other times, says Judy Pritchett in con- ple president. Mostly they were versation with Margaret Holub, “gossip, talking about the rabbi, assuming by relieving anxiety, [may] allow us to the worst about his conduct or [avoid] making necessary changes.” motives, discrediting him in ways that range from petty to slander- Impact on Communities ous. . . . Sometimes people raised legitimate concerns with me in As lashon hara can affect the lives of sensitive ways. At other times, I individuals or threaten the safety of eth- felt that people were cruel. The net nic groups, so can it undermine the well- effect was that the synagogue felt being of a small community. People may less like a sanctuary, less holy, than flee from or avoid assuming leadership it might have.12 roles in communities in which back- biting is rampant, privacy is not hon- Finally, our inability to control the ored and people are constantly being dissemination of gossip and the diffi- judged. In a congregation in which culty of retracting its words or undo- “nothing is communicated face to face, ing its damage increase the destructive and [the rabbi is always suspected of] potential of lashon hara. In “How to be an ulterior motive,”10 how many young A Popular Teenager,” Deirdre Dolan people (including the rabbi’s children) gives us this illustration: “Melanie sent will aspire to become rabbis? And when a scorching e-mail message to Julie, call- it is the rabbi who is known for spread- ing her a ‘tattletale’ and ‘traitor’ and tell- ing gossip, what child of that congre- ing her to keep her ‘fat mouth shut’ or gation would grow up longing to fol- she’d end up being ‘a big ugly loser.’ low in her rabbi’s footsteps? Within minutes, Julie sent the message to half the school.”13 Lashon hara can soil a sacred com- Long before the Internet, the Chof- munity. As a past president, I had etz Chayim gave his own illustration: the unfortunate opportunity to A penitent asks for a way to repair dam- hear first-, second- and third-hand age done by spreading harmful infor- gossip, mostly untrue, or at best, mation. The Chofetz Chayim gives him only partially true. . . . Perhaps the a feather pillow and tells him to slit it most damaging gossip was prob- open and shake the feathers out. “Now ably around our rabbi. We los[t] go collect the feathers,” he tells the peni- members, teachers, staff . . . Gos- tent. We can no more collect the scat- sip about our rabbi hurt impor- tered feathers than we can unsend tant temple relationships with lo- lashon hara-filled e-mail messages for- cal Jewish organizations, hindered warded again and again.

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 45 Benefits of Lashon Hara ous world behind closed doors.”16 Gossip not only provides a map of As necessary as it is to mitigate the the seen as well as the unseen elements potential damage, some forms of lashon of society, gossip also helps us apply and hara are benign and thus hardly worth actually modify cultural standards of prohibiting, while other forms actually behavior. Beard Haviland, again: “Gos- serve valuable social functions. sip is a primary metacultural tool, an Anthropologist John Beard Havi- activity through which people examine land documented ways in which gos- and discuss the rules they espouse. . . . sip plays a constructive role. “Gossip Through dialogue, gossip [also] allows provides an individual with . . . a map rules to change: it redefines the condi- of his social environment, including tions and application for rules, thus details which are inaccessible to him in keeping them up-to-date.”17 his own everyday life.”14 Quoting F. G. Bailey, he explains, Mapping Worlds

An event or an action is public not Gossip maps a seen and unseen world, only to those who see it, but also enables people to apply, interpret and to those who hear about it. Indeed modify cultural norms, and creates and it is speech which defines the na- defines the boundaries of a community ture of that event: the moral evalu- of shared value. Gossip can, of course, ation, which is what matters, is of exclude or evict individuals (or groups) its very nature unseeable. Com- from a community of shared values, but ment relates event and action to the if the grounds for exclusion or eviction ‘eternal verities’ (egoism, equality are not unjust then participation in a and so on) and just as these abstract community of shared values is probably qualities are invisible, so also are something we all desire. the events which are judged in their The first two definitions (i.e., the light. The map which a man has oldest usages) in the Oxford English Dic- of the community around him, of tionary reflect this function of gossip: a what is going on and of how he gossip is “1. One who has contracted should respond to others, is a map spiritual affinity with another by act- created by the spoken word, by the ing as a sponsor at a baptism (from god information circulating around his sib) 2. A familiar acquaintance, friend, community.15 chum. Formerly applied to both sexes now only to women. Especially applied In Scorpion Tongues: Gossip, Celebrity, to a women’s female friends invited to and American Politics, columnist Gail be present at a birth.”18 Collins makes a similar claim: “By re- In other words, there is an appropri- vealing behavior that’s normally hid- ate connection between the intimacy den, [gossip] helps people understand of family, spiritual family or the closest how things really work in the mysteri- of friends and the intimate informa-

46 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist tion they share with one another. Former Bok argues that “People cannot be said classmates or camp buddies share infor- . . . to own aspects of their lives that are mation with each other about members clearly evident to others and thus in fact of their group (e.g., who is ill, who is public, such as a nasty temper or a ma- getting divorced, whose child is having nipulative manner, nor can they reason- trouble, who is changing careers, who ably argue that others have no right to could use a friendly call). Cousins talk discuss them.”20 It is humbling and per- late into the night about a shared grand- haps sometimes inhibiting of negative mother whose behavior and attitudes behavior to remember that “all our both inspired and mystified them. deeds are written in a book” (, “Gossip forms a moral community,” Avot 2:1), that everything we do and say that is, “a group of people prepared to affects others and may be judged by them. make moral judgments about one an- Just as children will inevitably dis- other.”19 Within this community of cuss their parents, citizens or subjects shared values, speaking lashon hara may will talk about their leaders. To vote make it possible for initial hurt or out- intelligently, to exercise responsible rage to give way to comprehension or roles as citizens, we need access to in- even forgiveness: the simple act of talk- formation about the actions of public ing about another person may suffi- officials, good and bad. “The greatest ciently alleviate anxiety in the speaker possible example in the political realm to relieve the speaker’s worries and de- of ethical disclosure of negative infor- escalate the conflict. mation has to be Daniel Ellsburg’s leak- ing of the Pentagon Papers to The New Judging Behavior York Times. “One could make the case,” argues Rabbi Margaret Holub, “that Lashon hara not only helps us main- gossip ended the Vietnam War.” Free- tain the web of relationships in our dom of speech is such an essential in- community of shared value, it also re- gredient of our democracy that the press minds us that our behavior, too, is be- is afforded broad protection against li- ing judged. As much as we value pri- bel suits. “A public official and a pub- vacy, the question “Who owns this story?” lic figure and a private individual in- becomes more complicated when, for volved in a matter of public concern example, a woman speaks about her own will have to prove that a statement is father’s alcoholism. As Holub points false in order to prevail on their libel out: It is “his story,” to be sure. But it is claim” and will have to prove “actual also her story. Does she have a right to malice,” i.e., “that the editors or re- describe life as the child of an alcoholic porter had knowledge that the facts in order to explain to her lover why pre- were false or acted with reckless disre- dictability in a relationship is so impor- gard of the truth.”21 tant to her? For subordinates, lashon hara also In Secrets: On the Ethics of Conceal- serves as a means of legitimately wrest- ment and Revelation, philosopher Sisela ing some power from the more power-

