Jewish Life Sept-Oct 1970 by Jewish Action

JEWISH LIFE INMM AMERICAN COLLEGE TOWN AMERICAN JEWS AND SOVIET JEWS ■RACISM IN JEWISH VIEW * “ROSHÆff YESHIVAH?”

THE CONTRIBUTION (V LATIN Am M k AN JEWS TO ISRAEL TISHRI-Cï BSH V A N 5731 TEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

Announcement

72nd

ANNIVERSARY

N ational B iennial Convention OF THE

Union o f Orthodox Jewish Congregations o f Am erica will be held at the SHERATON - PARK in WASHINGTON, D.C. Wednesday, November 25 — Sunday, November 29, 1970 Cheshvan 26 — Kislev 1,5731

PLEASE RESERVE THESE DATES

Thanksgiving Week,

in the Nation's Capitai

Vol. X X X V III, No. 1/September-October 1970/Tishri-Cheshvan 5731

léwisK

J life

THE EDITOR'S VIEW

rra

PIDYON SHEVUYIM WITH PRAYER AND AC TIO N ...............................................3 Saul Bernstein, Editor Dr. Herbert Goldstein Libby Klaperman Dr. Jacob W. Landynski Nathan Lewin Rabbi Solomon J. Sharfman Editorial Associates Elkanah Schwartz 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. Editorial and Publication Office: 84 Fifth Avenue New York 10011, N. Y. (212) ALgonquin 5-4100 Published by U nion of O rthodox J ewish C ongregations of A merica

THE PO LITIC AL ACTION GAP................................. 4 THE GANGSTER TECHNIQUE IN THE IN TE R N A TIO N A L A R E N A ............................... 5

ARTICLES AMERICAN JEWS AND SOVIET JEWS/ Ronald I. R ubin................................................... 7 JEWISH LIFE IN AN AM ERICAN COLLEGE TOWN/ Philip E. M eyer..................................

“ ROSHA H YESH IVAH ?” / Hedy Peyser........................................................29 RACISM IN JEWISH VIEW / Justin H ofm ann.........................

THE CONTRIBUTION OF L A T IN AMERICAN JEWS TO IS R A EL/ Jacob B eller.............................................

J oseph K arasick

President H arold M. J acobs

BOOK REVIEWS

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

A CODE IN A L L TONGUES/ Ralph Pelcovitz..................................................58 REDISCOVERY OF THE L A N D / Herbert G oldstein..............................................61

DEPARTMENTS FROM HERE AND TH ER E............ .......................... 67 LETTERS TO THE E D IT O R ..................................... 70 AMONG OUR CONTRIBUTORS............................... 2 Cover and drawings by Naama Kitov © Copyright 1970 by

SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

UNION OF ORTHODOX JEWISH CONGREGATIONS OF AMERICA

m o n

our c 0 n

r 1

u t o

r s

DR. RONALD I. RUBIN is concerned with the role o f the Jewish people in the world drama o f opinion shaping, especially in regard to Jews themselves. In previous issues o f JEWISH LIFE, he examined the role o f Israel’s Jews as object o f opinion-shaping (“ America’s Voice in Israel,” May-June 1969), and as opinion-shapers (“ Israel’s Propaganda War,” March-April 1970). In this issue, Dr. Rubin observes how one Jewish community seeks to shape world opinion about another Jewish community. Editor o f “ The Unredeemed: Anti-Semitism in the Soviet Union,” and currently Visiting Senior Lecturer in Political Science at Haifa College in Israel, he carried out the research fo r this article under a grant from the Memorial Foundation fo r Jewish Culture. . . .Previous accounts in JEWISH LIFE o f various Jewish communities around the world moved DR. PHILIP E. MEYER to offer a view o f his own, of special interest as a campus community. His training as a C.P.A. had brought him to the faculty o f the University o f Maryland, and his background at the Talmudical Academy o f Baltimore helped bring his insights into sharper focus. He is now Assistant Professor o f Accounting at Boston University. . . .What does a lady do w ith her spare time if she is the wife o f a chemist fo r the Naval Research Laboratory, mother o f children aged six and two, holds an M.S.W. degree from the Howard University School o f Social Work on a fellowship from the National Institute o f Mental Health, was a caseworker with the Jewish Family and Children’s Service o f St. Louis, Missouri, and was the first National Corresponding Secretary o f Yavneh, the National Religious Jewish Students Association? If she is HEDY PEYSER o f Silver Spring, Maryland, she does what perhaps no woman has done before, as her article tells. . . . The application o f Torah perspective to social issues is much in order today. As Director o f the Hillel at the University of Buffalo, DR. JUSTIN HOFMANN is regularly involved in bringing Torah perspective to bear on contemporary issues. He was ordained by the Hebrew Theological College o f Chicago, and received his Doctorate in Education at the school whose Jewish students he now serves. . . .A name long familiar to readers o f JEWISH LIFE is that o f JACOB BELLER, whose accounts o f Jewish communities in various'spots throughout the world have appeared interm ittently through the years. Currently resident in Montreal, Canada, his present contribution merges his past (the Latin American Jewish community) with his intended future (Aliyah to Israel).

JEWISH LIFE

f l

the EDITOR'S VIEW

PIDYON SHEVUYIM WITH PRAYER AND ACTION S these lines are being written, news o f the freeing o f the th irty-tw o o f the remaining hostages taken by the Fedayeen terrorists has lightened, but has not removed, a shadow that darkened the world. Six still remain captive, their fate and where abouts unknown. Through the agonizing days since the passengers — most o f them Jews ® and crews o f the hijacked planes were kidnapped, Jews across the world have turned to the Ribbono shel Olom, offering supplication in prayer and in the eternal verses o f Tehillim. Now these voices are raised in thanksgiving and supplication both. May Divine Grace grant that all who remain be returned safe to their families and homes. The days o f prayer and psalm have been days also o f un ceasing e ffo rt on the temporal level, which many Jews have shared. The extent to which these efforts have contributed to the release o f the victims cannot now be deter With mined, and it is likely that some facets o f the Prayer story w ill long remain obscured. But let there be and no doubt as to their essential value. As with Action s p ir itu a l seeking itself, practical endeavor towards a vital need is meaningful whether or not the specific aim is realized. In responding on both levels to what has transpired, Jews have again been recalled to awareness o f both Hashgochah

SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

P’rotith and shared Jewish destiny. Alike in the spiritual realm and in that o f w orldly affairs, the experience w ill have continuing effect. *

ITH the shadow o f brigand terror amid universal ferment hovering about us as the year 5731 opens, there w ill be much search among Jews fo r a locus o f security. Unless the search is directed to our Heavenly Fount o f security, it w ill be in vain. Never was it more apparent that inner strength, the strength o f spirit, alone can shield us from the m ultiplying pressures o f a troubled world. Never was it more imperative that we recognize that this strength flows to us from on High. Frail seeming is the Sukkah, yet dwelling w ithin it we are eternally sustained, going forth to sow again in the fields entrusted to us, and to reap.

THE POLITICAL ACTION GAP N the wake o f the Fedayeen foray, the question is being asked: Why, w ith all the m ultiplicity o f Jewish organiza tions, did American Jewry find itself w ith o u t a prepared channel o f representation which could bring the fu ll weight o f the American Jewish comm unity to bear on highest Governmental quarters in this emergency? Actually, the gap was filled by the uncoordinated action o f various organizations and ad hoc groups, with the Union o f Orthodox Jewish Congregations o f America swinging into action in Washington from the first moment and throughout.

The makeshift, spur o f the moment reaction to critical emergency in this instance is but the latest illustration o f the failure o f the American Jewish comm unity to function as an or§an,zed f ° rce in political life. A t a time when other comPonents ° f American society have found ways to fend fo r themselves in this regard, at a time when the conditions o f fermenting national life make organized political power an imperative fo r the sustenance o f any group, American Jewry in general, and orthodox Jewry in partic ular, dare not remain collectively impotent in the political arena. Another issue w ith wide implications was disclosed in the indications at one point that negotiations with the Fedayeen Collective

Impotence

JEWISH LIFE

contemplated differentiation between the Jewish and non-Jewish captives. This move ^ designed as means o f pressure on Israel to yield to the terrorist demands M was soon quashed, apparently.by White House insistence rather than State Department initiative. The fact, however, that such a policy could have been so much as considered suggests a sinister tendency in some quarters to view the ties between American Jews and Israel as qualifying the American status o f American Jews. This is a problem which may loom large in the future and which demands definitive attention now.

THE GANGSTER TECHNIQUE IN THE INTERNATIONAL ARENA HERE is something peculiarly symbolic o f contemporary trends in the accepted currency o f the word “ hijacking.” It originated in the argot o f gangsterdom in the Prohibition era. The bootleg days have passed but the technique spawned by warring mobsters has found usage in international affairs. How fragile is a civilization whose most characteristic, and perhaps most pivotal, technological instrument, world air transport, can be all but paralyzed by a coterie o f terrorists. How flim sy is the world order which finds itself impotent to cope w ith the hijacker, with whom mighty nations must negotiate fo r the ransom o f his victims. And, how starkly revealing has been the shambles in Jordan. With what merciless blood-lust has Arab fallen upon Arab, with what savagery has Fedayeen guerilla vied with Bedouin soldier in slaughtering helpless civilian men, women, and children o f their own kin. Flinching as one must from this revolt ing picture, dare any face the thought o f what would have trans pired had the allies o f yesterday found the entree they had jo in tly sought to the te rrito ry o f their “ common enemy?” The nightmare episode bears m ultiple lessons, but only the most obvious seem to have registered as yet. That effective At measure must be taken to bar once and for all

^u rt*ier recurrence o f hijackings, is recognized on all sides. Doubtless means w ill soon be established to accomplish this, fo r otherwise civilian air transport w ill be brought to a halt. The world is much less ready to take stock - not to sj^eak o f actually dealing with — the deeper and wider implications o f the Pandora’s Point

of Gun

SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

box now opened. It is harsh reality that the Fedayeen piracy was prompted by the crim inality which is the fu n ctio n in g ‘c urrency o f international power dealing today. Essentially the same point-ofa-gun piracy has been and is being employed to subjugate nation after nation, from Central Europe to Southeast Asia. There are those whose smug, philosophy o f history assures them that while empires inevitably rise and fall and the destroyers o f others presently destroy each other, civilization somehow continues on its way. Whether or not that is a true reading o f past history, the present developments proclaim that its application to the world o f today opens the doors to calamity. More than any o f the past ages o f civilization, that o f today simply cannot sustain the rule o f lawless force, whether applied en masse or directed at key points o f society’s political, cultural, or technological makeup. The modern world has the weakness, not the strength, o f the sum o f its parts. The weakness can be compensated fo r only by B yes, the maximum o f law and order. There must be the w ill to stop the international brigand; w ith the will, the means to execute it w ill be found.

—S.B.

JEWISH LIFE

AMERICAN JEWS ■

SOVIET JEWS

by RONALD I. RUBIN ltho ug h political scientists cannot precisely estimate the impact o f non-governmental pressure groups on another co un try’s policies, there is plausible evidence that pro tests on behalf o f Soviet Jews in the late 1960’s and through 1970 have at least slowed the Krem lin’s plans to send its Jews to spiritual oblivion. Among indications o f the Soviet dis com fort are the follow ing: a trickle o f Jews, fo r the sake o f fam ily reunion, have been permitted to emigrate (mainly to Israel); a limited printing o f prayerbooks and the promise o f ex p a n d in g th e n u m b e r o f books authored in Yiddish; the visit o f Rabbi Yehuda Levin to the United States in 1968; the numerous stories put out by Novostoi, the Soviet foreign propa ganda agency, contending that the

SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

Jews in the U.S.S.R. are in good shape. In addition to showing that the Soviet Union is, w ithin limits, respon sive to hostile foreign opinion, these developments raise questions about the connection between Jewish-interest group protests and the desired response from the Soviet government. What are the characteristics o f pressure groups acting on behalf o f Soviet Jews? What methods have been used and what are their relative effective ness? Could the goals o f these groups be pursued more effectively? There are, to be sure, compelling reasons why American Jews should be concerned w ith their Soviet brethren. Many American Jews have relatives in the Soviet Union (only two or three generations separate most American Jews from the East European Pale o f

Settlement). Soviet Jews are the main survivors o f the once great East E u rop ea n Jewish community and silence on their fate would represent a rerun o f an earlier response to Hitler's program. According to Jewish law, there is no holier project than Pidyon Shevuyim (“ Every moment one post pones the redemption o f captives," writes Rabbi Yoseph Karo in the Shulchon Oruch, “ It is as though one c o m m its murder.") Moreover, the 3,000,000 Soviet Jews (this is not to argue that all are so inclined) are a prime source fo r much-needed Aliyah to Israel. Nonetheless, certain factors in American Jewish life encourage avoid ance and misunderstanding o f Soviet A n tis e m itis m . While Jews in the United States have shown more p o liti cal assertiveness and sophistication since the 1967 Six-Day War, strong traces o f what Israelis defiantly call the “ Goluth M en tality" still persist. The latter approach, defensive, appeas ing, and hesitant, stresses universalistic so cial concerns and reticence on Jewish issues. The “ Goluth m entality" is marked by reliance on Shtadlonim (worldly successful Jews who pre sumably know how to win the sympa thy o f the non-Jewish elite) who are e x p e rt in “ quiet diplom acy" and behind-the-scene intervention. In the “ New Politics" o f the 1970’s, how ever, where group strength is measured by activism and dramatic mass demon strations, “ quiet diplom acy" is re latively ineffective in aiding Soviet Jews. (Coincidentally, public protests

are o f short-term importance to Soviet Jews in impressing on them that they have not been forgotten.)

