Mrs Adler
To what degree do you think that the objections of Israeli Jews toward Orthodoxy are found in adherents of the more liberal Jewish movements in America? I could see some of your analysis (about typical Israelis who believe in G-d but cannot deal with the 'magic' that they see as part of Orthodoxy and thus reject Orthodoxy) applying to some American Jews. It is not a perfect fit because there are some American Jews who actually could buy the magic but do not want to be burdened with the lifestyle - but it seems to me that serious adherents of some of the liberal movements have fled Orthodoxy because of what they see as an anti-rational, anti-historical, anti-reality perspective.
My Response
I agree with you, the issue is really more of a post emancipation issue than an Israeli issue. After all these generations we are still struggling to deal with the fact that the secure walls of the ghetto have fallen down.
The ghetto walls provided a secure home which screened the reality that people were keeping a traditional form of halachic activity without very much scrutiny of the Philosophical basis of that activity. As the ghetto walls have come down, we are paying a very severe price for continuing that unreflective approach to Judaism in all communities all over the globe.
The ghetto walls provided a secure home which screened the reality that people were keeping a traditional form of halachic activity without very much scrutiny of the Philosophical basis of that activity. As the ghetto walls have come down, we are paying a very severe price for continuing that unreflective approach to Judaism in all communities all over the globe.
14 comments:
Can you please explain further what made the walls of the ghetto "secure"? What is your assessment of the quality of Judaism in the ghetto vs. without ghetto?
"הבעיה העיקרית היא בשיטה. כל התשתית של השיטה מבוססת על פחד ואיומים, הפחד מהשכנים ולא מהשכינה."
URL: הפחד של כולם מכולם / ישראל לבקוביץ / מוסף 'שבת', 'מקור ראשון', י'ב באב תשע"א, 12.8.2011
Google translation.
Moonlight
What made the walls of the Ghetto secure was the artificial separation of the Jewish population, from humanity at large. In essence, a Jew had no social or economic options, they had to conform to the practices of the community, or else.
This state of affairs kept Judaism alive as a community, but on a respirator. Our weak Philosophical basis was not exposed.
I think this is the point Hagyan is making with his quote as well.
So R' Sacks, what do you propose as a "remedy" for the "very severe price for continuing that unreflective approach to Judaism in all communities all over the globe"? How do you think this should change and be improved?
The Rambam, over 500 years ago, already pointed out this issue. It was he who insisted that the community carefully reflect on the Philosophical roots of the Torah.
Had we listened to him, making our Philosophical principles the core of our religion, our mitzva practise would be far more rational and acceptable to the community at large. We would have been ready for the emancipation, rather than being devastated by it.
We should do now, what we could have done all along. Root our religion in its philosophical core, as taught by Rambam.
How do you reflect on the philosophical roots of the Torah? Can you please given an example?
Maybe the reason people don't reflect so much from the philosophical point of view is that principles and ideas though important, are not tangible. And technically when someone abides by certain principles it's harder to know that person. and that's why people may resort to more non-philosophical approaches, b/c they seem more tangible and more graspable even though they may be belong to the category of a less deep approach than the philosophical one. What do you think?
The way we reflect on the Philosophical roots of Judaism is taught to us by Rambam. This becomes clear if we follow his instructions from the Introduction to Chelek in which he explains the 13 principles. It also becomes clear if we carefully study his textbook on mitzvot, the Mishne Torah.
Would you say though that in order for someone to be prepared to actually reflect on the philosophical roots of Judaism, they would also have to possess a certain frame of mind? And does an average person actually have this qualification to begin reflecting? Can an average person actually achieve this? What if not everyone is able to reflect? And even if they do begin reflecting, how far ahead can they go with this if they may not have the necessary intellectual capacity? And then would they not end up instead limited at some point, not being able to think out of the box? How would this affect then the process, the person and the long term end result for the Judaism of future generations?
Judaism and its foundations were given for everyone, not some obscure philosophical elite.
R.JS: "I think this is the point Hagyan is making with his quote as well."
No; that hadn't occurred to me.
I thought the quote expressed well what I hear from Jews about why they object to such Orthodoxy as they encounter. They tell me that they feel the impingement of the דרך אכזרייות that emerges from an "ontologizing" of 'הסתר פנים'.
Hagyan
What does fear of shechenim and not shechina mean in your interpretation?
R.JS: "What does fear of shechenim and not shechina mean in your interpretation?"
I don't understand this question. I thought that quote, especially in its original context, was univocal.
The article deals with the sorry state of the Hareidi world. The use of human power of "Cherem" by family and community to guarantee a false unanimity of opinion and external activity. This is an achzariyut in the sense of denial of the natural growth of mind out of fantasy in its individualistic expression.
Can you spell out where "ontologizing of hester panim" fits into this depiction of enforced uniformity of fantasy world?
R.JS: The article deals with the sorry state of the Hareidi world. The use of human power of "Cherem" by family and community to guarantee a false unanimity of opinion and external activity. ...
Though the article happened to describe part of the "Haredi" world, the phenomenon is universal; e.g., it is just as much the core dynamic of secular society, whether on Dizengoff Street or on the campus of Tel Aviv University. In fact, the phenomenon is natural.
R.JS: ... This is an achzariyut in the sense of denial of the natural growth of mind out of fantasy in its individualistic expression. ...
The natural process is cathectic reorientation, in stages, from individual עוונות to the sacrosanct עוונות of the society. This intergenerational propagation of עוונות requires political institutions.
Cf. ויקרא כו/לח-מב (via הלכות תענייות ה/א). [The JPS translation of 'יימקו בעוונם' is too genteel.]
R.JS: ... Can you spell out where "ontologizing of hester panim" fits into this depiction of enforced uniformity of fantasy world?
See, at the beginning of Civilization and its Discontents, Freud's analysis of Romaine Rolland's 'oceanic feeling'. Note the logical, and thus epistemological-metaphysical, error Freud commits by complacently reasoning from a merely statistical, though empirical, state-of-affairs to which he happens to belong and from which he accrues כבוד.
Post a Comment