Jewish Life May-June by Jewish Action

BLOCKBUSTING * WHO IS A JEW? THE BACHELOR CHOSSID FROM PRAGUE THE N EED F O R JEWISH COURTS WHY H AVE Y O U CHOSEN ME? WHO IS ETHEL SCHNURR?

SIVAN-TAMMUZ 5730 MAY-JUNE 1970

(JAKE

DOES A LOT

MORE THAN FEED PEOPLE

From the time of Israel's founding through the '50's and '60's, C A R E food packages sent by relatives and friends in the United States and Canada helped thousands of Jewish families establish themselves in the homeland. Food supplies in Israel have now improved sufficiently for C A R E to end its designated food package service. But there is still much to be done and C A R E remains on the scene, to continue its help in the work of nation-building. Job training, education and com munity development are among the fields in which C A R E conducts projects in cooperation with the Israeli Government. Today's " C A R E package" may be a carpentry workshop, sewing machines, technical books for a school. One major C A R E project seeks to equip vocational training centers for young teen-agers, usually children from new immigrant families, who otherwise would have no more than a primary education. They need the skills to become self-supporting adults. Israel needs trained manpower to produce finished goods for world markets. First food, then the means to feed and support themselves — this is C A R E policy for the people in all the countries it assists, and we are gratified to see Israel at the point where self-help aid can take priority. You can help assure further progress, through C A R E 's Israel Program. Your contribution is deductible for income tax purposes, and C A R E reports to you on how your money was used. Mail

CAKE Israel Program 660 First Avenue New York, New York 10016

or your nearest office

your check:

Vol. X X X V II, No. 5/May-June 1970/Sivan-Tammuz 5730

le w is li

Uf.‘ Saul Bernstein,

THE E D IT O R 'S V IE W JEWISH DIRECTIONS A N D JEWISH V O I C E S __ 2

Editor

A R T IC L E S WHO IS A JEW?/

Paul H. Baris Libby Klaperm an N athan Lew in R abbi S o lo m o n J. Sharfm an Editorial Associates Elkanah Schw artz Assistant Editor JEWISH LIFE is published bi-monthly. Subscription two years $5.00, three years $6.50, four years $8.00. Foreign: Add 40 cents per year.

Norman Lamm ................................................. 6 BLOCKBUSTING/ Jacob J. Hecht ............................................... 25 THE N EED F O R JEWISH COURTS/ Sanrael A . Turk . . . . ..................................... 3 7 THE BACH ELOR CHOSSID FROM PRAGUE/ Charles R a d d o c k .............................................42

FICTIO N Editorial and Publication Office: 84 Fifth Avenue New York 10011, N. Y. (212) ALgonquin 5-4100

WHO IS ETHEL SCHNURR?/ Avram Davidson

...................................17

PO ET R Y Published by U nion of Orthodox J ewish C ongregations of A merica •J oseph K arasick President H arold M. J acobs Chairman of the Board Benjamin Koenigsberg, Nathan K. Gross, David Politi, Dr. Bernard Lander, Harold H. Boxer, Lawrence A. Kobrin, Vice Presidents; .Morris L. Green, Treasurer; Emanuel Neustadter, Secretary; Julius Berman, Financial Secretary. Dr. Samson R. Weiss Executive Vice President Saul Bernstein, Administrator

WHY H A VE Y O U CHOSEN ME?/ Bernard Dov Milians

..................... .......... 31

BO O K R E V IE W S Y.U.: AM ER ICAN PHENOMENON/ A lex Weisfogel

.........................

.48

MORE H OLOCAUST VOICES/ Nathan L e w in ................

DEPARTM ENTS FROM HERE A N D T H E R E ................................... .53 LETTER S TO THE E D I T O R .................................. 56 AM ONG O U R CONTRIBUTORS .. inside back cover

Second Class Postage paid at New York, N. Y.

Cover and drawings by Naama Kitov © C opyright 1 9 7 0 b y UNION OF 0RTH000X JEWISH CONGREGATIONS Of AMERICA

M AY-JUNE 1970

th e EDITOR'S VIEW

JEWISH D IR E C T IO N S A N D JEWISH V O IC E S recent article in a magazine published by a major airline calls attention to the continuing and mounting virility of orthodox Jewish life, in contrast to the situation of other re ligious forces across the world. Coming from a disinterested source concerned only with the human interest aspect, this indi cates that the wider community is becoming aware of stirrings on the Jewish scene which many Jews themselves find puzzling. Understandably so, for traditional Jewry's upsurge stands con trary not only to trends among the world religions but contrary

also to other trends among Jews at large. The Jewish people, it appears, is simultaneously moving in opposite directions. The paradox touches every Jewish interest and lies at the core of every question of Jewish policy and program. It is visible in the debate over Jewish identity in Israel and in the issue of communal priority for day schools in America. It impinges on the relationships between the Jewish and non-Jewish

Divided Self

communities and is felt in social outlook, moral standards, and the world of ideas. In the life of the individual Jew, the urge towards the Jewish essence

battles the absorptive pull of the environment; each Jew, until his inner conflict is resolved one way or the other, is a divided self. Jewish youth especially, as is so apparent on the college campus,

JEW ISH L IF E

is shaken by colliding impulsions; and Jewish youth especially, in such large part, is ill equipped to find the way out of spiritual and intellectual confusion. Up to a point, the contradictions in Jewish life are common to those dividing the hearts and minds of men everywhere today. Since the earliest onset of modern materialist rationalism, alarms have been raised about its consequences for the human spirit. The cries of alarm have long since become an unheeded commonplace; they have not born fruit in an alternative program for mankind, one which would be of commanding force. Today, such protest is an empty gesture; the feared consequences have arrived in full. For multitudes, machinery has displaced spiritual resource. The worship of things has shut out the worship of the Creator of all things. The landmarks, of human goal are shattered, leaving life drained of content. The vacuum in men's souls is quickly filled with vain substitutes, ultimately with the perverse and the corrupt. Through the two centuries since the birth of modern industry and technology, materialism's child of golden promise, the religious heritage of Western society has provided a counter balancing force. But, in steadily diminishing degree for lack of replenishment. Today, judging by the strained efforts of leading denominations seeking "renewal," that reservoir is all but drained dry. How illustrative it is that while so many have awakened with shock to the mounting danger to the physical environment, so few are concerned with the critical threat to the moral and spiritual environment. Great resources are properly, if belatedly, Livable

now being applied to combating the pollution of the air, the waterways, the streets and highways, and this

World?

fortunately has the support of all. But what efforts are being put forward to combat the pollution of minds and lives? All recognize the urgency of a program for keeping the physical world livable. One looks in vain for a parallel demand for achieving a morally livable world. H IL E

Jews and members of other faiths are affected

sim ilarly by the prevailing conditions, an important difference is also to be seen. Perforce, we have had to come to grips with the challenge of secularist materialism earlier than have

M AY-JUNE \9 7 0

other faith communities. For us, it was a life and death struggle from the first. Once having entered into general society, Jews were exposed to the currents within it without being sheltered, as were the majority religions, by established social sanctions rooted in the pattern of national life. Now, with this status fallen victim to the technological era, we find parallels in the Christian communities of the conflicting responses to the life-and-death challenge to Judaism a century and a half ago. In the meanwhile, Jewry has lived daily with the challenge, has experienced the consequences of the varying responses, and — on the part of its core force — has learned how to maintain its integrity. This hard-learned experience has been gained through generations of exposure alike to the opportunities of democratic society and the pogroms of autocracies. It was steeled in Holocaust flames. It was crowned by the fulfillment of a great dream, the establishment of the State of Israel. The Jew and Judaism are unique among the families and faiths of mankind and the Jewish experience has no counterpart in the lives of others. A ll that has happened to us points our distinctive path. Day and night, the fact of life redeemed from The Jewish Contribution

the pit of doom is a beacon to us, the reality of the Jewish commonwealth reborn in the Jewish land speaks to us. And beyond the range of current experience is the totality of Jewish experience, the

call to Avrohom Ovinu, the Covenant at Mount Sinai, all that invests the Jew with eternal purpose. O f its nature, the experience is not transferable, but its essence is communicable. Often though it is said, it is not the less true that the Jew's best contribution to the world is the example of the authentic Jewish life. A nd it is only on the basis of the authentic Jewish life that a further much-needed contribution can be made: the application of Jewish insight to the basic problems of modern society. Long enough, much too long, have purportedly Jewish voices been heard offering nostrums utterly foreign to Jewish thinking as remedies for social ills and national and international problems. Too, it is not to be denied that men of Jewish origin but divorced from and often antagonistic to Judaism and Jewry have made an impress on modern ideas. How much better would both the Jewish people and the world at large be served by the contributions of Torah thinkers. We Jews have our full share and

JEW ISH LIF E

more of the world's common problems, but even if that were not the case there would be not less pressing need for genuinely Jewish approaches to the great dillemas o f modern man. E W ISH energies must necessarily be focussed on Jewish needs, yet this responsibility cannot be fulfilled without addressing ourselves to the needs of society as a whole. In this tight-meshed world, what affects our neighbors affects us — and all, across the entire globe, are next-door neighbors to each other. Our younger generation particularly, reared in the era of instant com m unications, is governed by a sharp sense of world community. In their search for personal identity, they are at a loss to determine their relation to the surrounding world. A t the top of Jewish priorities is the task of enabling our youth to find themselves, to achieve a life of Jewish meaning in purposive relation to the world in which they live. The key to this task lies with our Torah workers, our Torah statesmen, above all our Torah thinkers and leaders.

-S.B.

M AY-JUNE 1970

WHO

IS A JEW?

The Supreme Court and The Supreme Judge

by N O R M A N LA M M NE of the grand old men of controversy both in Israel and in the Hebrew letters in Israel, Eliezer Diaspora. Steinman, has written, “Who is a Jew? The problem does not concern One who doesn’t ask, ‘Who is a Israeli citizenship. A political state Jew?” ’ com p rises many different ethnic, The very raising of the question racial, and religious groups. Even in in our days is a troubling phenom ancient Israel, a non-Jew (ger toshav) enon. It means that our very identity* was accepted as a citizen. What is at our Jewishness, has become problem issue is Jewish nationality. Here the atical. It indicates that all of Jewish Halachah is quite clear:* a Jew is one continuity has been brought under a born to a Jewish mother (regardless o f question mark. his commitments or conduct) or This issue has plagued the State properly converted to Judaism (in almost since its very inception. Actual which case the conversion must be ly, the groundwork for it was laid in performed in a prescribed manner, and the Emancipation, at the end of the the con vert m ust be genuinely 18 th century, when the Haskalah committed to Torah). The Jewish bequeathed to posterity one of its1less luminous teachings, that one ought to be a “Jew” indoors and a “man” out *The principle is so w ell-know n that it re quires no d ocu m entation. For general refer sid e. T his obfuscation of Jewish ences, see Kiddushin, 66b; M aim onides, identity has now returned to monopo Hilchoth Issurey Biah 1 5:4; Sh. A. Even lize public attention and stir public Ha-ezer 8:5. See, to o , Ezra 1 0 :2 ,3 .

JEW ISH LIF E

tradition recognizes no other yardstick for en terin g Jewish peoplehood. Hence, any decision by the State concerning nationality (as opposed to

citizenship) is of immediate importance to Jews the world over — as significant to the ten million Jews in the Diaspora as to the two million in the State. II

N the most recent incident, the Supreme Court decided in the Shalit case to jettison the traditional criterion of Jewishness. A minority of four judges reaffirmed the Halachic standard, and in effect declared that th ere is no separation between nationality and religion; a Jew must fit in to both categories or none. A majority of judges, five of them, de cided to distinguish between nation ality and religion, and permit a man to adopt Jewish nationality by simple declaration of intent, even if the Jewish religion does not regard him as Jewish. They preferred the subjective criterion (Do I love Israel? Have I sacri ficed for the Jewish people?) to the objective Halachic rule (birth to a Jewish mother or conversion). The majority pointed to certain absurdities if the Halachic standard were to be accepted. For instance, a son of a Jewish mother who joins the El Fatah and is an enemy of the State of Israel is considered Jewish, whereas the children of a non-Jewish mother and a Jewish naval officer who has participated in the life of the State and sacrificed for it, are considered nonJewish. Justice Silberg, who wrote a profound opinion as one of the minor ity judges, responded that the El Fatah Jew is simply a contemptible, wicked Jew, whereas the children of the peti tioner in the present case are wonder

M AY-JUN E 1970

ful and noble Gentiles. But Jewishness, as he put it, is not an honorary doctor ate th at is awarded for specific achievements or accomplishments. It should be added that every law, by its very nature, is productive of anomalies. Any law, no matter how fair and just, can be made to look ridiculous by pointing to certain exceptional cases. Such an argument may score debator’s points, but it is invalid and unfair. The Torah — and this is true for law in general —covers ordinary circumstances. There will always be unusual cases in which the law will prove onerous, even as it protects and benefits the major seg ments of society. Maimonides devotes a whole chapter of his Guide of the Perplexed (3:34) to the problem. It is worth citing some of the passages in this chapter: The Law does not pay attention to the isolated case. The Law was not given with a view to things that are rare. For in every thing that it wishes to bring about, be it an opinion or a moral habit or a useful work, it is directed only toward the things that occur in the majority of cases and pays no attention to what happens rarely. . . In view of this consideration also, you will not wonder at the fact that the purpose of the Law is not

perfectly achieved in every indi vidual and that, on the contrary, it necessarily follows that there should exist individuals whom this governance of the Law does not make perfect.lt is impossible that the laws be dependent on changes in the circumstances of the individuals and of the times, as is the case with regard to m ed ical treatment, which is particularized for every indivi dual in conformity with his present temperament. On the contrary, governance of the Law ought to be absolute and uni versal, including everyone, even if it is suitable only for certain individuals and not suitable for others. Hence, it is true that in rare instances the purpose of the law seems to be ill served. But we must realize that these rare cases are the price we pay for the greater good of the entire community. The only alternative is to abandon law altogether. F u rth erm o re, th e Halachic standard, because it is objective, is much fairer than a subjective standard, in which judges may conceivably be called upon to check whether a man really has his heart and soul with the Jewish State. The objective standard is clear and identifiable, whereas the subjective one — the adoption of Jewishness by nationality on the basis of intent and wholehearted willingness

to share in the State and its destiny — is something that could pave the way to a kind of modern Inquisition. But the majority, prevailed, and th e Halachic definition was aban doned. The Court was asked, “Who is a Jew?” and answered, as i f with a Yiddish shrug of the shoulders, “Who isn’t a Jew!” Or, as the headline in an Anglo-Jewish weekly put it more wryly, “You don’t have to be Jewish to be a Jew.” However, more recently, the Knesset has voided the Supreme Court decision and has, thereby, conf ir m e d th e H alachic view o f Jewishness. It has been charged by many in Israel that the Knesset vote was a matter of the majority bowing to political pressure exerted by the reli gious parties in order to maintain the coalition that gives the Government its stability. That is not the whole truth, or even most of the truth. A number of non-orthodox people in Govern ment, according to their private re marks, simply found it more expedient to blame the religious parties for exert ing p o litic a l pressure on them. However, if there were no religious parties they would have to vote their own consciences, according to which, despite their secularism, the State must have some historic and spiritual continuity, which can only be pro vided by Jewish tradition and by Halachah as regards this most basic of all questions.

III

HY speak of this issue now that the Knesset has affirmed the Halachic criterion and the problem is

solved? Because the problem is not solved, it is only delayed. First, a

JEW ISH L IF E

Court decision of this kind is a symptom of a profound national malaise that cannot be overlooked; it has a moral force that must be rec koned with. Second, coalitions change, political realignments occur, new ideas take hold, and a new Knesset may decide to uphold the Supreme Court. Third, the problem has already been reopened and precipitated a crisis. The original text suggested for the Knesset vote was that one be recognized as a Jew who is “the son of a Jewish mother or one who has been converted according to the law of the Torah.” In the final reading, approved by the Knesset, the last several words were omitted, and we are left only with a statement that one is recognized as a Jew if he is born to a Jewish mother or if he is converted^ with no mention of its legitimacy “ according to the law of the Torah.” This means that the State must now face the problem of recognizing Reform conversions as legitimate. Needless to say, orthodox Jews do not do so. Halachah regards a Reform conversion as utterly meaning less. Perhaps the typical American, in his ecumenical euphoria, would want orthodox Jews to be more “Sports m anlike” about accepting Reform conversions. We shall then have to declare, most regretfully, our lack of sportsmanship, and say that our prin ciples, which are not subject to change by whim or caprice or pressure, do not permit us to accept a Reform conver sion as Jewishly legitimate. Orthodox rabbis in the United States now check, as a matter of course, into the third generation of both bride and groom

M AY-JUN E 1970

who come to them for marriage. If we discover that a Reform conversion occurred, we know that we cannot marry this couple unless a re-conversion takes place. Those who may consider such a policy as overly restrictive may find interest in the following information to support our inability to accept the genuineness of a Reform conversion: according to a leading Reform figure who is an expert in the field, a large number of his Reform colleagues will preside at the intermarriage of a Jew and a non-Jew without conversion by th e non-Jew, and a much larger number of other Reform men will “refer” such couples to their col lea g u es w ho do preside at such marriages. There is reputedly a list of thirty-five such men in the metropoli tan New York area who will officiate at a Jewish-non-Jewish wedding. In a recent article, Marshall Sklare reports a list of over 100 Reform clergymen who will officiate at interfaith mar riages —and this is not nearly the total number; those uncounted include such as are already too busy to accept more such “ b u sin e ss” and those still ashamed of being publicly identified as ready to preside at outmarriages. Sklare tells of a recent convention of the Reform congregations at which it was proposed to revoke all pronounce ments discouraging the ^ecclesiastical perform ances of intermarriage. A resolution to that effect was intro duced from the floor, “and a lively discussion ensued, from which became evident that the motion enjoyed wide support among those who were in attendance.”