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 47 ful. If a child is being abused or an em- sation. It doesn’t harm the person ployee is being discriminated against, at whose expense we laugh. . . . I speaking lashon hara may actually help think we each need a little free zone those who are vulnerable resist the abuse — a few minutes a week, a single of power or organize to overthrow those trusted companion, something like in power. As Gail Collins puts it: “For that — to keep ourselves from be- much of human history, [gossip] was one ing insufferably self-conscious or, of the few weapons available to the pow- worse, sanctimonious. I think that erless: servants who spread stories about the very same energy which allows their masters, peasants who irreverently us to laugh and mock, also keeps speculated about the most private aspects us alive, curious and fun.24 of life in the manor. . . .”22 In our day, the seeds of class-action Sisela Bok urges us to remember the suits are planted when one black or fe- essential roles gossip may play: male employee confides in another her frustration at being passed over for a Cheap, superficial, intrusive, un- much-deserved promotion. Some femi- founded, even vicious: surely gos- nists consider certain forms of gossip a sip can be all that. Yet to define it , “to question everything. To in these ways is to overlook the remember what it has been forbidden whole network of human ex- even to mention. To come together tell- changes of information, the need ing our stories, to look afresh at, and to inquire and to learn from the then to describe for ourselves . . .”23 experience of others, and the im- portance of not taking everything Degrees of Damage at face value. The desire for such knowledge leads people to go be- Speaking lashon hara may be a justi- neath the surface of what is said fied political act or it may be a creative and shown, and to try to unravel one. How much literature or theater conflicting clues and seemingly describes, pokes fun at, or satirizes peo- false leads. In order to do so, in- ple? Empathy is crucial to art but so formation has to be shared with are irony and humor. As important as others, obtained from them, stored it is to take seriously the dangers of in memory for future use, tested lashon hara, it is also important not to and evaluated in discussion, and take life or ourselves too seriously. used at times to encourage, to en- tertain, or to warn. Everyone has a If we are honest, there is probably special interest in personal infor- some percentage of that awful gos- mation about others. If we knew sip we all do which is just fun. It about people only what they really doesn’t fan the flames of our wished to reveal, we would be sub- negativity. It doesn’t keep us from jected to ceaseless manipulation; more serious and intimate conver- and we would be deprived of the

48 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist pleasure and suspense that comes mitted, in fact, required. Pliskin sum- from trying to understand them. marizes: Gossip helps to absorb and to eval- uate intimations about others’ If you are considering a partner- lives, as do letters, novels, biogra- ship with someone in business or phy and chronicles of all kinds. In in marriage, you are permitted to order to live in both the inner and inquire about details of that the shared worlds, the exchange of person’s character and behavior. views about each other — in spite You are required to explain to the of all the difficulties of perception informant why you are asking for and communication — is indis- information about your potential pensable.25 partner . . . When it is permissible to ask for information about some- I don’t know how the Chofetz Chay- one, the person who is asked is im would respond to the positive as- obliged to give a truthful answer, sessments of gossip offered above. Per- even if his reply will contain de- haps he would nod in recognition. We rogatory facts. . . . If someone do know, however, that even the Chof- wishes to relate [information] in etz Chayim permitted lashon hara when order to prevent an unqualified it was the only available means to pre- person from being mistakenly vent future danger. Consider the fol- hired, it is permissible. It is permit- lowing example: ted to speak of the poor quality of a person’s merchandise in order to In premarital counseling, a rabbi prevent another from being cheat- learns that the groom had long en- ed. It is permitted to speak lashon gaged in sexual practices at high hara if you believe your words will risk for HIV infection. The rabbi help an injured person receive asks him if he’s ever been tested. compensation.27 The groom says, “No.” When the rabbi recommends testing, the Although it is permitted to speak groom is outraged and refuses. In lashon hara in order to prevent or to their next meeting, the rabbi sug- redress damage, our commitment to the gests to the bride that her fiancé’s principal of “innocent until proven behavior and attitude might pose guilty,” and to the prohibition against some risk to her and to their fu- convicting someone on the testimony ture children.26 of a single witness alone, still stands. Therefore, while it is permissible to lis- If the intent is to alert someone of ten to lashon hara offered as a warning possible danger or to warn others not of possible danger, it is “forbidden to to follow in the footsteps of one who accept what you hear as absolute truth.” has transgressed mitzvot, speaking The listener should simply “exercise lashon hara about that person is per- caution.”28

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 49 Acceptable Standards of Speech not accept the lashon hara as the abso- lute truth and does not act on the lashon How can we guard against the dan- hara we tell him/her, little harm is done. gers of lashon hara without attempting And if our spouse can help us speak to suppress the forms of gossip that are directly to the person with whom we essential to society or merely harmless are in conflict, then speaking lashon fun? Which prohibitions should we hara to a spouse serves a constructive teach, which simply cannot be ob- purpose. Similarly, a single person prob- served? Which prohibitions or lenien- ably also needs someone to whom she/ cies strike us as unethical? he can safely speak lashon hara.29 As individuals, we can experiment Traditional prohibitions against with different standards. As an exercise, lashon hara afford the greatest protec- try these for a week: tion to talmidei hakhamim, to commu- -aTake note of everything you say about nal leaders, to rabbis and roshei yeshiva another person or about a group of (seminary heads).30 If we see any of people. them transgressing a mitzvah, we -aStop yourself from repeating anything should assume that our eyes deceived you do not know firsthand to be true. us, or that the transgression was in er- -aStop yourself from saying anything ror, or an aberration. And if we tell that might harm someone else (even someone else what we saw, the punish- their reputation). ment is more severe than if the subject -aEach time you are tempted to speak of our lashon hara were not a sage. about another person, ask yourself, Rabbi Stephen M. Wylen, in Gossip: “Can I accomplish my goal (e.g., to be- The Power of the Word, rejects the tra- come closer to the listener, to help a ditional hierarchy that gives sages the friend, to correct a problem . . .) in a greatest benefit of the doubt but accords better way? none to those considered apikorsim We will each discover our own lim- (heretics) or to non-Jews.31 Miriam Pes- its. I, for one, do not wish to keep se- kowitz, in Spinning Fantasies: Rabbis, cret from my partner things that hap- Gender and History, identifies another pen at work. In many cases, our spouses injustice: While on the one hand the are the only people with whom we can rabbis employed strong language to dis- safely discuss such matters. Of course, courage lashon hara, on the other hand, professional confidentiality restricts lashon hara about a woman, even from what we may say to our spouses, and the mouths of other women ineligible to speaking with a spouse is not a substi- give official testimony as witnesses before tute for professional supervision. None- a court, was sufficient grounds for a hus- theless, speaking with our spouses band to divorce a wife he suspected of about a negative encounter with a boss, adultery.32 Whatever prohibitions colleague, or student may be essential against lashon hara we teach ought to to helping our spouse understand why be free of double standards and avoid we are on edge. As long as a spouse does privileging one group over another.

50 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist Alternatives to Lashon Hara you, using gentle words of rebuke.”33 In his courageous sermon as a student • Giving others benefit of the doubt at HUC-JIR, Rabbi Matthew Gewirtz While it may be unjust to give great- broached the subject of rebuke: er benefit of the doubt to one category of people than to another, there is merit Who among us wants to rebuke a to the notion of initially affording it to neighbor, . . . a classmate or a col- everyone. When we witness behavior league? Many are scared to critique. in others that provokes our rage, instead We fear transgressing “You shall of ascribing the worst of motives or the surely love your neighbor.” We most blatant of conscious intent, and know we can hurt someone by re- then sharing our judgment with oth- buking them and can be hurt if the ers, we might instead assume the best of person we rebuke lashes out... We intentions. We are taught, “As we judge can ruin a relationship, engage in others favorably, so will God judge us an unhealthy power struggle, or favorably” (B.T. Shabbat 127b). open up our own sense of vulner- ability and insecurity . . . Yet, we • Rebuke are commanded to rebuke and Sometimes, however, a situation deemed guilty of sin if we do not should not be simply “explained away.” attempt to do so. Rabbi Tarfon In such cases, the alternative to lashon says, “I wonder if there is anyone hara prescribed by the Chofetz Chayim in this generation capable of ac- is direct (but private) criticism of the cepting reproof” . . . Rabbi Elazar presumed offender. As much as Jewish ben Azzarya responds, “I wonder tradition prohibits lashon hara, it re- whether there is anyone in this quires rebuke in fulfillment of an equal- generation who knows how to re- ly important biblical precept: “You shall prove” (B.T. Arukin 16b). not hate your kinsman in your heart. You shall surely rebuke your neighbor The risks of hurting someone or be- (hocheyach tochiach et amitecha), but ing hurt are severely reduced if we fol- incur no guilt [because of him].” This low the guidelines offered by our tradi- mitzvah is placed immediately follow- tion: ing the prohibition, “Do not go about -aMaimonides in his Mishneh Torah as a talebearer” and immediately before, teaches that one “should administer “You shall not take vengence or bear a critique in private” and never publically grudge against your kinsfolk. Love your embarrass another (Maimonides, neighbor as yourself. I am the Eternal Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Deot 6:7). God” (Lev. 19:17-18). -aThe Rambam teaches further that one Rabbi Wylen teaches: “If you are dis- should critique his/her neighbor by pleased with the actions of another per- “speaking to the offender gently and son, above all do not tell a third party. tenderly, so that he can hear the cri- Tell only the person who has displeased tique.”

