sign in sign up
<<
Home , Aryeh Kaplan, Hillel Zeitlin, Jewish mysticism, Jewish Renewal, Reb (Yiddish)

Rainbow Hasidism in America — The Maturation of

A Review Essay of Wrapped in a Holy Flame: Teachings and Tales of the Hasidic Masters by Zalman Schachter-Shalomi (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2003)

BY SHAUL MAGID

“Sometimes legends make reality, and with Havurat Shalom in Somerville, become more useful than the facts.” MA and continuing with B’nai Or — Salman Rushdie, (later changed to P’nai Or) in Phila- Midnight’s Children delphia, PA, Reb Zalman’s vision of cre- ating a modern and countercultural “When came, it made of American “post-Hasidic” Hasidism has a human; when Hasidism came, it expanded into a national and interna- made of the human, a God.” tional phenomenon. Annual confer- —Rashbatz ences and kallot (gatherings) are com- monplace, and scholars of are “The primal danger of man is ‘religion.’” beginning to take an interest in Jewish —, "Spinoza, Sabbatai Renewal as a unique dimension of Zevi, and the Baal-Shem Tov” American religion. This essay is not only a review of a ver the last 35 years, new book by Reb Zalman, Wrapped in Zalman Schachter-Shalomi a Holy Flame: Teachings and Tales of the O (Reb Zalman) has developed Hasidic Masters. More specifically, it is what is arguably one the most creative about the way Wrapped in a Holy Flame and influential movements in America is a lens through which one can view in the past half century. Now the maturation of Jewish Renewal. As known as Jewish Renewal, this move- is well known, the organizational, com- ment has made an impact on all exist- munal, and ideational vision of Reb ing Jewish denominations. Beginning Zalman’s Jewish Renewal arises out of

Dr. Shaul Magid holds the the Jay and Jeanie Schottenstein Chair in at Indiana University in Bloomington, where he is associate professor of Jewish studies.

The Reconstructionist Spring 2004 • 34 the Hasidic movement in Eastern Eu- Jewish Renewal has become the pan- rope and its transplantation to America denomination of contemporary Juda- initiated by Habad Hasidism in the ism, recently adding to its organiza- early decades of the 20th century. Ha- tional structure a decentered course of sidic teachings, devotional practices study toward rabbinical and lifestyle (tapered to fit the particu- mediated through the Internet and a lar needs and values of countercultural network of devoted mentors around America) are the foundation of Reb the country. Zalman’s ongoing project. Practical guidebooks, such as the The First - Trilogy of Major Works ish Catalogue in the early 1970s were the first popular manifestations of his Although Reb Zalman has been new approach to Hasidism.1 quite prolific (his works include trans- lations of poetry as well as of Writing and Teaching Hasidic literature, and spiri- tuality), to date two main works stand Reb Zalman’s writings were not as out: Fragments of a Future Scroll (1975) widely influential as his public teach- and Paradigm Shift (1993).2 The first ing and mentoring. Although he served is largely selected translations of Ha- as a professor of Judaism at several uni- sidic texts accompanied by Reb Zal- versities (University of Winnipeg, Tem- man’s modest commentary. It is a work ple University, and now at the Naropa that breaks the ground for what will University in Boulder, CO), he rarely become a more mature statement of chose academic venues for his publica- Jewish Renewal in Paradigm Shift al- tions. In the spirit of Habad Hasidism, most 20 years later.3 the source of his own Hasidic training, Before Wrapped in a Holy Flame, Par- Reb Zalman’s early works were in- adigm Shift was the most comprehen- tended for a young, estranged Jewish sive statement of Jewish Renewal. In audience, many of whom were travel- it, Reb Zalman addresses the major ing the country and globe in search of themes of his humanistic, universal, an alternative lifestyle that was organic, ecumenical, yet deeply ritualistic Juda- joyful, non-materialistic and spiritual. ism. Paradigm Shift is a collection of His later work widened this narrow lens previously written essays, interviews, and contributed to the burgeoning , theology, practical advice new-age religiosity of contemporary (e.g., “transcending the Sefer Barrier”) America. and even politics (e.g., “An Open Let- Reb Zalman is a master organizer, ter to the Honorable Teddy Kolleck”). creating a network of Renewal groups The book has a stream-of-conscious- that have started to become part of the ness (some would say disorganized) existing American structure, feel, but I have always thought at least as well as creating their own grass-roots part of this was intentional. Reb Zal- and centers. In some way, man’s Judaism is one that seeks to chal-

The Reconstructionist Spring 2004 • 35 lenge the linear and scholastic way of ism. This work moves far beyond pre- thinking about religion. In this sense, vious similar exercises (for example, in the literary style of Paradigm Shift ac- the works of or Adin curately reflects the literary style of Steinsaltz)5 because there is no reso- many Hasidic works, although many nance of apologetic thinking. Hasidic texts import the order of the Reb Zalman is not trying to present Hebrew or the yearly cycle as a Hasidism, and by doing so, to defend structure.4 Paradigm Shift’s non-linear it. As he puts it, “Jewish Renewal dif- trajectory moves from theology to fers from Restoration, which seeks to prayer to ritual to politics to the Holo- hold on to a dying or former para- caust almost inadvertently. It does not digm.”11 In fact, at moments he is quite seem to be a book that is intended to critical of Hasidism and is quick to be read cover to cover. point out areas where a particular Hasidic value or teaching simply can- Hasidic not be salvaged. It is in this sense that it is post-Hasidic and neo- The final piece to Reb Zalman’s tril- Reconstructionist. (A chapter in Para- ogy is Wrapped in a Holy Flame. This digm Shift entitled, “Reconstructionism book is much better organized, struc- and Neo-Hasidism: A Not-So-Imagi- tured as a collection of Hasidic teach- nary Dialogue” addresses this issue di- ings and stories according to Hasidic rectly.) masters. However, underlying this seemingly non-ideological guise, it is a Creative Reconstruction radical reconstruction of Hasidic spiri- tuality. It seeks to do what Paradigm For readers interested mainly in the Shift and his other works do not — it tales and teachings of the Hasidic mas- is Reb Zalman’s attempt to place him- ters as retold by Reb Zalman, the first self in a particular modern trajectory chapter, “A Renaissance of Piety,” as a Jewish theologian of Hasidism. In might seem merely prefatory. However, short, it is his personal summa of Jew- this chapter is one of the most impor- ish Renewal. In this work, one can most tant in the book. Without it, one can readily discover Reb Zalman’s “project,” easily overlook the underlying purpose although it is easily missed if one reads it of Reb Zalman’s retelling and recon- only for the retelling of Hasidic teach- structing these Hasidic teachings into ings. something useful for the . This Reading this book, one can under- creative reconstruction is scattered stand how Jewish Renewal is both an throughout the book, and is largely an outgrowth of, and also an impetus for, extension of this chapter, where Reb a radical reconstruction of Hasidism. Zalman reflects on the trajectory of That is, Jewish Renewal’s success be- modern interpreters of Hasidism and yond its own cultural context requires finds his place among them. The chap- an unambiguous revaluation of - ter also contains some important au-

The Reconstructionist Spring 2004 • 36 tobiographical material in that it traces their respective theories. And, Buber Reb Zalman’s thinking over 30 years adds, each failed by overextending his on the two fundamental questions that respective critique: Spinoza by elimi- this book attempts to answer: “What nating the personal God completely, is Hasidism?” and “How can one be a and by overextending the Hasid?” universality of Jewish messianism by In order to analyze this important converting to . chapter, I have taken the interpretive The historical, or theological, accu- license of dividing it into four distinct racy of Buber’s argument is not at is- parts: the situational, the psychologi- sue here. What is relevant is that Reb cal, the theological and the method- Zalman claims that, in a similar way, ological. In each part, Reb Zalman both Buber and Heschel paved the way demonstrates how Hasidism has and for Jewish Renewal, but could not take can continue to survive the test of time, their theological observations into the as well as create and carry us to a new realm of a devotional life. Each con- paradigm. tributed to a revaluation of Hasidism, but neither answered the fundamental Reb Zalman and Buber question, “How can one be a Hasid?” Reb Zalman understands Buber’s Martin Buber and Joshua neo-Hasidic project and agrees with it Heschel are the two most influential up to a point. Yet for Reb Zalman (and figures who introduced Hasidism to a this is still his early thinking, c. 1960), modern, North American audience. Buber gives us the individual “I,” and Reb Zalman engages both thinkers in even gives us a systematic philosophy/ a way that resembles Buber’s analysis theology of the “Thou,” but he doesn’t in his essay, “Spinoza, Sabbatai Zevi give us a human other who can point and the Tov.”6 There, Buber the way. For Buber, at least as Reb Zal- argues that Spinoza and Sabbatai Zevi, man reads him, the is not an both of whom waged their critique of integral part of the Hasidic experience. normative Judaism in the mid-17th cen- And Buber would agree with this — as tury, each had the right idea (albeit an existentialist, it is the individual who manifest differently). Yet each lacked points the way; it is subjectivity that cre- something to enable that idea to ma- ates the possibility of living authentically. ture and blossom — more specifically, For Reb Zalman, Buber got it right to become a full-blown devotional life. about the subject, but he was afraid The came along in “that the word would become flesh,” the mid-18th century and served as a that dialogue would yield to obligation. corrective — not that the others were Buber’s fear of “objectivity” made “be- “wrong” in principle (in fact, Buber coming a Hasid” impossible. He could argues, both offered accurate critiques not submit to a devotional life (even of Judaism), but they simply did not in the non-Orthodox way Reb Zalman go far enough in what was right about constructs it), because his commitment