Hence, the probleih of “who is a Jew” is still unsolved, and very much

with us. It no doubt will return to vex us in the near future.

(V HY does this issue so agitate traditional Jews? It looms large because it touches the very core of our being, the very essence of our deepest commitments. Orthodox Jews regard the Israel Supreme Court decision as calamitous religiously, historically, and Zionistically. Religiously, it strikes at what Judaism considers the essence of the history of the people of Israel: the B’rith or Covenant between Israel and G-d. The distinctiveness of our people, that which has safeguarded its perilous journey through the ages, is its special relationship to G-d confirmed at Sinai, a Covenant of which the record is the Torah and of which the Mitzvoth are the conditions. The Covenant legiti mates the inseparability o f G-d and Israel or, in other words, Jewish n a tio n a lity and Jew ish religion. “Silence! Hear, O Israel! Today you have become the people of the Lord you r G -d ” (DVarim/Deuteronomy 27:9). Now, one can violate one or another of the conditions of the Covenant without being guilty of reneging on the basic relationship. But when Israel declares that it divorces nationality from religion, it denies the essence of the Covenant — the prin ciple that this people is the people of G-d. The Supreme Court decision, therefore, represents an act of betrayal by Israel. It strikes at the heart of the Covenant — and thereby breaks the hearts of those who are loyal to it. Historically too it is a mis fortune. The State of Israel was not

created ab ovo, from an egg, com pletely new. It is the product o f cen turies of hoping and praying and living and dying. For the Jewish nation today to reject the Jewish religion which gave birth to it after a 3,500year pregnancy, is a kind of matricide — a peculiarly contemporary Jewish aberration evidenced in some of our current literature reviling the hereto fore sacrosanct image of the Jewish mother. The logic of the Supreme Court decision does not stop with according the status of “Jew” to an atheist who is not Jewish by Halachic standards. It must include even those who have reli gious commitments other than the Jew ish . Thus, we will now have “ Christian Jews,” “Moslem Jews,” “Hindu Jews,” etc.* But is this the mutation that generations of Jews labored to bring forth? Six million Jews died in the Holocaust, probably a majority of them religiously observant. At least retroactively they may have had some infinitesimal consolation, that out of their agony would rise a sta te th at would perpetuate the memory of the Jewish people. They died with an ani maamin, a song of faith —if not on theft lips, then deep in theft hearts —that their anguish would * S e e t h e critique o f the 1963 Israel Supreme Court d ecision in the fam ous R ufeisen case, b y Dr. Avner Shaki in his m onograph |Mihu Yehudi,* published by the Gesher F oun d ation, 1 9 7 0 . Shaki argues convincingly that the m ajority d ecisions in b oth cases are in con sisten t w ith each other.

JEWISH LIF E

not be meaningless, that something enduring would come of all this. But for what? For a State which will offi cially consider meshumadim as Jews? It is not merely that the Supreme Court decision will encourage and accelerate the rate of assimilation of many Jews. It is more than that —it is an effort to assimilate the whole people in one stroke. If this decision were implemen ted, or ever will be, it will contribute to the cutting of the roots connecting Israel’s past and Israel’s present, and will reduce the State of Israel into little more than a technologically muscle-bound, spiritually unimportant little democracy on the shores of the Mediterranean, and one which, in addi tion, will appear to aid and abet our enemies’ charges that Israel is an out post of Western cultural imperialism in the Arab world. So that historically too, the rupture between nationality and religion is an act of betrayal or at least of ingratitude. IONISTICALLY, such a decision is to ta lly self-defeating. Our rights to Eretz Israel are grounded in the Abrahamitic Covenant. In 1947 and 1948, Zionist leaders who pre sented our case to the United Nations maintained that the origin and sanc tion of our claims are contained in the Bible and in the subsequent history in which Jewish religion impelled us to return to th e Jewish homeland. Recently the World Jewish Congress officials met with representatives of the World Council of Churches be cause the former were troubled by the Christian contention that the Bible is being misused to support Jewish views.

M AY-JUN É 1970

“It was feared that this could be inter preted as challenging the Jewish view that the Bible justifies the claim to Israel as a homeland’* (New York Times, February 14, 1970). Without Jewish religion, there is no Jewish nationality, and there is no Jewish “national homeland.” Truthfully, not all critics of the State of Israel are malevolent and antisemitiQ. vSome of them, although assuredly riot all of them or even most of them, genuinely try to see the con flict in which we are embroiled in an objective manner. And, from an imper sonal and objective point of view, it is possible to conclude that Israel’s case is not as air-tight as we have imagined, and the Arabs may have some merit in their contentions. It is only in the context of the Divine promise, of the Covenant, that we have inalienable and unalterable rights to the Holy Land. Once we have cut ourselves off from that Covenant, the whole foundation of our case collapses, and we are in danger of appearing as hyper-efficient outsiders who have unjustly exploited what we ourselves consider as nothing more than an ancient myth in order to usurp the land of others. It is the Covenant which says, above all else, that this people and G-d are inter twined with each other. And it is only that Covenant Which assigns the land of Canaan to the people of Israel. ASHI begins his commentary to Bereshith/Genesis with the fol lowing: Why does the Torah begin with record of the Divine creation of the world? “So that if the nations of the world will say to Israel, ‘You are thieves, for you conquered the lands

of the seven nations (who occupied Canaan from antiquity)/ you will be able to answer, ‘All the world belongs to the Holy One. He created it, and He gave it to whom He pleased. He willed to give it to them, and He willed to take it from them and give it to u s/ ” We cannot be eclectic and accept the Covenant only for political pur poses and reject it for all other reasons. It is important to remember that were the relationship between nationality and religion severed at any point in the past, there would be today no State of Israel, and no Israeli naval o ffic e r s t^ a n d no Israeli Supreme Court. That is why religious Jews feel impelled to react vigorously. The State of Israel is too dear to us to accept without protest this grievous decision which can only exacerbate (as it has already begun to do) the deep divi

sions within Israel’s citizenry and which threatens to alienate from Israel many of the Jews of the Diaspora, w ho are probably, five times as numerous as those within the borders of the State. Committed religious Jews, inside of Israel and outside, will continue using the Halachic criterion exclu sively, no matter what any Supreme Court says. Religious principle is not subject to majority veto. Even if the Knesset had not overruled the Supreme Court, that ruling would have no effect on us in our daily lives. We shall continue to look upon Jewishness as legitimated only by the Halachah. What shall determine our con duct is not the decision of those whom the world regards as the Supreme Court of Israel, but the One whom Israel regards as the Supreme Judge of the world.

V T IS because these issues are so very important to us that a good deal of re-thinking has already been initiated, and more will certainly take place. I cannot accept the idea that no matter what the Government of Israel decides, we must not react because “we love Israel.” This is a myopic view. Love accepts, but it is also criti cal. To love does not mean to suspend one’s critical faculties. A parent who spoils a child by overindulging his every whim, does not really love him; he is only kind to him but is not really interested in him. True love accepts faults, but always strives to make the object of that love better, improved,

more lovable. That is our attitude to Israel: we love it, and so we are ter ribly unhappy about its most recent fault. There is another reaction that emerged instinctively in the hearts of some when the Supreme Court deci sion was announced: “Stop supporting Israel, let us ignore the State, let us begin to withdraw and retreat into our own community and make sure that we survive as the proper kind of Jews.” That may be a psychologically understandable, but it is Jewishly an inexcusable sentiment. It is an un thinkable thought. We dare not even entertain such a motion. For if love accepts and is critical, then we must be

JEW ISH L IF E

critical, but we must also accept. Israel is the land of our brothers, the chil dren of the survivors of Hitler. They are our Jews. Even without crises, even if its existence were not constantly called into question, we would not cease to identify with it. What seems to be emerging — and this is here mentioned descrip tively, without evaluation^S is an emotional reorientation in which a distinction is made or felt between Eretz Israel and Medinath Israel, be tween the historic Israel of the genera tions, and the little State that exists today. There is continued appreciation of the State as the home for Jewish refugees, and admiration for its many achievements, but the spiritual affinity is considerably weakened. In the wake

of the Government’s self-desacraliza tion has come a disenchantment. And with this disenchantment there may come a reassessment of our emotional priorities, granting relatively more importance to the spiritual welfare of our own American Jewry and of East European Jewry, both of which are bigger in population than the Jewish community of the State of Israel. I do not recommend that feel ing. I am deeply saddened and dis turbed by it. But it is the kind of emotion and attitude that we must expect if the State will ever enforce a non-Halachic standard on so basic an issue or even continue to proclaim that it is refraining from doing so only because of nefarious political pressure by religious parties.

VI BELIEVE that no matter what the legal and political situation is, we must begin now to rethink our entire position — not in a surge of initial resentment, but in a calm and collected manner. And we must begin to reassess some of our practical poli cies. Intellectually, we shall have to undertake what contemporary theo logians call a procedure of “demyth ologizing.” Religious Zionists and the Rabbinate have heretofore ascribed a certain Messianic quality to the State of Israel. They have seen it, whether explicitly or implicitly, as the initial stages of the Messianic kingdom-tocome. They have referred to it as the Athchalta diGeulah, the Beginning of the Redemption, and have referred to

M AY-JUNE 1970

it in our prayers for the State as the “first blossoming of our Redemption.” But clearly, a State of Jews in which nationality is divorced from religion will find it difficult to lay claim to such honorific Messianic assumptions. It will be much healthier for us and much less confusing, even if more painful, to begin to see the State of Israel in a more realistic light | | as not necessarily the Jewish State foreseen by our Prophets and dreamed of by our forebears. Of course, as religious Jews, we accept it as part of a Divine plan. I personally feel quite strongly that the State does mark a significant turning point in Jewish history, and that it figures most prominently in the calculus of Israel’s relationship with G-d. I have made known my convic-

tions, both orally and in writing,* that the emergence of the State of Israel indicates the first break in the hester panim (“hiding of the face” or eclipse) of G-d that has lasted for centuries. However, this is not the same as assign ing Messianic significance and status to the State. Of course I do not mean to deny the possible, even probable, role of the State of Israel in the Messianic re demptive process. To do so would be absurd. Rather, I prefer to suspend any ju d gm en t on this issue, to “bracket” possible Messianic dimen sions, and to avoid all such specula tions. It is now time for us to disabuse ourselves of the spiritual presump tuousness which leads us to identify stages of the Redemption, to indicate which step the Messiah is taking. We must learn to live without such illu sions. We must not be distracted by all this talk about Israel as either the end or the beginning of the Redemption. We have a long and disturbing history o f premature anticipation of the Messiah. More than once in the past, w hen p eo p le began to attribute Messianic qualities to individuals, they were later disappointed, and the dis appointment left permanent scars in the body of the Jewish people. What happened with individuals can happen with a State. Second, such Messianic pretenses attributed to the State have a double *See “The Religious Meaning o f the Six-D ay War,” Tradition (Sum m er 1 9 6 8 ) pp. 5 ff.

effect upon us, and paradoxically both effects are opposite to each other. On the one hand, they lead us to expect too much from the St^te. That is un fair to the government and the popula tion, and leaves us resentful when the State does not live up to our high expectations. On the other hand, they cause us to suspend any criticism, because who will dare to judge ad versely a Messianic State? Third, such a Messianic attribu tion, such a reading of the State of Israel as part of a heilsgeschichte, has a tendency to relieve us individually of too much responsibility. We begin to think that G-d will take care of things, and that we can relax; so, for instance, the great act of national Teshuvah, repentance, will be brought about by G-d, and we need not bother talking to those people who as yet have not been brought to Torah. But this is a mis take. We forget that if we are ethically faulty or morally flabby or spiritually stale, we will repel the non-observant Jew from Torah, and that nq magic conversion will take place. It is our job. The Talmud {Sanhedrin 97a) tells us that the Messiah will come at a time of distraction, when people are not thinking about him. It is only when people will be too busy to speculate about him because they are preoccu pied in creating the right kind of envi ronment, the proper kind of society, a genuine Jewish environment, that the world and especially Israel will be ready to receive the Messiah.

VII

E must, then, learn to see Israel as it is, and not only as we would like it to be. We must look on it

without illusions, but with ideals and visions. And this must lead us to a new course of action.

JEWISH LIFE

Primarily, we must recognize that although many Israelis are non observant, they remain our brothers. We must continue to support tnem, their security and their economy, not one iota less than we did before. We may have certain differing commitriients —but one destiny. Second, because we are brothers, We must increase our spiritual help and exert ourselves to do much more than before in order to save and enhance the Jewish character of the State. We can no longer rely upon Messiah or some mysterious redemptive process to do that automatically. We must plan for the day that, possibly, Reli gion and State will be officially sepa rated in Israel. That will no doubt be bad. It will create havoc insofar as the unity of the State is concerned, be cause two different marriage systems will prevail, and intermarriage between the two may ultimately become very difficult. It will make it impossible for the religious political parties to con tinue to make their contributions to the strengthening of religious institu tions in the land. But with all these dangers, there will be some blessings in disguise. The air will be cleared. We will have an opportunity to talk to non-observant Jews unencumbered with the onus of our political affilia tions. When we speak as orthodox Jews to the non-observant, we will not be automatically suspected of looking for partisan advantage. We will not be greeted by a silent but deep anti-cleri calism. We will be able J | and we should begin right now — to have genuine dialogue with non-observant Jews, “selling” ourselves and our way of life, not negotiating for political

M AY-JUNE 1970

bargains. Israeli Jews must begin to build bridges between the orthodox and the secularist communities and if Israeli orthodox Jews are unwilling or incapable of doing it by themselves, then we from America must encourage and help them. We must tell them not that we want their votes, but that we want to share with them our mutual Covenant and our Torah, out of love and not out of superiority — because we are not necessarily superior at all. We must come armed not only with answers, but also with a shared quest, inviting them to join us in the search for the meaning that we can derive out of Torah. Finally, American Jewish philan thropy must begin to follow through on these ideas by offering increased su p p ort to organizations such as “Gesher” which are attempting to do just that - to go out to the high schools and universities, to the cities and towns, to kibbutzim and moshavot, and talk as brothers to those who are outside the camp of Torah. We must begin to pay much more attention to those religious institu tions, from kindergarten up, which prepare young orthodox Israelis for a productive life within the State, teach ing them not to retreat into ghettos w ith in Israel, but to relate and communicate the messages and the ideas of Torah. We must increase our support for those schools Jg whether yeshivah, high school, university, or trade school — which create the type of student who is both in and o f the State, who is totally committed to Torah, but who is part and parcel of the social fabric of Israel, one with w hom non-observant Israelis can

identify and, from whom they can therefore also learn. A “demythologizing” of Israel

will thus lead us not to withdraw, but to renew our efforts towards the great need o f the hour: reconciliation, unity, peace.

V III N the Mechilta, Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai refers to the commandment which forbids us to use metal tools, such as the axe or the hammer, in building the altar. The altar, he says, was used as the means for reconciling G-d with Israel (the word korban comes from the word karov, close; and the word shelemoth, “ w h o le ” stones, from the word shalom, peace). Hence, he said, we have before us a logical deduction (kal va-chomer). If the altar, which can neither see nor hear nor speak, is spared the pain of a sharp metal tool because it enhances peace between Israel and its Father in Heaven, then certainly a human being who brings peace between man and his wife, be tween man and his fellow man, be tween city and city, between family

and family, most certainly will be protected from any punishment and shielded against any weapons forged by the enemy. All of us —religious and secular is t, o r th o d o x and non-orthodox. Diaspora and Israeli Jews — must strive for the blessing of shalom, of peace both without and within, of reconcilia tion of one camp with the other, of community with community — but above all else, of nationality and reli gion, of the State of Israel with the Torah of Israel, of the people with G-d. Having done that, having secured our inner integrity, we shall be safe from all dangers from without. “May He who creates peace in His high places, create peace for us and for all of Israel, and let us say, Amen.”

JEW ISH L IF E

A Story

Who is ETHEL SCHNURR? by A V R A M D A V ID S O N HERE were three sisters. The first was Mrs. Goldbeater, she looked like a cow, Bessie Goldbeater was her daughter, you’ve heard of Bessie Goldbeater? Everybody’s heard of Bessie Goldbeater, she went to live in Brazil, and the next sister was old Mrs. K atz w ho was married to Katz-the-Painter and there was this big scandal about her in her old age. And the third sister was the Old Lady Schnurr. They were nothing like each other. Old Mrs. Goldbeater nobody ever saw, she was as big as a house and had swollen ankles and never went outside of her kitchen. Mrs. Katz you know about already. And the Schnurrs have this little bakery on Oak Street in the old Jewish neighborhood. Not Frenkel’s, that’s the big bakery in the next block, and not Popkin’s, that’s more of what you might call a dairy restaurant although they do have cakes

M AY-JUN E 1970

and things that you can buy to take out. But not bread and not rolls. Schnurr’s is in the next block, you know where I mean? On the corner is Fisher’s Hardware Store, then comes old Shlemon in the second-hand place, he’s not Jewish, and next to that is where Drabin had the live poultry market before he got rich and moved to Louisiana, did you ever hear of such a thing? Florida wasn’t good enough for him. It’s been empty for years. And then there’s the candy store and next to that, is Schnurr-the-baker. So now you know. I’ll tell ybu what they look like. The Old Man Schnurr is a little bit of a man, he’s got a kind of a long nose, and he’s on the dark side, but not too dark. And the Old Lady Schnurr is also a little bit of a woman — you know the old joke, “Eyn oyg felt eym un fin onder rinf'l — yeah. Well, it’s not so bad as all that, it’s just that it

always reminds me. She’s a little bit cross-eyed in one eye and she has a palsy, not much, her head always shakes a little, but only the head. And he, as far back as I can remember, he had white hair. So that’s the Schnurrs, the old people, I mean.