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 51 -aWe must think through the reasons our own advantage if we will only behind our critique. . . . We may be listen. . . . Rebuke a wise man and angry or even jealous and so we critique he will love you (Proverbs 9:8; others to compensate for our own sense Sifra to Leviticus 89a-b).35 of failure. True critique is not a vehicle through which we express hostility. • Appreciation -aIt is our responsibility to critique our Rebuke or direct criticism is a mitz- fellow, continually, until he changes his vah. At the same time, we do not want ways. Only when our fellow refuses to to nurture negativity but to help de- listen are we free from the responsibil- velop in ourselves and in others an at- ity. “Love unaccompanied by criticism titude of gratitude. Rabbi Gewirtz is not love . . . Peace unaccompanied warns, “Let us not allow our responsi- by reproof is not peace”(Bereshit Rabbah bility to offer rebuke prevent us from 54:3)34. also seeing the good in each other.”

Rabbi Wylan adds, Sacred Speech, Sacred Commnities Most of us find it difficult to ac- cept criticism. We become defen- We who believe in the lofty poten- sive in the face of rebuke. We leap tial of synagogue life dream of creating to justify ourselves. We shut off in our congregations “sacred commu- our minds and do not let any nities,” microcosms of the world we words of criticism enter our ears. would like to create on a global scale, a Rebuke is hard to take when it world in which each person would be comes from a person in authority viewed and treated as a creature of God. — a boss or a teacher or a leader. At the same time, sacred communities It is even harder [for some] to ac- cannot grow stronger by ignoring the cept rebuke from a peer — a co- genuine weaknesses or faults of their worker or a friend or a sibling. It members, leaders or corporate culture. is nearly unbearable to accept re- Sacred community admits that people buke from a subordinate, an em- sin, and believes wholeheartedly that in ployee, or a child. The wise over- most cases constructive rebuke, teshu- come their human nature and vah, reconciliation and forgiveness are train themselves to love rebuke. possible. Change is possible. Learning One can learn a lot from rebuke, is possible. whether spoken in anger or out of Can a rabbi or a national movement genuine concern. We might learn dictate standards of lashon hara for all some way that we can improve Jews for all time? I think not. Just as ourselves. Even a tongue-lashing libel laws vary from state to state and from a spiteful person may con- have changed over time, so too must tain some surprising insight into the laws of lashon hara be developed by our character that we can use to local communities to meet their needs

52 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist at a specific time. Some families and Many people gossip out of frustra- organizations suppress all negative com- tion because they are not feeling ments. In those settings, laws of lashon heard, listened to, and they feel hara may have to focus on permitted powerless to elicit change. The forms. Other families and communi- people in charge may not be ap- ties fuel the destructive fire of lashon proachable, or don’t appear to care, hara. In those settings, laws of lashon or don’t produce results when ap- hara may have to emphasize the prohi- proached. I’ve noticed some ex- bitions and their sanctions. All would tremely caring people gossiping benefit from studying the Chofetz [out of just such frustration]. Also, Chayim, and later critiques. Imagine the people who have the nerve to such study taking place throughout the confront and complain to th[ose] movements, by professional and non- in charge get pegged chronic com- professional staff, officers, trustees, plainers, but what those people in committee chairs and other leaders, control don’t realize is that the ones youth groups, confirmation classes, who don’t complain often simply families, havurot, at regional biennials, leave the congregation without a and national staff retreats. . . . sound.37 “Once you read the Chofetz Chay- im,” testifies Rabbi Holub, “it is hard Good leadership is essential to the to chat idly about other people ever opening of channels for honest feed- again.” Rabbi Wylen’s and Rabbi Plis- back. In Leadership and Conflict, Speed kin’s summaries provide excellent ma- B. Leas, observes, “A leader who is un- terial for study. In Pliskin’s words, our comfortable with dissension . . . who tradition promises: “If a person dili- negatively judges those who do surface gently applies himself to studying the disagreements, is going to cause even laws of lashon hara, God will remove more organizational difficulty.”38 his (his urge) for forbidden Direct criticism saved and enriched speech. But if an entire group will re- my rabbinate. I arrived at Beth Am, The solve together to guard their speech, the People’s Temple in 1984 following a merit is greater than if only one indi- bitter conflict between two warring fac- vidual has. made this resolution.”36 tions. Though the focus of that con- flict was gone, the war continued, and Recommended Actions I was slated to be the new target. In a brilliant act of leadership, the president Though every community must ul- immediately mandated a monthly Li- timately establish its own particular aison Committee meeting. Both sides laws of lashon hara, some general no- were represented, as well as those with tions may be helpful. access to the grapevine and those in Opening up channels for honest positions to make decisions that most feedback in an organization is essen- mattered to the members of the con- tial: gregation.

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 53 The agenda? Every month, the mem- committee meetings to air my own bers of the committee brought com- complaints and enlist their help in ad- plaints from the congregation to my dressing them. Brit Kodesh: Sacred Part- attention. One, who had opposed hir- nership, Readings and Exercises for Self- ing me in the first place, carried a little Study on the Relationship Between the notebook in his breast pocket and after Professional and Volunteer Leadership each service solicited criticism from encourages every congregation to “cre- those he knew might be dissatisfied. ate a liaison person or committee for Every month, he drew his little note- each member of the clergy.”41 book from his pocket and went down While the Chofetz Chayim prohib- that month’s list. As the president put its the disgracing, belittling or ridicule it: The committee was established “not of a rabbi, legitimate disagreement with to stop gossip” but “to create an atmo- a rabbi’s teaching is permitted. As im- sphere where gossip would not breed. portant as the Liaison Committee was It was meant to drain the swamp.”39 to my tenure and education at Beth Another past president testified to the Am, equally important were the weekly achievement of that goal: “Gossip that Oneg Shabbat discussions, a tradition stemmed from legitimate concerns and established decades earlier by Rabbi Is- grievances” was curtailed by the exist- rael Raphael Margolies z”l. After each ence of “an appropriate avenue to dis- Shabbat evening service, the congrega- cuss the issues” while “idle gossip which tion helped itself to coffee and cake and stems from a drive possessed by too sat down for an hour-long discussion many people to entertain themselves at of that night’s sermon. The rabbi was the expense of others” was not affected granted absolute freedom of the pul- by the existence of the Liaison Com- pit. The congregation was granted equal mittee.40 freedom to disagree. In the first few years, the constant I never worried that congregants criticism was painful for me to hear. But might whisper about my sermons be- I far preferred knowing the details of hind my back. They shared their reac- congregants’ complaints to the anxiety tions to my face: blunt, trenchant, no I would have felt had I not known what holds barred. On occasions when there people were saying about me behind was no sit-down discussion, congre- my back. In time, when it became clear gants who objected to a sermon would that the criticism would not scare me tell me so on the receiving line, in a away, the Liaison Committee meetings letter, on the phone or in e-mail com- became the place where the leaders of munications. In congregations in which the congregation (who eventually saw a sit-down discussion of the sermon is themselves not as enemies but as part not practical, the rabbi could establish of a team) helped me figure out how to a special e-mail address dedicated to respond to the criticism and, where congregants’ reactions to sermons. possible, how to avoid provoking it in Lashon hara about the rabbi’s sermons the first place. And I felt free to use the will, I predict, decrease and objections