The Reconstructionist Spring 2004 • 37 was principally to the moment alone. pick up again some 25 years later. And he could not commit to the cen- Much has happened: the ’60s, the Viet- trality of the Tzaddik or Rebbe, be- nam War, psychedelic drugs. Reb Zal- cause, for Buber, the individual was the man has left the Lubavitch movement ultimate authority. and Orthodoxy; Far Eastern have saturated the American land- Reb Zalman and Heschel scape and Reb Zalman’s imagination. If Judaism can survive these seismic For Reb Zalman, Heschel comes changes, Reb Zalman , it will closer, but he still does not give us what be because of Hasidism. we need for a new paradigm. He gives But what about Hasidism? What us a theory of “radical amazement” and about the Rebbe? The Rebbe model, “divine pathos,” models whereby ha- he concludes, must stay, since being a lakha can survive, where we no longer Hasid necessitates having a Rebbe. But need to respond to Buber’s fear of in- the old hierarchical model of reb- carnation as the destruction of the sub- behood, one person around whom a ject. Heschel gives us a Judaism that community gathers and submits itself, can be lived, an alternative piety that cannot and should not survive — it will not submit the subject to the het- must undergo a transformation. The eronymous dictates of the law, but nei- Rebbe can no longer be a specific per- ther will it make the law inoperative. son. The hierarchical nature of com- Heschel can teach us a lot about Hasid- munity that this requires has not sur- ism, suggests Reb Zalman, but his the- vived the progressive movement of con- ology is just that — a theology of temporary culture. Hasidism. It cannot teach one how to Yet relation, what used to be the re- become a Hasid.7 lation between the Rebbe and the Reb Zalman’s critique of Heschel is Hasid, must survive. “Relation is fill- quite undeveloped, even transparent. ing the space between a subject and an He never explains what he means by object. It is the process bridging the Heschel’s limitations, implying only two. Renewal is always a process of that for Heschel, like Buber, God is ‘togethering,’ of partnering with some- mediated through the experience of the thing else. For in truth there is noth- individual alone. In short, Reb Zalman ing in the physical world that is not of ends his “old thinking” (here refracted a dependent nature” (85). Re-envision- through an abbreviated critique of ing the Rebbe is perhaps the first seis- Buber and Heschel) with the procla- mic move Reb Zalman makes from mation that to be a Hasid, one needs a Hasidism to Renewal. Rebbe. If the Rebbe does not survive in some manner, all we are left with is a Renewing the “Rebbe” “theology of Hasidism,” but not a lived devotional practice. That is, we are left With Wrapped in a Holy Flame, we with Buber and Heschel. Part of being

The Reconstructionist Spring 2004 • 38 a Hasid is an act of submission, the feel- quasi-apostolic claim, a reconstruction ing of being less rather than more, in of origins, attempting to revive a gene- need rather than in command. And alogy of the internality (penimiut) of here we are introduced to Reb Zalman’s Hasidism as expressed by its great mas- “organisimic” model of rebbe-ing (13). ters. And yet, its apostolic claim is but- Rebbe-ing is a function whereby we all tressed by a positivistic claim of cre- serve each other at different times and ative progress. for different purposes. “The Rebbe” is Reb Zalman does not claim to have no longer a title but a station; I can rediscovered the past, but only to have serve the community as a Rebbe and viewed a dimension of the past through then walk away and resume my ordi- the lens of a new future, making extra- nary life. It is a type of “playing Rebbe” neous all that does not cohere to the (Reb Zalman even uses that language, internal message of Hasidism as he sees 14). “So I’ve come understand that the it through his contemporary eyes. This Rebbe of the future is not going to be new vision of the Hasid directly con- ‘the Rebbe’ we knew in the past. For nects to the second theological piece some time, the Rebbe will serve as the of his introduction, the new theologi- Rebbe, and when that’s done, the per- cal paradigm. son will have dinner and go to see a movie and not necessarily be a Rebbe” (14). From Deism to Becoming Expansive Hasidim One of the advantages of being trained in, or at least conversant with, In other words, we teach one an- the study of religion more generally is other to be Hasidim, not Hasidim of the ability to employ categories in or- one person, but Hasidim in the wide der to explain the internal movements sense, that is, living Judaism, or sim- of specific traditions. Reb Zalman em- ply living, in an expansive way (24). ploys the language of the study of reli- “So, to be open and fluid, ‘walking’ is gion (albeit a language that is now the way of the Hasid. When one is somewhat dated in the academy) to static and certain of life’s limits, when place Hasidism within a certain spiri- one stands still, one is closed to the joy tual trajectory. of endless possibilities, even on a spiri- The theological component of this tual path” (31). prelude is to view Hasidism as moving Reb Zalman attempts to substanti- from deism (the old paradigm) to pan- ate this claim — that Hasidism’s origi- (the new paradigm), using bib- nal intent was not about the Rebbe per lical and post-biblical characters. In this se — in portraits of Hasidic masters. reading, biblical and rabbinic figures The Rebbe/Tzaddik model was a par- embody or represent world views ex- ticular, and necessary, instantiation, pressing certain theological positions. given the religious and cultural climate Again, the historical accuracy of this of the time. Thus, this book makes a exercise is not an issue, as it wasn’t for

The Reconstructionist Spring 2004 • 39 Hasidic masters who thought similarly, gues stands at the center of Beshtean albeit without Western theological cat- Hasidism.12 This suggests a new model egories. When we no longer look at of leadership whereby we all contain Jewish tradition as a seamless tapestry within us both the Rebbe and the where there is essentially no theologi- Hasid, depending upon the situation. cal difference between Abraham, Each person contains a manifestation of or (and here the histori- the divine that can serve another, whose cal method does plays an important divine nature lies elsewhere. role in Reb Zalman’s thinking), we can posit how different epochs (the biblical Seeking God period, the talmudic period, the ) offer different and contesting world For Reb Zalman, his new-fangled views.8 Hasidism is the Jewish “philosophy” of Historical events (the destruction of this new pantheistic age. The Baal the Temple or , for ex- Shem Tov already did much of the ample) also serve as markers for para- work by chipping away at the hierar- digm shifts, making the God of the old chical structure of classic theism (here paradigm (or the particular way God Reb Zalman is in full agreement with is envisioned and served) obsolete.9 In Buber). “Where may God be found, if some way, the success of a new para- not in space or time? In person, because digm is the extent to which it can read it turns out we are not doing so well itself back into the old paradigm with- with time today; time is not shared as out succumbing to the theological limi- much as it used to be. . . . First we tations of that paradigm. That is, to sought God in space, in olam. The new transform the old into the new with- started to look for God in time. And out detection.10 now we are looking for God more in Without giving us a detailed account person” (21).13 of “why” (this can be found in Para- This, of course, is Reb Zalman’s take digm Shift), Reb Zalman suggests that on the triadic division of worldly ex- the new theological paradigm of our istence in Sefer Yetzira; olam (space), age is pantheism, that is, that every- shana (time), nefesh (person). Instead thing is God. He rightfully discounts of a description of existence more gen- (God is in everything) as erally, Reb Zalman presents this triad basically meaningless and, I would add, as a developmental description of how a kind of uncourageous pantheism human beings envision God (“where (20). Pantheism undermines the hier- we find God”). Taking Hasidism’s re- archical structure of classic theism and, direction of kabbalistic to by extension, threatens the theological the person, Reb Zalman offers us a suppositions of classical Judaism.11 For model tracing God-consciousness from Reb Zalman, pantheism’s most useful classical theism to pantheism.14 dimension is the notion of the divine New theological epochs, as it were, in the person, something that he ar- are never clean. “Primitive” polytheis-