HILE it is wrong to disparage the bulk o f American Jews who, after all, by education and tempera ment may not be at home with the sensationalism o f the “ New Politics," it must be stressed that in the 1970’s signing a check alone w ill not very much help Soviet Jews nor other political issues affecting Jews. Soviet Antisemitism is one o f the problems in the Jewish world today not highly soluble by donations. Money helps indirectly by tooling protest and edu cational programs, but Soviet policy o fficially forbids foreign supplying o f the religious and cultural needs o f Jews (prayerbooks, Jewish calendars, etc.). F u r t h e r d e tr a c t in g fro m American Jewish protest potential is the large loss o f the most activistic population e le m e n t^ youth. Consid erable evidence has shown that in the absence o f a strong sense o f Jewish id e n tity, Jewish youth find social commitment not in “ Jewish" causes but in their peer group culture — and co n tra ste d w ith American foreign policy in Indochina and the fate o f the e n v iro n m e n t, Soviet Antisemitism does not rate. Many American Jews feel they fu lfill their responsibility to the Jewish people by supporting Israel, particu larly in view o f Israel’s more precari ous m ilitary position today. Although Israel’s survival and Soviet Antisemit-

JEWISH LIFE

ism are both pressing matters, and ideally the Jewish conscience should be sensitive enough to both claims, the reality is that most Jews do not have an unlimited reserve o f emotional energy and time. N ot only does the immediacy o f Israel's fighting and time detract from concern w ith Soviet Jews, but it is more exciting to help build a nation than to fight against the death o f a people. On the political level, it is much harder to determine a cause and effect relationship in urging a policy on the Kremlin than on one's own government. Philanthropy offers the donor tangible results — a forest, a school ¿4 whereas the needs o f Soviet Jews cannot be so packaged. Also Soviet Jews (with the exception o f the brave men and women who smuggle out appeals and the youths who dance in fro n t o f synagogues on Simchath Torah) are not visualized as in tune with today's romanticized picture o f the self-reliant Jew - the tanned, s tro n g , in d e p e n d e n t Kibbutznik. Soviet Jewry conjures up the image o f the East European Jews huddled to gether begging fo r rights. F in a lly , the failure o f most American Jewish organizations to alert th e ir members (particularly those under 30 to whom Stalinism is but a word) to the meaning o f Communism reduces awareness o f the fate o f Soviet Jews. These organizations neglected.to part ways w ith the dominant liberal notion o f “ co nvergence"#^ that the United States and the Soviet Union are becoming increasingly similar and over

SePTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

the years w ill converge from different poles. Had these organizations stressed the dangers o f Communism to free dom its totalitarian, police state anti-individualism and forced con fo rm ity — more American Jews would, as a corollary, have been ideologically prepared fo r the tragedy o f Soviet Jews. IVEN the foregoing influences, as well as the fragmentation o f American Jewish organizational life, it is understandable that various re sponses have emerged to the problem o f Soviet anti-Jewish policy. In terms both o f membership size and public importance, the major pressure group response has been through the American Jewish Conference on Soviet Jewry. Created in 1964 by 25 national Jewish organizations (a 26th has since joined), the Conference marked the first concentrated undertaking set up by American Jews to deal with the plight o f Soviet Jewry. This step marked a notable change from the c o m p e titio n characterizing these organizations' efforts in issues o f Jewish survival. On the one hand, such a coor d in a tin g b o d y u n d erscored the urgency o f Soviet Antisemitism. On the other, it revealed the fairly total inaction o f American Jewish organiza tions on this problem through the 1 9 5 0 's and the early 1960's, O f course, certain national Jewish groups during that period undertook isolated steps in response to specific crises. But none had mounted a systematic,

deliberate campaign devoted exclu sively to Soviet Jews. By 1964, the Soviet Jewish situation became in creasingly desperate: Stalin had de stroyed all Jewish cultural-communal institutions and his successors would n o t p e r m it their restoration; the number o f synagogues had been re duced from 450 in 1956 to an esti mated 100 in 1963; Jews were'scape goated in th e e a rly 1960's fo r “ econom ic crimes," punishable in certain cases by death; T rofim Kichko in 1 9 6 4 published his notorious “ Judaism W ithout Embellishment." HE orientation o f the Confer ence has been that o f a service body operating through established groups rather than that o f an activist organization working directly w ith the “ man on the street." Ideally, the Conference, as an umbrella group, was set up to plan overall strategy and to allow the ‘established Jewish agencies to fill in the details, but in effect the Conference lacked the resources to m o u n t a dynamic, thoroughgoing, in n o v a tiv e drive. Contrasted w ith other issues o f injustice, w ith which the p light o f Soviet Jews must o f necessity compete in the media, the Conference has been unable to apply the new technology o f professional ized pressure group activity — scien tific opinion sampling, targeting o f messages, etc. In its early years, the Conference had many earmarks o f an ad hoc undertaking. Even today it lacks a separate listing in the Manhattan

phone directory. From 1964-1966, professional guidance fo r the Confer ence was rotated among the constitu ent agencies. In 1966, NCRAC (the National Jewish Com m unity Relations Advisory Council), itself a-eoordinator o f Jewish com m unity relations groups, assumed full-tim e responsibility fo r Conference activities. The Confer ence's mailing address is at NCRAC headquarters in New York, and it still lacks an office o f its own. The Confer ence is headed by a part-time Chair man (a post rotating usually among its constituent groups) and an NCRAC staffer devotes nearly all his time to Soviet Jewish affairs. Yet the Conference as o f 1970 was neither financially nor structurally equipped to give the issue the atten tion it demands. Financially, besides the office and personnel expenses de frayed by NCRAC, all the Conference activities were self-sustaining. Thus, fo r a Conference-sponsored advertisement in The New Y ork Times on December 6, 1966 in which 90 United States S e na to rs condemned Soviet A n ti semitism, each o f the constituents o f the Conference was assessed $300. (Likewise, lobbying fo r this ad was carried o ut by a lobbyist on the staff o f one o f the Conference's constitu e n ts.) By 1 9 7 0 , the Conference d e cid e d to endorse a permanent budget — a sum exclusive o f NCRAC support and o f special projects ex penses. However, this upgrading was far short o f satisfying fhe massive educational campaign which young d is s id e n ts had sought from the

JEWISH LIFE

“ establishment. Structurally, the Conference has also been unable to develop system a tic , co he re nt policy. Conference policy is set by specific subcommittees consisting o f professionals o f its 26 constituent agencies. Lacking a per m a n e n t staff, the form ulation o f policy runs into obstacles an ongoing structure would not encounter. The p re s e n t a rra n g e m e n t compounds delay, adds to red tape, and detracts from the thrust o f Conference activi ties. Moreover, this arrangement runs counter to a basic bureaucratic law, namely, that members o f a temporary task force show less loyalty to the coordinating structure than they do to their home office. D e fe n d e rs o f the foregoing arrangement argue that it represents a necessary evil: if the Conference were to be s tre n g th e n e d , the Jewish agencies might scale down their Work for Soviet Jews maintaining, fo r in stance, their need to stress Israelicentered activities. Secondly, since such strengthening would decrease the C o n fe re n c e ’ s dependence on the Jewish agencies, top policy-making officials in the 26 Jewish agencies would be less involved in Conference work. Because the Jewish agencies on their own have not undertaken, thus far, ambitious programs fo r Soviet Jews, there is no great risk that an envigorated Conference would upstage them. Furthermore, a strong Confer ence, mapping general strategy and pressing local communities to imple

SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

ment programs, need not preclude programs geared to the backgrounds o f their memberships on the part o f the permanent Jewish organizations.

HE Conference’s limited funds permitted few grassroots' earn--. paigns. Among the Conference’s major grassroots projects have been demon strations. Previous to 1964, most American Jews had been content to stress “ quiet diplom acy” and to re s tric t their efforts to low-echelon Soviet officials who denied that there was any Jewish problem in the U .S .S .R . These d em on stratio ns, norm ally held jn connection w ith Jewish holidays touching on themes o f freedom (Pesach, Channukah), toward the late 1960’s reached their highlight on Simchath T o ra h ^ S a spectacle o f solidarity w ith the young Soviet Jews who sang and danced on that day in fro n t o f the Moscow synagogue. The tu r n o u t f o r these demonstrations hardly ever matched attendance at public rallies on behalf o f Israel. However, on Simchath Torah in 1969 fifty -tw o American communities (plus eight in Canada) held ra llie s iB | as compared to thirty-five communities in 1968, and three in 1967. In terms o f publications, another vehicle fo r alerting the Jewish masses, th e Conference has stressed back ground, supportive material. It has distributed a “ Fact Sheet on Soviet Jew ry,” a “ Program Manual,” and prayers to be recited fo r Soviet Jews at the Passover Seder (“ Matzoh o f Oppression” and “ Matzoh o f Hope” ).

Essentially, because o f insufficient manpower, the Conference has been geared to such background, feature type o f disseminations rather than being able to react to sudden changes (especially since late 1968 when Soviet Jews began to smuggle out petitions). Conference press releases on new developments in the Soviet Jewish scene are sent mainly to Jewish leaders across Am erica who, presumably, would alert local media. The Confer ence never developed a direct, ongoing tie-in w ith the nation's media. The most serious shortcoming in this area, however, has been the failure to put out a publication dealing exclusively with Soviet Jewry. With the mounting internal protests o f Soviet Jews from 1968-1970 a m onthly magazine would have been in order. N its governmental representa tions, the Conference has urged United States officials, w ith some success, to press demands fo r better treatment o f Soviet Jews. The Confer ence has provided the Voice o f A m e ric a w ith broadcast material. Conference officials have met many high political office holders and, while the fu ll records o f these meetings are u n d e rs ta n d a b ly confidential, both President Eisenhower (previous to the Conference's founding) and President Kennedy took up the issue w ith Soviet diplomats. Despite these and other meetings, the results should not be o v e re m p h a s iz e d . A c c o rd in g to Gunther Lawrence ('Three Millton M o r e ? ," 1 9 7 0 , Doubleday), who

served as pubfic relations consultant to the Conference: .. .Jewish leaders here during this period assumed that their constant pressure resulted in A m erican ambassadors raising the question at the Kremlin. No substantive corroboration was forthcoming, although in 1959, Llewellyn Thompson during his f i r s t to u r as ambassador to Moscow saw to i t that about one h u n d re d Yiddish books and periodicals were included in an American book exhibition in the U.S.S.R. Thompson was reluc tant to take more direct action and later advised Kennedy to have businessmen raise the issue with Soviet leaders. / was to ld at th e S ta te D e p a rtm e n t that A m b a ssa d o r Foy D. Kohler never spoke about the Jewish issue to anyone in the Soviet upper echelon, either, b u t con firm ed his discussions to Soviet intellectuals at social functions. T he C onference cites many pronouncements on Soviet anti-Jewish policy fo r American politicians, such as the 1968 Republican National Plat form , statements by a large number o f state Governors in connection with Human Rights Day 1969, and the signature o f a large m ajority o f Con gressmen on its advertisements. A dm ittedly, increasing attention has been paid to this issue by American p o l i t i c ia n s S e n a to r Eugene M cC arthy and Theodore Sorenson brought up the subject o f Soviet Jews

JEWISH LIFE

in visits to the Soviet Union the past year — although no accurate judgment can be made as to whether this recog nition is a response to Soviet Jewish restiveness or to American Jewish protests, or both. However, the reac tion o f American politicians has reflec ted more o f tokenism than substance. Criticism o f Soviet Antisemitism is not hard to o b ta in ^ ? which American interest group finds such statements offensive? If the test o f comm itment is whether the plight o f Soviet Jews is an electoral issue (as is American policy toward Israel) even in heavily popu lated Jewish constituencies, the answer is no. As Yale political scientist Robert A. Dahl notes: When / say that a group is heard ‘effectively’ / mean more than the simple fact that i t makes a noise; / mean that one o r more officials are n o t only ready to listen to that noise, b ut expect to su ffe r in some significant way i f they: do n o t placate the group, its leaders, or its most vociferous members. To its credit, the Conference has brought to the attention o f the United States Mission to the United Nations the plight o f Elizaveta Kapshitzer and her son V itold who was expelled from the Soviet Writers Union because o f his Jewish sympathies. The American representative to the Commission on Human Rights raised this case, to the Soviet U nion’s displeasure. In 1968, the Conference presented to the UN a petition said to contain some 250,000 signatures o f Americans protesting