54 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist voiced directly to the rabbi will become tional leaders about the reasons and instead the basis for valuable dialogue. procedures for censure, removal and/ or excommunication of members.”43 Sanctioning Transgressions An article on Beliefnet.com reports that “A North Carolina church takes a tough Sometimes, even in congregations stand on gossip. Senior pastor Phil Spry with open channels of communication, preaches against it once a year, and there still are members who disturb the members sign a covenant in which they well-being of the congregation by commit to getting along with one an- spreading nasty rumors. The Alban In- other. Those that fail to honor the stitute calls such members “church kill- agreement are asked to leave.”44 ers” or “clergy killers.” Except when dealing with “clergy or synagogue killers,” it is probably not Clergy killers . . . do evil inten- helpful for a synagogue president to tionally. . . . There are clinical dismiss a member’s lashon hara by say- names . . . personality disorders, ing, “You know lashon hara is a sin; I can- paranoid, antisocial, borderline, not listen to you,” or by simply refuting histrionic, narcissistic, and pas- the content of the complaint (even if it is sive- aggressive. They may be pre- inaccurate or false). I believe that in many vious or present victims of abuse. complaints lies some valuable informa- They may have volatile or addic- tion about the subject of the lashon hara tive personalities. They may have or about the speaker of the lashon hara or inadequate socialization, arrested about the circumstances that gave rise to adolescence, and violent role the lashon hara. Before censoring the models . . . Pastors are not always speaker, it may be worth discerning innocent victims either. . . . By whether or not in this case something and large congregations are made valuable can be learned. up of warm, loving, and tolerant [people]. And just for that reason Healthy Criticism people with power needs or other pathologies find the church a vi- It is important for leaders to find able environment to act out their healthy ways of enduring the indirect internal illness. Ideally, the con- or direct criticism they will inevitably gregation will react in responsible receive. Leaders need to ask themselves: ways to transform or at least con- What will help me endure this? What tain the harmful behavior. . . . support do I need? How can I listen to More often, churches are un- criticism (lashon hara or rebuke) with- skilled or unmotivated to call out feeling so vulnerable that I am in- people to account.42 capable of responding in any way but self-defense or offense? “The quality of If all other strategies have failed, interpersonal transactions between the “educate yourself and key congrega- members of the congregation,” writes

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 55 Rabbi Lawrence Kushner, 3. Bok, Sisela, Secrets: On the Ethics of Con- cealment and Revelation (Pantheon Books, is the single most important factor New York, 1982), 101. See also “Go Ahead. in determining its health. Do they Gossip May Be Virtuous,” by Patrici bear witness to the piety the con- Cohen, The New York Times, Saturday, Au- gregation claims to perpetuate? gust 10, 2002. Where the human relationships are 4. Plishkin, Zelig, Guard Your Tongue: A self-righteous, deceitful, and toxic, Practical Guide to the Laws of Lashon Hara, Based on Chofetz Chayim (New York, 1975). congregational life is wretched. 5. Ibid., 29. Where they are tolerant, honest, 6. Ibid., 13ff. and nurturing, congregational life 7. Ibid., 31. can be a transforming joy.45 8. This list is an abbreviation of prohibi- tions enumerated in Plishkin, 31ff. Rabbi Margaret Holub and members 9. This and all other quotes from Rabbi of her community have discussed pas- Margaret Holub are taken from an unpub- lished paper, “Gossip — An Appreciation,” sages from the Chofetz Chayim and ex- which she graciously agreed to share with perimented with standards of “right me and permitted me to quote. speech.” 10. E-mail to me from a rabbi who wishes to remain anonymous, Dec. 6, 2001. More than once of late I’ve heard 11. From a letter written by a past presi- someone stop a sentence and say, dent of a congregation in California. While “Oops! I shouldn’t say this. . . .The he gave me permission to quote him, he very process of being aware of how wishes to remain anonymous. 12. From an e-mail to Joy Weinberg, man- we speak about others and how we aging editor of Reform Judaism magazine, hear others will itself guide us in written by a member of the UAHC Boad the direction we want to go. . . . of Trustees who wishes to remain anony- This process of discovering how to mous to protect the privacy of her rabbi. live through conversation and 13. Dolan, Deirdre, “How To Be a Popu- lar Teenager,” The New York Times Maga- community is itself exactly the op- zine on the web, April 8, 2001, 3-4. posite of the kind of frozen silence 14. Haviland, John Beard, Gossip, Reputa- that I fear when speech is thought- tion and Knowledge in Zincantan (Univer- lessly curtailed . . . I have every sity of Chicago Press, 1979), 10. confidence that we will find our 15. Ibid., 10. answers as we keep talking.46 16. Collins, Gail, Scorpion Tongue: Gossip, Celebrity and American Politics (William Morrow & Co., Inc., New York, 1998), 6- 7. 1. Another version of this article appeared 17. Haviland, op cit., 170. in Reform Judaism (Summer, 2002), pub- 18. The Compact Edition of the Oxford En- lished by the Union of American Hebrew glish Dictionary, complete text reproduced Congregations. micrographically, Vol. 1 A-O (Oxford Press 2. Technically, the expression should be at the Clarendon, 1971), 310-311. transliterated leshon hara, as there is a sheva 19. Haviland, op cit., 8. under the lamed, but the spelling used here 20. Bok, op cit., 97. is the more common. 21. Goldstein, Norm, ed., The Associated Press

56 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist Stylebook and Briefing on Media Law (Per- Drs. Judith Plaskow and Martha Ackels- seus Press, Cambridge, MA, 2000), 359. berg for calling this to my attention. 22. Collins, op cit., 7. 33. Wylan, op. cit., 103-4. 23. Rich, Adrienne, On Lies, Secrets and 34. Gewirtz, Matthew D., HUC-JIR Silence: Selected Prose 1966-1978 (W.W. chapel sermon on Parshat Ki Tisa, March Norton, New York, 1979), 13. 7, 1996. 24. Holub, unpublished paper. 35. Wylan, op. cit., 102-3. 25. Bok, op cit., 90-91. 36. Plishkin, op. cit., 188-9. 26. Report from a congregational rabbi who 37. E-mail message, Nov. 30, 2001, from a wishes to remain anonymous. congregational leader who wishes to remain 27. Plishkin, op. cit., 64-83. anonymous. 28. Ibid., 83. 38. Leas, Speed B., Leadership & Conflict, 29. In taking this position, I am aware that (Abingdon Press, Nashville, TN, 1982), 63- I am contradicting a CCAR Responsum 65. (5750.4), “Gossip between Husband and 39. Letter to me from Judah Rosenfeld, Wife,” which upholds the prohibition December 15, 2001. against gossip even between spouses: 40. E-mail to me from Dr. David D. Markowitz, December 19, 2001. . . . it might be argued that, since total 41. Kahn, Rabbi Yoel, Brit Kodesh: Sacred confidence between husband and wife Partnership, Readings and Exercises for Self- helps to cement foundations of their Study on the Relationship Between the Pro- marriage, lashon hara could be seen as fessional and Volunteer Leadership in Reform serving a wholesome end (i.e., shalom Congregations (Synagogue 2000 and bayit), especially when they agree not UAHC, 2001), 45. to reveal the information to anyone. 42. Pappas, Anthony G., Pastoral Stress: But such an argument offends against Sources of Tension, Resources for Transforma- the basic rule that one should not try tion (Alban Institute, 1995), 46-7. to accomplish a mitzvah by commit- 43. Ibid., 55. ting an averah. (2)30. Plishkin, op cit., 44. Butcher, Andy, “Psst, Did You Hear? 99. Someone told me this church has a zero- tolerance policy toward gossip!”, 31. Wylan, Stephen M., Gossip: The Power www.beliefnet.com, 1. of the Word (KTAV, Hoboken, NJ, 1994). 45. Kushner, Rabbi Lawrence, “The Tent- 32. Peskowitz, Miriam, Spinning Fantasies: Peg Business: Some Truths about Congre- Rabbis, Gender and History (University of gations,” in New Traditions, No. 1, 1984. California Press, Berkeley, 1997). I thank 46. Holub, unpublished paper.