The Reconstructionist Spring 2004 • 40 tic elements remain in all religions as demic weakness that lie at the heart of civilization moves to different theologi- monotheism — the tendency toward cal positions. To soften apologetically irreconcilable divisions between good the edge of these polytheistic-like ritu- and evil, yielding fundamentalist theo- als in Judaism is not aligned with para- ries that are presently threatening our digm-thinking. Rather, Reb Zalman civilization. This is manifest in many acknowledges that these ways, including patriarchal language, emerged during a different theological intolerance toward the other, hatred of epoch and thus they are seen for what nature and human desire, and “ethnic they, in all their limitations, are, and cleansing” as a religious precept. “One not viewed negatively. thing people don’t like about religion is the hierarchical and patriarchal lan- Abandoning Old Paradigms guage, the antifeminist sentiment that goes all the way through the Vatican This does not mean that everything to the Taliban, Meah Shearim to the in the past, practically and theologi- Laws of Manu, and that is a big part of cally, must remain. What can be sal- the problem” (293). vaged should be, and what is too deeply The equating of Meah Shearim with rooted in the old paradigm should be the Taliban is intentional — it is to state abandoned.15 It was Hasidism, after all, that, rooted in monotheism, both paths that took us away from the more dual- are susceptible to the same dangers. To istic constructs of good and evil that argue for a disanalogy between the two, dominated classical Kabbala and of- arguing that one is more susceptible to fered a more dialectical model of the distortion than the other, is simply to good in the evil (Buber’s “hallowing the misunderstand the problem.17The mundane”). While this surely existed problem of the Taliban isn’t Islam per in earlier Kabbala (e.g., in Moshe Cor- se (although it surely manifests there); dovero and and even the it is a corrupted deism endemic to all ), what Hasidism added was the monotheistic religions.18 centrality of the person, the nefesh, as The rise of Far the new paradigm where God is most (e.g., , Hindusim, Shin- readily found.16 Implied here is that toism) in the West plays a positive role apologetic thinking, a part of the old in the correction of corrupt versions of paradigm, impedes theological prog- monotheism. These non-monotheistic ress. For Reb Zalman, to reconstruct religions do not share the particular unapologetically Hasidism is both to dangers of monotheism (although they bind us to it and liberate us from it. have their own vulnerabilities). For Reb Or, perhaps, to make it useful by free- Zalman, the appearance of these a-the- ing us from having to defend some of istic or non-monotheistic religions is a its outdated values. sign that Western civilization has en- Accompanying this, Reb Zalman tered a new paradigm, a more “organ- readily admits the fissures and the en- ismic way of looking at the universe.”

The Reconstructionist Spring 2004 • 41 Hasidism Anticipates computer terminology so common in New Paradigms Reb Zalman’s later writings, Hasidism needs to be reformatted. That is what Those committed to a particular Wrapped in a Holy Flame attempts to monotheistic (and Reb Zalman do. is, in the end, deeply committed to Judaism) are challenged to search out History and “How to Read” dimensions of the old paradigm that can be reformatted, transformed, even In order to contextualize what I un- reconstructed, to fit this new organistic derstand has happened in this new model.19 He views Hasidism as a move- book, I want to suggest four major ment that contained fundamental com- trends in reading Hasidic texts in the ponents of this new paradigm. Here, modern period: the traditional, the he is in full agreement with Buber’s as- quasi-scholarly, the scholarly and read- sessment of Hasidism as a “Jewish ing for renewal. The traditional reader Orientalism.” The problem with tra- studies these texts as sacred canon. ditional Hasidism is that, given the fact Their sacrality prevents historical or that it was living in a world still wed to critical analysis and denies, or at least the old paradigm, it oftentimes lacked ignores, contextualization or the im- the courage of its convictions. pact of foreign influences. The texts are Among the last great religious move- read solely for inspirational purposes, ments in that second religious age — that is, to understand “how to be a and not only for Judaism — was Hasid- Hasid.” (As stated above, this is also Reb ism. Coming on the very eve of - Zalman’s concern, which is why reading dernity, it represents the second age for renewal is, in a sense, closing a circle.) of religion trying to transcend itself; it The quasi-scholarly has two sub- steps forward and peers beyond the groups. The work of the first subgroup blinders of its age, but then moves back constitutes a kind of scholarly apolo- again out of understandable fear or getics, presenting Hasidic material to hesitation. Its original claim, that ka- a wider audience, not necessarily Jew- vannah (inwardness) is what true reli- ish, applying a critical and historical gion is all about, was still too revolu- method but still viewing the texts as tionary for its day (213). sacred, although the intent of their pre- Hasidism thus becomes the model, sentation is not purely devotional. but cannot be the solution to Reb Zal- Buber falls into this camp, although his man’s project. Without significant ref- interests were more philosophical, as ormation, Hasidism remains stuck in does Samuel Abba Hordetzky, Zalman cultural, ideological and even spiritual Shargai, and, to a certain extent, Hillel values of an old paradigm, even as it Zeitlin (who, interestingly, Reb Zalman may have felt the confines of its own includes as a Hasidic master). This world and, at moments, tried to expand group was popular in Europe in the first beyond it own limitations. To employ part of the 20th century, but has not

The Reconstructionist Spring 2004 • 42 really reproduced itself either in affiliated, some are not even , and or the Diaspora.20 their intended audience is primarily academe and not religious communi- Making Hasidism Accessible ties.

The second subgroup is more openly Reading for Renewal apologetic and less wed to scholarly discourse. This group has flourished in These three groups all have perme- the latter part of the 20th century, con- able boundaries, especially the latter sisting largely of Orthodox thinkers two. Many academics also have more who translate and comment on Hasidic theological interests, just as some in the texts as a way of making them more second group live and write in the acad- accessible to a wider Jewish audience. emy. Many write for multiple audi- The purpose of this group is largely ences, either simultaneously or via dif- inspirational (kiruv), geared toward ferent venues of publication. My point fostering the religious life, but it is more is simply to present a map of Hasidic knowledgeable of scholarly method readers in order better to situate where than the first traditional model, al- Reb Zalman, his literary oeuvre, and though scholarly method is only super- his emerging school fit. ficially deployed. Examples include Reb Zalman’s reading of Hasidism Aryeh Kaplan (although I think his exhibited in this book constitutes the agenda is a bit more complicated), Adin fourth group — reading for renewal. Steinsaltz, Nissen Mindel, and Jacob His intended audience is both Jews and Immanuel Schochet of Lubavitch, and non-Jews (the distinction is, in fact, ir- Chaim Kramer and Avraham Green- relevant, as Reb Zalman’s quasi-syncre- baum of the Research Institute. tistic theology makes all spiritual lit- In many ways, this group is a direct erature useful for all traditions). He outgrowth of the kiruv movement in writes with the hope that the reader will North America. be inspired but not necessarily return The third group consists largely of to tradition (i.e., Hasidism or conven- academics whose interests are more tional Orthodoxy).21 He does not read critical and less theological, reading Hasidic texts as an academic, yet freely Hasidic literature in order to under- employs scholarly terminology and cat- stand how and why it emerges when it egories when it suits him. The reading does. Many are historians interested in is not historical in any conventional Eastern European more way, but utilizes, and even needs, a generally, and some are scholars of Jew- historical/critical approach. He does ish who view Hasidism as not read apologetically, but does read the “latest phase” (to borrow Gershom theologically. Scholem’s phrase from Major Trends in More crucially, I suggest that Reb ) of this genre. These Zalman reads “paradigmatically.” That individuals are not necessarily Jewishly is, he assumes that Hasidism was the last

The Reconstructionist Spring 2004 • 43 vestige of an old paradigm and sometimes from the old paradigm is the abandon- touched on the first stage of a new one. ment or at least attenuation of the Reading for renewal looks for the para- proof-text. “We don’t treat proof-texts digm shift in these texts. He also readily the same way nowadays. What does a acknowledges that Hasidism’s para- proof-text mean to us? If I want to say digm has progressed and therefore the something is really so, we mean that it contemporary world cannot use all of corresponds to a pattern that sits very what Hasidism has to offer. deep in the reality map. So by refer- ring to scripture, we want to say, this is Finding the Fissures a very strongly shared thing” (121).22 When scripture was the fundamen- In some way, Reb Zalman’s reading tal reality map of a community and is always looking for the fissure, the truth was determined solely through it, break — not to exploit it but to show the proof-text was the strongest case how these fissures serve constructive one could make for truth. This is com- purposes and productive ends toward mon in pre-modern Judaism.23 When serving God. He bridges the historical other reality maps emerged in the and the ahistorical. “If I try to judge Middle Ages (e.g., philosophy), the use the paradigm of the past with my un- of proof-texts began to change. Taking derstanding of the present, I am going as an example, both to find myself in trouble.” And, “. . . I sources (philosophy and scripture) are believe that we still need to understand used to argue for truth, but the under- how to learn what they were saying, to lying assumption was that both were look at things through their eyes and essentially expressing the same truth.24 to apply their method” (23). Our need Maimonides would sometimes use a to understand their world (the histori- proof-text to illustrate a philosophical cal) is not because that is the best or point in his Guide for the Perplexed and most accurate way to read (the aca- other times he would not. In fact, there demic approach) or because we need are cases (e.g., Guide II: 25, on creation) to mirror their world in our world (the where Maimonides acknowledges that traditional approach), but simply be- he can make the text (here, Genesis 1:1) cause "theirs was a unique approach to support any position he finds - God and to life” (23).While it is often sophically most viable.25 And, when he correctly argued that historical recon- does cite a proof-text, it is legitimate struction can weaken a text’s inspira- to assume that the point in question tional potential, Reb Zalman holds that was not true for Maimonides because of while it does reveal the weaknesses of the proof-text but independent of it. the theological position, it also provides the necessary material to reenvision New Reality Maps what is valuable for a future paradigm. An example Reb Zalman gives of Reb Zalman’s point exists along this how reading for renewal is a departure trajectory; however he takes it one step