Schnurr’s on Saturday night but all the Shvartsas and the Polacks, because the stale stuff they sold cheaper, and some of it they even gave away if you’d tell them a hard luck story. So naturally they were no business people. But they made a living.

HAT do you mean, So who is Ethel Schnurr? That’s what I’m telling you, if you’ll have a little patience. Ethel Schnurr is the daugh ter. The father is little, the mother is little, even the aunt, Old Mrs. Katz, isn’t very big, but the daughter must take after the other aunt, the one that’s — Mrs. Goldbeater. Only not that I mean she’s fat, the daughter, only tall. Not hefty and not skinny, just tall, kind of dark like the father, a long nose, and that’s all. To begin with they’re very ignorant people. The Old Lady I’m not even sure can read. There was a Mr. Krimbein who lived in the house, you wouldn’t know him, he didn’t mingle much. So every night he used to read out loud the roman from the Jewish paper, and she would go up and listen to it. The serial, you know. A roman, they called it. And that Was her entertainment. They were no business people. What I mean is they used to keep the bakery closed Shabbas. They thought they were still in Europe. On Friday night if you wanted a challah, it should be freylach on the table, they were already closed. And on Saturday night, when people were out buying, he first opened up the store and started baking, and what did they have to sell? Only the stale stuff from the day before. So naturally, Frenkel’s got all the business, and who came to

N those days there was a Mrs. B o d en h eim , a very refined woman, her husband was Dr. Boden heim the Dentist, and she had no chil dren, she had a maid, and she didn’t know what to do with herself the whole day long, so she gave elocution lessons. Nowadays they call it dra matic readings, they call it speech therapy, and it’s a different sort of thing altogether; but in those days they called it elocution and it was a different sort of thing altogether. You know what I mean? Anyway, this Mrs. Bodenheim had various pupils, there was no Jewish Community Center in those days where they have classes in every thing for the children, and so different people, if the children weren’t taking violin lessons or going to Hebrew School, they gave them elocution lessons with Mrs. Bodenheim. So what was meant by elocution? First of all, they had these vowel exercises to develop the tone and the voice in speaking. That was very important, but that was just the training. Most of all, she taught them to recite poetry. Famous speeches, too, but the poetry was more popular. She taught them, like “The Song Of The. Shirt,” and “Trees,” and “In Flanders Field The Poppies Grow,” and in fact she taught them poems I haven’t heard of in years — “A Frenchman, Once, So Runs A

JEW ISH LIF E

Certain Ditty,” and there was a patri otic one about “When Freedom From Her Mountain Height;” and “She’s S o m e b o d y ’s M other, Boys, You Know,” and humorous ones such as '‘D arius G reen A n d His Flying Machine” and, oh, what was that one called, “It’s Nothing To Laugh At, As I Can See, If You Were Stung By A Bumble-Bee.” But she said, I mean Mrs. Bodenheim, that it wasn’t just memorization. Anybody can be taught to memorize, she said. Even a parrot can be instruc ted in how to memorize. What she placed her greatest emphasis on was expression. The pains she took with those children you wouldn’t believe. She didn’t just give them a book and say, go, learn. She used to have every thing typed out and then she would put these marks on the words to show where to put the expression and the emphasis. It was very well thought of by everyone, including the schools, and once a year she used to have her pupils give a recital. So, naturally everyone was surprised when Ethel Schnurr started going. I mean, they just weren’t the type. They worked all day long and the Old Man went to his shool and the Old Lady went to listen to her roman, and that was all they knew. Elocution, they never heard of it. In fact, they never heard of anything. You want to hear .a story? Believe it or not. Some one once said to the Old Lady, it was after the election or the inauguration or something, I forget which, and somebody said to her* “Well, we’ve got a new president now.” And the Old Lady looked at him, and she looked at him, and her face got real sad and she

M AY-JUN E 1970

said , “ Uncle Sam isn’t there no more?” Believe it or not. She thought Uncle Sam was the president’s name. This is an American citizen for you. So how she came to elocution was a mystery. NYWAY, to make a long story sh o rt, th e daughter, Ethel Schnurr, wanted to take elocution lessons. After all %r: pretty, she wasn’t — I forget how old she was then, just a girl, but pretty she certainly wasn’t and inasmuch as certain of the other girls were going to these lessons, so she wanted to go, too. So she went. And she went and she went and she went. Sixteen years old and she was still going. People didn’t know whether to laugh or to cry. She didn’t even finish high school. She never read a book. She just worked in the bakery and helped her mother around the house and studied elocution and every year she got up to recite at these annual recitals that Mrs. Bodenheim used to give. I mean, this child was six years old, this one was seven years old, the other one was ten years old tó it was cute, you know what I mean? It was cute. But then up comes Ethel Schnurr and she’s what you call a young lady already, and she stands up to recite these dramatic and sentimental poems with all the expression and the ges tures, and believe me, it was something to see. Boys? Boys didn*t care about her and she didn’t care about boys. And the Old Lady Schnurr was always on hand in the audience and she was so proud of her daughter that she was all ready to cry from happiness, she was so proud. Well, what could you do? You

couldn’t tell her, “Mrs. Schnurr, ex cuse me, your daughter is making a public jack-ass out of herself,” could you? Let alone the Old Man, let alone Ethel herself. And to talk to Mrs. Bodenheim was equally impossible — how would you do it? Anyway, it was taken out of everybody’s hands when Mrs. Bodenheim’s brother died out in Toledo, Ohio, and he left a.hotel and he left a factory and this piece of property and that piece of property, and he was an old buck, as the expres sion goes, he never got married, and so who inherited all the property and everything else? Mrs. Bodenheim is who. The rich get richer and the poor get children, believe me. So they moved out to Toledo, Ohio, and inso far as I know, they were never heard from again. O Bfj meanwhile, what of Ethel Schnurr? She went on working in the bakery and helping her mother in the house, and she didn’t get any younger and she didn’t get any pret tier, but she always had a smile for you, and that was that. Now comes the beginning of the story. Enter Manny Rothman. Rothman from the cigar store, not Rothman from Adams Street who married the shicksa and she drank him out of house and home, his own kind wasn’t good enough* for him; the other Rothman, Manny Rothman. From the cigar store. You know the one I mean? A macher, a koch-lefel, alw ays running som ething. The Masons, the War Veterans, the Oddfel lows, the Merchants Association, the B’nai B’rith, that’s Manny Rothman. So once a year the War Veterans used to give a party for the Orphanage, and,

after all, credit where credit is due, they did a very good thing. And who would run it? Manny Rothman. What they used to do was to hire that old movie down on Oak Street * the Rialto was the name of it, it was only open at night, so the War Veter ans would hire it for the afternoon and give a party for the Orphanage. They sh ow ed them movies, Our Gang Comedies, and cowboy pictures and each one was given a bag of candy, and the mayor would address them, and they had soda in dixie cups and after all this there was a sort of vaudeville and then the bus would come and take them back to the Orphanage. So, one afternoon Ethel was in the bakery and Manny Rothman came rushing and he told her she had to come right away and recite for the Orphanage. One of the vaudeville acts didn’t show up and the party wasn’t supposed to be over until the char tered bus came back for the children. He said they were supposed to pay the vaudeville act fifteen dollars, and why shouldn’t she get it instead, and be sides, she’d be doing everybody a favor and it would be a mitzvah, too, enter taining these poor Orphanage children. So she took off her apron and left the Old Lady in charge of the store and off she went. Well, when people heard about it, they were furious. “What do you mean, allowing that girl to make a public spectacle of herself like that?” She could do as she pleased, she was happy, the kids were happy and the War Veterans were happy and so whose business was it, anyway? You can’t faze that one; .he always has an answer for everybody.

JEW ISH L IF E

And Ethel Schnurr told every one who came into the bakery that she’d made fifteen dollars from her elocution and of course she got con gratulations right and left, some of them didn’t know any better and some of them were just being tactful, and some of them figured — listen: fifteen dollars is fifteen dollars. You know what I mean? Well, they say nothing succeeds like success. Don’t you think, from time to time different people didn’t come into the bakery and say that there was going to be a children’s party for one purpose or another and the question of entertainment was not as yet settled? And Ethel Schnurr would smile and look down and the Old Lady Schnurr would say, “She would recite for you,” and these dif ferent individuals would say, well, they couldn’t afford to pay. And the Old Lady would say, “She wouldn’t need to take any money” and she’d call the Old Man in from the back and she’d say, “They want Ethel to recite for them.” And the Old Man wouldn’t say a word, he was always on the shy side, but he would look at you and smile and look at Ethel and the Old Lady and you could see that they were all very proud. And this went on over a good many years. It’s a funny thing, and this is just a guess on my part, because I’m no mindreader. But I am convinced, I am a b so lu te ly convinced, that Ethel Schnurr in her own mind regarded her self as a member of the professional entertainers. Just from her attitude and various little things she said. Even though all she got was that little bit of money once a year for a few years

M AY-JUN E 1970

from the War Veterans, and the rest of the time she seemed to think she was doing people a favor by reciting these poems at the children’s parties. “I don’t mind,” she’d say. “I don’t mind a bit. Glad to do it.” And if you gave her half a chance she’d talk your ear off about using expression and how important the right gestures were, and what a pity nobody was teaching elocution around here anymore. And that was all she had to talk about, and what she cooked for supper and how she cooked it, and how she made her father’s eggs in the morning, until you were glad to get out of there and get away. I mean, it was just a lit t le hole-in-the-wall bakery, with fixtures from the Year of One and the walls were painted brown fifty years ago and the walls are still painted brown. You couldn’t get anything fancy there, either, I mean, if you wanted something like an ice-cream cake you could want it forever. Just bread and rolls and sponge-cake and honey-cake and shtrudel and mandelbrote and old-fashioned things like that. Still, they made a living. O — one day, in came Manny Rothman, and he said, “Ethel, I am going to put you on the stage.” And he had a telephone number for her to call. Yes -- Ethel Schnurr. That’s what I’m telling you. What was it all about, you remember Stein-thebutcher? Well,nrStein-the-butcher has this son, George Stein, Craig Stone he calls himself, I don’t know him myself and if I met him on the street I wouldn’t know him from Adam. But be that as it may, he was sick when he was a boy, the virus was then in its

infancy and there was no such thing as penicillin. So he stayed in bed and he started reading books about the stage and he kept on with it when he was better — this all came out later, in the stories in the newspaper —and instead of going to college he went to New York and got into the stage. No, not an actor. He was a scenic designer and a choreographer as they call it and he directed and he did this and that and the other thing. So one day they were casting a play and he was reading it and there was a part there about a girl who was always reciting poems from her elocution class. And he said to himself, ‘‘Didn’t there used to be a woman back in my home town who used to do that?” And he said, “Yes. ” He wasn’t sure what her name was, but he knew that Manny Rothman knew her, so he called up Manny Rothman. And that’s how it all happened. She went down to New York and she tried out for the part, and lo and behold, she got it. Did you ever hear of such a thing? Ethel Schnurr! Whoever heard of such a thing! Lilly Feffer, you know Lilly Feffer, don’t you? Well, Lilly Feffer is an aunt by marriage to this George Stein or Craig Stone, and according to her they called Ethel Schnurr down originally to show this actress, the one who originally had the part, how to do it —recite, you know, with the expres sion and the gestures — although why they had to call in Ethel Schnurr, for Heaven’s sake, to teach them their own business, is beyond me, and I don’t put much stock in that story. So, what happened, if somebody got taken sick and they shifted the cast

around or if this actress just didn’t want the part, I forget. But Ethel Schnurr got it, all right. The play was caUed “Anybody Round My Base Is ‘It.’ ’’ Did you ever hear of such a title? Well, the play was just as crazy as the title was, To this day I can’t make heads or tails of it, as the saying goes. But it was all about this family way back in the Twenties or maybe even longer ago, they never told you when, exactly, but everybody was wearing old-fashioned clothes, so it must have been a long time ago. What a crazy family! The mother was alw ays b ein g thrown in jail for Woman’s Suffrage and the father kept trying to invent a perpetual motion machine and they had a houseful of kids and everybody was always screaming and yelling. The oldest daughter was in love with a boy from dow n th e b lo c k , his name was Rodney, and to tell you the truth I think she was really having an affair with him. He was a goodlooking boy, but I don’t know what he saw in her, she had no figure whatsoever. So anyway. There was this girl named Sadie and she lived next door but she kept coming over to the Mason family’s house because the acoustics were better, and who was Sadie but Ethel Schnurr. The clothes she had oh were a scream. Everybody would be screaming and yelling and then the telephone would ring or something and everybody would become quiet and then you’d hear Ethel Schnurr reciting one of these poems. And everybody would laugh their heads off, everybody in the audience, I mean. What was so funny was more than I could see. Here she was, making

JEW ISH L IF E

a fool of herself as usual and every body laughed. I felt so embarrassed, I didn’t know where to look. And that was all she did, all through the play. Of course the Old Man and the Old Lady Schnurr were there. Believe me, where ignorance is bliss. I almost fell out of my seat when I saw them. The old man looked like someone who came to fix the plumbing. And the old lady was wearing a fur coat that if I say it was thirty years out of style I’m not exaggerating. I understand it was the only one she ever owned. The old man gave it to her for their anniversary and she kept it in cold storage and this was maybe the third time in her life she ever wore it. And I saw them talk ing to this man in the intermission and he got up with them and they went back-stage. Listen to me B S “backstage” — you’d think I was familiar with all these terms! Well, to make a long story short, they say that the critics can either make you or break you. You’ve heard that saying. The play opened on a W ednesday and it closed on a Wednesday. The same Wednesday. It lasted exactly one performance, which was one too many if you ask me. Did they pan it! I’ve got the clippings somewhere around here. But one of them, there was one sentence in it which I will never forget as long as I live. It said, “The ins and outs and w hys and wherefores of ‘Anyone Round My Base Is “It” ’ are beyohd your poor reviewer. The only redeem ing feature of this raucous comedy was the performance of newcomer Ethel Schnurr as Sadie. Her humorous and nostalgic version of old-time elocution b rig h ten ed an otherw ise wasted

M AY-JUN E 1970

evening.” Can you imagine? UT wait, wait. That was nothing. Remember I said I saw the Old Man and the Old Lady Schnurr talking to this man during the intermission? Well, who was it but the man who supplied the costumes for the play. I forget how many thousands of dollars they cost him, and of course he can kiss his money goodbye, you know what I mean? Opened on Wednesday and closed on Wednesday. He got into conversation with the old couple and he met Ethel and after the play was pronounced a failure and closed its doors he came up here and he went to the bakery and told them his tale of woe and he talked and talked and he stayed for supper. And that was the beginning of Mr. E. Mandell. That’s his business, he’s a theatrical outfitter or whatever they call it, and either he makes a lot of money or he loses a lot of money. He said that the Old Lady Schnurr reminded him of his own mother and she was a very religious woman and after she died his sister kept house for him and then she passed away, too. Of course, the nature of his business was such that he had to meet with all kinds of people and to eat what they eat, but he was always used to a kosher home. He had no use for most of these young actres ses they were mostly bums and tramps, he said, and all he wanted was to marry a decent Jewish girl like his mother and sister, they should rest in peace; and beauty was only skin deep and he was tired of clever women. Anyway, that’s what Sandra Millman,

she used to be a Katz, in other words the old lady’s niece, said she was told. And the long and short of it is, he proposed to Ethel Schnurr and she accepted him and they were married a month later. So that’s the whole story, and after that she had a baby. Did you ever hear of such a thing, a woman fortyfive years old gets married for the first time in her life and right away she has a baby. It was a boy and they named him Nathaniel, after the grandfather on the father’s side. They live out on Long Island in this huge and expensive house and she has every modem convenience and she has a maid and she has a second maid and she doesn’t have to put her hand in cold water and all she has to do is take care of the baby and cook for her husband when he’s home. And all these prominent theatrical personalities come out to

their place* and she cooks for them, too, and they’re just crazy about her, Sandra Millman says. And she’s in her element. She talks to them about expression and gestures* and they talk to her about expression and gestures. And the bakery is only open five days a week now. It’s closed on Sundays, too, and every Sunday morning the chauffeur comes from Long Island in this great big automobile and the old couple come out loaded down with bread and rolls and cake, as if the sonin-law hasn’t got the money to buy it, and they drive out to Long Island and spend the whole day there and then the chauffeur drives them back. So that’s the whole story and you go figure it out and if you can figure it out then you’re better than I am, because when you come right down to it, who is Ethel Schnurr? You know what I mean?

JEW ISH L IF E

by JACOB J. HECHT NE of the most serious urban problems today is “blockbust ing.” Not only is this a national prob lem, but it also is a Jewish problem, since in many large cities like New York long-established Jewish neighbor hoods have been a particular object of blockbusting, with devastating effect on religious and communal life. In my own community, East Flatbush in Brooklyn, we have been faced with this threat for the past few years. In our case though, unlike so many others, effective action was brought to bear to withstand the in road s o f the blockbusters. Our experience has brought an intimate view of this neighborhood raiding process, together with understanding of practicar ways to counter it. Blockbusting is the vicious prac tise o f transforming solid White neighborhoods into solid Black or P u erto R ican neighborhoods by

M AY-JUN E 1970

pressuring one homeowner in a block to sell in order to panic the rest into following. The homeowner is besieged by a variety of devices and tricks, all of which are centered around the idea that “more and more of ‘those people’ are coming in, and you had better get out while you still can.” Once the homeowner yields to this pressure, the block is effectively “busted.” Like a bridge that collapses when an essential part of its structure falls, the rest of the homeowners quickly sell out, making possible huge profits to the blockbusters, and allowing them to move quickly on to other bio cks, thè ethnic balance of the entire neighbor hood being turned topsy-turvy in the process. HE neighborhoods chosen by the blockbusting speculators are selected very carefully. Usually the area they settle on is one bordering on

a neighborhood already blockbusted. In this way they obtain a ready supply of new residents and it is easier for them to build up fears among the neighborhood’s homeowners because the physical presence of the other ethnic group is already being noticed and felt. O nce th e blockbusters have selected their target, they begin their bombardment and solicitation. All techniques of mass and individual persuasion are used. They send litera ture through the mails, offering superhigh prices to homeowners to sell. (Later, if homeowners do sell, they get nothing like these prices.) They engage in door-to-door solicitation. They enlist others to bring pressure on the homeowners, sometimes Blacks (for the psychological impact), even (I am ashamed to say) rabbis and cantors.