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 57 Gateways to Hasidism The Hasidic Parable: An Anthology with Commentary edited and translated by Aryeh Wineman Jewish Publication Society, Philadelphia: 2000, 191pages

REVIEWED BY JOEL HECKER

n the 1956 edition of Tales of Appeal of Hasidic Stories Rabbi Nachman, Martin T Buber wrote in his prefatory What was the allure of these teach- remarks, “I have not translated these ings and tales, unmoored from their tales, but retold them with full free- East European and ultra-Orthodox dom, yet out of . . . [Rabbi Nahman’s] milieus? First, they offered the prom- spirit as it is present to me.” With that ise of an unmediated relationship with bold, romantic, existential interpreta- God, apparently freed from the appur- tion, Buber began his efforts to render tenances, rites and robes of institution- the spiritual wealth of Hasidism acces- alized religion. In the modernized ren- sible and meaningful to modern read- derings of Hasidism, all one needed to ers. do was open one’s heart with sincerity In several volumes’ worth of essays, and joy in order to enjoy devekut, com- Buber aimed to represent the Hasidic munion, with Divinity itself. teachings, not with the ostensibly clear- Deep within each person lay a spark eyed objectivity and dispassionate of holiness that waited its overdue pol- analysis of the historian, but rather with ishing and attention. God was not the the goal of enabling the reader to open harsh biblical judge or the exacting her very self to the presence that the counter of mitzvot, an image promul- Hasidic teachers themselves were try- gated by the rabbis. Instead, God was ing to elicit. Buber aimed to kick-start to be seen as the Source of All Life, the an entire generation out of the spiri- Hidden Repository of Mysteries, the tual lethargy that modernism, in his Fount of All Being. mind, had wrought, and he sought to These were descriptions that harmo- do so through the resurrection of ap- nized with the ideals of universalism parently parochial and archaic tales and and individualism that colored much teachings. of Western culture in the 20th century. Rational ideals of democracy and free- dom were, somewhat ironically, found

Dr. Joel Hecker is Chair of the Department of Modern Jewish Civilization and Assistant Professor of Jewish Mysticism at the Reconstructionist Rabbinical College.

58 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist to be distant echoes of this esoteric and tion within Judaism. arcane lore. In the cosmology of Hasid- For Buber, these Hasidic teachings ism, holy sparks were scattered through- resonated with the revival of religious out the cosmos, each needing its re- feeling that he himself was trying to demption by a particular individual, engineer, as suggested in his landmark sometimes through eating a particular I and Thou. In that work, he draws dis- meal, sometimes through business deal- tinctions between religion and religi- ings in a particular location. osity, institutionalized religion and the Each of these events promised a sur- spontaneous movements of the indi- prising encounter redounding in spiri- vidual spirit. tual, even material, riches. This doc- In Buber’s romantic assessment of trine of avodah be-gashmiyut, worship Hasidism, the nascent movement was through materiality, taught that every- rebelling against an entrenched rab- thing in the world bore holy sparks; binic elite, and idealizing all interac- that through the sincere and open en- tions in the here-and-now.1 The imma- gagement with the spiritual core of nentism found in Hasidism, the latent people, food, places and things, one presence of Divinity in all of reality, could open up one’s own being to the provided the perfect backdrop to his common unity underlying all of real- own revivalist encouragement to seek ity. an I-Thou relationship with the Eter- nal Thou at every turn. Origins in Mysticism The Hasidic Parable Jewish mysticism dates back to an- cient times, and it was almost always In The Hasidic Parable, Aryeh Wine- the restricted preserve of an elite group man offers translations and analyses of of initiates, men who had spent con- more than forty parables taken from a siderable time in traditional learning of range of Hasidic sources, though most Talmud and halakhah. It was only with are from the early generations of the advent of Hasidic teaching that Hasidism. This book has the advantage making hidden holiness manifest be- of treating the parable — a small liter- came a popular doctrine. In this seem- ary unit, often overlooked in the ing democratizing of holiness, the child shadow of the tales or the larger homi- and the pauper, the shoemaker and the lies that make up the bulk of Hasidic donkey-driver were all potentially equal teachings. Wineman defines parable as bearers of holiness. As in the famous an imaginative story whose meaning Hasidic tale, the whistle of a child on refers to something quite beyond itself; Yom Kippur could break through all it alludes to an analogy or application the barriers that hampered the success not contained within the story proper. of the adults’ prayers. In this theme of A parable is a work of fiction, neces- surprise and paradox, Hasidism leveled sarily brief and compact, that is not told the playing field of the esoteric tradi- for its own sake, but to make a point

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 59 and speak a truth (xiii). God concentrates divine energies into Most Hasidic works are collections the finite world, or a teacher simplifies of homilies, long discursive talks, of- a profound teaching into digestible ten centered or building upon exege- form. ses of the biblical portion of the week. The descriptions above all suggest They were generally delivered on the the concessions made by a father or Sabbath at the Friday evening meal teacher in the face of reality: accepting night or at shalosh seudos, the third meal that ideal teaching must cede ground eaten in the Sabbath’s late afternoon. to practicality. Some of the Hasidic Delivered in , they were re- texts, however, go so far as to argue that membered by an amanuensis who the truth can only be understood by would write them down at the end of way of the parable: Yitzhak of Radvil the Sabbath. explained that “paradoxically, only Subsequently, they would be trans- through the concrete garb of analogy lated and published in Hebrew for pos- can one grasp the abstract idea con- terity, usually without editorial over- veyed in parable, just as the human eye sight of the rebbe who had given the can gaze at the bright sun only through talk. Contained within these homilies a curtain or veil”(xviii). were the parables, often serving to il- Wineman sorts the parables the- lustrate in a folksy way the more chal- matically: “Paradox and the Unex- lenging substance of the teachings pected,” “Redefinitions,” “Deepening proper. Very often the parable (mashal) the Implications of Divine Oneness,” was followed by the application or sig- “Echoes and Transformations of Older nificance (nimshal) of the story. Motifs,” and “The Polemics of an Hour of History.” Each section, save one, has Paradox and Surprise close to ten translations of parables with an accompanying analysis. The analy- Wineman argues that the parables ses provide background material of are not subsidiary elements of the hom- Hasidic history and doctrines, informa- ilies; rather, the often paradoxical sur- tion about the personalities behind the prises of the parables are a major com- texts, and parallels or alternate versions ponent of what lends the homilies their from other Hasidic works. The latter power. The parables usually revolve are particularly helpful as Wineman around a king (or sometimes a father traces the development of a motif or or a teacher) who seeks an indirect simply the range of uses that a particu- method to transmit his teachings. In lar parable can serve. The author’s style other instances, the surprise occurs is accessible to a broad audience and when a parable challenges a common- he is often quite successful at making sensical premise, thus encapsulating these largely unfamiliar texts compre- profundity within its nugget-like struc- hensible and meaningful to a modern ture. The parable is a literary mirror of audience. the cosmic act of tzimtzum, in which