Soviet Antisemitism. A C T IC A L L Y , the Conference has approached the issue o f Soviet anti-Jewish policy as a human rights, moral problem. Many o f its criticisms o f Soviet deprivations have been from the standpoint o f “ con science.*? The Conference has pur posely avoided politicizing the prob lem such as, fo r instance, attributing it to Communist doctrine or calling for boycotts against Soviet goods or per formances by Soviet artists visiting America under official cultural ex changes. As a result o f growing atten tion to the Soviet Jewish issue, how ever, certain independent American Jewish groups (as well as the Victorian Board o f Deputies in Australia) have urged boycotts. As a coordinating body short both on money and manpower, the Conference expects its constituents to carry on the case fo r Soviet Jews on an ongoing basis. While the 26 compon ents o f the Conference represent a w ide range o f purposes (religious, cultural, educational, Jewish defense), they all o fficially acknowledge the high p rio rity o f fighting Soviet A n ti semitism. (These conclusions are based on questionnaires- returned to the author by the organizations.) These organizations have passed resolutions on the Soviet Jewish plight and it increasingly appears on their foreign or interna tion al affairs subcommittees agendas. Individually, certain national o rg a n iz a tio n s have exposed antisemitic references in Soviet publica-

JEWISH LIFE

tions and other such offensive activi ties. They have raised the problem with national politicians and other opinion leaders and, where applicable, these organizations have communica ted developments on this score to their in te r n a tio n a l a ffilia te s . Certain members o f the Conference, through non-governmental organizations, have argued the issue before the UN. However, constituent organiza tions share the same basic shortcoming as the Conference, namely that their ad hoc approach prevents the develop ment o f systematic plans and detailed implementation procedures. Over the years, these groups have communica ted w ith district chapters or lodges through headquarters personnel for whom Soviet Jewry represents only one o f m any responsibilities. No n a tio n a l organization has a staff m em ber d e a lin g exclusively with Soviet Antisemitism. Thus, in the absence o f money, staff, and training these organizations are deficient both in terms o f input and output. Regarding the input, they are unable to put together the impact o f ongoing changes in the Soviet Jewish scene. They must rest content w ith familiar responses and are unable to anticipate and to project scientifically what lies in store. Since they lack contingency plans, they are caught o ff guard by new perils. In 1970, fo r in stance, these organizations were un prepared fo r Soviet accusations against Leningrad Jews fo r allegedly attem pt ing to hijack a plane to Israel, nor did

SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

they ever respond creatively (other than through traditional press releases) to the statement by fifty -tw o promin ent Soviet Jews attacking Zionism, and to the brave reply o f thirty-nine Moscow Jews challenging this pro nouncement. The output failings fo llo w from th e in p u t w eaknesses. D esp ite recognition o f the cause o f Soviet Je w ry in n a tio n a l organizational p rio ritie s, this piecemeal approach results in lessened thrust by the time material reaches local chapters. While articles on Soviet Jews have appeared in th e p u b lic a tio n s o f these o rg a n iz a tio n s ^ , an in d e p e n d e n t publication on this issue would be m u c h m o r e e f f e c t iv e . These organizations must also be prepared to send either their officers or selected groups to tour the Soviet Union, on a regular basis. By 1970, the heads o f most o f the Conference constituents had visited the U.S.S.R. at least once. Th ese o rg a n iz a tio n s should give incentives to Jewish-minded American youth to tour the U.S.S.R. in large numbers. N the last analysis, however, the Soviet Jewish protest campaign rests on success in stimulating aware ness and response on the local level. With the assistance o f the National Jewish Community Relations Advisory Council, this author sent out question naires to some eighty Jewish commu nity councils across the country which hold membership in NCRAC. Since o n l y t w e n t y - s i x c o m m u n itie s

answered, and the responses were returned in early 1968 (nationally, interest in Soviet Jewry has risen appreciably since then), it is d iffic u lt to reach conclusive judgments on the basis o f the current situation. How ever, it is possible to draw certain con clusions from this sampling; As o f 1968 (it must be recalled that certain hardships imposed on Jews such as the economic trials and the matzoth baking ban date to the e a rly 1 9 6 0 's ), m ost respondents ranked Soviet Jewry in a Number Three p riority, usually follow ing Israel and “ civil rights” or “ local issues.” Certain communities had active programs fo r Soviet Jewry marked by special meetings, exhibits, wide use o f n o n -Je w ish m e d ia , interreligious activities,and local publications dealing only with this topic. In other words, relatively active communities under took special projects, supplemented Conference issuances, and extended themselves to the general community. Less active communities; by c o m p a r is o n ; re lie d m a in ly on Conference mailings, focussed their work mainly on Jewish leaders, and had lim ited special projects. Signifi cantly, many o f the lesser active communities (in terms o f the forego ing criteria) sent delegates to such national conclaves as the Eternal Light Vigil o f 1965 in Washington, D.C. and the Conference Biennial in 1966, thus indicating that even if a community participates in a few national confer ences it is not enough to spur grass roots efforts.

In response to a question dealing with the respondents' “ general observa tions about the programs dealing with Soviet Jewry, and suggestions fo r the future direction o f these programs,” some officials noted the d iffic u lty in stimulating interest. “ This is one o f the toughest issues to deal w ith I have seen in over a quarter o f a century,” one agency official wrote. Another respondent wrote o f the need “ to arouse our people out o f their lethargy on this issue. No one seems to care.” He recommended “ more dramatic p rin te d materials” and visual aid materials as a response to the problem. Another suggestion was “ to put more emphasis toward youth in order to obtain their creative ideas in the problem o f finding new ways to tell the same story over and over again.” The executive o f a community spon soring one o f the most active programs called fo r a “ m onthly newsletter on Soviet Jewry which would serve as an im p o rta n t tool to develop public opinion. It is my feeling that not enough ongoing material is made avail able to communities in order to develop and maintain public under standing o f the issue.” What emerges from these ques tionnaires is the conclusion that under the present arrangement between most communities and the American Jewish C onference on Soviet Jewry, the former are unable to develop long term, systematic programs. The Con fe re n c e 's m ain tie -in w ith local communities was through mailings, but literature alone had a limited

JEWISH LIFE

effect. A t the time o f the sampling nearly all communities had inadequate budgets fo r Soviet Jewry programs B most spent a few hundred dollars a year exclusive o f staff time. The Jewish Community Relations Council o f Cleveland appropriated $7,500 fo r this activity, and the other extreme was a city (which shall remain name less) o f 450-500,000 Jews which spent $150-$250 a year, exclusive o f staff time, mainly fo r mailings, although it was reported that a larger budget was in the offing. In order to stimulate local activi ties, the Conference must redirect its e ffo rts from mailings to personal le a d e rs h ip . Regional coordinators, familiar w ith the communities they serve, should be named. Nationally, the Conference should appoint per manent staff in the areas o f youth, publications, and visual aids who would backstop the coordinators. As w ith other pressure group causes> the cause o f Soviet Jewry requires de centralized administration. RISING concern fo r the welfare o f one-fifth o f the w orld’s Jews together w ith dissatisfaction in some quarters with the objectives o f the American Jewish Conference on Soviet Jewry have led to th e form ation o f other organizations. The Conference on the Status o f Soviet Jeyvs is a blue ribbon group o f writers, educators, clergy, and civil rights leaders con cerned w ith Soviet Jews. Moshe Decter, an authority on Soviet Jews, is the organization’s Executive Secretary

SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

and the Conference on the Status o f Soviet Jews operates out o f the same mailing address as Jewish Minorities Research which Decter heads. The group has issued studies (in 1970 it co -sp on sored w ith the American Jewish Conference on Soviet Jewry a pamphlet “ Redemption: Jewish Free dom Letters From Russia” containing the appeals and petitions smuggled out by Soviet Jews since 1968), state ments, and advertisements. In 1966 it convened an Ad Hoc Commission on Soviet Jews as a public tribunal o f Jewish life in the U.S.S.R., among whose members were Supreme Court Justice William, O. Douglas, Walter Reuther, and Dr. Martin Luther King. The plight o f Soviet Jews lends itself to the concerns o f academics in view o f the heightened assertiveness o f the campus in pushing fo r political and social reform. It was only in 1968, however, that the Academic Com m it tee on Soviet Jewry was formed. In calling fo r the “ moral •internationaliza tio n ” o f the Soviet Jewish problem, the Academic Committee’s orientation is similar to that o f the American Jewish Conference on Soviet Jewry in that the Academic Committee has va rio u s ly sponsored advertisements and publications with them. O p e ra tio n a lly , the Academic Committee has been a service, back ground group rather than one directly in v o lv e d in form ing chapters on campus. Compared w ith the American Academic Association fo r Peace in the M iddle East (a pro-Israel pressure group a year older than the Academic

Committee), the Academic Committee has shown less energy and initiative. The Middle East group sponsors a steady stream o f publications, fact sheets, and newsletters. It has active chapters on many campuses, it has sponsored fact-finding tours to the Middle E ast(notonly Israel), and it has arranged fo r briefings o f American professors by Israelis. The Academic Committee, like the American Jewish Conference on Soviet Jewry, does not have an inde pendent headquarters, and is in the B’nai B’rith Building in New York. In 1968 and in 1969 (also in 1970), the Academic Committee sponsored con ferences drawing well-known speakers such as Dr. Leonard Schapiro o f London and Elie Wiesel. Professor Hans Morgenthau now chairs this body, and his predecessor was Profes sor N a th a n Glazer. While it has released certain material to the press, made some government representa tions, and published a few studies, it has not developed a systematic,(de liberate strategy. It has failed to publish a newsletter, to set up a speak er’s bureau, to systematically develop a rtic le s fo r appropriate scholarly journals, to schedule presentations at scholarly'conventions, to set up infor mation booths at scholarly conven tions, to draw up syllabi fo r courses, and to sponsor fact-finding trips to the U.S.S.R. It *might have been w orth while fo r the Academic Committee To politicize the probhem by publicly pressuring fo r the cancellation o f academic congresses set for the Soviet

U nion (a tack applied across the board, fo r instance, concerning the apartheid policy in the U n io n o f South Africa). TU DEN T Struggle fo r Soviet Jewry (SSSJ), an activist group led by Jacob Birnbaum and Glen Richter, is predicated on the belief that the Jewish “ establishment” ;has inadequately met the issue. Moreover, SSSJ feels it can reach quick policy decisions, whereas it is hard to move the wheels o f the 26 national groups comprising the American Jewish Con ference on Soviet Jewry. Set up in 1964 and supported largely by student contributions, SSSJ in 1970 consists o f a main office in Manhattan and five branches (two outside o f New York City 9 Boston and Syracuse). It pub lished frequent newsletters and other educational material. SSSJ mobilizes youth quickly, and its demonstrations show dramatic fla ir — imprisonment in chains outside the Soviet Mission to the UN to mark Tisha B’Av and a “ guerrilla theatre” production o f the trial o f the imprisoned Soviet Jew, Boris Kochubiyevsky. In terms o f demonstrations sponsored by “ estab lishment’l l Jewish groups, SSSJ has operated on the periphery; it enlists student participation while it is often critical o f alleged inadequate funding. On a local level, other activist groups have arisen which aim to apply more direct pressure on the Soviet Union. Mainly composed o f students, these groups are critical o f the “ estab lis h m e n t” fo r allegedly failing to

JEWISH LIFE

m ount necessary protests. Beyond the e “ tyranny” and Communist despotism. specific issue o f Soviet Jewry, it is In December, 1969, JDL drew possible to attribute the disaffection attention to the plight o f Soviet Jews o f these youth to general criticisms o f in simultaneous raids on the offices o f older Jewish organizations as being too TASS, Intourist (the Soviet travel “ fa t” and complacent. agency), apd A e roflo t (the Soviet air Such groups now exist in Los line). The Soviet offices were de Angeles, San Francisco, Florida, and corated w ith such slogans as Am Yisroel Chai (the people o f Israel Washington, D.C. Among the activities lives). JDL argues that such violence undertaken by these groups were inter has three merits: it impresses Soviet rupting the performances o f visiting Jews that outsiders are w illing to Soviet artists, boarding a Soviet ship “ suffer the consequences o f illegality docked in California (although in this case the “ establishment” also partici on their behalf;” it focuses muchneeded publicity on the fate o f Soviet pated), locking up in a room visiting Jews; it marshals latent anti-Soviet and S o v ie t newsmen, sending greeting cards directly to Jews in the U.S.S.R., anti-Communist feeling in the United and reproducing replicas o f the in S tate s to pressure the American g o ve rn m e n t to protest. JDL also ternal passports Soviet Jews must attacks the cultural exchanges between carry. The San Francisco group was the United States and the U.S.S.R., responsible in 1970 fo r offering the and it plans to pressure travel agents to first course on Soviet Jewry fo r college turn down tourist bookings fo r the credit at the University o f California at Soviet Union. Berkeley. This group has also seen to it Critics o f JDL hold that their that the issue o f Soviet Jewry is repre tactics actually are harmful in the sented permanently among the other long-run fo r Soviet Jews. Although the protest tables in the plaza at Berkeley. media is hungry fo r sensationalism, such'as represented by JDL anti-Soviet HE Jew ish Defense League violence., c r itic s argue that the (JDL) has emerged among the most potent and publicity-rich organi American public which must be drawn to the side o f Soviet Jews regards J DL zations regarding Soviet Antisemitism. tactics as similar to those o f the Founded in 1968, JD L ’s attitude toward this issue stems from its thesis Communists and thus subsequently disregards the fate o f Soviet Jews. that “ The time has come fo r Jews to Another agency involved with say loud and clear that he who seeks the p ro b le m is the International to give the Jew the short end o f the League fo r the Repatriation o f Russian stick may end up getting that stick Jews, which argues that the thrust o f over his head.” JDL sees Soviet Jewry not as an isolated human rights prob American Jewish activities should be securing emigration rights fo r Soviet lem, but as an outgrowth o f Soviet

SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

Jews who seek to leave. It has spon sored speaking tours in the United States o f Jews who managed to emi grate to Israel from the Soviet Union. Whether ot not recent Jewish im m i grants should join the campaign o f publicizing the situation o f Soviet Jewry has been a political dispute in Israel. According to Abba Eban, recent immigrants were not the best people “ to carry this message forward because we don’t want them to be the last.’’