S o m etim es the blockbusters operate in the open. Other times they work at night, holding clandestine meetings in parking lots and restaur ants. All this time they keep up a whispering campaign ( “So and so is selling. You’d better sell too.”), and they keep pressing the panicr button. (“If you don’t sell now, you will lose your money.” “You’d better sign now, because we won’t buy later.”) In cases where they find a block hard to bust, the speculators resort to even more insidious tactics. Often, to get a block busted, they or their agents purchase a particular house themselves and resell it immediately to a Black, Other times they spread false rumors, p la y in g one hom eowner (“Your neighbor’s selling,” they say falsely to one man) against another (telling him falsely the same thing).

TH E B L O C K B U ST E R S A N D T H E IR P R E Y HERE are generally three types of people who do blockbusting. One is u n scru p u lo u s real-estate brokers, who usually live outside the community and care little for it. All they can see is an opportunity to make a killing. Two are certain residents in the community. They are either so much in need of money that they do not care if they ruin the neighbor hood, or they blockbust because they want to spite their neighbors for some personal reason. Third are local spec ulators, not licensed brokers, but homeowners themselves looking for a fast buck. Some groups in a neighborhood are more easily pressured by the block busters than other groups. Most resis

tive to the blandishments of block b u sters is usually the middle-age group. Bound to the community re ligious and social ties and their busi nesses or professions, they usually do not want to leave, nor do they have the means to relocate. They also have a self-pride. They do not want to be pushed around. Many too hâve a close religious affiliation which limits their moving. However, it is a different story with the younger and older groups in the community. The young usually have the means to move, and they have fewer roots that hold them to the neighborhood. Also, they are more worried about safety in the streets and the local schools. Particularly, when

JEW ISH L IF E

they have children, they want to do the best by them. Similarly, the older inhabitants in a community are more prone to move. Usually retired, with their chil dren married and moved away, with fewer ties than they once had, they feel now that it is time to get back the investment they made earlier in the community. works many different ways, but a typical case starts after the solicitation is successful and the homeowner has been inter ested enough to talk to the block buster. An appointment in the home itself is arranged, and once inside, the blockbuster looks it over carefully, usually making disparaging remarks about its condition and at the same time flashing a big roll of bills. The blockbuster then asks the hojneowner how much he wants for the house. When the homeowner gives a price like, say $28,000, the blockbuster shakes his head, explaining this is far too high. “We will pay only $20,000,” he says, but he adds that the sale can be concluded right away and that he, the blockbuster, is authorized to make a large cash down-payment. Attracted by the cash and fearful that his home may really be in poor condition, the homeowner gives in, settling for some thing in the neighborhood of $22,000. What the homeowner does not realize is that the blockbuster already knows he can get the FHA to value the house at $39,500^ and since the FHA w ill give a mortgage commitment amounting to 85% to 90% of the sale evaluation, approximately $37,000

l o c k b u s t in g

M AY-JUN E 1970

can be obtained from a funding organ ization or a bank for this house. Once the sale has been con cluded, the blockbuster then goes out and finds himself a prospective pur chaser from among the Black or Puerto Rican communities. This is very easy, since he can offer an opportunity to buy a home without putting up any cash. The F.H.A. evalu ation can be converted into $37,000 cash — $35,000 for the house, $2,000 for closing fees. Thus, the purchaser can move in almost at once without any financial payment. Then the second sad chapter begins.* Almost always the purchaser has trouble meeting the mortgage payments. To afford the house at that $39,000 figure, he should have a sub stantial income. But most often he does not, and often too the block b u sters have falsified information about him to the banks and the F.H.A. It has been amply proven that in many cases the blockbusters have even sub mitted fake W-2 or federal income tax returns in applications to indicate that purchasers earn far more than they really do. It is known too that some times they even print up fake com pany stationery, on which they certify the employment of men or women who are not even working. And when all this fails, they even try to bribe F.H.A. employees. The many Blacks and Puerto Ricans who are in over their heads *The facts cited here and elsewhere in this article have been substantiated by the Inves tigating C om m ittee o f the Secretary o f State o f N ew Y ork, headed by Mr. Patrick Cea.

financially, try desperately to hang on to their new houses. Some work at two full-time jobs to earn enough money for the mortgage payments. But in many cases, they cannot keep up, and their house is foreclosed. Thus everyone has lost, the original homeowner who was pres

sured into leaving his neighborhood and into selling his house for a price far below its actual worth, #the one who paid a highly inflated price and who often ended up- losing his house because of that factor, and the com munity which saw its social structure disrupted.

HOW TO STOP B L O C K B U ST IN G ESPITE the insidious way in tion should find a prospective buyer, w h ich blockbusters operate, and if none are available it should blockbusting can be stopped. All it arrange for one of its members to buy takes is unified action by the home- the house himself. owners in a community. There are just Five, communicate to the entire five general rules to follow: neighborhood that blockbusting is not First, do not panic. Should a only a question of moving from one member of another ethnic or religious area to another, but that it also erodes community move into the block or an individual’s self-respect, dignity, next door, make him welcome. He has and communal responsibility. When every right, just as all do, to live where Jews are involved, one Jew ends up he wishes. Moreover, a homeowner hurting another, and in doing so, he is may be better off with this individual committing the crime of giving the than with a neighbor of his own race weapons to our enemies to destroy us. and faith. If the newcomer is ^-:as he It is not just a question of morals or often is — of fine character, he will ethics, but also one of Torah law, since appreciate livihg in the neighborhood, Halochah forbids an action that would and he will want to respect it and destroy another Jew or a Jewish enjoy it as much as the original home community. And community destruc owning group. tion it is. Once a neighborhood has Two, report at once to local, been blockbusted its families are dis state, and federal authorities —'Office persed and their social pattern is of the Secretary of State or the DA’s uprooted. Merchants who have been office in your city a* anyone who serving there .many years usually have makes solicitations to owners and uses to go o u t of business. Religious scare tactics. s c h o o ls , h o u ses of worship and Three, do not be afraid to testify communal institutions nurtured and against these people. built up over years, perhaps genera F our, organize block associa tions, have tb shut down. What once tions to bind together the homeowners was a stable community will have been in a particular block. If one home- turned into a wasteland. owner threatens to bolt, the associa

JEW ISH LIFE

B L O C K B U ST IN G IN EA ST FLA TBU SH S a rabbi living and working almost a quarter-century in the East Flatbush section of Brooklyn, I have watched for years with a great deal of apprehension the transitions and changes taking place in other Brooklyn Jewish communities such as Brownsville, East New York, Crown Heights and Williamsburg. Like many others, I was waiting to see when the blockbusting enemy would attack our community. Two and one-half years ago, blockbusting arrived. On that side of East Flatbush opposite Brownsville, several blocks were busted. Imme diately I arranged a meeting of the community’s rabbis, and sounded a warning. I called upon my colleagues to become involved, to take a stand arid fight for the maintenance of the community, pointing out that the situation was comparable to a storeowner who acts when he sees a man in fro n t o f h is store chasing away customers. Our synagogues and our entire community were being threat ened, just like that hypothetical store. But these words seemed to fall on deaf ears. Despite this, however, I decided to fight back even if I had to do so alone. I sent telegrams to all the synagogues in East Flatbush, asking them to announce that in the interests of anti-blockbusting, the rabbis were now in a position to handle, without commission, all problems of real-estate - buying, selling, and renting. Only one rabbi responded, Rabbi Solomon B. Shapiro, a colleague and neighbor, who ever since has worked side by side with me in combating the menace.

M AY-JUNE 1970

We started to fight back on various fronts. We used our pulpits. We used the resources of the public rela tions agency that does the publicity for th e National Committee For Furtherance of Jewish Education, of which I am executive vice president. We arranged broadcasting appearances on important local radio and TV inter view and news shows. We sent public ity releases to the Yiddish, AngloJewish, and New York daily news papers. We also called meetings of neighborhood Jewish groups to inform them of what was going on, and to urge them to hold fast. In many Gases, when East Flatbush Jews insisted on selling, we arranged to purchase their homes ourselves. Unfortunately, the side of East F la tb u sh fa cin g Brownsville was busted, and the Jewish community there wiped out. But because of our efforts, a buffer zone was created at that point, and here the blockbusting was solidly checked. Then our efforts began to bear fruit in other areas. In another corner o f East Flatbush, Rabbi Solomon R o th en b erg and R abbi Josep h Levinson joined forces and organized their own group of anti-blockbusters, which was able to stop blockbusting there. Others also joined the fight -IEmore neighbors, for example, and, six months ago, the Mid-County Church Association, consisting of Protestant and Catholic clergy. Meanwhile, the authorities also joined in. New York State’s Secretary of State Hon. John P. Lomenzo

started an investigation which resulted in the issuance of cease-and-desist orders forbidding | certain real-estate operators from conducting blockbusting operations. The F.H.A. also inves-

tigated, and Kings County District Attorney Eugene Gold began handing down indictments against those blockb u sters who employed fraudulent practises.

A T H R IV IN G C O M M U N IT Y ODAY, as a result of all our efforts, East Flatbush is under going a slow, normal process of in tegration. Because of the community’s unified approach to the problem, and because of the cooperation of the various state, federal, and city agen cies, East Flatbush is still a thriving Jewish community. The population ratio today is 70 Jews to 30 Blacks and "Puerto Ricans, and the newcomers •are families of excellent character whose presence is valued. With the community stabilized, panic has now been removed from the air, and faith has been renewed in rab b in ic leadership. Jews in East Flatbush are now cautious, and they resist coercion and pressure. Many sacrifice dollars they could have re ceived, and have taken less to stay in and enjoy the community where they have lived for years. Today if a house has to be sold, a homeowner consults first with his rabbi, who makes every effort to get him as much money as he can for his home, and who also brings in as the new owner a man who, irre spective of race, will contribute to the community. In this way the previous owner leaves with the blessings and good wishes of the community. Today in East Flatbush, when apartments become avacant, people grab them up. New businesses are being attracted to the area. Out of this has sprung up the United Rugby East

Flatbush Jewish Community Council. This organization is planning several h o u sin g developm ents and other community services. East Flatbush is still a fine, well-rounded residential Jewish community with yeshivoth for boys and girls, synagogues, a mikveh and ample sources of kosher products. HAT has happened in East Flatbush has also become the model for other communities and neighborhoods. As a result of our efforts, the New York State Legisla ture, through the initiative of Stanley Steingut, the Minority Leader of the Assembly, and State Senator Jeremiah Bloom, has enacted one of the strong est anti-blockbusting laws in the United States. It calls for fines to be levied against blockbusters, revocation of licenses of real-estate operators who blockbust, and in certain cases of illegalities and frauds, prison terms. This bill gives the state the power to designate certain areas as ones where no real-estate solicitation will be allowed to take place, and where all rea l-e sta te transactions must go through non-profit organizations. Blockbusting as a problem and danger may long remain, but our ex perience in East Flatbush shows that it can be stopped, and that an area can be integrated peacefully and smoothly to the betterment of all, and to no diminution of its Jewish character and institutions.

JEWISH LIFE

'Wty .H a v e Y o u I C L lo s e n IMLe?

by B E R N A R D D O V M IL IA N S I f some tomorrow man —if man there he To search the holocaust his madness flared And sift the charrings o f humanity — Find one lorn Jewish soul that had been spared (One Jewish soul whose gutted breath Laughs at the doomsters o f his death, To light beside the Throne o f Last Resort And dare to bare its plaint in Heaven’s Court), One question, sad-defiant, will it form -r. One anguished question, o f the Judge on High A stiff-neck question, reeling-mad, astorm: An angry, bridling, hapless question, WHY? “Why ?” —A question that must sear the soul O f all who tell the Jewish toll! Why have You chosen me? Why have you chosen me for pain ? To taste the singeing lash o f humankind’s disdain? Me o f all men —the weakly tender-soft Whose heart-chords throb, Whose pulsings twinge With every whimper o f the soul o f man!

M AY-JUN E 1970

Why have You chosen me to be Your brand And plucked me from the pyre by Your Own Hand Only to cast me back another day Again, again to scorch my heart away ? Me, raptured and enwrapt in billowed clouds — The coverlets o f dreams! Me who arise to pray exulting psalms That I am risen thus to greet the freshbom day The Heaven gilded with a timeless joy! Who whisper paeans fo r each unfolding flower, Each laughing sun ray in a dew-kissed bower, Each gentle blade, each Fall-daubed leaf That dangles, daring, from a wind-tossed bough A nd flitters lazily, fulfilled, to earth! Why have You chosen me to stoke the fire O f man’s inhuman and unholy ire ? Me o f all men, who cast my body first In sacrifice upon the altar shrine To shield the midge, the quivering flea, The violated handiwork o f G-d, A nd give them succor, fly them free, Upraised! Me o f all men, who suffer every cause, Who weep the meek, the strong, the weak; Who seek The soul-in-soul caress O f wistful tenderness; Who hear The swelling music o f the Angel-sphere; Whose prayers a lute, whose dreams a lyre That ’companies Your Heaven Choir! Me who y e t dream o f vineyard, fig and palm, O f w o lf with lamb, and shepherd both with care: The Mountain o f the Lord where hearts as one Sing Thy great Goodness! Me, the infant naif who y e t believe In Man as Spark o f G-d . . . in Beauty, Truth . . . Who y e t believe . . . but grieve That Man is man . . . uncaring, reft o f heart! 32

JEWISH LIF E

Why have You chosen me to stir The conscience o f mankind and spur Man Upward? Chosen me to preach on earth The grand magnificence o f Heaven’s worth ? Man does not want; man does hot need. Man is an em pty shriveled reed: An impious thing man, berthed in hell, Who sells his soul, with none to s e ll. . . Why have You chosen me, the sore abused, The sinned against, the wronged, To stand before the world accused? Me who would give And give and love and live! Whose Halleluyahs soar in grateful thanks Unto the Heavens’ highmost ranks When I can kneel to depths untold To feel and fo ld A brother Or an other And reach him skyward! Yet You have chosen me to immolate, And let man thrust Me to the holocaust, and watch its roaring lust Taste me and waste me, Test me and best me In a cruel auto de fe! The blaze consumed . . . once . . . twice . . . And ten-times-thrice . . . Once, twice my anger surged And screeched, above the furnace roar, “No more. Please, G-d, no more!” And anger urged Me snatch the ravening flare And fling it forth I-know-not-where 1| 8H Into the wilt-chaff stubble That is man, And leave his world a helter-skelter rubble! “Avenge. Destroy, ” it bade me.

Destrpy ? Avenge? I? But h ow ? I! How can I? I would But could not. Can not . . . Instead, I wept fo r man: I bowed my head And drank my tears, Embalmed my hopes upon their biers; I chanted Kaddish fo r my dreams And nightrhare screams. “It is the will o f G-d,” I moaned with Job, (A Will I can not measure, dare not probe!) And, as I turned to ash, I kneeled my body to the lash Whose every slash Did You obeisance. I bowed my head and drank my pain: It was my fate To be the root and flow er and butt o f hate, To be Your rod, To be man’s conscience and man’s prod . . . To see new minyan-myrid embers die, As millions died, to silent-still v Exultant stares A nd chill Satanic glares . . . > . Why, Almighty One, , My brother millions herded, slaved, undone? My sister hundred-hundreds scourged amain? My sucklings ravished, ravaged, slain? When Reds and Yellows strive in war, Why am I slaughtered by the thousand-score? When Blacks and Whites enlock in strife Am I, the innocent, despoiled o f life ?