The Reconstructionist Spring 2004 • 44 further. What happens when there are Sarfei , Shmuel of Shivaneh’s other reality maps (for example, Freud, Ramatayim Zofim to Tanna d’b’ Eliyahu, neuroscience, other metaphysical sys- and various examples in Bratslav litera- tems) that are so far removed from the ture). But this book is a kind of radical reality map of scripture that citing a anthology, one where Reb Zalman’s proof-text to justify a point from these commentary is not meant to clarify a reality maps becomes futile?26 Reb text or present a coherent statement of Zalman writes that in the old paradigm a Hasidic school, but to turn, re-shape, (even in its last stages in Hasidism) “the in some cases transform the texts be- text is proof of what you are saying” ing retold from their original paradigm (121). to the present paradigm.28 However, today we have accepted Below, I will discuss what I see as things as truth that are not founded in the central method utilized to accom- scripture and are often a contradiction plish this. Here, I just want to point to scripture. How do we then read out the way in which Reb Zalman ap- scripture as a reality map; that is, what plies the distinction he draws between are we looking for in an era of conflict- earlier readers of Hasidism, between ing reality maps? Or, more strongly, theologians of Hasidism (i.e., Buber how do we read when the new reality and Heschel) and himself. The latter maps upon which we build our lives two were writing books, Reb Zalman undermine the reality map that is scrip- implies, about Hasidism, whereas he is ture? Regrettably, Reb Zalman never writing a Hasidic text by reading other gives us any detailed discussion on this texts and retelling older stories. Where- important matter. as Paradigm Shift delineates the archi- tecture of Jewish Renewal, Wrapped in Hasidism as an Approach a Holy Flame is its applied dimension. It is only here where the genealogy of Finally, Reb Zalman concludes this Renewal is revealed, albeit in a largely chapter with an important observation. implied fashion. “This book is not a book about Hasid- ism. I don’t want to talk about Hasid- To Retell and to Interpret ism as a static thing; Hasidism is an approach. It is an approach to Juda- As a Hasidic anthology, Wrapped in ism” (24).27 What Reb Zalman does a Holy Flame is trying to accomplish not tell us explicitly is what exactly this two things: to retell and to interpret. book is really about. My suggestion is But what is interpretation? This age- that this book is an attempt to create a old question stands at the center of this Hasidic text in English, an example of book, but it is never explained in any Hasidic anthology with a very specific systematic way. Conventionally, one agenda. We have numerous examples could say that to interpret is to explain, of this in Polish Hasidism (e.g., Yo- to explore, or to understand a text. Or, akhim Kim Kadish’s three-volume Siah. to interpret could be to make a text

The Reconstructionist Spring 2004 • 45 one’s own, to manipulate or massage a the meaning garnered through inter- text, to enable it to speak to you. But pretation changes the way we (the there are limits; anarchic interpretation reader and the listener) live in the will always evoke ire among more con- world. Textual interpretation as reality ventional readers. The great talmudic modification is quite compelling as a scholar Saul Lieberman once warned a Hasidic theory of reading, especially student who was offering a far-fetched when put in the mouth of the Baal reading of a talmudic text, “You can Shem Tov. seduce a text, but you can’t rape it.” The hagiographical literature of the Philosophers interested in herme- Baal Shem Tov is replete with instances neutics, such as Martin Heidegger, Paul where his “interpretation” of a text Riceour, Georg Hans Gadamer, E.D. changes someone’s life, in fact, creates Hirsch, Wolfgang Isser, Jacques Der- disciples. The most well-known in- rida, Stanley Fisch, et al., always at- stance is the story (extant in numerous tempt to navigate between text and versions) of the Dov Baer of Mezritch’s reader, between exegesis and eisogesis, first meeting with the Baal Shem Tov, between what a text says and what it in which the Baal Shem Tov explained can say, or, whether a text says anything a passage from Isaac Luria’s Etz Hayyim. at all. Reb Zalman offers his under- that transformed Dov Baer’s life, in- standing of interpretation through the stantly making a devoted disciple. voice of the Baal Shem Tov. “All right, There are many similar stories in Hasidic let’s take a little detour. I am the Baal literature related to other masters. Shem Tov, and I am about to interpret Reb Zalman’s notion of interpreta- Torah. What am I trying to do by in- tion as reality modification suggests terpretation? I am trying to modify re- that truth is created through reading, ality . . . How we interpret something not the truth of the text but the truth will make a difference in reality. It is of reality as lived by the reader.30 Is this almost as if to say that this interpreta- what Reb Zalman is trying to do in this tion that I am going to give determines book? That is, instead of showing how how the world will come out”(40). Hasidism reflects and serves as a foun- dation for Jewish Renewal (this would Bringing the Text to Life still be a book about Hasidism), he is interpreting Hasidic texts to modify To interpret here is not to under- reality, to bring about and not just il- stand the text at all — in fact the text lustrate a paradigm shift through these (once read) loses all meaning until it is texts. given new meaning by the reader. More importantly, it is not the text here that Fusion of and Mind is ultimately important; it is how the reader brings it to life and, by so do- Our world is no longer the world of ing, changes the life of subsequent read- miracles or of tzaddikim traveling long ers.29 The claim made here argues that distances in a matter of seconds. That

The Reconstructionist Spring 2004 • 46 is an old paradigm, where fantasy and Guide for the Perplexed, Bahya. ibn reality were blurred, a method popular Pakuda’s Duties of the Heart, or in Yiddish storytelling and also cap- Treatise on Be- tured in the description of Gabriel atitude — Hasidic literature rarely, if Garcia Marquez’s novels as “magical re- ever, offers a positive assessment of alism.”31 Our paradigm, teaches Reb other spiritual paths.32 The non-Jew is Zalman, is more mind-oriented, where depicted as inferior at best, demonic spirituality has been psychologized, at worst. Other religions, when not de- where miracles are phenomenological scribed as idolatrous, are deemed infe- and not ontological, where the soul/ rior to Judaism in both substance and spirit and the mind have become fused. form.33 Psychology plays an important role It is surely the case that contempo- in Jewish Renewal. The work of Carl rary constructive Jewish thinking, even Jung and Vikor Frankl and contempo- in a more traditional context, employs rary figures such as Edward Hoffman other religious traditions. However, in and serve as models for Reb most cases, these sources are employed Zalman’s theory of reality modification. pragmatically, that is, to entice the He takes these new models and applies reader, who has likely been exposed to them to the interpretation of texts in other traditions, into taking Hasidism, general and Hasidic texts in particular. or Judaism, seriously. In other words, To read is to create — not only to cre- it is a tool of kiruv.34 While this may ate meaning in the text but to create have also been true in Reb Zalman’s worlds into which one can then enter early writings (he begins his career as and live. New religious schools and an emissary of the Rebbe of Lubavitch communities begin with reading, and in the late 1940s), I think his more recreating through rereading, old texts. mature works, and this work in par- This seems to me Reb Zalman’s first ticular, has a different end in mind. lesson for the new paradigm. Misunderstanding the Other Encounter with Other Religions It is appropriate that Reb Zalman begins his discussion of the other with Someone comparing this volume as an admission of guilt. That is, he feels an anthological Hasidic text in English compelled to undermine popular to other classical Hasidic texts will no- Hasidic apologetics by acknowledging tice that Reb Zalman offers us frequent, Hasidism’s (and Judaism’s) past failure in fact almost constant, references to in understanding the non-Jewish other, masters and teachings of other religious both as person (the as neigh- traditions. While this is not uncom- bor) and thought (Gentile religions). mon in classical — for The following is another good example example, in medieval philosophical and of how Reb Zalman expresses his own pietistic literature, such as Maimonides’ ideas through the mouth of another, a