L E A R L Y , the groups which have formed recently to protest Soviet Antisemitism fill a vacuum stemming from the inadequate re sponse o f the major Jewish organiza tions. Undoubtedly, current activism is a factor in the desire o f these groups to “ do their thing” fo r Soviet Jews, but as the daring o f Soviet Jews rises (experts agree it w ill) more concerned Jews w ill examine their own response. The main channel fo r new activity must come through the “ establish ment” ; it represents the vast m ajority o f American Jews who look to it to fig ht antisemitism in general. But the f ‘ e s ta b lish m e n t” in terms o f the American Jewish Conference on Soviet Jewry has not dealt with the problem systematically. The Jewish response has overwhelmingly been one o f jum p ing from one crisis to another rather than in providing fo r overall planning. An institutional arrangement demands methods o f planning and implementa tion which would gather the best ideas and information available both in the Jewish comm unity and in the political

world. Underscoring policy making in this area must be the recognition that world Jewry and the-Krem lin are at war over the future o f one-fifth o f the w orld’s Jews. American Jews know that war is a serious business as far as Israel’s security goes, but they do not see the plight o f Soviet Jewry simi: larly. In contrast, Israel recognized that on this score alone the Soviet Union was its adversary even before the latter began constructing SAM-3 sites in Egypt. An effective policy on behalf o f Soviet Jewry must be creative. This means developing anticipatory, imagi native procedures for reaching the five target groups concerned: Soviet Jews; the Soviet Government; the United States Government; American Jews; American non-Jews. This in turn re quires enlisting professionals on a fu ll time basis who bring to bear scholarly training in the fields o f public opinion, communication, and politics. Unaided, the generalists who man the Jewish organizations w ill fail. Intelligent policy making also demands a determination o f the facts. In c o m p le te in fo r m a tio n distorts reality and prevents the form ulation o f contingency plans. What is really happening to Soviet Jews? How could the Kremlin be, persuaded to ease up, to let Jews who so desire emigrate? W hat is n o n -S o v ie t C om m unist o p in io n on this issue? Lacking a common structure to pool information and sift theories, the answers must r e m a in in c o m p le te . A c a d e m ic

JEWISH LIFE

scholarly expertise on Soviet Jewry must increase. There is probably no scholar attached to a university who devotes a major portion o f his time to studying current trends on Soviet Jews. Finally, there must be effective implementation procedure. American public opinion must be convinced that Soviet Jewry is not too far gone and that the future w ill be determined, in good measure, by how this message comes across to the Kremlin. This goal requires men who w ill have regional responsibilities in educating public opinion, in stimulating awareness in d iffe r e n t opinion groupings. UJA,

Israel Bonds, and other Jewish fund raising campaigns are so organized. Why should the cause o f Soviet Jewry be denied the same option? How the Kremlin w ill react is unknown, o f course. But while Soviet Jews tell outsiders in a hundred d iffer ent ways “Shum, Shum ” (make noise, make noise), can we reject their martyrdom?*

*The concluding concepts for improving decision-making on Soviet Jewry are based on the foreign policy analyses of Henry A. Kissinger (see “Comment by Henry A. K issin g e r,” Committee on Government Operations, U.S. Senate, March 3,1970).

A SEDER FOR RUSSIAN JEWRY O TW CTED BY THE NEW YORK (OTlNATlNifcOMMITTEE ; FOR SOVIET J E W R Y OF THE N.Y. J.C .R .C ,

ON THIS FESTIVAL of FREEDOM WE ASK FOR FR EED O M FOR JEWISH LIFE IN R U S S I A

photographs by Y on a Zaloscer

SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

Jewish Life in an American College Town by PHILIP E. MEYER

HEN one discusses Jewish life in A m e r ic a , a tte n tio n is typically focused on New York and o th e r large c e n te rs , w ith some consideration fo r other locales which c o n ta in Yeshivoth and/or Hebrew day schools. A ll too slowly, the Jew ish public is becoming aware that into its vista o f the American Jewish scene there is being thrust a m a jo r new fa c e t: th e cam pus community. Here we shall deal w ith Jewish life in one such community, that o f College Park, Maryland. This particular college town is w orthy o f attention precisely because it does n o t p o s s e s s “ p e rm a n e n t” or “ established” Jewish families, for its Jew ish c o m p o n e n t is composed entirely o f the approximately 4,000 Jewish students who happen to be

enrolled at the University o f Mary la n d , and a n u m b e r o f Jewish members o f the faculty. As its name suggests, the university is the primary institution o f higher learning operated by the state o f Maryland. College Park is situated th irty-tw o miles southwest o f Baltim ore and six miles from b o th Washington, D.C. and Silver S p rin g, Maryland. Jewish students comprise about fifteen percent o f the more than 30,000 undergraduate and graduate student population; the professional schools are located at another campus. O f these students, approxi mately one-half commute daily from th e ir parents’ homes. Accordingly, such individuals’ social, recreational, and religious activities do not tend

JEWISH LIFE

to revolve around the events held on-campus. And o f those students w ho reside in the campus area, many participate in the activities of, and in turn identify w ith, organized fraternity and sorority groups. The rem ainder have allegiance to dor m itory. cliques, honor societies, and special interest groups. Ninety percent o f the Jewish students are from the greater Wash ington and Baltimore areas. They are typically second and third generation Americans, products o f the public school system and from middle and upper middle income strata. Most o f the male students pursue programs in the sciences or business admini stration while Jewish coeds tend to study education and/or the humani ties. The presence o f Jewish students in campus politics and on deans’ lists is disproportionately high. With respect to discerning Jewishness on campus, only a handful o f students wear yarmulkes as they stroll across campus. In fact, poor attendance on Yom Kippur ironically causes that day to be the only occasion that the presence o f a Jewish student population can be appreciated. EW ISH student activities re volve around the B’nai B’rith Hillel Foundation which maintains a b u ild in g adjacent to the campus* T he H ille l o rg a n iza tio n plays a prominent role in the lives o f par ticipating Jewish students. In fact, one objective o f this report is to demonstrate the potential vita lity o f

SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 1970

H ille l in th e re lig io u s m ilie u , contrary to popular belief particu larly prevalent in orthodox circles. In te rm s o f religious orien tation, it can be said that students’ affiliation w ith an “ at-home” syna gogue probably reflects the pattern o f a typical eastern United States com m unity. Hillel adopts a “ nondenominational” point o f view with the hope o f catering to all interests, e.g. respect fo r Shabboth laws is maintained w ithin the confines o f the Hillel House. Hillel at Maryland is staffed by three professional people. The focal p o in t o f Hillel life is its Kosher D in in g C lu b . -T h is p ro je c t was instituted in the late 1950’s by a g ro u p o f concerned Jews in the Baltimore and Washington commu n itie s . Financial, professional, and moral support were and are fo rth coming so that kosher meals might be provided on a continuing basis. Some 175 students are currently e nrolled in the program by sub scribing to four-month contractual agreements to eat meals at the Hillel H ouse. Such enrollment is recog nized by the university and thus e xe m p ts dorm itory students from th e u n iv e rs ity board plan. Three meals are served Monday through Saturday and dinner is available on Sundays. The cost o f the contract exceeds that o f the university by a relatively nominal ten percent. Space limitations are such that each prospective dining club member

donning o f yarmulkes. Kiddush is is screened so as to ascertain his chanted in the traditional manner, commitment to Kashruth observance. the “ M otzi” is recited, zemiroth are In practice, any student who merely sung, and all join in the concluding states that he or she seeks to “ eat Birkath Hamozon. Needless to say, a kosher” is admitted. The nutritional q u a lity o f th e fo o d apparently very enriching atmosphere pervades the Sabbath table. attracts members who would other wise not be concerned w ith Kash HE dining club has additional ruth. Admission o f even such mar avenues through which the stu ginal individuals has been justified dent can relate to his Jewishness, his on the grounds that by virtue o f the ensuing contact w ith observant mem c o m m u n ity , and h is fellowman. Under one program, students invite bers, sincere observance may yet favorite professors fo r dinner, thus emerge. Experience has upheld the affording an excellent opportunity validity o f this theory although not fo r student-faculty interaction. Stu as frequently as desired. d e n t birthdays are celebrated by The dining fa cility is operated by a professional staff including a making the appropriate arrangements fu ll- tim e m ashgiach whose pro for a special birthday cake dessert. nouncem ents as to Kashruth are • This may seem childish, but not so to the participants; the nostalgia and accepted by all. During Pesach, any personal touch are well worth the member o f the campus comm unity may eat at the Hillel, as is the case effort. A number o f club members in v ite some o f their Jewish and for Wednesday dinner and Shabboth non-Jewish friends as guests on Fri meals th ro u g h o u t the year. The day nights. Such a practice promotes d in in g c lu b ’s weekly publication, goodwill, and occasionally embarrass “ Food fo r Thought,” contains pithy ment, too, when the grateful guest reprinted articles about Judaism, and remarks that he or she is unequip w e e k ly luncheon seminars involve ped to reciprocate because o f Kash presentations by faculty members ruth constraints. and communal leaders followed by The presence o f the dining fac question-answer sessions. These latter endeavors are designed to emphasize ility provides certain fringe benefits, to th e s tu d e n t th a t Jewishness to o . Speakers at evening cultural extends beyond the mere intake o f programs, who are often just arriving material sustenance to every facet o f fro m a d is ta n t location, become life. d in n e r guests. Some preliminary On weekdays, meal times are ra p p o rt between speaker and stu staggered so as to avoid conflict dents is usually the result. Campus with scheduled classes. On Shabboth, visitors attending conferences, Hillel all eat at the same time and approp functions, new student orientation riate attire is required including the p ro g r a m s , o r g ra d u a te sch oo l

JEWISH LIFE

e n tra n c e examination sessions are also afforded the opportunity to partake in a kosher meal. A Jewish fa c u lty g ro u p — sm all in n u m bers — lunches at Hillel regularly. During Succoth, commuting students are encouraged to use the Hillel Succah. As a llu d e d to e arlier, the dining club brings together students o f different religious persuasions. By no means are there rigid cliques re flecting such disparate orientations. Interaction exists and in a number of cases there are religiously favor able lo n g -te rm effects. Religious matters are often discussed, although invariably restricted to an intellec tual level. There is no overt move ment, fo r example, to oblige the less observant male students to follow the example o f the more observant in wearing yarmulkes at weekday, as w e ll as Shabboth, meals. On the other hand, the very presence o f the tastefully appointed Succah attracts some students whose previous ex posure to this aspect o f Judaism had been limited to a coloring book in Sunday School. HE U n iv e rs ity o f Maryland ko sh e r dining fa cility is re puted to be the largest o f its kind in the United States. Similar pro grams have been instituted on many o th e r cam puses, often w ith the assistance o f the local or neighboring Jewish communities and/or national organizations such as Yavneh a.nd Young Israel. One o f the most im portant benefits o f these programs is

SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

th a t

religiously

observant students

are thereby attracted to the particu lar campus. Such students often are at the core o f the dining club as is th e case a t M a ry la n d . As the follow ing discussion suggests, it is largely the result o f a viable dining club that other campus activities can be attuned to the needs o f both the observant and potentially observant students. A t the Maryland Hillel, mor ning- and evening prayer services are conducted each school day. In ad dition to its regular participants, stu dents seeking to recite the Kaddish a tte n d fre q u e n tly . On Shabboth, services are held' and, as on week days, it is entirely a student project. Words o f Torah, not sermons, are a part o f both the Friday evening and Shabboth morning services. An Oneg Shabboth is held each Friday night, w ith singing, Israeli dancing, dis cussion, refreshments, etc. On Friday n ig h ts , there is also a “ Liberal” (Reform) prayer service held on the campus which has been known to in c lu d e the use o f music in its attempt to be “ creative.” For the High Holy Days also two concurrent services — orthodox and Liberal — are held, and at Pesach, both groups conduct Sedorim the first evening, an orthodox seder taking place, of course, on the second evening too. ESPITE the enrollment in the dining club and the Hebrew courses offered on campus, atten dance at religious services is not im pressive. On weekdays, the 6:45

A.M. and 6:15 P.M. services are not well-attended. Relatively few resident s tu d e n ts are a ccusto m e d (from hom e) to such participation. On Shabboth, a number o f students visit th e ir p a re n ts and/or out-of-town friends. And, fo r most students re maining on campus, attendance at services just does n o t appear to be “ a ttractive /' presumably fo r reasons similar to those applying to larger communities. This latter point, how ever, might be qualified by what I refer to as the “ participation syn dro m e /' Many students believe that “ a t-h o m e " synagogues (ostensibly) minimize participation by worship pers and thus relegate the individual to the role o f spectator who is en tertained by a cantor and rabbi. Y o u n g p e o p le seeking an active rather than passive role become dis in te re s te d . Upon arriving at the college campus and its purely stu d en t-m a na ge d services, they are either terribly indifferent to organ ized worship and/or totally unequip ped to, assume the various roles o f active participants. Weekly study groups are held in subjects including basic Judaism, Talmud, Sedrah o f the week, Jewish philosdphy, Yiddish, and elementary H ebrew. Each o f these classes is" conducted by volunteers. A Hebrew program also exists w ithin the uni v e rs ity w ith nearly 200 students e n ro lle d in its va riou s courses. During the Spring 1970 Semester, some fo rty students participated in a “ semester in Israel" program fo r

which college credits were earned. Once each semester, Hillel pre sents a Shabbaton program. The fo r mat involves the presence o f one or more specially invited guests who address th e students three times d u rin g S h a b b o th . Students from neighboring colleges and universities are also invited to participate. In a d d itio n to th e formal lectures, there is informal interaction between the guests and students. Recent pro grams have included the subjects o f R e c o n s tru c tio n is m , b la c k Jews, science and religion, and contempo rary Jewish philosophy.