JEW ISH L IF E

Why? Why? I shrieked, within, a strident plaint To Abraham and Jacob, Mother R achel. . .You . . . Wailing, “Annenu, please! Annenu, please my G-d! Answer us. Answer. Tell me . . . tell us Why? Why? A question sem piternal. . . A question sad, diurnal. . . A question tragic-mad, infernal: A question that must sear the soul O f all who tell the Jewish toll. But some tomorrow, high in Heaven’s Court, A scapegoat Jewish splinter-spark t-c A splinter o f Eternity, an ember mite — Will light Upon the Holy Throne o f Last Resort Aloft, before G-d’s Torah Ark, And, in a voice to make the sky-hosts quail And set the firmaments aquake, Impeach the world, impeach humanity, Impeach the skew-eyed Justice, The lopside scale, The fell decree . . . Impeach the Judge Himself In a din Torab that must shake The reeling universe in mighty shudder from pole to pole With its distressful pleading So G-d must listen and condole . . . (iWhy? Why have You chosen me? Me o f all men? What is m y sin ? What evil mine? What vile transgression o f Your Law Divine That You thus flay me and refine Me. Why, Dear m y Father? I Your chosen one, Your son, Your eldest one, Your brand, Your plucked-by-hand, Dare In fire and in despair Entreat You: Say Your answer to me, pray . . . M AY-JUN E 1970

Tell me, t e l l . . . or here will I remain To turn My blood-etched self upon the Heart o f Stone And burn My WHY into Your very Throne That it shall be a glowering stain, A festering mark o f Cain, A ghoulish smoldering blight Whose sight Must stir the conscience o f Almighty You For having chosen me, Your hapless Jew, For pain and censure and for deathless death . . . Here will I lie Till You bring easing to my racking, scathing WHY; Till I, no more a shackled fugitive Can live Unchained, like other men Again . . . Till You make covenant to free my soul, New-salved and swaddled and made whole, That it may flit from sky to sky A t one with You, the Glorious One on High; Till You ^ $nd man will give me leave to live and love, On earth ¿>r*in the welkin-arch above, Enclasped and clasping, laughing, lilting free Unto eternity . . . Tell me . . . Tell me . . . But know that though Man still Refuse to give me breath to live I Will N ot die!!!,y

JEW ISH L IF E

by S A M U E L A. T U R K ^ J u s t i c e , j u s t ic e shall you if pursue, that you may live and inherit the land which the Lord your G-d is giving you” (Devorim 16:20). Our Sages inferred from the above Biblical admonition that the establish ment of Jewish courts of law and the appointm ent of competent judges therein is basic to the continuity of the Jewish people and its eventual return to the Holy Land (Sifri, Devorim 16:20). The Jewish people has always been distinguished as a people of law. Their very nationhood was called into existence by their acceptance of the Divine Law at the foot of Mount Sinai. Whereas other nations refused to subordinate them selves to the discipline of the Torah’s commandments, we enthusiastically em braced them ( Rashi, Devorim 33:2), saying: “All that the Lord has said will we do and obey” (Shemoth

M AY-JUN E 1970

24:7). The rule of law and the admini stration of justice have been empha sized by the Jewish people from the very beginnings of its history. Of Abraham, the Almighty said: “For I have known him, to the end that he may command his children and his household after him,j that they may keep the way of the Lord, to do righteousness and justice” (Bereshith 18:19). On the verse: “The strength also of the King who loves justice, you have established equity, you have executed justice and righteousness in Jacob” (Psalms, 99:4), the Midrosh Rabbah (Shemoth 30:23) interprets: “Moses said to the Children of Israel: G-d has given you His Torah. If you do not administer the civil laws He will take His Torah from you, because He gave you the Torah on condition that you carry out the civil laws. If you will

do this the Almighty will restore to you your former system o f courts, as it is said: ‘And I will restore your judges as at first’ (Isaiah 1:26), and it is followed with ‘Zion shall be re deemed with justice’ (Isaiah 1:27).” Accordingly, the fulfillment of the Torah as a whole hinges upon the application of Torah law to the solu tion of controversies and disputes by Jewish courts. While civil law concerns itself with such matters as contracts, torts, damages, and business law, the use of the courts in the solution of fa m ily , personal, and community problems is equally implied. The worship of G-d through prayer alone and not accompanied by the application of religious law in daily affairs makes religion irrelevant and ephemeral. The Rabbis expressed this clearly when they commented that just as the Decalogue was given at Sinai, so were the civil laws; and that the portion of the Torah dealing with civil law was placed immediately following the portion dealing with the building of the altar in the Sanctuary, in order to tell us that the seat of the Sanhedrin should be in the Temple court (Rashi, Shemoth 21:1). The Holy Temple in Jerusalem was not only a place where sacrifices to the Almighty were brought, but also the place from where the highest tribunal promulgated the final legal decisions of the land. Without the administration of justice, religion becomes abstract and remote. The application of Divine law to worldly matters, on the other hand, makes religion meaningful and down to earth. By the separation of church and state and the secularization of

laws and courts, religion was relegated to an insignificant factor in the lives of men and confined to a relative few moments spent in formal Divine wor ship. Religion thus became divorced from most of men’s daily existence and behavior. Many of the complaints of the younger generation Jo day, that religion is not grappling with impor tant problems of society which affect their welfare and happiness, are largely due to this dichotomy. Judaism, how ever, which is theocratic in nature, has never recognized a dichotomy of reli gion and society. The Torah views no domain of life as secular and it en deavours to regulate all of life’s activi ties^ be they economic, social, or political. It demands that the rule of law be recognized in all aspects of daily living. N TIL rat her recently, every Jewish community boasted of its own court or courts. Their calibre and reputation were so exemplary that it was common for non-Jews to bring their disputes to these courts. Needless to say, Jews did not resort to the secular courts, for this is strictly for bidden by the Torah. Maimonides in his C ode sta te s (Mishneh Torah, Sanhedrin 27:7): “He who resorts to non-Jewish courts, even if their laws coincide with Jewish law, is a wicked person, and it is as if he desecrated and blasphemed the Almighty and rebels against the Torah of Moses, our Teacher . . . If the power of the nonJewish community is oppressive and one’s opponent is strong, so that he could not possibly collect his money via the Jewish court, he should never theless first resort to the Jewish courts

JEW ISH L IF E

regardless. If his opponent refuses to appear, he should obtain permission to bring his ease before the non-Jewish tribunal.” The prohibition against resorting to non-Jewish courts extends not only to those whose allegiance is to pagan and idolatrous cults, but to secular courts as well. Acceptance of even sec ular law in preference to the laws of the Torah constitutes a desecration of G-d Who gave us the Torah, and is an unpardonable sin. Where Torah law does not correspond to the law of the land and a Jew collects money from another by verdict of a secular court, he' is considered a thief, guilty of stealth and extortion in the eyes of the Jewish law, and is thus disqualified to serve as a witness in legal matters (Responsa, Tashbatz, Part IV, 3:6). It should be understood that judges who decide Torah law today lack the traditional historic ordination, the original “Semichah,” which was transmitted from Moses through the generations and was interrupted about a thousand years ago. The right of subsequent authorities to adjudicate stems from the fact that they are considered agents of ordained judges of prior generations and by agreement of the disputants to accept their deci sion. Under no circumstance can a n o n - J e w b e s u c h an a g e n t (Nachmanides, Shemoth 21:1). Our Sages maintain that G-d Himself dwells in the Jewish halls of justice. In Berochoth (6a) we read: “And how do you know that if three are sitting as a court of judges the Divine presence is with them? For it is said: ‘In the midst of your judges He judgeth’ (Psalms 82:1)” As a matter of fact, the terms

M AY-JUN E 1970

“judge” and “G-d” are interchangeable (Shemoth 21:6), indicating that the spirit of G-d rests on a Jewish judge who administers justice in accordance with the laws of the Torah. According to Samuel’s famous dictum that “The law of the govern ment is the law” (Gittin 10b), Jews should adhere to government decrees in civil matters. However, if a decree is in violation of a principle of the Torah, no such obligation exists. A ruling that Jews must bring their cases to secular courts would no doubt result in the ultimate abolition of administration of justice by Jewish courts, This, of course, would be a violation of a cardinal Torah principle (Isserles, Choshen Mishpot 369:11). However, most governments make no such demand. Very often the state courts even urge Jews to have certain cases ad ju d icated before Jewish trib u n als. Furthermore, Samuel’s dictum applies to specific decrees issued by governments and not to deci sions of equity by non-Jewish courts (Beth Yoseph, Tur, Choshen Mishpot 26), There is, therefore, no moral or practical need for Jews to resort to secular courts before bringing their cases to a court of Jewish law. HY, then, do so few Jews in the United States ¡¿even those who live in accordance with Torah precepts — bring their financial controversies and family and community disputes to a Jewish court? Is it that Jewish judges who are steeped in Torah scholarship are incapable of understanding busi ness matters and community and family problems? We may truly ask what makes the secular judge more

knowing and understanding. Where judges do lack knowledge of a particu lar matter, they can always seek advice and expertise. Also, an increase in the administration of Jewish justice would doubtlessly result in the emergence of sp ec ia liz e d co u rts competent in specific areas of the law. Is the reason for such derelic tion, perhaps, that the honesty and integrity of Jewish judges is to be questioned? Do we really believe that a judge nominated in a political club room is more trustworthy than a Jew whose life is devoted to the study of Torah and to the observance of its precepts? To believe so is the greatest imaginable malignment of Torah. Is it perhaps that the justice administered by Jewish courts would be more costly? One of the greatest problems of the American judicial system is the high cost of litigation. Lawyers’ fees are often exorbitant. In Jewish courts this enormous expense would not exist, for Jewish juris p ruden ce does not recognize the lawyer as an integral part of the judicial process. Some assert that Jewish courts would not be efficient in expediting cases which would be brought to them. This, too, is not valid. On the contrary, resorting to Jewish courts would speed up matters, for it is com m on k n ow led ge that secular courts are plagued with overloaded calendars and tremendous backlogs. Others maintain that decisions rendered by Jewish courts would not be enforceable. This is not true. No problem of enforcement would exist if the litigants would pledge themselves to accept the decision of the court.

I believe that the neglect of this matter even by religious Jews is in part at least due to the unavailability of regular Jewish judicial tribunals in the various communities. When we realize that in a city like New York there are only two rabbinical organiza tions who maintain a Beth Din, the existence of which is known to but a lim ite d number, we perceive the magnitude of the problem. In my opinion, rabbis of neighboring syna gogues should unite and form Jewish courts of law and arbitration. They should seek assistance from national rabbinic groups and the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations bf America. Rabbis should publicize the existence of such courts and urge their congregants to utilize them before turning to municipal or state agencies. There must be a program of enlighten ment, stressing the importance from the Torah standpoint of Jews seeking judicial decision and arbitration in Jewish courts. Such courts should be largely supported by the Union, indi vidual congregations, and rabbinical organizations. The court fees should be very nominal. The hours of opera tion of these courts should be highly publicized. Their decisions should be published periodically. Rapid success cannot be expec ted, but gradually even non-practicing Jews can be taught to place their faith and trust in men of Torah. I believe that in the course of time “Daath Torah,” the opinions of Torah schol ars, can become fully as acceptable as, if not more acceptable than, that of p o litic a l a p p o in tees or elected officials.

JEW ISH L IF E

■ F we could reawaken and re- gates which the Lord your G-d is giv I establish the concept of “Din ing you, tribe by tribe, and they shall Torah” in the Jewish community, judge the people with righteous judge there would arise a greater respect for ment” (Devorim 16:18). Judaism as a whole. The prestige of According to the authorities, the Rabbinate would be enhanced. this obligation exists not only in the The rabbi would again be looked upon Land of Israel but equally in the as a judge vested with powers to Diaspora, This can only be fulfilled by decide law, and Torah scholarship organized groups representing the would rise to new heights. Let us, Jewish community (Oruch Hashultherefore, set out to fulfill the Torah’s chon, Choshen Mishpot 1:18). Leaders commandment of “Judges and officers of Torah Jewry in America must shall you make for you in all your satisfy this great need.

M AY-JUN E 1970

by C H A R L E S R A D D O C K RAGUE had evoked uncommon memories for the Jews long before August of 1968, when Russia converged on Wenceslas Square in a pincer squeeze with German, Polish, H ungarian, and Bulgarian invaders. Praha, Czech metropolis of one-time Bohemia, was the home of such figures as K afka, Werfel, Brod, and Jiri Langer, Jews who made so distinctive an imprint on the modern literary scene. And, earlier too, Prague was the seat of Jewish saints and mystics — Maharal and his disciple Tosephoth Yomtov, and Shalah and Nodah biYehudah. To those to whom such names are unfamiliar, surely Golem is familiar, that legendary robot created by Maharal, Praguers rabbi-mystic whose monument stands today near Town Hall. There was something singular about a city that spawned literati with a touch of the mystical and rabbis

with a touch of the fabulous. Even Prague’s lesser poets, playwrights, or other illuminati who never achieved renown were tinged with its baroque mystique. So strong was its Gothic impact even on modern intellectuals between the two World Wars that Kabbalistic Chassidism too found a haven there. The great Kafka began to look into Chassidism after young Jiri Langer lured him to a Chassidic rebbe. And Kafka’s discoverer Brod even asked for daily lessons in T almudics from the same Jiri. The three Praguesmen, it seems, had something extra terrestrial in common during Kafka’s last years —Chassidism. Y et though both Kafka and Brod confessed their debt to their much younger friend, comparatively little is known about Jiri (Georg) Langer. Jiri was eleven years younger than Kafka and ten than Brod, but except for scattered, brief obituaries

JEWISH L IF E

on “ th e b a ch elo r Chossid from Prague,” as he was branded, Czech, German, and Hebrew writers have curiously bypassed him. The one fine English translation of Langer’s most important book B »published eighteen years after his premature death#- was missed by reviewers, and masterpiece though it is, sold only 1,250 copies, according to David McKay publishers, reporting eight years of hardcover availability. Jiri Langer’s masterpieces & in Czech, German ¿¿and Hebre w, three languages in which he created -Sf|are known only to a handful. Yet, apart from his books, Jiri’s very life right up to 1943, when he died in Tel Aviv at 49, deserves a book. The split person ality that Jiri Langer was parallelled Kafka’s, and culminated as prema turely and as uncompleted. Moreover, Langer’s background was remarkably id en tica l with Kafka’sHg9 pseudoemancipated, Jewish-Czech, middlemiddieclass, barely one or two generat io n s rem oved from o r th o d o x Judaism. HAT finally set Jiri Langer apart, however, from his older friend and fellow-townsman Franz Kafka was that, one day, Jiri left his comfortable home in Prague for a muddy, primitive townlet, Belz, in eastern Galicia, whose population was barely 4,500, half of them devout Poles and Slavs and half of them devout Chassidim. Jiri would later refer to Belz as “the Jewish Rome,” for it was a stronghold of pristine Chassidism for more than a century, from when the first Belzer Rebbe converted that Galitsianner backwater

M AY-JUN E 1970

to a bastion of Chassidism at the beginning of the 19th Century. To understand Jiri’s sudden flight at nineteen from sophisticated Prague to Chassidic Belz we must remember that Prague’s population was close to a million and most of its 3 8 ,0 0 0 Jews were alienated from Judaism even more than the'cosmopol itan German Jews. Jewish children in Prague attended Catholic schools, spoke German at school and Czech at h o m e, and no Yiddish whatever. “Down east” in Belz, however, over 600 kilometers áway, every Jew spoke Yiddish only and the men dressed in what, in the eyes of Prague Jews, was outlandish —1 long black kapotta, w i d e - b r im m e d black pancake beaberhut,and let their beards and earlocks grow from early manhood on, while their women wore the sheitel, or if poor the babushka, but always with head modestly covered. Not even his own family could und erstand J iri’s departure for C h a ssid ia . His o ld e st b roth er, F ra n tisek eminent playwright, soldier, and physician | | would later remember Jiri as fond of Czech “nonJewish” poetry at fifteen, and of the C zech P h ilh arm on ic, o f Gustav Mahler’s music, of ‘American Negro spirituals^; and as a skating buff pir ouetting ' on the frozen Moldau in January. To Frantisek, six years older and a senior medical student' then, Jiri’s sudden interest in piety and Talmud and Kabbolah was “a case of b ela ted adolescent psychopathy.” Papa Langer, too, shook his head at a changing Jiri, with grave concern, see ing his youngest son’s behavior as “eccentric” for, among other things,

Jiri now covered his head with a hat or yarmulka when studying the Talmud, and he read it in the ancient singsong of the yeshivah bochur. When the worried parent, how ever, saw Jiri being greeted one day on the street by an influential Jewish townsman who had received many decorations from the government, Papa Langer concluded that his son was no mere eccentric but rather a serious Talmudic scholar modestly winning the respect of communal elders. Jiri quit high school and turned down an "opportunity to register at Prague’s historic Charles University, first Central European university to admit Jewish students. Instead, Jiri now spent his days and his nights at Prague’s 13th Century Altneuschul in the old Ghetto, where three centu ries earlier, as it was believed, Maharal buried his Golem’s remains under the roof. D e sp ite the legend-crusted Gothic ambience of Prague’s Alt-Neu sanctuary, however, Jiri decided one fin e day th at merely to peruse Talmudic folios unmolested in an old shool was not enough. Moreover, a modern Prague with the majority of Jew s w h o lly divested of Jewish practice and custom was not, he felt, conducive to piety or to study related to the faith. What the youngster craved, apparently, was a Jewish milieu such as his native city in the second decade of the present century did not offer. And the Jewish authen ticity that Jiri Langer was seeking, as he finally concluded, could only be f o u n d u n tarn ish ed am ong th e Chassidim in eastern Galicia, where the very clothes on a Jew’s back set Jew

JIRI LANGER B o m 1 N isan, 5 6 5 4 / April 7, 1 8 9 4 - Prague D ied 5 Adar II, 5 7 0 3 / March 1 2 ,1 9 4 3 - Tel Aviv

apart from goy even outside synagogue walls. URIOUSLY, the Chassidim in kapottas that Jiri dreamed of would soon be turning up in Prague itself, with World War I, as fugitives. But, coincidentally ^several months before the war broke out, the nineteen-year-old Jiri — in the summer o f 1913 packed a small suitcase with the barest necessities, including some favorite books and his tephillin, and boarded the slow train that would carry him to the marshes of Easf Galicia. After traveling over a day and

JEWISH LIF E

a night, he arrived at the “gate to the empire of the Chassidim” which, as he would confess later, “never opens suddenly for anyone.” The pious mystics of Belz regarded the “mod ern-dressed alien” from far-off Prague with unconcealed suspicion. Nor at the beginning, as Jiri would tell it much later, could he adapt himself to the tight, shut-in environment. “The life of isolation from the rest of the world is intoler able,’- he would write later. He was “disgusted with this puritanism, this ig n o ra n ce, this backwardness and dirt.” And notwithstanding the great fame of the Rebbe of Belz, the saintly Yissochor Ber Rokeach and his impos ing synagogue on the square which “reminds me of Alt-Neu in Prague,” the East Galician town was mired in the starkest poverty, its star-gazing Chassidim the poorest of the poor, their daily fare dry bread, an onion or two, and a bowl of buckwheat mush called grappel. The squalor and pov erty — not to mention the cultural frustration — soon drove Jiri back to Prague. H is disillusionm ent notwith standing, after that abortive encounter w ith B e lz , th e tw enty-year-old Praguesman is no longer the same. On the streets of Prague he is not at all self-conscious about his Belz-style caftan, pancake velour hat, and side whiskers dangling in ringlets down his cheeks to his shoulders. “My brother,” said Frantisek, “had not come back from Belz, he had brought Belz with him.” Though Jiri -II responding now only to his Hebrew name Mordechai, but neither to his Czech name “Jiri” nor to his German name “Georg” —