The Reconstructionist Spring 2004 • 47 tactic that filters through this entire him as a Hasidic master. He is viewed book and is quite common in Hasidic as a proto-advocate of Renewal, a vi- literature more generally. Speaking sionary of a new paradigm that would about Hillel Zeitlin, a fascinating and only arise from the ashes of the Holo- complex personality from early 20th caust, from his own ashes. Reb Zalman century Eastern Europe who was mur- views the lifting of that cloud as an dered by the Nazis on the road to opportunity (one part of a paradigm Treblinka, wrapped in phylacteries and shift) once again to confront the fis- a prayer shawl, Reb Zalman writes, sure Zeitlin described, a blemish that prevents us from moving forward and For Jews, Christians were expend- meeting the shifting paradigm of post- able. Often they were only seen as war reality. And so the attitude toward useful expedients — Shabbos the non-Jew must be addressed and the Goyim — and the rest were super- incorporation of non-Jewish religions fluous. This was the attitude that must be programmatically employed to they took. We are finally emerg- create a new Hasidism for the future. ing from that attitude. But there he was in his time (1930s), and Ending Isolation how was he going to say that? Zeitlin reached into what people Comparisons with other religious have called the second Isaiah and traditions serve an essential function in that universal vision, and he real- this reconstruction of Hasidism. While ized that nobody can be redeemed the comparisons are not detailed or par- without everybody else being re- ticularly sophisticated, they function to deemed. When a person becomes open the mind of the reader, who may fully aware of that, it ushers in a be accustomed to viewing Judaism in whole new way of thinking (283). isolation. Reb Zalman’s comparative exercise is not academic, that is, it is How bizarre yet powerful to make not historical, nor is it polemical in any such an admission of guilt about the way. Rather, it implicitly suggests that Jewish attitude toward the non-Jew when one views Judaism refracted through someone who was brutally through the lenses of the other, even murdered for no other reason than his one that is/was your enemy, one’s vi- own Jewishness! It is true, as Reb Zal- sion of Judaism is both attenuated and man recounts, that Zeitlin saw a deep deepened. That is, Judaism becomes and corrosive fissure in Judaism’s an- smaller because it is severed from its tipathy toward the non-Jew. How- myth of exclusive superiority. Yet it ever, surrounded by the dark cloud of becomes deeper because it is now un- and baseless anti-Semitism, derstood as one very creative and of- Zeitlin had no audience, and no pro- ten profound way of addressing peren- gram, to correct this. nial issues of human existence. But this is why Reb Zalman includes Such comparative analysis also di-

The Reconstructionist Spring 2004 • 48 minishes (although it does not erase) no longer, “Is it permitted to study the propensity for exclusivist and fun- other religions?” — a question that damentalist readings. When these com- reaches back to the Mishna and served parative readings of religion are as the foundation of many internal contextualized within the secular via medieval Jewish debates. For Reb psychology and , what emerges Zalman, that is a question of the old is a Judaism that is both usable and paradigm. The new question is, “Is it malleable. permitted not to?” For example, when Reb Zalman ex- plores Shneur Zalman of Liady’s theory Undermining Tradition of the animal soul (nefesh ha-behamit), in conjunction with the Sufi concept This raises another important di- of nafs (“the soul seeking its own plea- mension of paradigm-shift thinking sure”) (119), he is not suggesting any that needs further exploration. Reb historical confluence. He is also not Zalman’s broadening of the Jewish dis- using as a foil to show how the course through the necessary incorpo- “Jewish” idea is superior. He is simply ration of non-Jewish sources and tra- arguing that Shneur Zalman’s theory ditions and the implicit that these of the animal soul is not original, and “external sources” (seforim hizonim. ) its very unoriginality is an indication can deepen one’s understanding of Ju- of Shneur Zalman’s deep thinking (the daism, undermines an important con- Hebrew saying barukh sh’kavanti, cept in traditional Judaism — “the de- “thank God I have independently un- scent of the generations” (yeridat ha- derstood an already existing observa- dorot), one fundamental component of tion,” is quite apt here). That is, by iso- rabbinic authority. While it is true that lating the nefesh ha-behamit and trying this doctrine does not appear before the to understand its place in the human geonic period in the work of Sherira condition, Shneur Zalman enters into Gaon and was, as Menahem Kellner one of the great perennial spiritualist has argued, likely rejected by figures as struggles.35 And further, Sufism’s long seminal as Moses Maimonides, it has tradition of struggling with the issue become a dominant trope in traditional of human desire and the human spirit Judaism.36 can, and should, be a resource for Jews Most non-traditional modern trying to make sense of Shneur Zal- , including , have man’s thinking. largely rejected this notion, even as I would go even further to say that some try to retain it by bifurcating le- the logic of this argument suggests that gal (halakhic) and non-legal (aggadic) utilizing Sufism in this case may en- dimensions of Judaism. However, Reb able us, in this new paradigm, to have Zalman is constructing his Judaism a broader sense of what the nefesh ha- from the ultra-traditional sources of behamit means than Shnuer Zalman’s Hasidim and Kabbala, traditions that own contemporaries. The question is prima facie accept this idea. I think

The Reconstructionist Spring 2004 • 49 paradigm-shift thinking unapologetic- place. This is exhibited through its in- ally undermines “the descent of the ability to engage seriously in, among generations,” and it would be a desider- other things, the question of gender atum for Reb Zalman to weigh in on and the truth of non-Jewish religions. this. It shows, on my reading, an un- By freely exhibiting both, Reb Zalman derlying positivism in Reb Zalman’s opens up a treasure chest containing thinking, a kind of spiritual reconfigu- jewels and charcoal and asks his reader ration of Auguste Comte’s foundation not to discard the former for the latter for secularism. or to deny the existence of the latter in Here again, I think there is an inter- order to salvage the former. esting, yet still unexplored, correlation between Reb Zalman and Mordecai Creative Act of Translation Kaplan. How does one create a life of devotion and piety wed to a traditional In the broadest sense, Reb Zalman’s body of classical literature while espous- deconstruction and revaluation of the ing a positivistic theory of civilization? Hasidic legacy is enacted through the While Kaplan has much to say about creative act of translation. By transla- this, it remains largely undeveloped in tion, I do not mean simply rendering Reb Zalman’s work, yet constitutes and a word or phrase from one language important part of the Renewal project. into another. Rather, I refer to an act whereby a value expressed in a word or Stretching the Paradigm phrase is subverted to mean something other than what it has come to mean More generally, what this book at- (what it was intended to mean, no one tempts to do, and I think does so quite really knows), yet the initial term re- successfully, is to rend the veil of the mains, albeit in a new state. so-called traditionalist mind-set of This is perhaps captured in the Hasidism — not by arguing that zoharic phrase milin itin haditin (new Hasidic masters were overt heretics, but ancient words).37 If successful, tradition that they were, in a sense, engaged in is transformed but not effaced. In many stretching their own paradigm to its cases, especially in esoteric literature, limit. In some cases, they may have the transition of translation is not be- broken momentarily into the next para- tween one term and another, one lan- digm and then quickly retreated, fear- guage and another, even one culture ing the sociological consequences of and another — it is between language, marginalization and exclusion from tra- any language, and the experience it ditional society. seeks to express. This is a common To illustrate this, Reb Zalman shows theme in translation theory from both the radical underside of Hasidism Dryden to Benjamin and appears in a as well as the instances where Hasidism different form in ’s fails to remain true to its inner drive attempt to define Jewish mysticism in and becomes a product of its time and the beginning of his Major Trends in

The Reconstructionist Spring 2004 • 50 Jewish Mysticism. Reb Zalman is sim- ‘selfness,’ your ego, and you anni- ply applying it to Hasidic teaching. hilate it, you ‘bash’ it, that is go- ing to take you closer to the love Translation and Experience of God. But today I don’t even think it is a good strategy to bash For example, writing about the He- the ego. I think a better strategy is brew term bittul ha-yesh as “the anni- to make the ego transparent(171). hilation of the self,”he notes: “It is not that it is a poor translation of the He- “Transparency” is not set in stone. brew, but the words are a bad transla- and Reb Zalman seems open to other tion of the experience” (76). I do not possibilities. What is accomplished here read this claim to be transhistorical. is simply that the open engagement That is, at one time, and under certain with the conscious act of revaluation historical and ideational circumstances, creates a new strategy for the aspiring bittul ha-yesh could very well have paradigm-thinker. meant “the annihilation of the self.” That is, at one time this could have Generosity, Not Fear been an accurate description of a hu- man experience that was deemed a Hence, while creative translation is positive part of the devotional life. In a classic exercise of all religious systems, this time, given the paradigm shift of Reb Zalman’s self-conscious and open postwar postmodernity, Reb Zalman deployment of this method offers his claims the annihilation of the self is not readers a transparency that is both re- an experience we deem healthy or use- freshing and productive. In Reb ful. (Perhaps the brutal program of Zalman’s Hasidic text, the reader is in- annihilation of “the other” in Nazism vited to evaluate, accept, expand, or re- destroyed any positive value of annihi- ject a particular translation precisely lation more generally?) Hence the because she becomes part of the very translation, once appropriate, now be- act of translation. The hidden agenda comes obsolete. of creative translation in tradition, of- Looking for a concept that better ten protected through the concealment represents what we may be trying to of its method, is a reflection of the old achieve, Reb Zalman suggests “becom- paradigm. The new paradigm, built on ing transparent” to express a notion the principle of generosity and not fear, whereby distance between the self and unity and not polarity, pantheism and God is narrowed without the efface- not deism, can abandon the protective ment of the self in the process: garments of hidden translation, since progress and change become positive And so the Hasidic masters are us- values for religion and not ones that ing old language about the body threaten to undermine it. to talk about the ego. If you do The best way to illustrate Reb Zal- bittul ha-yesh, if you take your man’s tools of translation is through a