60 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist Keys and Locks prayer, kavanot (intentions), developed by the 16th-century kabbalists. The One of Wineman’s most intriguing trend of mystical prayer from the 16th offerings is the following parable and through much of the 18th century was accompanying analysis: to employ highly complex and de- manding technical kavanot, before or Every lock has a key that opens during the recital of each unit of the and fits that particular lock, but prayer service, often for each word. there are also thieves who open For the spiritual elite, and for those doors and locks without using who could afford to do so, praying with any key at all but rather by simply these kavanot could take hours. breaking the lock. Similarly, every While recent research has demon- hidden matter has a key, namely strated that the founder of Hasidism, the kavanah, the specific contem- the Baal Shem Tov, himself used these plation appropriate to that mat- intricate techniques,2 his students and ter. But the ideal key is to do as his students’ students, in a populistic the thief does and break down ev- and anti-scholastic turn, endorsed at- erything, namely break one’s own tention to the simple meaning of the heart with submission, thus words and to the holiness that is latent breaking the barrier separating in each word. To these Hasidim, the man from God, which serves as words of the Torah and the words of the lock keeping man out (159). the prayers bore holy light, and the one who devoted himself could attain In this parable, we find unusual ad- devekut (union) with Divinity within vocacy of learning the tricks of thiev- those very words.3 ery. When access is denied to the words The focus here is inward, on the of prayer, any means can be used to opening of one’s consciousness to fuse gain entry. Here the surprise of the par- with the godliness underlying all real- able rests on two separate twists: First, ity. The teaching offers a critique of the one would have thought that highly artificial keys of kavanot, opting instead refined tools would be superior to for the less erudite, but more broadly brute force, whereas here the latter is available, sincerity of the heart. preferred; secondly, the assault is not waged upon an external object, such Breaking the Door as the gates of prayer, but rather in- wardly, to the psychological impedi- In another version of the same par- ments to spiritual engagement. able, force is regarded not as an ideal but rather as a measure of final resort: Techniques of Kavanah It sometimes happens that people The parable’s references are to the open a lock with a key, but there liturgical and spiritual implements of is also the case of a person who has

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 61 no key and who needs to break knowing what he is holding in it. the door and the lock with some And he deceives people and asks strong object capable of breaking each person, “What am I hold- iron. So it is that the earlier gen- ing in my hand?” To each person erations, after the destruction of it seems as though he is holding the Temple, would open all the whatever that particular person locked gates with keys, namely, happens to desire. And so every- the kavanot. The later genera- one runs after him thinking what- tions, however, lack the power of ever he desires is in that runner’s the kavanot and consequently we hand. But afterward, the person must break all the locks without running opens his hand and it is keys, employing instead simply empty. the shattering of our own evil Similarly, the yetzer ha-ra de- hearts (159-60). ceives the whole world; everyone pursues it as it deceives each and Here, the thief’s model is not the every person into thinking that ideal, but rather the last resort of a gen- whatever he desires is in its hand, eration that has lost the power of the each person according to his fool- kavanot; this latter model deprives the ishness and his lusts and desires. parable of its surprise, rationalistically And afterward, in the end, it affirming the conventional condemna- opens its hand and there is noth- tion of the thief. But, in doing so, this ing in it, for no one can satisfy version offers a more pessimistic assess- his desires through it . . . (33). ment of the quality of contemporary Jewish spirituality. (A pessimistic and This parable speaks to the insatiable ascetic current is one of the streams that and empty nature of our desires. With runs through the course of Jewish mys- this fleeting image, desire allures us and ticism, and is not alien to the Hasidic we are tricked. In the first of the Harry tradition). Potter volumes, the Mirror of Erised serves a similar purpose. When one The Evil Inclination gazes upon it, one sees whatever one wants; Harry is warned about the dan- Another parable, this one by Rabbi of excessive gazing, for it can lead Nahman of Bratslav, the great-grand- to an immersion in one’s desires. son of the Baal Shem Tov, highlights The extension of this parable in our the difficulties of maintaining disci- socio-cultural context is the lesson pline in one’s spiritual path: about our consumerist culture, whose multisensory assault not only suggests The yetzer ha-ra [evil inclination] that new products will satisfy our de- can be likened to one who goes sires, but first creates the need and then running among people . . . his offers to satisfy it. hand . . . closed shut, no one

62 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist Quest for Wholeheartedness penchant for emphasizing sincerity over seeking any kind of pecuniary or In one of the most startling of the social benefits. He then proceeds to parables, we read the following: indicate Maimonides as an important literary source for privileging service A parable told about two broth- out of love (avodah me-ahavah), i.e., ers, one of whom was wealthy, the sincerity, over service out of fear (avo- other poor. The poor brother asked dah me-yirah), i.e., fear of punishment his rich brother, “What accounts or hope for personal utility. for your wealth?” And he answered him, “It is because I do evil deeds.” Spontaneity in Prayer The poor brother then went and forsook the Lord and did as his Emphasizing the need for spontane- brother, but his evil actions bore ity and transparency in prayer, Rabbi no fruit. He returned to inquire, Nahman of Bratslav recounts the fol- “See, I have done as you do, and lowing tale: why hasn’t success come my way?” This time, the rich brother an- On a well-traveled road, known swered him, “It is because you have to all, murderers and highway done evil only in expectation of men act at will because they know wealth and not for the sake of the in advance the route on which evil deeds themselves” (20). people will travel. But when people journey instead along a This parable, offered in slightly dif- new path that is not commonly ferent versions by Ephraim of Sedlikov, known, the thieves are unable to the grandson of the Baal Shem Tov, and lie in wait to ambush them (65). by Yaakov Yosef of Polonnoye, another leading disciple, champions the value Wineman describes Rabbi Nahman’s of wholeheartedness even over righteous- pervasive concern with the dangers of ness. The reader delights in the appar- rote performance in prayer. The mys- ently subversive switch, winking along tical mindset animated the dangers of with the text, knowing that the parable’s perfunctory prayer in the guise of de- true intent is not to undermine traditional monic agents, seeking to waylay those morality but rather to expand the pan- who lack appropriate fervor. For Rabbi theon of values, placing genuineness and Nahman, the road to mindfulness and integrity in its upper echelons. sincerity came through a practice of In his analysis, Wineman indicates hitbodedut, solitary interaction with the context for this parable, a homily God. While for earlier kabbalists and based on the rewards and punishments other Hasidim, hitbodedut signified a for following God’s will, as prescribed contemplative practice, for Rabbi in Leviticus 26-27. The author takes Nahman, it pointed to a pouring out the opportunity to explain the Hasidic of one’s soul (hishtapkhut ha-nefesh),

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 63 preferably in an isolated location where requests of that person having an one could truly cry out to God. This audience with the king to have innovative practice set a high standard him in his thoughts and remove for his disciples, but reflected Nah- the servant’s sackcloth, clothing man’s general critique of the increas- him instead in respectable and ing institutionalization of Hasidic ide- beautiful garments so that he, too, als that threatened to encrust them with may be able to come before the the same tiredness that potentially plagues king . . .(88). any orthopraxy.