M AY-JUNE 1970

could not endure the physical environ ment of Belz, he had nonetheless absorbed enough of its manner and mood even to cling to its esoteric habiliments on Prague’s streets. Jiri became now an anachronism in his own home town, until one night, it seems, when “suddenly I am dazzled by a bright light penetrating into my dark bedroom through the half-open door.” What he suddenly beheld was the saint of Belz “looking fixedly at me . . . I have no idea how long the apparition lasts, but it is enough to shake me.” And so, again, Jiri takes to the road. This time to stay, evidently M for Jiri Langer reaches twenty-five years of age before he again takes leave of the saintly rebbe in the winter of 1918, when the war is over, and“after having follow ed the long-bearded septuagenarian rebbe from refuge to refuge. And interestingly, barely two years later* in Prague ^ brother F ra n tisek , army physician, comes home, surprises Jiri in the impious act of reading modern, secular German and Czech literature. But the Chossid come home to roost will not remove the yarmulka from his head, as when immersed in Zohar in Belz. S expected, of course, Jiri’s later odyssey parallels that of other Jewish Praguesmen who were to flee -ft not to Belz i|g|| from a Hitlerized Europe shortly before another World War. Jiri himself manages an heroic escape as early as the winter of 1939, ending up in Tel Aviv with no more than the clothes on his back except two hundred of his favorite books, which now include Freud’s psycho a n a ly tica l studies, besides Belz’s

eso te r ic breviaries and exegetical homilies. Jiri’s body is broken by one affliction and another picked up along the hazardous voyage, not the least of them nephritis: his face no longer as vigorous, his forehead higher for his hair has receded, his strong square chin belying big dark eyes that no longer shine with the light of the Chassidic mysteries. Youngest of three brothers, only he and Frantisek are now alive, though far apart, as brother Josef committed suicide when the Nazis overran Prague. Of the 3,500 remaining Jews of Czechoslovakia’s erstwhile 385,000, tw o-thirds drift to Eretz Yisroel, among them leading Prague intellec tuals: Max Brod, Robert Weltsch, and Friedrich Thierberger, biographer of the Golem’s creator who would soon render in to German Jiri’s Czech masterpiece on Chassidism, for Belz had provided the writer Jiri Langer with a powerful theme. Still, Jiri in Tel Aviv remains a loner, like his departed friend Kafka. Jiri’s favorite Hebrew word is galmud, which means lonely, forlorn. He repeats galmud again and again in another, his final book, which he writes in Hebrew. It is- not for his lyric Hebrew poetry, however, that Jiri remains an original of the first order, though he. had been composing poems in Hebrew fro nr the time that he left Belz and they had even given him something of a reputation as the first Western writer to turn modern Hebrew poet. To be sure, his very last book was in Hebrew, the galleys of which Brod brought to his bedside as Jiri lay dying in 1943, age forty-nine. But Jiri’s most original creations are his psycho-anthropologi

cal studies in German, published in Freud’s own journal Imago ft- on off beat subjects like tephillin, mezuzah^ and a whole book in German on the Kabbolah itself. And though he also published an anthology in Czech of Hebrew poetry and another anthology in Czech of Talmudic aphorisms, his literary chef-d’oeuvre by alTodds is his narrative, philosophical Czech work on C h assid ism , entitled Devet Bran. Fortunately, it has been translated into English, as “Nine Gates to the Hasidic Mysteries. ’’ The “gemora” he had absorbed in Altneuschul, apparently, was not of the so-called modern school, as was fa sh io n a b le in Germ an-speaking seminaries, but rather the classical “gemora—mit-tosfos” kind taught him by a pious Yiddish-speaking melamed. This humble, anonymous Chassidicm inded mentor who inadvertently primed “Mordechai” for Belz was typical of “gemora melamdim” who in the “East” were legion, of course, but in westernized Prague a rarity. Jiri Langer somehow never seemed to mention him by name in his eight published works which, in the order of publication, appeared as fol lows: 1923, “Die Erotik der Kabbala” ; 1928, “Zur Funktion der judischen Turpfortenrolle” ; 1929, “Pi-yu-tim ve-Shirae Ye-di-dut” ; 1931,, “Die judischen Gebetriemen-Phylakterien” ; 1937, “Devet Bran,” published as “Nine Gates” in England in. 1961, and in U.S.A. in 1967; 1938, “Zpevy Zavrzenych” ;s 1939, “Talmud” ; and 1942, “Me-at Tsori.” Whatever may be the, final judg m en ts on his Hebrew poetry or Germ an p sy c h o -a n th r o p o lo g ic a l

JEW ISH L IF E

studies, his “Nine Gates” is his master piece. Not even Buber’s Chassidic tales match it for sheer purity of spirit. In “Gates,” Jiri shares ‘ with us his Belz pilgrimage and his metamor p h o sis f as even his anti-Chassidic brother Frantisek verifies (before the latter dies in Prague, at 77). Reading “Gates,” we understand how the sensi tive Kafka, though eleven years older than the young Chossid home from Belz;, | co u ld agree to become a Chassidic initiate under the tutelage of the younger man, as Thierberger con firms. With Jiri, Kafka was seeking his own origins. “Like your countrymen y o u w an ted to return to our people . . . Mordecai Georg Langer,” wrote the Hebrew University don Dov Sadan on Jiri’s death, “our lonely friend . . . the riddle of your life re mains a mystery . . .” Sadan called Jiri Ha-Bochur He-Chossid, the “bachelor C h o ssid .” Both Praguesmen were bachelors Jiri Langer and Franz Kafka. Though he paid his tribute to the man Jiri, Sadan could not ignore muddy Belz at the same time. The Hebrew University professor recalled his own great-uncle saying, when he too was a lad, “It won’t harm you if

M AY-JUNE 1970

you r fa th er to o k you to Belz. Everybody goes to Belz.” Ironically, h ow ever, Jiri’s brother Frantisek, eminent Czech playwright, consigned Belz to oblivion. “The mystical reality of the Chassidim/’ said he, “cannot last.” When Frantisek said that, how ever, a half-dozen years before his own death, in 1965, Belz had been trans p lan ted to B ro o k ly n ’s Chassidic enclaves in Williamsburg and Borough Park, and to Jerusalem even earlier. Barely a year after Jiri’s death, the Belzer Rebbe himself, son of Jiri’s mentor, settled in Jerusalem. “I loved Belz,” Jiri had said one year earlier, “ for Belz was naivete in subtlety and, simultaneously, subtlety in naivete like myself.”

RUTH to tell, Jiri Langer had loved as deeply his native AltNeu at Parizska Street in Prague’s Old Town, where it all began. “O how I loved your mystery when but a lad / And but ancient Gemora could make me glad,” Jiri had sung in one of his first poems. If Belz is gone from Belz, then, at least Jiri’s Alt-Neu still stands even in Communist-overrun Prague, second oldest Jewish city in Europe.

B ooh

Y .U .: AMERICAN PHENOMENON by A L E X W E ISF O G E L THE STORY OF YESHIVA UNIVERSITY, by Gilbert Klaperman; New Ybrfc The Macmillan Company, 1969, 301 pps. $8.95 ABBI GILBERT KLAPERMAN is to be credited with a contribution to the literature of American Jewish history. He has painstakingly set down for us . the account of the birthpangs of this country’s foremost Jewish institution of learning, Yeshiva University. More significantly, it is also the record of the struggle out of which emerged the major change in direction in Jewish education since the dawn of western culture, the symbiosis of the sacred and the secular. His facts are meticulously docu mented. More than one hundred pages devoted to notes, appendices, bibliography, and index help establish this as the most authoritative work on the subject thus far produced. Anyone who will write on it subsequently will, in honesty, find it neces sary to quote Rabbi Klaperman. Early in the book he tells us that no records are available

RABBI W EISFOGEL, a m usm och o f Mir Yeshiva in Poland, serves as spiritual leader o f Congregation K odim oh in Springfield, M assach u setts. A Vice-President o f the Rabbinical Council o f Am erica, he has just been ap p ointed Professor in Biblical Studies at Am erican International College.

of Y.U.’s parent, the Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary, from its inception in 1897 until the time of its merger with Yeshiva Etz Chaim in 1915. One would therefore expect further reference to this period to be scant. However, in the one hundred pages, Rabbi Klaperman, with arduous research, so skillfully reconstructs the entire period for the reader that one is left wondering what else could have been said if the records were extant. Y et, despite its obvious value to students of history, the book* unencum bered by technical jargon, reads easily. The addition of an introduction by Arthur J. Goldberg and the sixteeen-page gallery of well-chosen photographs inserted in the volume, leads one to believe that it was designed to have popular appeal. Of that following it is most deserving. Rabbi Klaperman’s thesis itself, how ever, should arouse much debate. It is his contention, seemingly well supported, that the demand for secular education* parallel ing the Sacred studies of RIETS, came from the students. It was their relentless pressure, mounting to the point of an actual students’ strike, which eventually caused the early administration, committed to creating a European-type yeshivah, to capitulate and take what the jacket calls “a leap from the

JEWISH LIFE

Middle Ages into the twentieth century.” In fact, the book seems somewhat of an indict ment of those dedicated founders for their implied shortsightedness in opposing what we are asked to believe was progress. If this is the case, then it should disturb us. The most significant influence towards creating our greatest institution of learning did not come from the seasoned minds and devel oped philosophies of our great scholars or from the initiative of national leaders of Jewry but from student protest. Should we not re-evaluate our attitude toward the current wave of campus activism? Perhaps anxious not to be guilty of lacking objectivity in recording history, Rabbi Klaperman seems deliberately to have avoided involvement in polemics, merely recounting the RIETS experience to estab lish the case. Yet it seems to this reader that a broader discussion of the basic issue and of the validity or fallacy of the stands of the protagonists would have enriched the book. If this is truly “The Story of Yeshiva Univ ersity,” it is incomplete without some evalu ation as to whether the philosophy of synthesis actually has borne the fruit that its missionaries promised. With the advantage of more than half-a-century of subsequent experience, should we be content to leave it as seen only through the eyes of those who launched the movement?

dropped from RIETS’ Semichah program. What does a frantic new rabbi in the field do when a sh ’eylah comes his way? A wag once quipped that stamped on the back of every American yeshivah semichah certificate is Rabbi Moshe Feinstein’s telephone number for just such emergencies. Perhaps for Y.U. musmochim it is a Boston number. The question begs discussion. In retro spect,. has the burden of secular education served thé best interests of the orthodox rabbi and the orthodox community? We send into the field rabbis who have spent their yeshivah years acquiring academic degrees with mathematics or chemistry etc. as their majors, but who cannot preside at the issuance of a get or deal with the common daily Halachic problems of their communities. Can such a rabbinate really attract any but the mediocre? What effort has been made to tailor a special degree program to the specific needs of the rab binate? It can be argued that Yeshiva Univ ersity’s goal is to produce a dynamic ortho dox lay community that is secularly cul tured, prepared for meaningful careers, and at the same time Jewishly sophisticated in the best traditional sense. Perhaps the goal, akin to Kaufman’s Systematic Theology, is to raise a generation that will interpret “all sides of human experience” on the basis of a Torah orientation. Is this being achieved? HE contemporary orthodox syna What is the relationship at Yeshiva Univer gogue is experiencing a crisis of leader sity today between the sacred and the ship. Fewer and fewer young men are secular? Our people, with its special apti entering the rabbinate. Gould it be that the tude for higher cultural development, has rabbinate itself is so emasculated of true always had a tendency to adopt the most rabbinic purpose and function that it no progressive manifestations of the culturé of longerholds any fascination for them as an the majority society. Sadly, however, in the arena for their idealism or as a field for their past the choice to pursue the secular has scholarly specialization? With the already been predominantly the road to assimila heavy, yet still expanding, load of secular tion. Is it true, as most of us believe, that studies demanded as degree requirenients in Yeshiva has successfully reversed the .trend? a college whose faculty is anxious to see it The discussion cap be relevantionly enter the Ivy League, something must be within the ;framewbrk of file njoáern perkwl, sacrificed. Hilchoth T’reyfoth, the launching the era of Yesftiva?s phenomenal growth pad of Yoreh Deyah studies in European under the rémaïkable administration of yeshivoth gedoloth, has, for example, been Rabbi Belkin. Djsappomtingly, Rabbi

M AY-JUN E 1970

Klaperman dismisses that entire era in eight pages which neither match the excellent caliber of the remainder of his book nor are in any way enlightening. They read like a catalogue issued by the institution’s public relations department.

The contemporary “story” needs desperately also to be written and with Rabbi Klaperman’s book before us it is evident that none is better qualified than he to complete the task. It is to be hoped that he will. •

MORE HOLOCAUST VOICES by N A T H A N LEW IN T HAS taken two-and-a-half decades recounted in “A Secret Press in Nazi for the world of letters to catch up Europe,” by Isaac Kowalski,* a first-hand with the cataclysm which engulfed Europe account. Of the “United Partisan Organizaand its Jews, but it is now doing so with a tion” formed in the ghetto of Vilna, vengeance. Every month sees the publica- Lithuania. The author was instrumental in tion of a handful of books - both fiction clandestinely establishing a printing press and general - on the subject of destroyed near the ghetto on which anti-Nazi leaflets Jewish communities, Nazi persecution, resis- were issued and where useful forgeries were tance movements,¡ existence in the concen- manufactured. But notwithstanding a tration camps, etc., etc. The best of the detailed command structure and apparently novels published on the subject in 1969 was meticulous discipline, the Vilna ghetto easily “The Reckoning,” the third of partisans were unable to accomplish more Richard M. Elman’s trilogy on the life of a than a few isolated “nuisance” forays. The wealthy Jew and his family in Hungary in most poignant lines in the book come at the 1944.* In the two earlier novels in the series conclusion of the description of the final jd “The 28th Day of Elul” and “Lilo’s ghetto roundup of September 1943 when, Diary” — Elman had described the life of according to the author, the organization Newman Yagodah, Advokat and Factor, was betrayed by a spy who advised the S.S. from the viewpoint of his son and his niece, to enter the ghetto through a side and rear In “Reckoning” we glimpse Yagodah entrance: “It was thus that the Vilna ghetto through his own diary, and see the pitiful never staged a revolt that might have self-deception practiced by a comfortably- become famous as a heroic episode in which off Jewish merchant in Ñazi-occupied all the Jewish fighters had fallen in the Europe even in the late stages of the war. unequal fight against Hitlerism.” The story of a ghetto uprising that Kowalski’s book is more of a had been planned but never came off is memorial than a literary account. It ---- -------contains photographs of all the major and *. Scribner s, 184 pp., $5.95 minor herpes of the Vilna ghetto, and copies MR. LEWIN, an Editorial Associate of of various orders issued during the Nazi JEWISH LIFE, is an attorney iif Washing- occupation - not selected either on the ton, D.C. 'whó^Toxmeriy hefd^ppsitioftlñvjth' \ ^ ? the tf.S. Departments Jastife-Jahd State, . ^Central Guide Publishers, 411 pp., $7.95

; 'M r~t:f V"’L, §p-. •% • *

"%;V JEW ISH L IF E

basis of importance or any other obvious criterion. The surrender by the ghetto, on Nazi demand, of the commander of the organization, Itzik Wittenberg, in July 1943, is described in the most sympathetic terms possible for tjhose making the decision. The Nazis had threatened to destroy the whole ghetto unless Wittenberg were brought to them alive, and Kowalski says: “Many people asked in despair: should we all perish now for just a single man? Should the twenty thousand Jews still surviving out of the original eighty thousand be sacrificed for one man? The prevailing mood in the ghetto was: Wittenberg must be surren dered.” That reasoning was, of course, the linchpin of the Nazis’ success in turning Judenrats and Jewish Councils upon their fellow Jews —in each instance, action was taken in the deluded belief that it would forestall worse reacton. Wittenberg’s murder by the Nazis did not, as matters turned out, save the Jews of the Vilna ghetto. It prolonged their agony and removed one leader who might just have .succeeded in bringing off the Vilna Ghetto Uprising that never was. FASCINATING view — of the kind one usually gets in seeing old news reels emerges from the collection of essays originally published in The New York Times during the thirties and forties, now issued as “Nazis and Fascists in Europe, 1918-1945,” edited by John Weiss.* Contemporary commentary' by perceptive observers of the period when Hitler rose to power is, in many ways, more revealing than hindsight. The introduction to the volume obviously alt hindsight ^ begins as follows: “The historical record of fascism numbs the imagination. The Nazis shot, gassed, or buried alive some six million Jews.. .’’ Yet the contemporary observers for the Times were less interested in the Jews (14 indek references) than in the Versailles Treaty (19 index references) or Bolshevism (17 refer-

ences). In “The Nazi Persecution of the Churches (1933-45)”,* Associate Professor J.S. Conway of the University of British Columbia attempts to trace, in detail, the developments of Hitler’s policy toward, and use of, the Christian church groups in Germany. The volume is of interest to the Jewish reader not only because of the account it gives of the corrupt purposes for which the famous Concordat with the Vatican was entered into through the man who ultimately became Pius XII, but also for its all-too-brief descriptions of the guilt shared by the churches in the genocidal policies pursued by the Nazis. Appendix 2 of the volume, for example, is a transcript of the short-wave radio broadcast in English by the highest official of the German Evangelical Church several days after the first concerted activity by the Hitlercontrolled government against Jewish storeowners in early 1933. Designed to calm protests in the United States, the speech by" General Superintendent Dibelius (who subsequently fell out of favor and was tried by the Nazis when he objected to excessive interference with his church) spoke of “agitation” started by “world Jewry” on the basis of “false report?” about a; “boycott movement against Jewry in Germany... [which] went off in absolute peace and order.” The clergyman concluded by referring to a “government measure to remove Jews from the public administra tion, particularly from judicial offices. The Jews form less than one per cent of Germany’s total population. The conditions; and relations here are to be brought back to their former level. TheChristian Church stands for gallantry and charity.” The silence of the churches ,and church leaders after the “Kristallnaeht” of November 1938 and in the face of known genocide is an ineradicable blot on the German clergy, and Professor Conway does not mitigate the indictment — though hes

* Quadrangle B ooks, 2 3 4 pp., $ 2 .4 5 paper.