The Reconstructionist Spring 2004 • 51 series of brief examples. In them, I hope as “One-ing” or “sticking to God”), to show that translation is the core to which is a classic kabbalistic way of Reb Zalman’s thinking. I will begin translating. with a simple list of seven translations and briefly explore how I think these Saving Torah translations function. On the other hand, one could sug- 1) olamot — usually rendered as gest that what Reb Zalman is doing “worlds”; Reb Zalman suggests “genres” here is classic Maimonideanism. In the (154). first part of his Guide for the Perplexed, 2) sinat ra — usually rendered as “ha- Maimonides engages in a lengthy ex- tred of evil”; Reb Zalman suggests position of biblical terms, translating “aversion to evil” (151). and defining them as a necessary pre- 3) tumah [related to , menstrua- lude to the remainder of his philosophi- tion] — usually rendered as “spiritual cal treatise. Maimonides, of course, uncleanliness”; Reb Zalman suggests believed he was actually telling us what “aversion-therapy” (161). the term “really” meant; that is, phi- 4) bittul ha-yesh — usually rendered as losophy was employed as the hand- “self-nullification”; Reb Zalman sug- maiden of philology, but that is beside gests “transparency” (172). the point. 5) aimeh — usually rendered as “fear” In one sense, there is a Maimoini- or “trepidation”; Reb Zalman suggests dean strain throughout Reb Zalman’s “paralyzing anxiety” (166). thinking, perhaps in the trajectory of 6) kelipot — usually rendered as “ex- Maimonides’ more spiritualistic dis- traneous matter” or “demonic forces”; ciples, his son Abraham and his grand- Reb Zalman suggests “ systems” son Obadia. Yet Maimonides was ar- (150). guably looking for synthesis between 7) — usually rendered as “com- philosophy and scripture, whereas Reb munion with God”; Reb Zalman sug- Zalman has no such illusion. He is not gests “One-ing” or “sticking to God” seeking to merge “reality maps,” but, (53). in fact, to make a new reality map of Reb Zalman never suggests that his Torah (here exemplified in Hasidism) new translation is what the term actu- by reenvisioning it through a series of ally means. This would render his new reality maps. In this way, Torah is project scholastic, even apologetic, but not coming to save civilization (an not constructive. In fact, he is often older apologetic stance) but, rather, the clear that his rendering is not what the new paradigm is coming to save Torah term has come to mean or even origi- through its devoted and creative reader nally meant. There is rarely any philo- — saving Torah from obsolescence and logical basis for his translation (an ex- the dustbin of history. ception would be aimeh, 166). There When he speaks of olamot as genres, is often a hyperliteralism (e.g., devekut he views them as “reality systems that

The Reconstructionist Spring 2004 • 52 are perpendicular to one another” Zalman’s pantheism is not fully (154) — that is, a web of different but antinomian; that is, all is not permit- not mutually exclusive intersecting sys- ted. There are things that we should tems through which and into which we simply avoid for all kind of reasons: live. Olamot ceases to mean something They are destructive, unhealthy, cor- “out there.” They are stripped of their rosive; they take us away from loving metaphysical characteristics and be- God and loving others. In Renewal, come modes by which one can ascer- prohibitions remain. tain, explain or simply think about the Reb Zalman’s question — which is human condition and one’s relation- metahalakhic at its core — is not, ship to others, be they organic or inor- “What is prohibited ?” or even “Why ganic. If Reb Zalman’s work is success- is this or that prohibited?” Rather, the ful, the term olam will enter into the question that concerns him is “How do lexicon of contemporary reality that we succeed in distancing ourselves from Reb Zalman is always looking to ex- that which is prohibited?” Calling it pand. Once the term enters, its multi- “evil” is one sure way, since it presents valent meanings from the past can im- the prohibited object or idea as threat- pact on the present. In this sense, trans- ening. Evil is a tool used by religious lation is a vehicle for confluence. We authorities to assure compliance with must remember that for Reb Zalman, religious standards. The downside is the new paradigm is not a “Jewish” that evil breeds a desire, even an obli- paradigm, but one of human civiliza- gation, to destroy or annihilate. When tion. Judaism can contribute to this the object or act is ontologically “evil,” new era to the extent to which it al- its very presence in the world under- lows (and trains) itself to enter into its mines the religious life. The “sacred” emerging and developing discourse. act of killing in a religious war, the en- emy being the embodiment of evil, is Understanding Evil the obvious example of how evil func- tions negatively. Sadly, this corrosive The translation of ra, or evil, as language has been revived in a quasi- “aversion" is another telling example. secular context by the current president Evil is a concept from the old deistic of the . paradigm, a term that thrives on the Reb Zalman suggests the term “aver- bifurcation of reality into God and not- sion” as an alternative. Healthy aver- God — good and evil. Even if we un- sion (Reb Zalman brings Stanley derstand this in terms of negative the- Kubrick’s film, A Clockwork Orange, as ology (i.e., evil as the absence of good) an example of unhealthy aversion ther- or the more modern dialectical ap- apy) is born out of love. “ In my life, proach of classic Beshtean Hasidism, I I’m totally connected with the energy think Reb Zalman is suggesting that of God, and I so love God that to do evil is a term that cannot survive the anything contrary to God’s will is pantheism of the new paradigm. Reb something I couldn’t handle. If I did

The Reconstructionist Spring 2004 • 53 that, my consciousness would be cut tures the Hebrew term aimeh. His ren- off from God. It is an aversion driven dering is based on a loose philological by the resultant separation from the Be- observation. Ai-mah, “Where is it?” or loved” (153). That which is contrary “What is it?” That is, “I don’t know to God exists, as it always will, but it what it is, I don’t know where it is, but only threatens me when I give it my I got this uncanny feeling something attention. When I ignore it, it remains is impending” (166). Reb Zalman ad- “out there,” but it is outside the sphere mits, “nobody says that we need to have of how I want to live my life. And, more this kind of fear of God”(166). Yet it is importantly, when it is ignored, its an anxiety that is all too common, even power is diminished, an interpretation under normal conditions, a fear that of the classic kabbalistic idea that the can only be overcome by succumbing life-force of the demonic realm is de- to it — moving past it and not allow- pendant upon its interaction with the ing oneself to stuck in the paralyz- holy. ing moment. This kind of fear is natu- ral and, unless one can move beyond “Paralyzing Anxiety” it, the true fear of yeriah may elude one. In these brief examples — and there The final example of translation that are many more — Reb Zalman builds I will discuss is the term aimeh, usually his theory of reading for renewal: read- rendered as “fear.” Reb Zalman calls it ing as an act of creative reconstruction. “paralyzing anxiety.”To illustrate this His translations are not meant to be example, he retells a teaching he heard scholarly but useful; they serve one who from Rabbi Yisrael Jacobson, a teacher needs and wants Hasidism, but refuses of his in the Lubavitch , that to dwell in the old paradigm where it aimeh is a fear that is malevolent, one resides. These terms, this new Hasidic that is not healthy, but yet many have lexicon, are the building blocks of Jew- to overcome to get to the healthy fear ish Renewal. It is only in Wrapped in a of God, or yeriah. Reb Zalman uses the Holy Flame that Reb Zalman explores example of a peyote ritual and the fear this systematically and comprehen- of impending doom that often accom- sively, exposing the reader to his theory panies a hallucinogenic experience. The of reading for renewal, one that would heightening of one’s senses through allow the reader herself to continue his these stimulants often brings about a work. feeling of uncontrolled movement. When this is coupled with fear (as it Engaging Islam often is initially) it results in a con- sciousness of impending doom and the There are two brief and intercon- inability to do anything about it — the nected observations that will serve as a fear one experiences immediately be- conclusion to this essay. First, one of fore one is hit, anticipating the pain. the lesser-known dimensions of Reb This experience, he suggests, cap- Zalman’s contribution to contempo-

