A Conversation

For halachic reasons, Shuli insisted that his real-life wife, Michal Bat-Sheva, who with Shuli and had never acted before, star opposite him in Ushpizin. Shuli won the Israeli Film Academy’s 2004 Best Actor Award, the Israeli equivalent of the Oscar. Photos courtesy of New Line Home Michal Rand Entertainment BY DOV PARIS

Shuli and Michal Bat-Sheva Rand don’t look like your typical movie stars. Sure, they recently starred in a groundbreaking Israeli film that has won acclaim far beyond the Jewish community. But this middle-aged couple is anything but your typical image of celebrity, and that’s because this former actor and his wife are Breslov Chassidim. Ushpizin, a box-office hit in Israel and one of the highest grossing foreign films in America last year, was a rare collaboration between secular and Orthodox Israelis. Screenwriter/actor Shuli Rand won the Israeli Film Academy’s 2004 Best Actor Award, the Israeli equivalent of the Oscar, for his role in Ushpizin. Dov Paris sat down with the Rands to discuss the movie, their return to Judaism and their plans for the future. In what follows, unless otherwise indicated, the answers are credited to the Rands, rather than to Shuli or Michal separately, since they were both present at the interview and answered the questions together. Ed.

JA: Do you view your stage and movie reasons. [Shuli would not play opposite superficial understanding of the career primarily as an opportunity for a woman other than his wife.] Orthodox world. We did not aim [at personal development, or as a means to We did not want to appear as if reaching] only the non-observant, but impact our largely secular society and we are out to proselytize. Nor do we rather we hoped to foster unity, to bring people back to the fold? think that we are suited for that role, or enhance mutual understanding between that the movie would have had such a religious and non-religious. Shuli: Answering this question is not positive impact [had our agenda been to easy. Personal development came second “convert” the audience]. Because of my JA: Could you name a particular mis- at most; certainly for Michal, who had demanding work, I do not learn as conception you wished to dispel? never been involved in acting before much Torah as other members of our The Rands: Well, take, for example, the and joined the cast because of halachic Breslov community and do not consider supposed oppression of women in tradi- Rabbi Dr. Paris was born in Israel, educated in myself qualified to preach. We had a tional Jewish communities. Two earlier Israeli yeshivot and attended Brown University more modest aim: to expose people, via Israeli movies spread the false notion where he earned a PhD in economics. He has the medium of movies, to the treasures that Chareidi women are little more taught both Chassidic thought and economics in and beauty of Judaism, to Rabbi the United States and in Israel. He lives in than baby-making machines, and are Jerusalem with his wife and four children. The Nachman’s ideas and to the Breslov cast aside if they cannot have children. interview was conducted in Hebrew and trans- world. We hoped to dispel misconcep- In Ushpizin, Malli has difficulty becom- lated by Dr. Paris. tions that are rooted in the media’s ing pregnant. Yet Moshe, her husband,