* Basic B ooks, 528 pp., $ 1 0 .0 0 .

M AY-JUN E 1970

spends precious little space discussing it. His conclusion is that “all save a handful of German churchmen continued to turn a blind eye on events, retreated into apathetic indifference, and even manifested a sort of sympathetic acquiescence.”

INIIIERIORS n

for

S Y N A G O G U I ES

ALBERT W OOD & FIVE SON'S»

PORT W ASH IN G T O N

L-I- N E W YORK

Separate H.S. and College Groups

Machón Kayitz Dati The 17th Religious Israel Summer Institute Seven weeks in Israel» kibbutzmoshav work period and spe cial seminars, complete tours, permanent Jerusalem base. $995 complete. Write: Machón Kayitz Dati 150 Fifth Avenue New York, N. Y. 10011 255-5366

THE HEBREW PUBLISHING COMPANY IS HAPPY TO ANNOUNCE THE PUBLICATION OF Ha-Siddur Ha-Shalem Nusach Sephard Newly Translated, Annotated, and Provided with an Introduction by PHILIP BIRNBAUM A new edition o f the com p lete D aily P rayerbook N usach S ephard with an entirely new, m odern English translation, richly furnished w ith fo o tn o tes containing concise, lucid, and 'clarifying explanations and references to biblical and talm udic sources. The major influences w hich have entered the Prayerbook from all branches of our classical literature are faithfully recorded in Dr. B im baum ’s edition. The Hebrew te x t has been carefully vocalized, in the m anner o f Dr. Birnbaum ’s fam ous Siddur Ha-Shalem Nusach A shkenaz, and divided in to sentences and clauses by the use o f m odern p u nctuation marks, so as to m ake intelligible the full meaning of the prayers. Dr. Birnbaum ’s com prehensive Introduction is principally concerned with the developm ent o f the Siddur as the m ost popular Jewish classic, em bracing the greatest variety o f H ebrew style. A running com m entary has been provided in the D aily P ra yerb o o k N u sa ch S ephard to explain m any p oin ts o f interest. For the con ven ien ce o f worshippers and students, all recurrent prayers are system atically repeated in our new ed ition of S id d u r H a-Shalem N usach Sephard. Each of the services is arranged as a com p letely integrated unit. A ll the d irections here are explicit, brief, and to the point.

Beautifully printed and bound, $4.50 in all bookstores.

HEBREW PUBLISHING COMPANY 79fDELANCY STREET NEW YORK, N.Y. 52

JEW ISH LIFE

EV /M b t ^ r T TH E VACUUM Unfortunately, many o f our children are deprived o f a father image at home — and I do not mean only those children whose fathers are mechallei

Shabbos, violators o f the Sabbath, or do not observe Kashrus and taharas hamishpocha - they are deprived o f a father image simply because in their homes, and this includes even some religious homes, there is not the atmosphere of idealism and o f a yearning and an aspiration towards things that soar above the mundaneness o f the toil and moil of life. This is the main reason why youngsters today are in revolt against everybody and everything, why so many Jewish children become hippies, or beatnicks. So many o f us ascribe to youth all the responsibility and guilt for youth’s revolt and impetuosity without realizing that many times the parents themselves are more at fault than the youngsters for youth’s unrest and rebellion, in that they have failed to instil moral fibre in the hearts o f the children by not providing the kind of atmosphere at home to inspire them toward things that soar above the mundaneness and the vulgarities and the profanities o f life . . . Either a father fills up the spirit of his child with spiritual and ethical norms and aspirations or he invites spiritual and emotional scorpions to pene trate the heart of the child.

—from “Law and Morality in Modem Society” by Rabbi Aaron Soloveitchik in The Jewish Parent

RECOLLECTION I t is a Shabbos afternoon in the sum m er o f 1940. The R ebbe, the previous L ubavitcher R eb b e o f blessed m em ory , having miraculously escaped from Europe a f e w m onths before , is tem porarily staying in the Grey stone H otel a t Broadway and 9 1 st St. in Manhattan . The newly-organized Yeshivah Tomchei

M AY-JUN E 1970

LEBOWITZ PINE VIEW HOTEL Fallsburg, N.Y. 12733

Gold's

Reserve now for summer season Open Passover Through Succoth

HORSERADISH

* 4 hì0lùul's p

Catering to tots, teens, and in-betweens (Q)Supervision and Endorsement (212) 724-2575 (914) 434-6100

S C H L E C H T E R & H I R S C H ’S HOTIl

f______ ë B

ENTIRE 0CEANFR0NT BLOCK — 37th to 38th St. MIAMI BEACH

...is a

GREAT Kosher Hotel # DIAL M IAM I beach

FREE!

you’ll love it!

For Reservations Sp e ak to

FREE PARK ING

S A M SCHECH TER

Q o o

- 3 2 7 - 8 1 6 5

O r C a ll N.Y. O ff: PL 7 -4 2 3 8 Evenin gs & Su n d a y FA 7 -1 7 4 2

PRIVATE POOL AND SA N D Y BEACH

Cleaned, Fresh-Eviscerated Soaked & Salted R E A D Y -T O -C O O K

Fresh and Fresh-Frozen Supervised and endorsed by The (Union of Orthodox Jewish Congre gations of America. Inspected for \ wholesomeness by the U.S. Dept. >Agriculture.

SOLD COAST-TO-COAST

The Most Trusted Name in Kosher Poultry 54

JEWISH LIFE

Tmimim has fo u n d tem porary quarters in the Oneg Shabbos Synagogue a t 5 1 st St. and Snyder A ve. in B rooklyn. A num ber o f its students go to Manhattan every Friday to spend Shabbos w ith the R ebbe. E very Shabbos the R eb b e says a maamar, a Chassidic discourse, either a t the start o f the holy day, before Kabbalas Shabbos, or towards its close, after Minchah. The students are also p e rm itted a t the table fo r the Shabbos afternoon repast. The R eb b e is seated a t the head o f the table. E xactly a minyan (1 0 ) chassidim are participating in the Seudas Shabbos; fo u r o f us students are stand ing in back o f th e chassidim. Two men who live in th e vicinity o f the h o tel com e in and join the others a t the table. One o f the b o ys is singing the nigun (wordless chassidic m elo d y) know n as the bainoni, a very reflective m elody, the R e b b e 9s favorite. The R eb b e is engrossed in thought; his eyes seem fix e d on som ething far a w a y . . . In a lo w voice, the R eb b e began speaking: “Som e armies are considered the best, tops, while th ey are in their barracks, b u t on the fro n t in real war they collapse very q u ic k ly .99 (He was m ost likely alluding to the French arm y and its Maginot line which had been rated undefeatable, b u t which collapsed before the N azi hordes in a m atter o f ju st a fe w weeks.) “O ther armies are hardly known in peace tim e, b u t th ey hold the fro n t when war com es." (This tim e he was probably alluding to the Finnish arm y which held back the Russians throughout the w inter o f 1 9 4 0 ) “The chassidim o f previous generations w ere excellent soldiers, b u t they never left their barracks. L ife in the sh tetl posed very fe w spiritual problems, presented very fe w challenges. The chassidim o f this generation may n o t be as outstanding as their predecessors, bu t th ey are continuously on the front, faced w ith gigantic tests and trem endous challenges, and the front is holding firm!”

—from an article by S. Bar-Yochai in Di Yiddishe Heim

M AY-JUN E 1970

L e tte rs to th e E d ito r ON MOURNING PRACTICES

Bronx, New York I was pleased with Rabbi Benjamin Blech’s review of my recent book, “The Jewish Way in Death and Mourning,” in these pages of JEWISH LIFE. He treated the work with respect and demonstrated erudition and exhaustive research. While it is not customary for an author to respond to critical reviews of his book, I hasten to respond to this review because it is the first such comment in an orthodox publication and because it calls into question Halachic decisions on vital problems of mourning. I will respond to the Halachic questions in seriatim: If Yizkor During the First Year: Rabbi Blech is upset that I urge the recital of Yizkor on the first festival after death rather than waiting a full year, despite the decision of the Kitzur Shulchon Oruch. While the purpose of the year-long delay is that its recitation in the first year provoked sadness on the holiday, the conclusion drawn from numerous sources is succinctly stated by Gesher Ha’Chayyim: “K ’var Nimnu Ve’gomru She’ayn Le’minhog Zeh Ta’am V’yesod,” that the whole custom is without reason or foundation. The very last paragraph in Rabbi Greenwald’s Kol Bo contains an even more sharply-worded critique of the few commentaries who support this custom. In light of the numerous commentaries and the definitive statements quoted by these two recent compendia on mourning laws in support of the immediate recitation of Yizkor, I am

not overwhelmed by the Kitzur Shulchon Oruch’s opinion to the contrary. 2. Flowers at the Funeral: Flowers at funerals are sometimes the cause of much agony. Rabbi Blech’s criticism of me makes it sound as though I approve this custom and provide a blanket heter. The reviewer obviously must ignore the true sense of a passage in order to gain a point of criticism. I refer you to the text which says, “They are used primarily at Christian funerals and are considered to be a non-Jewish ritual custom. . . ” I do indeed allow for the keeping of the flowers, but only after all persuasion has failed and a full-fledged dispute is impending. Realizing that the motive of sending flowers is honor to the deceased, kovod ha'meth, as Rashi indicates, and realizing that an argument in the funeral parlor would surely be bizoyon ha’meth, a shaming of the dead, I urge quiet acceptance of it if all other intelligent means to remove it fail. I suggest a re-reading of the Shulchon Oruch to the effect that the sages never prohibited spices or flowers, especially for an unembalmed body, and a full review of the sources in Rabbi Greenwald’s Kol Bo.* 3. Act of Keriyah: The rending itself for relatives other than children, I maintain, “may be done by others, not necessarily by the hand of the *The Jew ish Funeral G uide, prepared b y the Join t Funeral Standards C om m ittee o f the Rabbinical C ouncil o f A m erica and the U nion o f O rth odox Jewish Congregations o f Am erica, states: “ F low ers and m usic have n o p la c e a t t h e J e w is h fu n era l service." - Editor

JEWISH LIFE

mourner himself,” because all of the major rabbinic decisions have asserted this. Rabbi Blech has found one reference to the desirability of not doing it in this manner. But here again he pins his decision on a single given interpretation or a favorite posek rather than on a broad current of opinion among Halachic commentaries. I refer the reviewer to Oruch Ha’shulchon and She’orim Metzuyonim B’Halochah, and the numerous sources they quote which indicate it may be done and not that it should be done in that manner. 4. Which Clothing Must Be Rent: Regarding the keriyah on the vest, it should be noted that the reviewer over looked my lead paragraph on this essay which said, “The clothing to be rent is customarily the outer clothing worn at room temperature. This precludes the cutting of the overcoat and under clothes . . . ” The recommendation of the cutting of the vest is drawn from the fact that it is the article of clothing usually worn in the privacy of the home and, therefore* able to be worn during all shivah. Because it may not be customary for the mourner to wear his jacket (which is the optimally desirable garment for keriyah) at home, and because one should not make the tear in the shirt which is these days partially worn directly over the body, the vest has been suggested as an alternative by Rabbi Greenwald in Kol Bo and by others. The recommendation of the cutting of the tie, as is practiced by “some orthodox rabbis,” if the vest cannot be cut, stems from the approval of the eminent authority, Rabbi Eliezer Silver, of blessed memory, and conveyed to me through his son, the distinguished Rabbi David Silver, Yibadel L ’chayyim. Since the tie, especially our wide ties, can be considered a beged in regard to the Sabbath and since it is always worn, and since it is the garment closest to the neck, it does seem logical to conclude that it should be permitted as an object for keriyah. I should like to add that since the publication of the book, a number of rabbis

M AY-JU N E 1970

have assured me that the usage of the absurd black ribbon buttons has diminished noticably. Those Jews who would never consider the rending of a jacket easily accede to the rabbi’s request that they rend the tie. While I am aware that this represents somewhat of a departure, I do believe it should be accepted, where the vest cannot be cut, as a legitimate means of discouraging the undertaker’s ribbon concoction,* 5. Yahrzeit Date: Rabbi Blech is quite right, however, when he says that the observance of yarhzeit on the first year may possibly be the anniversary of the date of burial and not the date of death, when there has been a significant lapse of time between the two. While the number of commentaries are almost evenly divided as to which date to observe, I should have indeed indicated that there is a possible divergent point of view. Similarly, when he notes my comment that relatives other than children should recite Kaddish for thirty days, he is quite right that there is no definitive authority that makes this statement, although it is a custom in a number of western European communities. The slight revision for the paperback publication this fall will take due note of this oversight. 6. Arranging for the Monument: I recommend arranging for the monument soon after shivah or sh’loshim because this truly represents kovod ha ’meth, the honoring of the dead. In light of this most important principle of mourning laws, the “excellent interpretation” of a single commentary, the Mateh Ephroyim, fades badly. The quick, erection of the monument has been practiced in the times of the Talmud, through all the ages of the dispersion, and was insisted upon Jn such * The Jew ish Funeral Guide states under “K ’reeah” as follow s: ^ ‘The rending o f the m ourners’ o u te r garm ents.” The Rabbinic C om m ittee responsible for the Halachic c o n t e n t of this Guide considered the op in ion Of the late revered Rabbi Eliezer S i l v e r , o f blessed m em ory, a “ Daath Y o ch id .” -E d ito r

great Jewish communities as Sanz and Munkatch. Both recent authoritative compendia on mourning urge the acceptance of this practice. Not only is it religiously proper but also pragmatically worthwhile as the family is already gathered during shivah, readily able to discuss planning for the monument, and is eager to avoid the reenactment of anguish by the delay in -ordering the monument until the following year. It is hardly valid, to criticize any Halachic decision on the basis of one “excellent explanation.” 7. Praying to the Dead: It does seem incredible that of all the principles and the myriad laws the book deals with, the reviewer has chosen for special comment the question of Doresh El Ha’methim, the directing of one’s prayers to the dead, either instead of to G-d or as an intermediary between man and G-d. Even more curious is that he has chosen to espouse the view of several of the early poskim that using the dead as intermediaries under certain circumstances may be all right, even though this needlessly exposes traditional Judaism in this age of philo sophical sophistication to the ridicule of superficial and unsympathetic “thinkers.” Jewish philosophers have consistently condemned this use of intermediaries as compromising the unity of G-d, and Maimonides and Albo state this in absolute terms. Numerous poskim have decried it. Our modern sensibilities cringe at the suggestion. It cannot be denied that there is a significant number of poskim who have recognized the. instinctive needs of the people and have permitted them the custom of pleading that the very righteous dead serve as their advocates before G-d. But is this concession necessary or even desirable to propose in our day. Even if it were, in order to permit, let alone encourage, such a procedure we would have to insist, at the very minimum, that the dead be tzaddikkim whose religious merit is unquestionable, and also that the prayers to these tzaddikkim be directed to G-d, only appending the

additional recommendation and protection of the tzaddik. I must confess that I am astonished even by the suggestion of the reviewer. Is it believeable that this matter is an issue today? 8. Kaddish - Praying or Paying: What is most unbelieveable relates to the matter of paying for the Kaddish. Can any rabbi today seriously seek to encourage or even approve paying for the Kaddish instead of the reciting of the Kaddish by the surviving son? This position is wholly indefensible both from the view of the Halochah and in the context of contem porary life. While the text indicates the reasons why one should engage a student of Torah to recite the Kaddish when no son survives, there is no warrant whatever for the “hiring” of a Kaddish when a son can recite it. I refer the readers to the statement of Rabbi Ezekiel Landau in Noda B’Yehudah, II, 8: “Only when one has died and not left sons is it permitted to engage a man to recite Kaddish, but not in a situation where there are sons surviving. Cholilah V'Cholilah L ’hatir, it is absolutely sacri legious to permit it. Only the son or sons may recite Kaddish, as have insisted the princes of exile, the ancient sages, the earlier commentaries, and the greatest poskim” There is no need to marshal the august and numerous authorities who denounce such actions as a vilification of the Jewish spirit, let alone as useless and absurd. Shall we allow ourselves to adopt today a primitivism unworthy of primitives? Is our primary concern sextonian economics or Halachic relevance? Shall we appear as though we are selling indulgences? Does not this smack of the prevalent utilitarian idea that everything in this world can be bought, that you can open the gates of heaven with a bank book, not a prayer book? The sons paying for the Kaddish defeats every conceivable purpose of the prayer, “There is, in sum, nothing religious about the whole matter.” I am thankful for the specific critical