Distraction at Prayer The Hasidim taught that when an extraneous thought comes to mind How to manage distracting thoughts during prayer, the person should not during prayer was a perennial problem cease or interrupt his praying. His con- for normative Judaism. Hasidism in- tinuing to pray at such a time affirms novated a practice for dealing with these that the “strange thought” came to him mahshavot zarot, strange thoughts, that for the specific purpose that he repair called for tracing them back from their that thought so that it might be able to profane expression to their divine ori- ascend to its real Root in the holy (89). gins. Ephraim of Sedlikov offers a tale Everything stems from holiness and to describe this tool. so, if one is thinking of a beautiful woman during one’s prayer, the most common When a person is standing in the example provided in the Hasidic texts, presence of the king and speak- one should find its root (we might say ing with him, it would certainly “reframe the thought”) and see that the be improper and impudent for underlying desire is for intimacy with any of the king’s servants to call God. Erotic energies are thus intention- out to that person and to chat ally, and in consonance with mystical tra- with him, interrupting that per- ditions cross-culturally, sublimated to- son’s meeting with the king for ward God. Wineman notes that, increas- matters lacking any import. . . . ingly, this doctrine was relegated to an And should one of the king’s ser- elite, the dangers of focusing on distract- vants call to a person and converse ing thoughts such as these being too great with him, it stands to reason that to trust to the common folk. he is acting in accordance with a directive from the king him- Divine Dialectics self. [Or] it may be that the servant Meshullam Feibush Heller teaches is announcing that he, too, is in a lesson about the dialectics of relation- need of the king but is unable to ship with God. approach the king while in his garment of sackcloth, and so he A very young child pursues some

64 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist very childish thing and his thoughts A parable of a king who gives sub- turn away from his father. But af- stantial wages to his servant that terward, upon seeing his father, he he might carry out his wishes casts everything aside out of his whenever the king might require desire for him and thinks only of his service . . . . And the servant him, running to him, all because takes those wages and goes instead he is made of the very substance to carry out the wishes of another of his father (97). king who is hostile to the servant’s own king and employer. Now, Heller teaches here, as Wineman ex- could there be a greater act of re- plains, about the two contradictory bellion and disloyalty than this? impulses within human beings. On the Indeed, he would deserve death at one hand, the individual needs to sepa- the hands of his king. And the rate from the Divinity, and requires the nimshal: This is what happens freedom to explore even if it leads to when one takes the divine life distance from one’s holy source. The force that belongs to the King of successive impulse is that of return, Kings, the Holy One, blessed be overcoming the distance from holiness, He, the sole purpose of which is having established one’s own existence. to enable a person to do the Di- This is an interesting precursor to vine Will, and rebels, using it in- Freud’s tale of his grandson’s playing stead to do the will of the Sitra Fo and Da with a ball attached to a Ahra. [the Other Side] and the string. Freud interpreted this as an en- kelipah [shell] that the King of actment of the separation from the Kings, the Holy One, blessed be mother, the process of individuation He, detests (101).4 required for all individuals, first estab- lishing independence, then internaliz- Wineman explains as follows: ing the security that the home-base originally provides. Hasidic teaching emphasizes that apart from hiyyut. (the divine life Normative Praxis force activating all that [exists]), . . . nothing whatsoever could exist. Many of the parables cited above And it is that same life force — validate the sincerity of worship that divine in origin and nature — that characterized early Hasidism, rather accounts for whatever capacities than the piety of practice that is char- we have, including the ability to acteristic of present day ultra-Ortho- see and hear, speak and think, etc. doxy. The following parable sacrifices The concept of hiyyut. implies also none of the former preference, but, in that our perceptions of multiplic- historical context, fuels the devout ity, along with . . . [that] of sepa- commitment to normative praxis: rate identity, are ultimately inac- curate. The hiyyut. , which partici-

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 65 pates in any person and any exist- egory of sin, redeeming it from the dis- ing entity, is also the same sole comfort that people often have with divine life force that enables the ex- conventional understandings of sin. istence of all that is (101-2). It is that potential for wide applica- tion that explains the continued appeal The core teaching here is that of bit- of Hasidism to the modern reader. tul atzmi, annihilation of self, and bittul One of the longstanding reasons for ha-yesh, annihilation of reality. In or- Hasidism’s appeal is its emphasis on joy der to attain the awareness of the mo- as an independent religious value. One nistic or undifferentiated quality of re- of Rabbi Nahman’s teachings about ality, one must first shed the egoistic dancing illustrates this well: parts of the self that construe individu- ality as a virtue. For the Hasidim, one Sometimes when people are rejoic- destroyed the ego’s constraints on rela- ing and dancing in a circle, and tionships with others and with God; there is a man outside the circle in other words, the bittul atzmi was not who is immersed in sadness and so much an act of destruction as one depression, they will grab him and of expanding one’s consciousness, al- bring him into the dance against lowing the holistic nature of the divine his will and force him to rejoice reality to prevail over the constrictions with them. of one’s mind. Gladness and joy should pursue and grab sadness and sighing, Continued Appeal of Hasidism which flee from the very presence of joy, in order to bring them with- In historical context, this teaching in the orbit of joy even against was understood, at least partly, as a rais- their will. For there is that sadness ing of the stakes of deviating from and sighing that are really the Sitra halakhically prescribed norms. Using Ahra. , and that have no desire to one’s life energy (a discrete microcosm be a foundation for the holy, and of the divine matrix underlying the fab- so they flee from the very presence ric of reality) for something other than of joy. Therefore, it is necessary to its intended use was deemed a grave force them into the realm of the act of disloyalty to God. Zeev Gries, holy and its joy, against their own an Israeli scholar who studies the prac- will (103). tices of the early Hasidic movement, refers to the Hasidic masters as “men Rabbi Nahman developed a typol- of halakhah” first and foremost. None- ogy of sadness with levels of broken- theless, a non-Orthodox reader will heartedness coming from regret and an find support in the parable above for ongoing and prevailing sadness that impassioned dedication to any just could lead to depression. With both, cause. This reading also effectively however, he advocated not denial but transvalues the crucial religious cat- rather a full engagement with the root

66 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist cause of the depression, ultimately again lacked for incentive for galva- seeking to redirect those energies to- nized playing. ward joy. Personifying the sadness as As Wineman explains, the nimshal the man who cannot dance, Rabbi here is that the ideal in prayer is to Nahman gives feet to the abstract, if battle against the fatigue and rote re- palpable, feelings that prevent emo- cital that can set in as a result of daily tional and spiritual wholeness. repetition of the same prayers. Each day, one must marshal resources to find Cultural Chasms something new and illuminating in the same, old words (29-30). There are instances in which the author’s explanations do not reach as Modern Barriers far as one might have wished. Though throughout the book Wineman is care- I would add to Wineman’s explana- ful to translate and analyze in a mod- tion that God slowly enhances one’s ern idiom, there are times when the concentration in prayer, eliminating cultural ethos of the Hasidim and that distraction, enabling the pray-er to de- of the contemporary reader are sepa- vote herself with renewed daily fervor. rated by such a chasm that one wishes Unfortunately, even this modified les- he would have acknowledged the dis- son will be largely lost on the modern parity or worked harder to “translate” reader, too horrified by the idea of from one paradigm to another. blinding as a legitimate course for in- The most striking instance of this ducing animated virtuosity on the part comes in a parable in which a king of the musician. While the core of summons a skilled violinist to come Hasidic teaching is indeed soulfulness, play the king’s favored melody on a as Wineman indicates (xi), there are daily basis. For a while, the musician times when it sounds a sour note. performs admirably, pleasing the king. Wineman recognizes the startling After some time, however, the tune quality of the blinding, but addresses becomes stale for the musician, so the it only from within the context of the king compensated by bringing in a new Hasidic literature itself, without ques- person from the marketplace on a daily tioning or interrogating the nature of basis; the new audience inspired the that soulfulness. The author has some violinist to play with increased vitality other inelegant and outmoded formu- and enthusiasm. lations, but on the whole, they are in- The king tired of laboring to bring frequent and do not hamper the book’s in a new market-goer every day and aims. found a better solution: He blinded the There have been many books pur- eyes of the musician so that he could porting to be introductions to Hasid- never discern the actual presence of a ism; Wineman’s book, while not ex- new person. The violinist always imag- pressly aspiring to that goal, does so ined someone new there and so never admirably. Through the translations of