IL L E L at the University o f Maryland is also involved in th e m any usual college campus activities such as cultural and social programs, student counselling, and protest activity. Maryland students have been active in the Washington, D.C. Soviet Jewry demonstrations as well as those in support o f Israel. The pro xim ity o f the campus to the nation's capital does n ot serve to d im in is h such participation. Oncampus ceremonies have been con ducted to mourn the victims o f the Swissair bombing, recall the uprising o f the Warsaw Ghetto, call attention to the plight o f Soviet Jewry, and honor the people o f Denmark fo r th e ir heroic efforts on behalf o f th e ir Jewish fellow-citizens during World War II. Furthermore, students are also involved in a tutoring pro ject in a nearby black neighborhood and in protesting the presence o f

JEWISH LIFE

the United States in the Vietnam conflict. O f the approximately 100 Jew ish faculty members, most live in neighboring communities other than College Park. Their participation in religious programs and worship, in turn, does not center around the campus. Several times a year, Jewish faculty members o f various greater Washington universities attend cultu ral programs usually involving a dis tinguished (out-of-town) speaker. As mentioned earlier, a handful o f Jew ish faculty members lunch at Hillel bi-weekly; this is an outgrowth o f an unsuccessful attempt to organize these academicians into a viable and cohesive group. In terms o f the role o f their Jewishness vis-a-vis students, there has been no program to speak of. It is to be noted that two fac ulty members conducted classes fo r Hillel on a volunteer basis during the past academic year.

HE* Jewish student community o f College Park is impressive when compared to its condition o f fifte e n years e a rlie r and when viewed in context o f other campus communities in the United States. Yet, when evaluating the situation in light o f what could be happening, much serious thought is warranted. Students already «committed to the practice o f Torah Judaism are able to pursue their religious observances. Students with marginal attachment, however, all too often discard upon arrival whatever measure o f Jewish

SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

p ra c tic e they have brought w ith them. As fo r those having no defini tive relationship to Judaism, they re main more distant than ever from the inspiration and insights which might bring them to a life oTJewish belief and observance. A ny attem pt at a solution o f the problem must be keyed to two stages. First, the most determined e ffo rts must be made during the pre-college years to inculcate young sters w ith a love for, and fluency in, Judaism at both the intellectual and practical levels. The synagogue, the school, and the home alike must be a ttu n e d to th is v ita l objective. Second, efforts must be forthcoming w h ich are geared to meeting the needs o f students during the crucial cam pus years at which time so much o f an individual’s outlook is conceived and formulated. A m a jo r portion o f Jewish communal e ffo rt is currently direc ted toward the needs o f the undereighteen segment (schools) and the over-twenty-five group (synagogues). Surely the critical college years must now begin to receive the attention they warrant. Efforts to bridge the all-im portant gap between the school years and the synagogue years must become commensurate to the scope and importance o f the need. Con sider this report, if you w ill, as a case study in how such a gap can be initially bridged. Normative aspects o f this re port must also be considered; speci f ic a lly , th e e s ta b lis h m e n t o f a

carefully planned program to reach college students. Funding, o f facilities and staffs is an overriding aspect o f the issue (the almost decrepit con d itio n o f the College Park Hillel House must be seen to be believed). Rabbis and teachers must be en couraged to pursue campus activities as full-tim e vocations. Members o f the emerging orthodox intelligentsia should involve themselves in campus a c tiv it y i f o n ly through fireside chats and big-brother type o f con ta c t. C ollege students should be actively recruited fo r participation in the functions o f neighboring Jewish

communities and selected yeshivah students should be regularly spen ding Shabboth on campuses in an e f f o r t to create th e appropriate atmosphere.

experience

Maryland

suggests that both traditional and innovative avenues have yielded considerable success. What is there fore needed is some self-sacrifice by the Jewish community so that to day^ college students can tom orrow assume the leadership their elders know w ill be so critically needed.

JEWISH LIFE

by HEDY PEYSER HE phone rang. It was G., President o f the Yeshivah High School. “ How would you like to run the school?” he asked. “ How does a nice Jewish girl get into this kind o f mess?,” I thought. My parents always wanted me to become a teacher B a “ noble” profes sion fo r a Jewish girl — “ after all you only work half a day and have a two month vacation.” They were horrified at my choice o f social work. However, after I received my Master o f Social Work degree, they p ro u d ly referred to me as “ my daughter the social w orker.” They were still hopeful that I would end up in the teaching profession^- even if it meant teaching social work. My problems and entry into the domain o f education began a year

SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

after the birth o f my second child. I volunteered to help the high school find new classroom facilities and soon found myself totally enmeshed in the myriad o f other problems facing the school. Indeed, the continuation o f the school’s existence was very much in doubt because o f its massive deficit. However, as a result »of a few large contributions, the timing o f which can only be considered miraculous, we purchased a building. One major problem still remained, however, who was to run -the schooi? Or better vet, who would be crazy enough to want to run the school. So now I was being asked to take a job which (1) no one wanted, (2) defied description, and (3) re quired qualities o f either optimism or masochism.

HY did they ask me to take the job? First, there was no one else, and “ after all, who knows more about the school’s problems?” “ The Presi dent,” I said. “ But he already has a jo b ,” they responded. Second, who would take a job that defied descrip tion?— “ Only a woman.” Third, moreover, I was an optim ist and in the “ business o f trouble.” Fourth, my social work background was an asset — since I “ knew how to work w ith kids and could talk to people.” The fact that I never had a course in education didn’t matter too much, the Board told me B “ you w ill learn.” Finally, the Board reasoned that they w ouldn’t have to pay a woman as much as a man and especially not to me because “ yo u k n o w our serious financial problems.” To which I successfully countered, “ you don’t want the school referred to as being cheap.” Yet knowing all o f this, the challenge o f the job got the better o f me, and in a moment o f weakness, I succumbed. I recognized that it was out o f desperation that a woman had been offered a traditionally man’s job in the traditionally male-dominated Yeshivah world. It is interesting that the suggestion that I be considered fo r the job first came from a rabbi who until then was considered a right-wing Chossid. (As a consequence, he be came known as the left-wing Chossid.) Some o f the so-called liberals on the Board were initially shocked at even considering a “ rosh<7/7-yeshivah.” A fter all “ What would it look like to have a woman run a yeshivah?” Their con

cerns were eased when Rabbi A. was appointed part-time Hebrew Principal. Another d iffic u lty was in decid ing on an appropriate title fo r me. It was deemed inappropriate to call me “ D irector,” since this was the title given my bearded and ordained prede cessor. The title “ Principal” proved inadequate since my duties would also entail extensive administrative work, public relations, management o f the office, and fund raising. Even the title “ Superintendent” was considered; but with a large Jewish population from New York, they didn’t want me to be mistaken fo r the janitor. So, a new title was coined: I would be called the “ Adm inistrator.” The Board’s creativity was by no means limited to coining new titles. Their ingenuity and resourcefulness extended to the development o f a u n iq u e s tr u c tu r a l adm inistrative arrangement. The school’s two divi sions (20 boys and 23 girls), under one administration, were separated by a distance o f ten miles. With a staff o f 23 teachers, the administrative tasks w o u ld be formidable. The Board, however, recognized the impossiblity o f one person being in two places at one time. This consideration as well as the desire to project an image o f a yeshivah, as opposed to a day school, led to the appointment o f a Mashgiach. Thus, few schools could boast o f a two to one student-teacher ratio, one spiritual supervisor, and at least three authority figures, one o f whom was a woman no less. I was already worried. The obvious questions

JEWISH LIFE

immediately facing me were: Would being a woman make a difference in holding this type o f position, and if so how, and to whom? Would it bfc an advantage or disadvantage? O f course the main, underlying question was: Can a woman make it and survive in the Yeshivah world? I started the job w ith a great advantage — I d idn’t need it.

___ THE FIRST DAYS HAD two and a half weeks to prepare for the arrival, or should I say onslaught, o f the students. The first week was spent in doing house work — and here I was paying some one to keep my own home in order! My office was to be in the Girls D ivi sion, which was located in small facilities owned by a Young Israel synagogue. Renovations to convert this house into a school building were under way. Much to the amazement o f all, including my five-year-old daugh ter who would later insist that she attended Yeshivah High School kinder garten, this small six-roomed building would accommodate on any given day, a nursery operated by the synagogue, a kindergarten (a branch o f the local day school), Talmud Torah classes, the Girls High School classes, and tw o rooms used exclusively fo r offices. The first and perhaps the most im p o rta n t step undertaken in my administration was the hiring o f Mrs. B. as secretary. To this very day some people maintain (jokingly o f -course) that this was the most significant o f

SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

my accomplishments. O f course, some friends teasingly insisted that I get a male secretaryH- after all, two women in the same o ffic e .. . . So these two women, amid thé workmen and physical chaos (which resulted from moving everything into our new quarters), moved heavy file cabinets and steel desks, changed light bulbs;Jlsfixed drapes, and reorganized and attempted to locate missing files. We soon found that the mimeograph machine was broken and herein was my first introduction to the state o f our finances. The company refused to repair our machine until we paid the $50.00 due from two years before. To my horror, I discovered that there were no accurate records o f outstand ing bills. The treasurer o f the school informed me that “ if they say we owe them the money, then we do.” The next thing which we discovered was that we had six typewriters, none o f which operated. We still had to engage most o f the secular teaching staff. An ad in the lo ca l nêwspaper provided unusual inquiries. O f the ten persons who called about teaching French, four did not have college degrees. Each ex plained that since he or she was born in France, and spoke the language — “ o f course I can teach it.” One caller, interested in teaching History, turned out to be a Jesuit theology student. When he learned that it was a Jewish parochial school, he was insistent that we hire him and offered to teach theology free o f charge! During these weeks, my career in

public relations was launched, as I found myself on the lookout fo r new angles. There was one obvious way of getting into the papers — by capitaliz ing on the fact that I was the first woman to hold this type o f position in a yeshivah. We made the fro n t page o f the local Jewish weekly, the religious section o f one local paper, and the woman's section o f another — right next to Ann Landers.