The Reconstructionist Spring 2004 • 54 rary Judaism is that he was one of the lam, and much of Islam conflates de- first constructive Jewish theologians mocracy and freedom with secularism seriously to engage Islam as a well- and the Judeo/Christian tradition they spring for Jewish devotional life. Much view as incompatible with their theo- of 20th-century Jewish theology in logical world-view. America was rooted in the European tradition, where the only serious Resisting Change “other” was . A good example of this, in fact the I do not feel that the political and exception that proves the rule, is Franz theological polarization following 9/11 Rosenzweig’s somewhat pathetic treat- and the collapse of the Oslo accords ment of Islam in his The Star of Re- undermine Reb Zalman’s engagement demption (and this was likely the prod- with Islam – in fact they give it new uct of Hegel’s superficial assessment of immediacy. Reb Zalman’s ecumenical Islam and not of any serious engage- (really post-ecumenical) and even syn- ment with the tradition).38 American cretistic project is that Islam is not the theologians such as Soloveitchik, Heschel, only thing that needs to be saved – Ju- Fackenheim, Kaplan, Herberg, Wyscho- daism and Christianity also need to be grod, Greenberg, et al., almost never saved, and perhaps the Muslim struggle deal with Islam in anything more than to come to terms with modernity is a a perfunctory way.39 Almost all ecu- mirror for our struggle to come to menical work, until very recently, has terms with this new paradigm. Islam is been between Jews and Christians. not the problem but the symptom of a While 9/11 has changed all that, as more global reluctance to move into early as the 1960s Reb Zalman was se- this new paradigm, manifest in many riously reading Muslim literature, ways, including post-colonialism, im- dialoging with Muslim contemporar- perialism, military hegemony, unsym- ies, and using Islam, mostly Sufism, as pathetic capitalism, and the profiteer- a source of his own inspiration. Given ing dimension of globalization. Of the recent turn of events since 9/11, course, the problem is more complex, Reb Zalman’s visionary notion that Is- but to place the onus solely on Islam is lam is an important part of this new to ignore a more global crisis that im- paradigm has come to fruition. The fact plicates all of us. The solution is not to that our world is now confronted with eradicate the symptom, but to come to radical Islam, a secular America driven understand the underlying cause of the in part by evangelical (radical) Chris- disease. tianity, and an Israeli political environ- Reb Zalman, like most of us, knows ment influenced by religious (radical) that Islam is a rich tradition with cen- messianism, makes Reb Zalman’s work turies of enlightened teachings. His glo- even more pertinent. Most Jews and bal vision of Renewal includes employ- Americans more generally have a ste- ing these teachings, thereby exposing reotypic and “Orientalist” view of Is- Jews and Christians to them, as well as

The Reconstructionist Spring 2004 • 55 exposing contemporary Muslims to the it claims to be — it is more than a col- ways in which Judaism was positively lection of Hasidic teachings and sto- influenced by the golden age of Islam. ries. It is an important step in the matu- There would not have been a rich me- ration of Jewish Renewal. In Wrapped dieval Judaism without Islam — no Sa- in a Holy Flame, Reb Zalman has left adia Gaon, Moses Maimonides, Bahya. us a treasure, but one that must be read ibn Pakuda, or Judah Ha-Levi. Perhaps closely and creatively, not only to en- Reb Zalman believes it is time for us joy, but more importantly to use. to pay back the Islamic tradition. I would love to hear a more detailed dis- cussion about the place of Islam in 1. Richard Seigel, Michael Strassfeld, Renewal, given the present state of Sharon Strassfeld, The First Jewish Cata- world. logue (Philadelphia, PA: JPS, 1973). 2. Fragments of a Future Scroll: Hassidism An Unrealistic Vision? for the Aquarian Age (Germantown, PA: Leaves of Grass Press, 1975); Paradigm The second related point is that any Shift (New York/London: Jason Aronson, reader of this essay, or of Reb Zalman’s 1993). Another short book that continues work more generally, can rightfully re- this trajectory is The First Step: A Guide for spond that his progressive vision of the New Jewish Spirit (Toronto/New York: unity, this Aquarian Age of spiritual Bantam Books, 1983). Reb Zalman’s dis- renewal, seems unrealistic. Religious sertation, written at HUC/Cincinnati. has also been published as Spiritual Intimacy: is on the rise, in Is- A Study of Counseling in Hasidism (North- lam, Christianity, Judaism, and Hin- vale, NJ: Jason Aronson, 1991). This work duism. It seems as if we are heading explores the relationship between the back toward a dangerous old paradigm Rebbe and the Hasid as a relationship of that preceded modernity, a time when counseling, and thus develops his notion holy wars and accusations of an “axis of the Rebbe as an integral part of the of evil” were commonplace. Reb Zal- Hasid. While playing a role in his Renewal man never addresses this issue. Given trajectory, its focus is more limited than his predictions of a new paradigm, he either Fragments or Paradigm Shift. never tells us why human civilization 3. Both Paradigm Shift and Wrapped in a seems to be heading in the opposite Holy Flame contain chapters that were pub- direction, and what can we do about lished previously as essays, some as early as the 1960s. it. Reb Zalman has given us much, but 4. The structure of Hasidic books, that is, maybe his work is not yet done. Per- how they were composed, collected and haps he can also offer advice in these published, has been comprehensively stud- most pressing matters in light of his ied by Zeev Greis. See his The Book in Early lifelong struggle to explicate and articu- Hasidism [Hebrew] (Tel Aviv, 1992). late a new paradigm. 5. For example, see Aryeh Kaplan, The Unlike many books, Wrapped in a Light Beyond: Adventures in Chasidic Holy Flame is actually much more than Thought (New York: Moznayim, 1981);

The Reconstructionist Spring 2004 • 56 and The Chasidic Masters and Their Teach- As far as I know, Reb Zalman never men- ings (New York, Moznayim, 1984). For tions Fackenheim in his writings. ’s writings on Hasidism, see 10. In some way, then, Reb Zalman tells In the Beginning: Discourses on Hasidic us too much; that is, he shows us his hand Thought (Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson, and thus excludes those whose commit- 1992); and The Candle of God: Discourse ment to tradition is steadfast. His recent on Chasidic Thought (Northvale, NJ: Jason works in Hebrew are closer to the older Aronson, 1998). model. I have discussed this in a yet un- 6. Martin Buber, “Spinoza, Sabbatai Zevi, published essay, “Translating into Tradi- and the Baal Shem Tov,” in The Origin and tion: Subversion and Constructive Meaning of Hasidism (Atlantic Highlands, in the Hebrew Writings of Reb Zalman NJ: Humanities Press, 1988),89-112. Schachter-Shalomi,” presented at Awaken- 7. Here I believe Reb Zalman is hinting at ing, Yearning and Renewal: Conference on the pedagogical model of R. Kolonymous Neo-Hasidism, , March 26- Kalman Shapira of Piasceno, the rebbe of 28, 2003. On this exercise in Kabbala, see the Warsaw ghetto, whose trilogy on Ha- Daniel Matt, “‘New Ancient Words’: The sidic pedagogy was focused on this ques- of Secrecy in the Zohar,” in Gershom tion (i.e., how does one become a Hasid?). Scholem’s Major Trends in Jewish Mysticism: See his Hakhsharat Arekhim and Mevo Fifty Years After, P. Schafer and J. Dan, eds. Shearim (, 1962). (Tubigen: Mohr, 1993),181-209. 8. For example, Reb Zalman is quite open 11. There is an interesting connection here about the way he thinks Hasidism rubs between Reb Zalman’s pantheism and against the grain of traditional Judaism. Mordecai Kaplan’s theological a-theism. A Discussing Sefer Ha-, Reb Zalman more detailed comparison of Reb Zalman writes, “Now, Reb Shneur Zalman makes and Kaplan would be useful. One fasci- a very important move from the way of nating comparison that touches on the the . He is not really interested in pantheistic components of Kaplan’s think- behavior as much as he is interested in at- ing can be found in Jack Cohen, Guide for titude and transformation” (108). This the Age of Confusion: Studies in the Think- may sound like a benign and obvious ing of Avraham Y. Kook and Mordecai point, but what is being suggested here is Kaplan (New York: Fordham Press, 1999) that Sefer Ha-Tanya really takes its reader 12. I have dealt with the issue of the di- in a direction away from the basic assump- vine in the human in Hasidism in “Ethics tion of (i.e, that behav- Disentangled from the Law: Hasidism and ior stands at the center of Jewish ). Dispositional Ethics,” in A Companion to 9. This theory is developed more compre- Religious Ethics, William Schweiker, ed. hensively in Paradigm Shift, 247-308. It (England: Blackwell Press) in press. It is also has precedent in medieval kabbalistic also noteworthy that this theological move works, such as Sefer Temunah, Sefer Peliah in Judaism, one that places Judaism in and Sefer Ha-Kaneh. This thinking also much closer proximity to Christianity, can influenced Sabbateanism. For example, see only be achieved in a climate where Juda- , Messianic Mystics (New Ha- ism can grow without the fear of seeming ven: Yale University Press, 1998),183-212. too “Christian.” So much of modern Jew- Another worthwhile comparison here is be- ish thinking has been stunted because it tween Reb Zalman and Emile Fackenheim. was always concerned with marking how