44 JEWISH ACTION Fall 5767/2006 treats her with the utmost love and care, rience but also a way of life; Breslov intellectual pursuit, that it means com- insisting that he wants to have children Chassidut is highly creative in numerous mitment, actually observing the mitzvot. but only with her. Moshe buys the “dia- ways, and it offers a unique perspective As we became more observant we also mond,” the most expensive etrog in on life. It provides overall life direction saw that my acting career was not con- town, for the exorbitant price of 1,000 as well as guidance in daily matters. sistent with a genuine Torah life. I quit shekalim—about a quarter of his and Naturally, we want to convey to others the theater to study Torah full time. Malli’s miraculous windfall—because it what worked so well for us—the movie I only became Breslov after I might mystically trigger another miracle is one way of doing so. returned to observant life. Breslov is and help Malli become pregnant. Some quite fashionable in Israel even among critics noted that the movie portrays the JA: What attracted you to Orthodoxy, the non-observant—in fact, a recent modesty and love found in Chareidi and specifically to Breslov? Which one Khan Theater show based on Rabbi marriages, as Moshe and Malli show came first? Nachman’s “The Seven Beggars” was a such affection for each other without Shuli: It is hard to say what attracted us tremendous success—and like many ever touching on screen. Israelis, we had already been acquainted with Breslov before we began JA: Do you feel you keeping the mitzvot. Now, have been suc- like others in the process of cessful in dis- doing teshuvah, we experi- pelling these ence ups and downs in misconceptions? our search for answers. The Rands: We have found that Beyond our Rabbi Nachman’s writ- wildest dreams. ings are more attuned to We certainly did our needs than others, not expect the that he offers in-depth film to elicit such advice regarding the very a warm response problems that bother us; among viewers. A he infuses our certain Israeli-owned Jewishness with mean- web site announced it ing. would be showing Ushpizin for free for JA: How do you a short period of explain the interest in time. The site drew Breslov, and why some 20,000 visi- Shuli Rand (as Moshes Bellanga) Breslov attracts so stars in Ushpizin, a movie about a Breslov many people? Does this interest actual- tors, several times its ba’al teshuvah whose faith is challenged usual number. It also when people from his past arrive unan- ly lead significant numbers to embrace generated 1,353 responses to a ques- nounced at his sukkah. Orthodoxy? tionnaire about the movie. A compre- The Rands: The interest is indeed hensive analysis of the data is yet to amazing, for two reasons. Firstly, since come, but some of the results are to Orthodoxy because we returned Rabbi Nachman’s death [in 1810], astounding. For example, 670 respon- gradually. It did not happen overnight; Breslov has not had a living rebbe, yet it dents expressed an interest in learning we did not “see the light” and return in attracts more ba’alei teshuvah—from all more about Judaism, 540 were surprised a flash. Unlike Michal, I grew up in a walks of life—than the Lithuanian by how women are treated in the religious home and had a religious edu- yeshivot and most other Chassidic Breslov community, and 275 reported cation. At a certain point, I lost my groups put together. Breslov Chassidut is that the movie caused them to begin to faith, as happens with many youth, but so attractive, perhaps because it makes observe Shabbat. we made our way back to the fold room for everybody, even beginners. together. True, Breslov, like Chassidut generally, is JA: How important are Rabbi I was still working in the theater based on the paradoxical maxim that Nachman and Breslov Chassidut in full time when we began learning Jewish man can become something only by your Yiddishkeit? texts. At some point, we felt that some- considering himself nothing—relative to The Rands: Very important. Being a thing was lacking; we realized that God—thereby attaching himself to Breslover is not just an intellectual expe- Judaism is about life itself, not just an Him. At the same time, Breslovers treat