THE STUDENTS N the very first day o f class a student who had never registered appeared in my office. This surprising event set the tone fo r what was to follow . For the first three months there seemed to be an endless stream o f students entering my office. The girls would send delegations and/or peti tions. Another approach to get my attention consisted o f telling Mrs. B that there was a crisis. By far the best and most effective method was tears, sometimes bordering on mass hysteria. A n y and all problems were com pounded by the fact that they were practically tripping over one another because the quarters were so small. Yeshivah high school girls in general, and 10th graders in particular, being new in the school, are conscien tious. I was doubly blessed — they were neurotically conscientious. Half the time they seemed to be blearyeyed and sleepy, w ith facial pallors approaching pale yellow — and in one case, green. They studied day and

night, letting everyone w ithin earshot know it, especially their sympathetic mothers. I was bombarded w ith such student requests as to (1) “ please notify the secular teachers that we have a double program and therefore, shouldn’t be given so much home w ork;’’ (2) “ please tell the teacher to change his teaching methods;” (3) “ please fire the teacher;” and (4) “ please ask Mr. H. to return to our school.. . .he was the greatest.” The requests were endless, but at least they said “ please!” A t times my only alternative was to beg and plead w ith the girls to stop studying so much. But, they seemed to react to me as they would to their mothers — i.e. by doing exactly the opposite. Then came the phone com plaints from their parents asking, for example, “ What are trying to do to my poor daughter.. . ?” “ Who needs such an educated daughter?” asked the father o f five girls. A n o th e r attem pt to alleviate some o f the pressures resulted in near disaster. I obtained the approval o f all the girls to institute an “ excellentpass-fail” system, fo r the first grading period. My efforts, which included extensive instructions to teachers, culminated w ith first the parents and then the girls insisting on knowing what their “ real grades” were. My problems w ith the boys were exactly the opposite. I was the one who sought them out. I attempted to encourage them to study more and chided them about their lack o f disci pline. Their parents never called me to

JEWISH LIFE

complain about too much work — after all they hardly ever saw their sons studying. So it was often .up to me to call them. And yet, how sur prised they seemed to learn that their son was failing, or that he was a disci pline p ro b le m M | “ A fter all, he’s so good and helpful at home,’’ or, “ We never had any problems w ith him in the day school.” These same mothers were the first to complain b itterly when it became necessary to discipline their sons by suspending them fo r the day and sending them home. HE students’ problems were not my only concern. There were many other matters which I had to attend to. In fact, even my executive o ver-size d calendar did not have enough room to jo t down all the chores that had to be done. Two words appearing every two weeks on that calendar meant a series o f phone calls: “ Meet payroll.” They were a constant reminder o f my biggest headache, the continuous necessity fo r fund raising. For the first two months, the school operated on credit financing, i.e. bank loans to meet the payroll. This was on top o f a deficit o f $35,000 which I inherited from my predecessor. When I telephoned a prominent local rabbi and pleaded w ith him that “ we need money to meet the payroll,” he responded, “ So what else is new?” Apparently few men can tolerate hear ing a woman plead. The next day, though, he brought in a $500 contri bution from one o f his members. I always wondered what tears would

SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

have accomplished. Approxim ately one-third o f the budget was derived from tu ition pay ments. Those requesting tu ition reduc tions (and there were many) were sent forms and upon the return o f these the requests were referred to the tuition committee. Getting the parents to return these forms proved a form id able task. It was amazing how many claimed that they never received the forms, or had lost them. A t least three parents referred to the “ private ar ra n g e m e n ts” they had made the previous year. They were so private, in fact, that we never did locate any w ritten records. One parent refused to fill out the form , and dared us to “ refuse a Jewish child admission to a yeshivah” because we didn’t Trust her word that they couldn’t afford to pay tuition. I found that there was usually a direct correlation between a negative p a re n ta l a ttitu d e towards tu ition payment and a negative attitude on the part o f the child towards learning. Many o f these parents would then accuse the school o f giving more weight to the opinions and complaints Of parents who were paying fu ll tu i tion, thus completing a vicious cycle.

THE BANQUET HE school’s main fund raising effort, the m idwinter banquet, required my constant attention. The phone rang continuously, in school and at home. In order to spend a little time with my fam ily, I began removing the p ho ne from the hook, This

method proved invaluable until one Sunday morning, when at 7:30 A.M. I was jolted from my much needed sleep by the doorbell. It was the friendly telephone company repairman. “ You never come when I really need yo u,” I told him. He insisted that our phone was o ut o f order, since they had received a call the night before that our phone needed repairs. I learned later that one distraught parent, after failing to reach me (how could some one be on the phone fo r five hours on a Saturday night?), had called the phone company. A fter this incident was repeated a second time we realized that something drastic would have to be done. So we bought a telephone “ valet” (automatic answering device). We were the first to have one and soon w o rd a b o u t th is gadget spread throughout the Jewish comm unity, and we found that people would call repeatedly just to have members o f their fam ily listen to the tape; we heard the recorded giggles. Some o f the responses came in the form o f a “ tape recording” o f their message to us. We had attempted to inject a humorous touch into our recorded message by saying that we were either “ unwilling or unable to answer the phone at this tim e.” A few people (no sense o f humor) were insulted and others simply refused to “ talk to a machine.” HE most important and most d iffic u lt aspect o f our prepara tions fo r the banquet were those in volving fund raising. It was obvious

that the same few people who were involved not only in helping the high school, but in all the other im portant Jewish organizations in“ town, would be once again called upon to help. This year, however, we needed more volun teer solicitors to see some o f the V IP ’s as well as members o f the Jewish c o m m u n ity who had never been approached before jS m any o f whom did not even know that the school existed . This method o f personal solicitation, usually accomplished in teams o f tw o ’s, had proved successful in the past. Many o f the prominent individuals who were solicited were impressed to learn that O rthodoxy still existed. They were also impressed to see “ such young and dedicated profes sionals” giving up their precious even ings and Sundays in order to solicit funds fo r the high school. We spent a great deal o f time trying to recruit new volunteers, only to find that fo r the most part mere mention o f the words “ fund raising” evoked much the same response S “ not m e!” or, “ Who - Me?” The most a rtic u la te and verbal individuals became silent or offered some feeble excuse. In one instance, a prominent court attorney known fo r his verbal eloquence told me that he was a “ solicitor, not a solicitor.” Many were w illing to offer suggestions on ways to raise funds, b u t would refuse to assume any responsibilities in carrying them out. It was disheartening to hear the head o f a department at one o f the universities state that he was afraid to assume “ the total responsibility” but

JEWISH LIFE

would be w illing to share it. Even more surprising was a psychologist’s statement that he was “ afraid” to ask people fo r money. While we somehow managed to recruit a few new volunteers, I had found this ordeal very frustrating. Therefore, I decided to once again discuss w ith the president the merits o f a professional fund raiser. His re sponse was short and to the point — “ You can’t find one and even if you could we can’t afford o n e .. . . ” Originally my fund raising activi ties were to be limited to the coordina tion o f such efforts. Thank G-d, our Board believed that it was inappropri ate fo r a woman to personally solicit funds. However, shortly before the banquet, I decided to call a few people personally. A fter the initial shock o f having a woman call and ask not for $10 but for $200 or more, many contributed. Some, I am certain, did so merely to get me o ff the phone, others, because I “ sounded like a sincere young lady.” BANQUET and a Jewish wed ding have much in common, including the likelihood o f inciting the anger o f a number o f insulted people. In our comm unity, not only does everyone expect a w ritten invitation w ith a -return postage-paid envelope (which they never bother to return), but a personal phone invitation as well. Complaints about seating are co m m o n p la c e d e s p ite strenuous efforts to please everyone. For the firs t time in the five-year

SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

history o f the school, a new problem presented itself S where was I to sit? In previous years, only rabbis were seated at the dais. This policy was adopted in order to establish the image o f a yeshivah ^ and also to preclude the possibility o f improper female at tire on the dais. Numerous suggestions, such as the elimination o f the dais completely, were made and rejected. A s o lu tio n was finally found. Since Rabbi and Mrs. L. were being honored on their 50th wedding anniversary, Mrs. L. and I were seated at both ends o f the dais ¡1 next to our respective husbands, o f course. The. awkwardness o f my pres ence was obvious -9 the speakers, in their opening statements, not knowing how to address me, simply ignored my existence. However, I managed to win acclaim as being the shortest speaker | | and I am not referring to my height.

THE AFTERMATH February-March FTER the banquet, the girls resum ed th eir petitions and delegations. Some o f their grievances were justifiable. In fact, in those areas where one least expects difficulties to a ris e » they invariably do. With all the complaints one hears these days about oversized classes, who would believe that small classes could pose serious problems. In a math class consisting o f six girls, three o f the girls who had already taken geometry were coinci dentally better math students and fo r them the pace was too slow. For the

others t;he pace was too fast. In order to find a solution I proceeded to consult with “ experts” in the field o f education, only to learn that they “ wished they had such problems.” With this helpful insight, I decided to experiment on my own. A fter receiv ing the support o f the teacher and students, we divided the class into two groups, each having half the period fo r instruction and the rest fo r independ ent study. I was somewhat concerned that I might be setting education back fifty years through the use o f the “ little red school house” approach. Nevertheless, the experiment was an amazing success. There was one occasion when I had to bring my own petition to the girls. It was my good fortune that it was the Year o f the M iniskirt. I am certain that the rabbis were grateful fo r a woman’s presence, to deal w ith this delicate problem. With the bless ings o f the Hebrew teaching staff, it became my task to give the girls a Mussar talk. While it was true that our girls wore long stockings and their skirts were longer than those worn by the girls in public schools, it wasn’t easy to get them to understand that it was also a matter o f “ kavod” fo r the rabbis. The fact that the daughters o f some o f the local rabbis were among the short skirt contingent did not help put the point across. HE number o f crises at the boys’ sch oo l m u ltip lie d and were compounded by a sudden outburst o f parent complaints regarding my missed

visits to the school during the hectic banquet weeks. The fact that I was in contact w ith the boys and available for any situation requiring *my attention didn’t seem to matter. Neither did my statement that “ Jewish boys could use a little neglect from their mothers.” Even my presence did not deter the endless “ accidental” breakage o f windows. Our boys were fast becom ing expert “ glazers,” but unfortu nately their talents did not include plumbing. The boys also sent their delega tions, and their requests included dog food (which they informed me was fo r the laboratory mice) and oddest o f all, possibly because o f its frequency, hand towels and soap. Due to the co n s p ic u o u s consumption o f the latter, I was often tempted to com ment about compulsive handwashing. How could I complain? — they were after all “ clean.” Our boys made the fro n t page o f the second section o f the local news p aper w ith a headline that read, “ Yeshivah Students Experiment with Drugs.” One antisemite with a heavy Yiddish accent called to express his shock at such goings on at a yeshivah. Had he bothered to read the article he would have discovered that the stu dents were doing experiments in an advanced Biology class with rats and m ice. While this publicity evoked otherwise favorable responses, we also received crank calls from animal lovers and a letter from one “ Humane Society” decrying the program and stating that they thought that “ Jewish

JEWISH LIFE

people were supposed to be humane.” Since I have brought up the subject o f our rats, perhaps I should also mention that we had a basement f u ll o f these highly reproductive animals. N ot being an animal lover, I rarely ventured into the lab area. I was certain that the boys were aware o f my phobia and half expecting to find a rat in my desk or in a drawer, I bravely ventured into the lab and announced my admiration o f the mice, making certain that I was heard by all. I then alluded to earlier expectations o f see ing these creatures upstairs, but was happy that I never did.

FIRE ORE excitement at the boys* school! One morning, soon after I arrived at the girls’ school, I received a call from Rabbi A., who taught the boys in the morning. Barely hearing him, all I could make out was that there had been a fire and to please com e rig h t over. During the ten minutes it took to get there, I had visions o f a lo t covered w ith ashes, and only one consolation — namely, the strategic location o f the fire depart ment — next door to the school. Everyone had, in the past, complained about the noise from the roaring sirens, but n o w .. . .We had fire insur ance. . . .oooops we should pay that $500 premium im m ediately.. . .What synagogue would take us in? I knew we were in tro u b le .... .It turned out that only part o f the basement, which had been used to store old dorm itory

SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

equipment including old mattresses, was partially destroyed. I had always wanted to sell that junk, but there were no buyers — now not only did we get rid o f it, but the insurance money enabled us to meet three payrolls; Perhaps this was one o f those miracles, but there’s got to be a better way to meet payrolls. The fire set o ff a whole chain o f events. Suddenly, both schools looked like armed camps. We had fire mar shals all over the place. One came, however, not because o f the fire (he didn’t even know about it), but be cause some neighbors didn’t approve o f having a Jewish school in their neighborhood. We then received evictiqn notices fo r both schools because they not only failed to meet the build ing code regulations, but also because it was illegal to run a private school w itho ut the proper zoning. The latter point was straightened out with the help o f the attorney who had w ritten the zoning code. With the investment o f a few thousand dollars, we would be able to use the boys’ school. How ever, w ith a straight face, the fire mar shal informed us that the only way to meet the requirements in the girls’ school was to “ bring the second floor down to the firs t.” During the same week, we re ceived a call from the Supervisor of School Accreditation fo r the State. He informed us that we would not be able to issue diplomas since we were not recognized by the state. He visited our school the next day and told us that we might be eligible fo r temporary

approval if among other things we would comply w ith the fire code regu lations. In order to receive fu ll recogni tion from the State, we would even tu a lly need f if t y acres o f land, extensive physical facilities and a physical education program. A t least he was most impressed w ith the excel lent academic standards.