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 67 these pithy bits of Hasidic lore, contemporary and subsequent scholarship. contextualizing them within the history See, for example, Gershom Scholem, of Jewish mysticism and Hasidism, “Martin Buber’s Interpretation of Hasid- providing background information ism” in The Messianic Idea in Judaism and Other Essays on Jewish Spirituality about the doctrines undergirding them, (Schocken Books, New York, 1971), 228- Wineman has succeeded in giving a 250. hospitable entry into a foreign world. 2. Menahem Kallus, “The Relation of the When Martin Buber first started Baal Shem Tov to the Practice of Lurianic translating Hasidic tales for Western Kavanot in Light of his Comments on the Rashkov,” : Journal for the audiences, he hoped that their very for- Study of Jewish Mystical Texts 2 (1997), 151- eignness would help jolt the reader into 167. confronting their spiritual and moral 3. The teachings and spiritual practices of claims. Wineman has succeeded im- Hasidism, like those of the entire recorded pressively in continuing Buber’s over- history of Jewish mystical practice, were arching goal. androcentric, with little or no treatment of women as subjects in their own right. 4. In the kabbalistic tradition, the Sitra Ahra. signifies the demonic counter-image 1. These interactions are not only human to the side of Holiness, the Godhead. encounters but with all of nature, as Buber Materiality, itself often a marker of evil, indicates in his discussion of an I-Thou trapped the sparks of holiness in shells or encounter with a tree. Buber’s explanations husks, hampering access and maintaining of Hasidism came under harsh critiques by demonic sovereignty.

68 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist Journeys in Judaism The Way Into Torah, by Norman Cohen Jewish Lights Publishing, Woodstock, VT: 2000, 176 pages The Way Into , by Lawrence Hoffman, Jewish Lights Publishing, Woodstock, VT: 2000, 186 pages The Way Into Encountering , by Neil Gillman, Jewish Lights Publishing, Woodstock, VT: 2000, 205 pages The Way Into Jewish Mystical Tradition, by Lawrence Kushner, Jewish Lights Publishing, Woodstock, VT: 2000, 184 pages.

REVIEWED BY YAEL RIDBERG

continue to be amazed by the and accessible way, a journey through expansion of the Judaica section the sacred texts of Jewish tradition. I of bookstores. It has obviously be- Each volume addresses an important come profitable for these stores to make Jewish concept in terms of its history, room for titles that enable a wide au- vocabulary and meaning for contem- dience to find its way in the search for porary seekers. meaning from a Jewish perspective. There is clearly a market for such Complex Metaphorical System books, and Jewish Lights Publishing has been at the forefront of this growth, The intention of the series is to serve enabling seeking Jews (and non-Jews) and educate the liberal Jewish commu- from all walks of life to have meaning- nity by presenting a guided tour of Jew- ful encounters with Jewish texts and ish texts through the ages. Biblical, tradition. midrashic, talmudic, Hasidic and con- The two-year-old Jewish Lights se- temporary texts are presented as evi- ries, The Way Into…, presents an op- dence of the evolving Jewish experi- portunity for readers to be exposed not ence. only to the major spiritual and historic The complex metaphorical system paths of Judaism, but to many of the that supports Judaism is one that, ac- seminal thinkers of the 21st century. cording to Neil Gillman is pluralistic In what will eventually be a 14-volume and fluid. Although speaking prima- series, these authors present, in a clear rily about the Jewish encounter with

Rabbi Yael Ridberg serves (JRF) West End Synagogue in New York City.

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 69 God, Gillman’s sentiment is one that time when presented with texts that can be applied to the approach of the show Judaism to be "the evolving reli- entire series: gious civilization of the Jewish people." The Way Into… series is a successful It is pluralistic because it is com- effort to underscore that evolution. By posed of images formed by count- presenting, in the case of these four vol- less human beings who, over cen- umes, prayer, Torah, mysticism and the turies, experienced God’s presence encounter with God as journeys Jews in their lives in an infinite number have traveled over time, we become of ways and then translated their aware of the complexity and diversity experiences into metaphors that of Jewish experience, religion, and the captured what they felt. It is fluid Jewish people’s quest for meaning. because as we study Judaism’s clas- This series is a great resource for rab- sical texts, certain metaphors dis- bis and teachers of Judaism, as well as appear, presumably because they for those going at the learning on their no longer capture our ancestor’s own. For rabbis, it is helpful to have a sense of God’s presence in their variety of texts (often in civilizational lives; other ones are added — again order) at one’s fingertips to use in presumably because these new classes on prayer, Torah and spiritual- metaphors more effectively capture ity/theology. experiences that our ancestors did I appreciated the scope and range of not share; still others are trans- perspective that was created by each formed before our eyes so that the author, bringing me into the subject later image, though clearly emerg- in a holistic way. I was reminded of ing out of an earlier one, com- the teaching that even if one knows the pletely subverts the original mean- whole of the siddur by heart, to pray ing. from memory doesn’t allow for the same level of attention and intention. Either-Or Judaism Something different happens when we have a text open in front of us. I often meet Jews who find them- Although the concepts and many of selves in what they believe to be an “ei- the texts were familiar to me, I was able ther/or” approach to Judaism. Either to appreciate the author’s perspective God is supernatural, all knowing and and knowledge because of the struc- all powerful, or God does not exist. ture and content of each book. Even Either ritual practice or prayer must be when I was familiar with the concept done in their totality or not. Either the under discussion, these books refreshed Torah is a literal deposition of God’s my own understanding of the evolu- word and deed, or it is simply myth. I tion of Jewish practice and thought. have often found that these same Jews For those just beginning their jour- can embrace an alternate understand- ney into Judaism, these books are writ- ing of how Judaism has developed over ten in a clear and accessible style,

70 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist thoughtfully translating, explaining are then invited to examine the larger and interpreting. Each book has an in- questions of integrating Jewish study troduction that seeks to define and and practice into our modern lives. explain the approach of the author. For Jewish Lights Publishing has example, Lawrence Kushner organizes brought us opportunities to increase The Way into Jewish Mystical Tradition our interaction with Jewish tradition, around fifty Jewish mystical ideas. Each and this series is no exception. Each of is presented in a classical way — by bib- the authors makes the reader feel as if lical verse, rabbinic maxim or phrase. s/he is receiving a private guided tour Hebrew and/or Aramaic are used with through the author’s area of expertise translation and transliteration, and and passion in Jewish textual experi- then each idea is illustrated with sev- ence. Each volume points to the larger eral classical texts. questions — not only about what each of these central aspects of Judaism com- Essential Elements of Judaism prises, but how these concepts can make a difference in the lives of those The Way into Torah by Rabbi Nor- who engage in the study of these ideas. man Cohen also invites readers to ex- These volumes will surely find a plore the origins and development of place of primacy in the lives of those Torah by understanding what Torah is, who open themselves to the journey the different approaches to study and into Judaism — and, not incidentally, understanding, as well as asking why will continue to find a place of promi- and how Torah study in general became nence on those many shelves of Judaica such an integral part of the Jewish ex- in contemporary bookstores. perience. As in the other books in the series, we are shown the way into an 1. Neil Gillman, The Way into Encounter- essential element of Judaism, and after ing God in Judaism (Vermont: Jewish interacting with representative texts, we Lights Publishing, 2000), 11.

The Reconstructionist Fall 2002 • 71 Subscribe to The Reconstructionist

Our Spring 2003 issue will feature “Reconstructing the Jewish Community” ✡aEnvisioning the Community of the Future ✡aThe Changing Synagogue ✡aAgencies, Federations and Schools ✡aDemographic Changes and Religious Needs and more

Four Issues for $40

Please make check payable to The Reconstructionist and mail to: The Reconstructionist/JRF 7804 Montgomery Avenue, Suite #9 Elkins Park, PA 19027-2649

Please enter my subscription to The Reconstructionist for four (4) issues beginning with ______. I have enclosed a check for $40 ($36 for members of JRF affiliates). Back issues are available for $10/issue.

NAME

ADDRESS

CITY STATE ZIP

72 • Fall 2002 The Reconstructionist