Fall 5767/2006 JEWISH ACTION 45 everyone with respect: One may belittle nity follows Rabbi Nachman’s teachings. money are capable of genuinely over- himself, but not others. Breslov is very Rabbi Nachman was not merely a deep coming the desire for money. inclusive and believes that everybody— and abstract thinker as many believe; he Hence he encouraged his disci- scholar or not—can have a deep rela- was also a leader of a community, teach- ples—even his very son-in-law—to tionship with Hashem and can join in ing that the way of a Torah life is in the become financially independent by avodat Hashem. details. Thus, when dealing with print- engaging in business, exhorting them to Secondly, it is amazing that Rabbi ing the Likutei Maharan—which he do so honestly and only for a few hours Nachman himself was surrounded by regarded as heralding the Era of a day, as learning Torah should be their highly pious and learned disciples, sort Mashiach—he inquired about even the primary occupation. This is an example of an elite society, yet his writings are most mundane details, such as the of the Breslov holistic approach, relevant very well attuned to beginners and to minute expenses. to everybody, at all times. ba’alei teshuvah today. He actually Rabbi Nachman struggled exten- stressed that he was writing for future sively with the issue of materialism and JA: What has been the response of the generations, and he deals with the very developed a dualistic approach to it. He Chareidi community to the movie? issues that bother modern despised and sharply criticized material- The Rands: Officially, people. Rabbi Nachman’s the movie was shown writings, which are at the only to non-Chareidi same time both logical and audiences, since that poetical, reveal how multi- was the condition dimensional he was. under which our rabbi Some try to sell permitted us to make Judaism as an escape, a this movie. Hence, we utopia; observe the mitzvot, could hardly observe they claim, and it will make [Chareidi] reactions. your life better and solve all However, many your problems. Breslov does Chareidim watched not compromise the truth in the movie on DVD order to attract people; it on their home com- does not promise that puters. The responses becoming observant its way were extremely favor- will in itself solve your able. People reported problems. Rather it invites that the movie caused one to continuously con- them to pray better, and front himself, never to seek Director Giddi Dar and Shuli on the set of generally to try harder in heeding the nirvana and to endlessly struggle for mitzvot. self-improvement. Breslov attracts peo- the dramedy Ushpizin. The movie was a rare collaboration between secular and ple because it is challenging, demanding Orthodox Israelis. JA: Can you explain the scene where and, most importantly, relevant today. everything is going wrong and Moshe We hope this message came through. prays to God in the woods? Is that typ- istic desires per se as disruptive to avo- ically Breslov? How and why? JA: The movie takes place in a small dat Hashem, separating man from God. The Rands: Yes, it is typically Breslov. Breslov community, and it is imbued At the same time, he stressed that When very young, Rabbi Nachman, with the Breslov spirit and teachings. money is a necessary means, not only like his great grandfather the Baal Shem Actually, many of the seminal themes for sustenance, but also for observing Tov, used to seclude himself in the of the movie seem to have been culled the mitzvot and for Torah learning, and woods to pray, learn and meditate. He from Likutei Maharan, part A, chap- even for attaining the highest levels of taught that everyone should do so regu- ters 59-60, for example, where there is holiness. larly, especially during critical moments. a discussion about spiritual practices to Rabbi Nachman claimed that Often, especially in tough situations, a help one get pregnant. Did you really overcoming one’s desire for money, person who is part of the picture needs write the script this way, from book to despising money, is a prerequisite for to get out of it to see things more clear- screenplay? attaining the highest spiritual levels ly. Ultimately, whatever we experience is The Rands: Not at all. The material for (Likutei Maharan, part A, chap. 60). It due to God; the figures we encounter in the movie grew out of our day-to-day may seem paradoxical, but he argued life are actually His emissaries, but experience, which in a Breslov commu- that only people who actually possess many times we act like the dog who

46 JEWISH ACTION Fall 5767/2006 tries to bite the stick with which his Master—rather than deal with the seems to me that Ushpizin has shown master hits him. “stick,” his guests. This is a universal that a movie can also do the reverse—it This scene is actually the climax of message, Rabbi Nachman-style. can also expose one to sacred or holy the plot, Moshe’s lowest point. It was amazing to watch non-reli- ideas and can influence people for the Receiving the unexpected money good. I hope this will help change the seemed to him to be a sign from mindset of those who think that movies Heaven for a fresh start. He believed are inherently evil—they are simply a that he had performed all the mitzvot of “Some critics noted that medium. Sukkot perfectly, and at a great sacrifice, the movie portrays the but now everything seems to have fallen JA: Why did you pick Sukkot as the apart. He discovers that his sukkah was love and modesty found time frame of the plot? Was it because actually a stolen one, and hence not in Chareidi marriages, as Rabbi Nachman passed away on kosher, and that his guests have gone Sukkot? Or because sukkah is the only wild causing Malli to leave him. Worst Moshe and Malli show mitzvah into which man physically of all perhaps, his perfect and precious such affection for each enters? Or is it because of another mys- etrog, the “diamond,” which was sup- tical/symbolic reason? posed to bring the blessing of fertility, is other without ever gone. Moshe, completely baffled, grows touching on screen.” The Rands: It was a practical considera- more and more furious and is about to tion; it provides a treasure-trove of lose his temper, reverting to his earlier screenplay elements with subtle effects violent self. At his lowest point, Moshe and messages. Pesach in contrast, offers finally realizes that it is all from God, nothing comparable to a stolen Sukkah, that the problem lies within himself, gious audiences, sensing the symbolic for example, or the precious etrog and its and he manages to control himself. This significance, gasp in shock while the “murder” at the hands of the guest. marks a turning point for him. He is etrog is cut. The Chareidim object to now ripe to go to the woods for seclu- viewing movies, lest they get exposed to JA: Indeed, how did these meaningful sion, to “discuss” matters with the and influenced by tainted ideas. It scenes occur to you?