JEWISH LIFE

comments in the review. It is at least an Halochah K ’divrey Ha’meykil, the decision implicit commendation for the entire is in favor of the lenient view in mourning remainder of the book. But I fear that the laws, I see no special virtue in espousing the tone of the criticism, so well-intentioned by more stringent view, especiallyin the so respected and capable a rabbi, bespeaks a climate of twentieth-century America. prevalent attitude that is detrimental to Maurice Lamm contemporary Orthodoxy. In a field where Editor’s Note: It is the policy o f JEWISH LIFE not to publish any Halachic controversies. However, inasmuch as the review of Rabbi Lamm’s book by Rabbi Blech dealt with Halachic matters, we deem it only fair to afford the author the opportunity of the above rejoinder. However, no further correspondence on this matter will be published. The Editor wishes to point out that it is an abiding principle of Halachic conduct to follow, in cases of Halachic controversy, the ruling of one's own Ravi the local “Moro D’athro.” ' *■' jnerely has to visit those places under the ON THE jurisdiction of the Ministry of Religion in EDITOR’S VIEW Israel. By way of example —having been at the grave of the Rambam, seeing the Kingston, Rhode Island beggars, the broken soda bottles, the sheer ugliness of what passes for the preservationof I have read your editorial concerning traditional religion, it is no wonder at all the recent decision of the Israeli Supreme that the average Israeli is filled with nothing Court with reference to the status of who is but contempt for everything our people a Jew. cherished in the past. Like yourself, I am deeply disturbed If one combines this with an appre by any move which would drive a wedge hension of the venality and the shocking between the traditional identity of the Jew lack of moral sensitivity of the religious and the future course of our history as a establishment in Israel, one can only wonder people. how we do even as well as we do. However, what disturbs me most of all The time has come for the displace is the amazing blindness displayed in the ment of our cherished myths and a realistic editorial itself. The assumption that these look at the gross injustice the Mizrachi has anti-religious manifestations in Israeli public perpetrated against our religion by repre life are somehow the views of a minority of senting it in a political context. If we wish Israelis who for reasons totally irrational are to fight for Torah» our establishment must opposed to traditional Judaism is simply a get out of politics, become sensitized to mis-statement of the case. moral issues and attempt to make honest First of all, it is patently false for you human contact with the mass-of Israelis in to state that “an overwhelming majority of an atmosphere that truly embodies Ahavath Israelis adhere. . . to the faith of their Yisroel. fathers.” A cursory walk down virtually any Rabbi Melvin Granatstein Israeli street on a Sabbath testifies to the Director, Hillel Foundation falsehood of your statement. Thus, we must University of Rhode Island conclude that the majority of Israelis are far indeed from the traditional religion of our people. The supposed religious awakening of THE EDITOR REPLIES : the Six-Day War is a myth. It never happened and I dare say, given the kind of The question whether most Israelis do leadership represented by the National Re or do not adhere to Jewish religious belief ligious Party, it could never happen. cannot be meaningfully answered by “a If you really wish to understand the cursory walk down almost any Israeli street hatred directed against our religion, one on a Sabbath.” In that or any like proM AY-JUN E 1970

100 Elite, compassionate and generous, will spare the beloved Gaon Harav Moshe Feinstein and gain everlasting fame as The Savers of Torah. You * can be one of them! Since coming to America 33 years ago, the internationally eminent Halacha authority, the Gaon HaRav Moshe Feinstein, Dean of Mesivtha Tifereth Jerusalem of America - one of the oldest Yeshivos on the American continent - hoped and . .. dreamed ... to establish a resident division for promising students. Under his tutelage, they could train to be the future Halacha authorities throughout the world. A contract has been signed for the purchase of a beautiful 9-acre campus on Staten Island. Its existing 4-story, 38*000 sq. ft. 75 room, fire-proof granite building and the additional future buildings will house Tifereth Jerusalem's Resident Division. The Yeshiva can move in for the coming September school term but the Gaon is.. ..

$100,000 SH O R T FOR N E X T P A Y M E N T . . . . toward the total of $1,000,000 needed for Phase I of this Development Program. IM A G IN E THE G A O N 'S D IS T R E SS ! He must tear himself away from responding to the questions and problems of individuals and Kehillos to plead for this $100,000 and if his pleas are unanswered, G-d forbid, the entire project and the substantial down payment is lost. It takes only 100 kind-hearted, Torah-loving and generous Donors, each to respond with a deductible gift or pledge of $1,000 to Mesivtha Tifereth Jerusalem, and this "Rabbi's Rabbi" and Spiritual Leader of world Jewry can resume his sacred work - so vital to the welfare of all of Israel. SP A R E T H IS G R E A T SA G E ! Be one of these "100 E L IT E " who will be recorded for posterity in the Entrance Hall of this new Torah Citadel as 'Torah Savers" who came to the rescue. (If the Al-mighty hasn't blessed you with the $1,000, do your utmost and send your most generous contribution or pledge so you share in this great Mitzvah.) D O N ’T D E L A Y ! I n d ic a te your d ed u c tib le gift or p l e d g e t o: M E S I V T H A

TIFERETH JER U SA LEM on the form and RUSH it to the venerable and revered Master. ♦A ny m an, w om an , c o n g r e g a t io n or organization can be o n e o f the “ 1 0 0 E L I T E ” and the name

will

————————— RABBI MOSHE FEINSTEIN NEW Y O R K 1 0 0 0 2

———————■ 4 5 5 F .D .R . D R IV E

Y E S ! I am p le a s e d to com e to the rescue Yeshiva - M ESIVTHA TIFERETH JERUSALEM

NEW Y O R K , and

help

your

__ I w an t to be on e o f the “ 1 0 0 E lite.’’ Enclosed is m y E M E R G E N C Y ____con trib ution o r ____pledge of $ 1 ,0 0 0 I am to be con tacted for inscription te x t. __ I can’t give $ 1 ,0 0 0 n o w b u t I w an t to share in th is great M itzvah w ith my con tribu tion o r ____pledge o f $_______ | NAM E_____________ ■

__________________

r e c o r d e d o n the special Torah Savers Tablet.

A D D R E SS

________ ___ .__________

CITY___________________ STATE

________ ZIP

cedure, the observer is likely to see what he is pre-disposed to see. Whether the domi nant impression is of a pervasive Chillul Shabboth or of a flourishing Shemirath Shabboth depends on his own prior attitude; also, of course, on the particular locale. A more perceptive view of Israeli attitudes, however, cannot rest simply on surface impressions. The under-surface realities must be probed, and all must be appraised in the light of conditioning factors. With Israeli life marked by such sharp contrasts and contradictions, there is an understandable tendency to conclude that those Israelis who are not professedly and by daily observance in the “Dati” fold are by definition in the non-religious camp. And, if one’s gaze is focussed on the abounding evidences of irreligiosity on the Israeli scene, it is easy to conclude that the majority of Israelis have discarded Jewish religious belief. Both these assumptions, we maintain, are fallacious. The extraordinary fertility of Torah life in Israel ^ a reality too obvious and too potent to brook denial — self-evidently springs from mass roots. It is because of this very fact, because the surging vitality be speaks a wide and widening popular base irrespective of political affiliations and party votes, that so determined an attack is made upon it. An insignificant force lacking mass base would not be honored by such atten tion. As regards the numerical weight of the definitively religious part of the Israeli populace, an accessible index is the propor tion of children of elementary school age attending religious schools: nearly 40% of the total. It is sufficiently well known to be above argument that'were more religious schools available, and more places available in existing religious schools, and were political-economic pressures lifted which now dissuade many parents from sending their children to them, the number attend ing religious schools would be much greater yet. Even allowing for the fact that religious families have more children than others, it

M AY-JUNE 1970

remains clear that the fully Torah-commit ted segment constitutes well over one-third of all Israeli Jewry and may be a half or more. Another wide segment of the Israeli populace, not to be identified with the committedly non-religious, is composed of the massive numbers with casual attitude to religious observance. In the ideologically compartmentalized atmosphere of Israel, these are not accounted as “Dati” yet certainly, as any direct enquiry will show, they consider themselves as within the fold of historic Judaism and take such allegiance for granted. Typically, though a not-tooscrupulous Kashruth observance is the norm among them, daily Tefillah and Tefillin are casualties; their Shabboth falls markedly short of the “Shomor” requisite yet has not lost its “Zochor” component; attendance at Sabbathr services is occasional; at Yomim Tovim, more frequent; and at the Yomim Noroim - when all but a small fraction of Israeli Jewry attend services en masse — invariable. Deficient in observance as is this broad section of the populace, and uncer tain and confused as they may be spiritually and ideologically, yet they are basically, beyond question, of the traditional Jewish faith. Each of these two great segments of Israeli Jewry composes a major part of the total populace. Together —and in terms of basic religious allegiance they are to be accounted together — their numbers attest that: “The overwhelming-majority of Israelis adhere — in whatevef de£r6es of observance —to the faith of their fathers.” Clearly, then, anti-religious manifesta tions in Israel do derive from a minority of Israelis, representative in fact of but a small proportion of the total populace but occupying positions of key strategic influ ence.. We did not, however, attribute their motivation to ‘‘reasons quite irrational.” Within the terms of their philosophy, the motivation is quite rational: the aim of a society composed of Jews stripped of Jewishness.

U O J C A SYNAGOGUE LEADERSHIP MANUAL SERIES

volume one

THE SYNAGOGUE JOURNAL prepared by Rabbi Martin L. Applbaum

A comprehensive practical reference $7.50 per copy In five full sections 33 1/3% discount for A step by step HOW TO book member congregations DETACH TO ORDER

O R D E R FORM

Publications Department ,Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America 84 Fifth Avenue New York, New York 1Q011

NAME

__________ '

__________

____________ _ _ ___________

AD D RESS

_______________________

C O N G R EG A T IO N

T IT LE _________I_______ _________ __ _______

____________

Only a total unawareness or disregard of the spiritual impact of the Six-Day War on the Jew of Israel could permit anyone to assert that ^the supposed religious awaken ing of the Six-Day War is a myth.” Such an incredible denial of the most profound Israeli - and indeed K’lal Yisroel ^ soul experience of our time merits no further comment. The “kind of leadership represented by the National Religious Party” can stand on its high record without need of any recital of accomplishment here. To cite the abuses at some sacred sites as demonstrating “the ugliness of what passes for the preser vation of traditional religion” and as imply ing the unworth of the Ministry of Religion is as absurd as would be a condemnation of American democracy and its system of government because of the havoc wreaked by visitors at American historical sites. The gratuitous slander of “the religious establish ment” suggests that the charge of “shocking lack of moral sensitivity” could more suit ably be directed to its author, whose tor tured effort to discredit Israel’s leading religious force ill serves his apparent objec tive. One hopes that the character of the above letter is not representative of the thinking and argumentation of those espous ing “separation of Torah and State” in the Jewish homeland.

decision on marriages and divorces to the Rabbinate and this, of course, means that the final decision on conversions, as well, is also left to the Rabbinate. Israel can only accept such decisions from rabbis and not from Reform or Conservative ministers whose decisions Orthodoxy can not accept anywhere. Because Israel leaves the final decision as to who is a Jew (who has the Jewish commitment) to Torah, the State itself accepts the Jewish commitment. We should all understand just how important a matter this is‘ because a political state alone could not claim this collective heritage. We should be grateful that Israel — our great blessing —has such an essential commitment to Torah and I trust this will always remain so despite intensified campaigns of the Reform and Conservative movements. As I told a representative of the Neturey Karta, “If you celebrate Chanukah, you should celebrate the State of Israel’s independence.” Both mark similar salva tions. There are all kinds of salvations —we have received one in the State of Israel while we continue praying for the ultimate salva tion — the restoration of the Temple and the coming of Moshiach. Simon, the last of the Maccabban brothers, has justifiably been praised for much that he did for the Jewish people. However, for one thing he did I do not believe he has been praised sufficiently —he refused to accept the title of King, realizing that this could only be held by a descendant Bronx, New York of David. Thus the Maccabean state did not The recent JEWISH LIFE editorial claim to be the Messianic kingdom and was “Who Is A Jew Or What Is A Jew?” erudite in accord with Torah. Later on, to our ly explains that no secular court or institu shame, Simon’s descendants defamed them tion can decide for Torah Jews anywhere — selves by taking the title of King and then who is a Jew. May I comment on some the state they headed lost its holiness and matters of great import to the Jewish people became just another political entity. Medinath Israel also does not claim to that are implied in this editorial. The State of Israel, by giving jurisdic be the Messianic state, has an essential ad tion for personal status to the religious herence to Torah, and thus has holiness. courts, becomes more than just a political Jews everywhere should understand that we state —it attains holiness and can claim the should try to be worthy of this salvation we have received and the more Torah is ob collective heritage of the Jewish people. The State of Israel leaves the final served, the more worthy we become.

M AY-JUN E 1970

azi Komatz sound. Since English o has two pronunciations — o as in hot and cold — our method in this regard has a disadvantage in using o for both Komatz and Cholom just as others have, but without similar basis, in using a for both Hebrew vowels. We feel though that on the "whole it offers preferable phonetic familiarity and also helps conserve the grammatic and vocal Irving Pollack values of the Komatz. In rendering r by a, as most systems of transliteration do, these values are lost. T O THE EDITOR Our own method could be refined by the use of diacritical marks (e.g.c^ o', etc.), Mt. Vernon, New York but we feel that this should be avoided in the case of our magazine. I have been at a loss to understand It may be noted that some authorities why JEWISH Life uses Shabboth . of the past and present maintain that the o The ending is a plural ending as you sound for ^ has equal antiquity and vali recognize in such words as Shabatoth and dity to the Sephardi aa (not, incidentally, a Mitzvoth. as in Israeli pronunciation). Among the I can understand that you might wish Yemenites and some other ancient oriental to avoid the Ashkenazic diaspora terms like communities, the Komatz is pronounced Shabbes or Shabbos, but I cannot see That much the same as its standard pronunciation if) , which is usually transliterated among Ashkenazim. It is important to note Shabbat (or perhaps Shabbath), can be given further that the short Komatz, as distin the rendering of Shabboth. guished from the long Komatz, is properly I should be grateful for an explana pronounced o' by Seph&rdim also. For this tion. reason, the Komatz Koton should really De represented by o, not a, in any system of Saul Sigelschiffer transliteration. As regards the J\ , the Ashkenazi pronunciation s, indistinguishable from \jy and b is apparently a teutonization (there THE ED ITO R REPLIES: is no th sound in German) which spread from the German communities to those of In JEWISH Life we use a translitera Eastern Europe. In this case, we feel that tion method of our own. The aim is to give phonetic familiarity is not a sufficient con a phonetic rendering of the familiar Ashken sideration in the transliteration. Nor is t a azi pronunciation, subject to certain adapta desirable alternative in our view, since it tions. To illustrate: effaces the important distinction between The vowel T is represented by o (e.g. J) and J ); and the form t is not meaningful Boruch), except if in a final syllable when a to a general readership. Th has the merit of is used (e.g. Torah). The reason for this long-familiar usage via English-language seeming inconsistency is that the English Bible translations and comes closest to reader assumes that o at the end of a word is representing the correct J) sound. Hence to be pronounced like the final vowel in our adoption of this usage. oratorio; (While final ah is generally pro And hence, for these various reasons, nounced ¿zw, which is closer to the Ashken Shabboth!. All of the foregoing, obviously, does not remove the necessity to strive for change in the recently adopted registration provisions to the Law of Return so that “conversions according to law” be stipu lated. This will help make the truth clear — that Israel leaves the final decision as to who is a Jew to the Torah authorities.

JEWISH LIFE

a m o

n g our c

0 n t r 1

b u t o

r s

AVRAM DAVIDSON is a familiar name to long-time subscribers to JEWISH Li f e . His stories, poems, and essays —all highly distinctive — graced many an issue in our magazine’s earlier years. Readers old and new will welcome his reappearance in our pages after a lapse of more than a decade. In the interim, Avram Davidson’s writing has won recognition in wider literary circles. His stories have appeared in many periodicals and anthologies, especially in the field of science fiction and fantasy. His produce includes a dozen published books, with others to be published in coming months. In the course of a widely travelled life he has served in the United States Navy and has lived in Israel. Now he makes his home in Novato, California . . . As the spiritual leader of his community’s largest synagogue (Congregation Yeshiva Rabbi Meir Simcha Hacohen), and as the father of ten children raised in that same community, RABBI JACOB J. HECHT needed no prodding when a problem which has shattered one community after another was thrust upon the East Flatbush section of Brooklyn, New York. Here he exposes the problem and tells how, in this instance, it was effectively met. A member in the third American-born generation of a dis tinguished family which has reared four generations in America, Rabbi Hecht is one of six brothers who are all rabbis. Since 1946, he has been Executive Vice President of the National Committee for the Further ance of Jewish Education, an agency of the Lubavitcher m ovem ent. . . Now it may be told: Dov Benoni, whose poem “Lunatic Songs” appeared in our September-0ctober 1969 issue, is really BERNARD DOV MILIANS, Acting Director of Research in Maimonides Institute in Far Rockaway, New York, and senior executive of Ted Peck Advertis ing. His poetry and prose, all on Jewish themes, have appeared in numerous publications under various pseudonyms . . . The searching mind of RABBI DR. NORMAN LAMM has illuminated various focal issues of our time in the pages of JEWISH LIFE as well as in other publications, on the lecture platform, and in other channels of public expression. His views here on the controversial question of Jewish identity in relation to Israel developments will undoubtedly evoke wide discussion. Dr. Lamm is Rabbi of The Jewish Center, New York, and Erna Michael professor of Jewish philosophy at Yeshiva University . . . A free-lance writer of long standing, CHARLES RADDOCK was editor of the former magazine Jewish Forum in its final years. He is the author of “Portrait of a People,” a history of the Jews . . . When RABBI SAMUEL A. TURK first appeared in these pages (“Am I My Brother’s Keeper?” , May-June 1967), he contributed significant thoughts on ways to address classic Jewish concepts and institutions to contem porary social ills. His further views on modern social problems have found expression in subsequent articles and in this issue. Rav of the Kingsbridge Center of Israel in the Bronx, New York, he is a past president of the Rabbinical Alliance of America.

Meet the Ketchup branch of the Heinz © "mishpocho” Ketchup with Relish (NEW!) — Ketchup with Onions (NEW!) — Hot Ketchup— Regular Heinz Tomato Ketchup.

Here are two new © soups by Heinz Great American Soups (blue label)— Velvety Cream of Mushroom and Abundant Vegetarian Vegetable. They're so good you can pretend they're homemade. Watch for them in your community.

The seal of approval of THE UNION OF ORTHODOX JEWISH CONGREGATIONS OF AMERICA.