The Reconstructionist Spring 2004 • 57 Judaism was unlike Christianity. See Elliot Healer of the Cosmos (Stanford: Stanford R. Wolfson, “Judaism and Incarnation: University Press, 2003). The Imaginal Body of God,” Christianity 17. For an argument on the disanalogy in Jewish Terms, Frymer-Kensky, Novak, between Jewish and the other monotheis- Ochs, Sandmel, Signer, eds. (Oxford: Ox- tic religions on the question of fundamen- ford University Press, 2000), 240. Reb Zal- talism, see Zvi Kurzweil, “Fundamental- man’s new paradigm transcends that fear. ism and Judaism,” L’Elyah 25 (1966), 8- 13. Here I would say Reb Zalman is gen- 10. Kurzweil argues that the centrality of tly criticizing Heschel’s space-time discus- law and the oral law, in particular, enables sion in The Sabbath by arguing that Judaism to successfully circumvent many Heschel’s notion of Judaism as a religion of the problems of fundalentalism. In my of time is part of an old paradigm. view, his argument is weak, never delving 14. The argument that this new panthe- into any substance, and traffics largely in ism, the divinity of the person, takes Juda- stereotypes of all three religion. Reb Zal- ism closer to Christianity is not lost on Reb man is able to acknowledge both the Zalman. I will discuss the ecumenical di- strengths of other monotheisms and the mensions of this work later in this essay. weakness that is endemic to all monothe- 15. This appears quite close to Mordecai ism. For an example of how fundamental- Kaplan’s Reconstructionism and, in a way, ism plays a central role in the ba'al teshuva it is. However, Reb Zalman is more will- movement in Judaism, see Janet Aviad, ing than Kaplan to creatively reinterpret Return to Judaism: Religious Renewal in Is- (I call it translate) old paradigm ideas to rael (Chicago and London: University of fit in the new paradigm. This is partly be- Chicago Press, 1983). Aviad examines cause Kaplan’s rationalism and dedication comments by prominent and newly to plain-sense meaning (p’shat) made it observant Jews involved with this move- more difficult for him to engage in the kind ment, which exhibits a hatred for secular- of creative reading that Reb Zalman, who ism, Western civilization and modern val- was raised in a world of Hasidic exegesis, ues, all quite reminiscent of Christian deploys. Also, coming from mysticism, Reb and militant Islam. Zalman is not nearly as put off by the 18. Reb Zalman does not use deism in the “polytheistic” dimensions of Judaism as classic sense of one God who is no longer Kaplan and does not think they need to engaged with the world but rather as a sub- be totally purged. stitute for a monotheism in opposition to 16. Both and Lawrence pantheism. It is also important to note that Fine, in different ways, argue that the per- Reb Zalman does not equate non-mono- son is indeed central to the Lurianic world- theistic religions with idolatry, even from view, but I would suggest that what a Jewish perspective. Idolatry can be mani- Hasidism does, in effect,is to allow the per- fest in both monotheistic and non-mono- son to overshadow, and even efface, the theistic religions. metaphysics that still loom large in classi- 19. This book, and Reb Zalman’s work cal kabbalistic systems. See Liebes, “Two more generally, do not address the fact that Young Roes of a Doe: The Secret Sermon contemporary Hasidism has become, in of Isaac Luria before His Death,” [Hebrew] some way, more fundamentalist and more in Mekharei Yerushalayim 10 (1992): esp. intolerant than in the past — in short, that 114-126; and Fine, Physician of the Soul, Hasidism may be reinventing an old para-

The Reconstructionist Spring 2004 • 58 digm to counter Jewish Renewal’s new one. the rabbinic mind, but that the proof-text 20. Buber’s early work on Hasidism was was the most commonly deployed method not intended for a Jewish audience but of making a case for both textual and ex- rather an intellectual/spiritual German tra-textual truth. audience in search of authentic Oriental- 24. Maimonides’ scholarship indicates that ism, For example, see Paul Mendes-Flohr, this assertion is very complex and not at “Fin de Siecle Orientalism: The Ousjuden all as straightforward as it sounds. I sim- and the Aesthetics of Jewish Self-Affirma- ply employ Maimonides here for the sake tion,” in Divided Passions (Detroit, MI: of argument. Wayne State University Press, 1991), 77- 25. Even though in Guide II:25 he seems 132. to accept the traditional notion of creation 21. Reb Zalman writes, “Some seekers have over eternity, he does not do so by using a reacted against all this (i.e., Renewal), as proof-text (as does, for example, Saadia you well know, and have decided to pick Gaon in his Emunot ve De’ot), but rather another time and place — a medieval Ti- because he is not convinced (or so he says) bet, for example, or 18th-century – by Aristotle’s theory of eternity. However, in which to live. They have constructed in Guide II:14, he presents a very strong small universes for themselves and have case for Aristotle without asserting his own paid a dear price personally and intellec- position. tually, but in some cases have reached re- 26. It is Michel Foucault who argues that markable spiritual attainments. To these only in modernity do we find arguments people we can only offer our blessings — evaluated outside the confines of the au- but it is not with envy that we see them. thority of the author as normative. See The life of the spirit must move forward; Foucault, “What is an Author?” in Re- the God who created those earlier ages Thinking Popular Culture: Contemporary made this one and also the ones to come” Perspectives in Cultural Studies, C. Mukerji (Wrapped in a Holy Flame, 209). and M. Schudson, eds. (Berkeley, CA: Uni- 22. Another example common in the me- versity of California Press, 1991), 446-464. dieval period, especially in Kabbala, is the 27. This language immediately reminds notion of “proof person.” In the words of one of Heschel’s essay, “Hasidism as a New Eitan Fishbane, “Legitimate meaning ul- Approach to Torah,” reprinted in Moral timately only requires that the source of Grandeur and Spiritual Audacity, Susannah transmission be considered authoritative Heschel, ed. (New York: FSG, 1996), 33- within the specific cultural context.” See 39. E. Fishbane, “Authority, Tradition, and the 28. Anthology is a fascinating and under- Creation of Meaning in Medieval Kabbala: examined genre of Jewish literature. For Isaac of Acre’s Illumination of the Eyes,” one very insightful analysis, see Eugene Journal of the American Academy of Reli- Shepphard, “‘I am a Memory Come Alive’: gion 72-1 (March, 2004), 65. This notion, Nahum Glatzer and the Legacy of German which has its modern correlate in the no- Jewish Thought in America,” Jewish Quar- tion of daas torah, would be, for Reb Zal- terly Review, 94-1 (Winter, 2004),123-148. man, an example of old-paradigm think- 29. On this reading, Reb Zalman’s think- ing. ing on interpretation is more aligned with 23. This is not to say that s’vara, or ratio- the philosophical hermeneutics of Gada- nal reasoning, did not also play a role in mer and Riceour and the reader/response

The Reconstructionist Spring 2004 • 59 criticism of Wolfgang Isser and against the of Lekha Dodi and Kabbalat [He- belief in the possibility of recovering au- brew] (Los Angeles and Jerusalem: Cherub thorial intent argued in E.D. Hirsch. See Press and Magnus Press, 2003), 82-133; Hirsch, Validity in Interpretation (New and Ronald Keiner, “The Image of Islam Haven: Yale University, 1967). For a dis- in the Zohar,” Jerusalem Studies in Jewish cussion of this in Jewish sources, see Moshe Thought 8 (1989). 42-65. Halbertal, People of the Book: Canon, Mean- 34. Aryeh Kaplan’s work is a good example ing, and Authority (Cambridge, MA: of this kind of usage. Harvard University Press, 1997), 45-50; 35. See, for example, Wrapped in a Holy and E. Fishbane, “Authority, Tradition, and Flame, 126. “The issue here is so clear, and the Creation of Meaning in Medieval this is what and all these other things Kabbala: Isaac of Acre’s Illumination of the are about: to make the body and the Ani- Eyes,” 75-78. mal Soul, as it were, a more and more trans- 30. Buber makes a similar but not identi- parent and willing subject. To allow them cal claim in “Saga and History” in his Moses to do what is required.” (London: East West Library, 1946), 13-19. 36. See Menahem Kellner, Maimonides on Cf. Ahad Ha-Am, Moses (Berlin: Juedisch the “Decline of the Generations” and the Na- Verlag, 1905). ture of Rabbinic Authority (Albany, NY: 31. See, for example, David Roskies, A SUNY Press, 1996), esp. 37-54; and Iggeret Bridge of Longing: The Art of Yiddish of Sherira Gaon, Nossin Dovid Rabin- Storytelling (Cambridge, MA: Harvard owich trans. (Jerusalem, Vagshal, 1991). University Press, 1995), especially pages 1- 37. See Daniel Matt, “‘New Ancient 20. The classic example of “magical real- Words’: The Aura of Secrecy in the Zohar,” ism” is Marquez’s One Hundred Years of in Gershom Scholem’s Major Trends 50 Years Solitude. After, 181-209. 32. See Menahem Mansoor’s “Translator’s 38. On this, see Gil Anidjar, Arab/Jew: A Introduction” to Bahya Ibn Pakuda’s The History of the Enemy (Stanford: Stanford Book of Direction to the Duties of the Heart, University Press, 2003), 87-98. M. Mansoor trans. (Routledge & Kegan/ 39. One notable exception was Martin Paul: London, 1973), 1-82; and Paul Buber, who did engage Islam more than Fenton, Treatise of the Pool (London: Oc- his contemporaries. However, this engage- tagon Press, 1981), 1-23. ment was largely the product of the early 33. This is, of course, true of Kabbala as 20th-century Orientalism practiced by a well. For an interesting series of examples circle of German intellectuals led by the about kabbalistic attitudes toward Judaism Hart brothers. On this, see Paul Mendes- and Christianity in the 16th century, see Flohr, “Fin de Siecle Orientalism,” cited Reuven Kimelmen, The Mystical Meaning above in note 20.

The Reconstructionist Spring 2004 • 60