Fall 5767/2006 JEWISH ACTION 47 The Rands: The damaged etrog is a common theme in Jewish lore and leg- Though Rabbi Nachman of Breslov died some two hundred years ago, he end. Rabbi Elimelech of Lizansk, a great continues to speak to our own generation. What is it that makes him ever fresh early Chassidic master, for example, was and ever relevant? penniless before Sukkot, just like Modern man is constantly escaping from himself. Rabbi Nachman forces Moshe, and was unable to afford an a Jew to confront himself, allocating time for being alone with himself and etrog and other necessities for the festi- time for being alone with God (hitbodedut). Rabbi Nachman rejected self- val. Hence he sold his precious pair of effacement when it interfered with clarity of thought. He proclaimed that it tefillin and used all the money to buy was a great mitzvah to be joyous, and saw depression as the root of all illness. an expensive etrog. His wife got upset, Rabbi Nachman suffered from many opponents who thought he was especially as he didn’t leave any money haughty and arrogant. They mistook his emphasis on self-worth for overbearing for food. In the course of the exchange, pride. the etrog was ruined, and Rabbi Most of all, Rabbi Nachman spoke to the individual aloneness of each Elimelech bemoaned that he was left Jew. He felt their pain and helped them make their lives whole. with nothing—no tefillin, no etrog and MG no necessities for Sukkot. On a personal note, some years rudely as the criminals did. Their ago, somebody assumed that our sukkah Divine mission was to try the Bellangas’ JA: What does the hero’s name, was hefker [abandoned], and took it for hospitality, test their nerves and espe- “Bellanga,” imply? Is it an acronym or himself. This incident gave us the idea cially bring out the bad guy in Moshe— a symbolic/mystical gematria? for the plot. his past anger and potential violence, so The Rands: It sounds like “balagan,” he could overcome it. Only criminals JA: Rabbi Nachman’s “bad guys” were Hebrew slang for trouble, alluding to could serve this purpose. At Moshe’s wild past. “maskilim,” modernized Jews drifting the same time, they away from Judaism, but otherwise respectable folks. Rabbi Nathan, Rabbi JA: What are your plans for the future? Nachman’s editor and disciple, calls “Ushpizin has shown Shuli: We are writing a screenplay for them at one point “the aristocrats of that a movie can our next feature movie, which we hope Uman.” Contrary to other tzaddikim expose one to holy will be an American-Israeli co-produc- of his time, Rabbi Nachman believed ideas and can influence tion. his mission was to specifically address people for the good. I this elite. You choose a different strate- hope this will help JA: When do you think the screenplay will be completed? gy and have two criminals serve as the change the mindset of antagonists to Moshe, the hero; why those who think that The Rands: We don’t know; it goes not choose ordinary irreligious intellec- slowly. Learning Torah and working and tuals, for example? movies are inherently evil—they are simply a raising our six children leave little time for working on this project; we want to The Rands: Firstly, today Breslov deals medium.” with all Jews, even criminals; hence they bring the screenplay to Hollywood in as are relevant. Secondly, ordinary antago- perfect a state as possible, so that the nists would have detracted from the folks there will not distort its Breslov plot’s central messages, weakened the illustrate that even the content and messages. We are looking climax and branded the film preachy. lowly could be Divine instruments for investors who can appreciate this so Unlike ordinary guests, criminals have a (unfortunately, though, this last point things can move quickly. We believe tainted image, which legitimates was lost on many viewers). When that it will be an even greater success attempts to “convert” them. As the Moshe stares angrily at the two petrified than Ushpizin. “good guy,” Moshe is also not the most criminals who just ruined his etrog, he is respected in his community—with his undergoing an intense inner struggle. JA: What will that movie be about? tendency to miss prayer services and his Moshe’s ordeal ends as soon as he real- Does it have a name already? limited Torah knowledge. But still he izes that these “bad” folks are simply The Rands: At this stage we can only represents Judaism and Breslov. Thus, Divine messengers sent to test him. He say that it will further expound upon both sides are represented by marginal controls his anger and thereby over- Breslov themes and that it will deal with characters. Also, the plot imposed con- comes this test. Anger, by the way, is a the relationship between Israel and straints; an ordinary guest is unlikely to weakness against which Rabbi Nachman American Jewry. A name? It is too early appear unexpectedly and behave as inveighs frequently. for that. JA

48 JEWISH ACTION Fall 5767/2006 Fall 5767/2006 JEWISH ACTION 49