GAMES CAN BE DANGEROUS AND FUN T is not easy to lose eighteen boys and one rebbe. It happened to us, though,on Lag Ba’omer. It seems that they became engrossed in a base ball game w ith the rebbe on a hitting streak, and lost all sense o f time. Besides, that rebbe never wears a watch anyway Sr and the boys weren’t about to remind him that they were missing their secular classes. N ot all o f our boys’ activities were “ on the ground,” as I learned that they were diligently working on an “ underground newspaper.” Our girls were missing classes fo r other reasons. They were involved in w r itin g and producing a musical, which they presented at the school’s firs t annual luncheon. They had also planned to stage a fashion show, but they found that the clothes were o u t rageously short, fo r our girls. The play, entitled “ A Spoof o n .. .Fiddler on the R oof,” was a smash success. It con cerned the “ frummies and the mods,” w ith the main character being the school itself. We were taken to task with such songs as “ I f I were a rich

school.. . . ” HILE our children concentrate on games such-as baseball, adults engage in other more sophisticated games,, such as politics. This game was probably developed either during a period o f boredom or possibly during a time o f crisis, when it was deemed easier to create a diversion than to face the problem(s) directly. These tradi tions, w ith numerous variations, have n o t escaped the Yeshivah Board. Could it be a coincidence fo r example, that the renewal o f contracts takes place at a time o f year when most schools face their most serious finan cial crisis? I firs t became consciously aware o f and directly involved in the “ game” when I witnessed the approach used in negotiating contracts w ith the fu ll time teachers. Certainly, few could argue that our teachers are, G-d forbid, overpaid. Yet, when setting budgetary priorities, the teacher is the last to be considered. He ranks on the list after the janitor. And even then, he is treated as though the Board was doing him a favor in not cutting his salary. An interesting phenomenon, which I shall term the \VE and TH EY Prin ciple, becomes apparent at such times. WE refers to the baale-battim and THEY to the school staff. A group feeling usually prevails until the time fo r discussing money matters. Sud denly, we have a group o f efficiency experts and evaluators. The teacher is told about his deficiencies, in detail B leaving him w ith the impression that

JEWISH LIFE

he is fortunate to even be re-consid ered fo r the follow ing year. Few Board members are w illing to com m it them selves to raise more funds, so that the teacher can be given a living wage. Instead, the teacher is shown all the outstanding bills and told that there is also some doubt as to whether the school w ill re-open. Forgotten is the back salary still owed from the year before. P o litica l moves and counter moves were not limited to teacher contracts. My husband had alerted me to the fact that my Job would even tually become “ p olitical,” and recog nizing this wisdom, I had originally taken the job fo r one year. I continued to remind the Board o f this, but fo r some reason they d idn’t take me seriously. Perhaps I should have con sidered this complimentary. A t the same time, however, no one men tioned anything about the next year until my husband told one Board member he hoped they were looking for a replacement. When word o f this reached the other Board members, I was immediately asked to re-consider lith e “ game” had begun—: . but w ith one unwilling partner. Knowing that there was no one else under considera tion fo r the job, I was unprepared fo r the tactics employed during this meet ing. It began w ith petty critical com ments, “ to set the right tone,” I was told. “ So why haven’t I heard these remarks before this?” I asked. When I proceeded to analyze their tactics and told them that all they were really doing was laying the groundwork fo r a

SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

b e tte r b a rg a in in g position, they laughed in agreement. My adamant position produced some very attractive offers, but I remained firm in resolve not to return to the school fo r a second year. T was during this period that I became fu lly aware o f my dis taste for political issues and dealing. The domain o f politics is not limited to men, but the number o f women participants is limited. It was most interesting that at that time Mrs. Golda Meir was elected Prime Minister o f Israel, thus raising Halachic questions which were dis cussed in the Jewish community, regarding women and their role in politics. My husband’s interpretation o f the Halochah referred to by the Rambam (Mishneh Torah, Melochim 1,5) that a woman cannot hold an authoritative position was that this would involve “ politics,” a role too demeaning fo r a woman. In relation to my experiences in the political arena I found that in general, my approach to immediate problems was usually more practical than the men’s (women seem to panic less in crisis situations), and that it was more d iffic u lt fo r me to compromise on certain issues, as this readily be came translated into a personal com promise o f basic ideals. The latter was viewed by others as the stance o f a shrewd politician, but I knew better. Another major aspect o f the “ game,” which I had unw ittingly played in accordance with the wrong

ground rules, was the method and manner o f presenting new ideas and approaches to some long-standing problems. In many instances, however, I found that sheer persistence paid o ff simply because the idea became in corporated in the mind o f the other party and eventually emerged as his or their original idea. I had also been indoctrinated into believing that one must first de fine the problem and then attempt a solution using the simplest approach. Apparently, this method is not feasible in school politics where the rule o f thumb is “ NEVER S IM P LIF Y !,“ or point out the obvious. One must in stead present a complex proposal, which includes not only extraneous material, but incomprehensible ver biage as well. The reasoning behind this being, “ if you can't understand it, it must be good,“ and furthermore, the excess material makes fo r excellent leverage. I wonder what could have happened had I known all o f this before becoming a “ lame duck.“

THE LAST DAYS Peace and Quiet. . . .Not Quite ETWEEN final exams and pre parations fo r graduation, there was never a dull moment. Somehow students seem to go out o f their way to prove that everything must get done at th e last possible minute. This syndrome also seems to be passed along to the teachers. On the very day that the Yearbook was to go to press,

we found that the rebbe’s Mussar letter to the graduates was too long fo r the fu ll page allotted to him. A t first the students tried to make the revi sions, but then turned to me in total frustration. A fter I worked on the paper and read it to the rebbe, I learned the reason fo r their despair. The deletion o f a single word not only involved lengthy explanations but in cluded charges that I had “ ruined the meaning.“ With my newly acquired knowledge o f the art o f compromise, and after three hours o f bargaining, we finally reached an agreeable condensation I H much to the relief o f the students. G ra d u a tio n posed the usual problems. I was most grateful that the valedictorians sought the aid o f their parents in w riting their speeches. However, their stage fright was an other matter, as we soon discovered during rehearsals. They must have set a record fo r speed reading and the inter val between breaths. Possibly fo r the first time, they learned how to breathe p ro p e rly. We also had difficulties teaching the boys to walk in an up right position. . . . it proved even more d iffic u lt getting them to sit down simultaneously. With the students gone, prepara tions fo r the coming year reached a peak. I suddenly found myself at one point w ith three part-time secretaries,; as Mrs. B. was going on vacation. I was most relieved that we had gotten through the y^ar w itho ut missing a p a y r o ll, thus avoiding a possible

JEWISH LIFE

teacher walkout. Our policies o f set ting high standards fo r student admis sions paid o ff and we received many applications from unexpected sources. With the curriculum arranged, and many o f the teachers hired, I was able to get all records up to date. I also had some time to reflect on the more personal impact o f the year’s work. I concluded that, phys ically, I was indeed a member o f the stronger sex. Socially and psychologi

SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

cally, my life had been simplified to some extent, as there were only two areas o f focus, my fam ily and the High School. HE year ended much the same as it had begun W but this time w ithout the workmen providing the background noise. The quiet was deaf ening. My last official act was the purchase o f a building fo r the Girls Division.

by JUSTIN HOFMANN HERE can hardly be any quarrel w ith the assertion that “ racism” remains one o f the major problems o f our day. Developments since the issu ance in 1968 o f the report o f the N ational Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders have not léssened the force o f what was stated therein.The Commission, comprising a group o f o u tsta n d in g Americans headed by Governor Kerner o f Illinois, had been charged by President Johnson w ith studying the upheaval and violence oc curring in American cities and w ith prescribing remedies fo r this intoler able situation. A fter a painstaking in vestigation, the follow ing conclusion was reached: The record before the Com mission reveals that the causes o f r e c e n t ra c ia l disorders are

embedded in a massive tangle o f issues and c i r c u mstances — social, economic, po litica l and psychological — which arise o u t o f the historical pattern o f N e g ro -w h ite relations in America. Despite these complexities, cer tain fundamental matters are dear. O f these, the most funda mental is the racial attitude and behavior o f white Americans toward black Americans. Race prejudice has shaped our history decisively in the past; i t now threatens to do so again. White racism is essentially responsible fo r the explosive m ixture which has been accumulating in our cities since the end o f World War l/ ( p . 9 J j.

JEWISH LIFE

The report goes on to identify “ three o f the most bitter fruits o f white racial attitudes as being perva sive discrimination and segregation, black migration and white exodus, and black, ghettos.” These conditions, the report points out, are the ingredients o f a potentially disastrous situation. One might add that the effects o f “ w h ite racism” transcend our national boundaries. Our racial a tti tudes have international ramifications. They affect our relations w ith the peoples o f Africa and Asia and they provide a good deal o f material fo r the Commcinist propaganda war against the United States. When black diplo mats are refused service in an Am eri can restaurant or denied accommo dations* in an American hotel, as has happened on occasion in the past, the State Department is faced w ith a most delicate and embarrassing situation. Finally, it should be pointed out that racism has been one o f the three or four major issues on American cam puses in recent years. A significant proportion o f campus violence can be traced to exploitation by campus radicals o f the student struggle fo r racial equality. The notion that there are su perior and inferior races — a theory advocated w ith such tragic conse quences b y H itler's pseudo-scien tists — has few overt supporters in this country. The American public at large identifies itself w ith the principle o f racial equality. The implication to the contrary by the Kerner report, capi talized to the fu ll by the student pro testers, shocked many. The indictm ent SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

o f white Americans as collectively guilty o f racism has been widely re sented. Undeniably, the view that no individual or group can be considered good or bad on the basis o f skin color or other ethnic criterion is part o f the American creed. Yet it follows from this universal tenet that it is wrong to either grant or deny opportunities to people solely on account o f racial ori gin. That such discrimination has been prevalent is indisputable. Today, racial discrimination is spelled racism. T is the contention o f this essay that racism is rejected by Juda ism; that it is inconceivable to be both a good Jew and a racist. This, in fact, may be the burden o f the message of the creation account in the beginning o f Bereshith, a question that ap parently occupied the Sages, as may be gleaned from the firs t comment o f Rashi on the Torah. By asserting that all men descended from Adam, the Bible precluded a racist position. This, in any case, seems to have been the conclusion drawn by the Prophet Malachi when he admonished the Jew ish people, “ Do we not all have one father? Has not one G-d created us all? Why then do you deal unfaithfully a man w ith his brother to desecrate the covenant o f his fathers?” (Malachi 2:10). According to one o f the tra ditional commentators, “ father” refers to Adam and the intention o f the pro phet is to point out the physical unity o f all men in the firs t part o f the verse and their spiritual unity in the second part (Metzudath Dovid, a dloc.). This view is supported by a

statement in the Mishnah. The ques tion is raised as to why man was created a single being rather than seve ral beings. Among the answers pro vided is the follow ing: “ And fo r the sake o f the peace o f the creatures, so that one man should not be able to say to his fellowman, ‘My father is greater than your father! ’ ” (Sanhedrin 4:5). In the corresponding Toseftah, the answer is formulated in terms o f the group rather than the individual: “ In order that families should not quarrel one w ith the other. Now that he was created singly they quarrel w ith each other, how much more so [ i f man had been created] tw o .“ (Toseftah Sanhedrin 8:3). The logic inherent in the above citations could be applied w ith equal validity to even larger social groupings. Given the fact o f common origin, how could a nation or a race claim superi o rity over another? Would not such a claim have to be rejected as well on th e basis o f mankind’s common origin? In short, Judaism w ill have to oppose racism by carrying the foreg o in g a rg u m e n t to its lo g ic a l conclusion. Even more compelling is the argument from creation in the Divine image. “ And G-d created man in His image. In the image o f G-d did He crea te h im ,” th e T o ra h states (Bereshith 1:27). Rabbi Akiva calls attention to this im portant principle in the Ethics o f the Fathers: “ Beloved is man who was created in the image. As a result o f added love, it was made known to him that he was created in

the image o f G-d, as it is w ritten (Bereshith 9:6), ‘ For in the image o f G-d did He make man’ ” (Pirkey Ovoth 3:18). Each and every human being bears the seal o f the Alm ighty. To be a human means to be in some way G-d-like; to carry w ithin oneself a divine spark; to be endowed w ith a soul that comes from G-d. Conse quently, every human being possesses an inherent dignity o f which he cannot be deprived. There is no room in such a view o f man fo r a position o f racism. To speak o f superior and inferior races would amount to a denial o f the Torah concept o f man. To adopt such an a tti tude would necessitate the m odifi cation o f the Biblical principle to the e ffe c t that only some men were created in the image o f G-d. In the light o f this consideration, it w ill hardly come as a surprise that the Nazis were not only the sworn enemies o f the Jewish people, but o f the Bible as well. In fact, they were unable to make peace with any reli gious tradition that shared this Biblical view o f man, except perhaps o ut o f political expediency. No doubt, there were many Biblical concepts and val ues which they b itterly opposed. But the concept o f man certainly figured prominently among them. N view o f the far-reaching im pli cations o f the Biblical notion o f man, it is understandable that it was recognized as one o f the fundamental principles o f Judaism. A discussion is recorded in the Jerusalem Talmud (N e d o rim , Perek 9 Halochah 4)

JEWISH LIFE

between Rabbi Akiva and Ben Azzai. The former asserted that, “ ‘And thou shalt love your neighbor as yourself’ (Vayikra 19:18) is a great principle in the Torah.” To which the latter re sponded, “ T his is the book o f the generations o f man’ (Bereshith 5:1) is a greater principle than this.” The complete text o f the verse to which Ben Azzai refers reads as follows: “ This is the book o f the generations o f man, on the day on which G-d created man, in the likeness o f G-d did He make him .” In short, Ben Azzai’s reference is to the Biblical concept o f man created in the image o f G-d, from which flows the notion o f human dig nity and the consequent right o f every individual to a meiasure o f respect. This principle which establishes the essential equality o f men and the in violability o f the human person and his rights is even more basic than the p rin c ip le o f practicing love and kindness toward others. T he Jew ish attitude toward racism may also be gleaned from seve ral Biblical references to black people. Moses, it w ill be recalled, was married to a Kushite woman (Bemidbor, 12:1). The crucial question is, what is meant by Kushite? Some o f the commen tators, including Rashi, suggest a non literal interpretation. “ This teaches,” Rashi notes, “ that all admit to her beauty just as all admit to the black ness o f the Kushi.” And he goes on to observe, “ Kushith has the numerical value o f yefath mareh (of beautiful appearance).” Others, among them the Rashbam and I bn Ezra, take the word

SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

in its literal meaning o f black. Hertz refers to this interpretation when he notes that there are those who “ take the word Kushite in the usual sense o f ‘Ethiopian’ . . . . ” The fact thafMosheh Rabbenu, the greatest Prophet o f Israel, was married to a black woman teaches as effectively as anything can what Judaism’s position on this ques tion is. Equally instructive is Amos 9:7, “ Are you not like the children o f the Ethiopians unto Me, O Children o f Israel? says thè Lord. Have I not brought up Israel out o f the land o f E g y p t, and th e Philistines from Caphtor, and Aram from Kir?” Finally, a verse in the Song of Songs may be cited as a reflection o f the Jewish attitude on racism. “ I am black and beautiful, O daughters o f Jerusalem, as the tents o f Kedar, as the curtains o f Solomon” (Shir Ha-Shirim, 1:5). Various figurative interpretations o f this verse are found in traditional sources. Thus, “ black” is taken to be symbolic of sinfulness and contrasted w ith “ b e a u tifu l,” the symbol o f righteousness. Several ways in which these apparently contradictory terms may be reconciled are proposed. But a more literal reading would almost have a contemporary ring to it and suggest a message o f considerable relevance for our time. INCE Judaism is first and fore most a system o f command ments, Halochah is, no doubt, the most reliable indicator o f its value orientation. An exploration o f the

status o f racism in Halochah would thus prove o f critical importance. Does Halochah, in fact, discriminate in terms o f race? Characteristic o f the racial a tti tude o f Halochah are the laws o f con version. There are no racial restrictions on proselytes to Judaism. Converts are accepted on the basis o f certain objec tive standards. Most prominent among these is the willingness to assume the responsibilities o f Jewish living and to do so w itho ut ulterior motives. Sincer ity is the first condition to be met by a potential convert. But racial qua lifi cations are conspicuous by their ab sence. N ot only are there no racial qualifications for the admission o f converts to Judaism, the Halochah does not differentiate either between newly admitted converts and other Jews. “ There shall be one law fo r the home-born and fo r the ger who dwells among yo u ” (Shemoth, 12:49). This, the Mechiltah explains, teaches that the Ger and the home-born are equal with respect to all the commandments o f the Torah [ad loc.). According to I bn Ezra, Ger refers to a “ righteous convert.” Other commentators, inclu ding Rashi, appear to be in agreement w ith this interpretation. The question is included by Maimonides in his Mishneh Torah (Hilchoth Issurey Biah, 12:17) and adjudicated in the fo llo w ing manner: “ A ll the idolators that convert and accept upon themselves all th e c o m m a n d m e n ts o f th e T o ra h .. . .are like an Israelite in every respect, as it is w ritten (Bemidbor,

15:15), ‘As fo r the congregation, there shall be one statute both fo r you and fo r th e G er th a t sojourns with y o u .. . .* ” This means, then, that Judaism rejects the notion o f first and second class Jews. The Ger, no matter what his racial origin, is in no way in ferior to those born to Jewish parents. In fact, racial categories are not found in Halochah altogether. Found is a distinction between an Israelite and a Ben Noach, i.e,, between a Jew and a non-Jew. The distinction is one o f differing obligations. The Israelite is duty bound to observe the 613 com mandments o f the Torah. The non-Jew is charged w ith the observance o f the Sheva Mitzvoth B’nei Noach, the seven basic laws which G-d gave to the chil dren o f Noah. The distinction does not imply a value judgement any more than do the differing obligations ad dressed to Jewish men and women. Moreover; the special regulations concerning certain peoples and tribal groups contained in the Torah are based on moral, not ori racial consi derations. Thus, “ An Am m onite or a Moabite shall not enter into the assem bly o f the Lord; even to the tenth generation shall none o f them enter into the assembly o f the Lord forever; because they met you not with bread and w ith water on the way, when you came forth out o f Egypt; and because they hired against you Balaam the son o f B eor fr o m P e th o r o f Aram Naharaim, to curse yo u ” (Devorim 2 3 :4 -5 ). On the other hand, the Edomite and the Egyptian are barred from entering the congregation o f

JEWISH LIFE

Israel fo r only three generations (Devorim 23:8-9). The Egyptians en slaved the Jews and cast their male children into the Nile. But this evil is mitigated by the fact that the Israelites found a home in Egypt when they were in great need o f one (Rashi, ad loc.). The Edomites denied the Israel ites passage through their country and came out w ith an army against them (Bemidbor, 20:14-21). But Edom is “ your brother.” Esau, the ancestor o f Edom, was the brother o f Jacob and because o f this relationship deserves this limited consideration. The commandment to “ harass the Midianites and smite them ” is simi larly based on a moral offense. “ For they harass you, by their wiles where with they have beguiled you in the matter o f Peor, and in the matter o f Kozbi, the daughter o f the prince o f Midian, their sister, who was slain on the day o f the plague in the matter o f Peor” (Devorim 25:28). The harshest treatment, how ever, is reserved fo r the Amalekites, but also on moral and not on racial grounds. The remembrance o f Amalek is to be blotted out, because the Amalekites attacked the weak and the tired at the rear o f the Israelite marchers at the time o f the Exodus from Egypt (Devorim 12:17-19). For this dastardly deed, they forfeited their right to exist. There is nothing more despicable in the view of Juda ism than to cut down the helpless. HE absence o f racial categories "in Judaism is reflected also in the special blessing which the Rabbis

SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

ordained at the sight o f a great scholar. “ If he sees Jewish scholars he says, ‘ Blessed be He Who imparted o f His wisdom to those who revere H im .’ If he sees pagan scholars he says, ‘Blessed by He Who gave o f His wisdom to His creatures’ ” (Berachoth 58a). Wisdom is wisdom no matter who the scholar is. It is w orthy o f admiration whether found in a Jew or a non-Jew. Judaism does not countenance the racism re flected in the travesty perpetrated by the Nazis when they differentiated be tw e en “ Aryan” and “ non-Aryan” scholarship. To them, only “ A ryan” scholarship was meritorious. That o f “ non-Aryans” was considered inferior regardless o f what its'creative nature may have been. More than that, Judaism ex presses a universal concern fo r people in which racial distinctions have no place. “ The Holy One, blessed be He, gave the Torah to Israel so that they would benefit all the nations” (Tanchumah on Devorim 2:2-4). A tra dition with a racial orientation would not be interested in extending its béné ficient influence to anyone outside its racially approved sphere. Judaism’s universal concern bespeaks the absence o f such an orientation. The attitude expressed by Juda ism transcends even this world and in cludes the world to come. From the verse (Tehillim, 9:18), “ The wicked shall return to the nether-world, even all the nations that forget G-d,” Rabbi Yehoshua deduces that “ there are righteous among the idolators who have a share in the world to come” (Toseftah Sanhedrin 13; 1). A similar 47

conclusion is revealed in the Talmud: “ Bilaam did not enter the world to come. From this may be inferred that other [Gentiles] did enter i t ” (San hedrin 105a). This view is included by Maimonides in his code o f Jewish law: “ And in the same w ay,” Rambam writes, “ the righteous o f all nations o f the world have a share in the world to c o m e ” (Mishneh Torah, Hilchoth Teshuvah 3:5). The definition o f “ righteous” is supplied by one o f the commentators. It refers to those who follow the seven commandments o f th e so ns o f Noah (H a g o h o th Maimunioth, ad loc.). HE attitude o f the Jewish tra dition toward racism is probably best expressed in the Talmudic passage

com m enting on the Exodus from Egypt. When the Israelites had miracu lously crossed the Red Sea while their Egyptian pursuers had been drowned in it, there was great rejoicing not only on earth, but also in heaven. “ The ministering angels wanted To sing a song. Said the Holy One, blessed be He, 'T h e w ork o f My hands is drowning in the sea and you are singing a song?’ ” (Megillah 10b). A ll human beings, regardless o f color or nationality, are the handiwork o f the Alm ighty. They are equally precious in His sight. To hold that some people are by nature superior to others be cause o f their racial origin would thus run counter to the deepest convictions o f Judaism.

JEWISH LIFE

THE

CONTRIBUTION

LATIN

AMERICAN

JEWS

ISRAEL

by JACOB BELLER HE Jew ish com m unities of* South and Central America have contributed vitally to the welfare and upbuilding o f the Jewish state. Their contribution measures up well against that o f the six m illion Jews o f North America. These communities, it must be remembered, are quite young: some only recently marked their fiftie th b ir th d a y . Altogether their Jewish population comprises 900,000. The g ro w th and development o f their comm unity life has not gone as far as in th e N orth ern hemisphere; the struggle fo r existence and the e ffo rt to reach some level o f economic inde pendence has been much harder be cause o f the political chaos and the general backwardness o f the Latin American countries. Aside from a small privileged

SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

class which have “ made i t ” or “ made America” as the saying goes there, the great preponderance o f Jews o f Latin America belong to the middle class. This explains their limited activity in organizational work until recently and why so little was heard from them fo r so long on the international Jewish scene. It was only in 1939, on the eve o f World War II, that the World Jewish Congress convened a conference o f all the Latin American Jewish communi ties in Baltimore and created a per manent liaison with North American and world Jewry. The love and longing fo r the Jewish homeland had its beginning in Argentina more than eighty years ago on the fields o f the colonies o f Baron de Hirsch, whose plan it was to show the world that Jews were capable of

doing hard and productive work as farmers. It was when the first Jewish colonists were settled on their lands cultivating the sandy wastes in the capricious climate that the yearning and love fo r the Land o f Israel was "awakened. The question came to their minds: if we must work hard on fields, why on foreign fields? The Argentine Jewish w riter S.J. Horowitz tells how a group o f these early colonists gathered signatures and sent a request o ff to the Zionist leader o f the day, Menachem Ussishkin. The plan they offered in volved a large-scale Aliyah. It was in the colonies o f Baron de Hirsch that the first Zionist groups were organ ized, bearing such characteristic names as Ohavey Tzedek, Louis Brandeis, Agudath Achim, Sokolow Dorshey Tziyon, etc. Mounted astride their horses in marshy pampas, fighting o ff intense blasts o f wind, they would buy shekolim in the colonies. Some would pledge a dozen eggs to the Keren Kayemeth, others a couple o f hens. ^ From the farm colonies the Zionist ideal spread to the cities. Fifty-three years ago when the Balfour D eclaration was proclaimed, more than 100,000 Jews marched through the streets o f Buenos Aires carrying Torah scrolls and blue and white banners (which are the same colors as th e Argentine flag.) A t first the governm ent was alarmed and the police were alerted. Only when the authorities were satisfied that what was taking place was not an anti governm ent coup d'etat were the troops withdrawn. The entire press

commented on this event, the firs t of its kind in Buenos Aires. O this day the Argentine Jewish comm unity is entirely Zionistoriented. Zionist activity and, gener ally speaking, the attitude t& th e State o f Israel bear a different character from that in North America. The parallel is closer to the former commu nities o f Eastern'Europe before World War II. It is more o f a folk-attitude, fo r th e p ioneers o f Zionism in Argentina were simple folksmenshen who had a direct, unsophisticated way o f looking at this matter, in contrast to N orth America where a more planned and “ practical” policy pre v a ile d . ‘ ‘ Professional Zionism ” or “ Z ionist professionals” do not exist in Latin America. To this day Zionist and other Jewish communal activity is carried in the main through active volunteers. The legacy o f the colonists o f an earlier era is visible today in all phases o f local Jewish life. Their sons and grandsons are in the leadership, directing the communal and cultural apparatus. As a result o f these conditions, comm unity life has a warmth which is lacking wherever the central apparatus functions on a mass production basis in which the individual is overlooked. The communal structure in all depart ments, whether it be education, relief, culture, or other activities is conduc ted in a more personal and intimate manner. We all know the leading role played by the North American Jewish

JEWISH LIFE

community in working towards the United Nations decision on the form u lation o f a Jewish State. Less is known, however, o f the vital role o f th e Jewish communities o f Latin America in this historic decision. It must be borne in mind that the U.S.A. despite its power and size had only one vote to cast; the Latin Am eri can states, w ith more than twenty votes, were a key factor in the situa tion. Long before the United Nations vote, when Israel was as yet “ a state in the making,” the preparatory work began in Latin America. Two impor ta n t em issaries were involved Mosheh Tov o f Argentina and Benno Weiser (now Binyamin Varon) o f Ecuador, now Israel’s consul in Santo Domingo. These men initiated the a c tiv it y by form ing pro-Palestine leagues in each o f the various coun tries. Im portant statesmen and diplo mats joined these associations and committees and later they were in a position to influence their govern ments to cast their vote fo r the resolu tion. It w ill be remembered that the first ballot at the U.N. (on a Friday) was held o ff after Herschell Johnson, the American delegate, realized that there were not enough votes at hand to ensure a favourable result. A t the follow ing balloting the vote o f the small republic o f Paraguay was o f the utmost importance: its representative Vasconseles Cesar voted in favour o f a Jewish state. The late Guatemalan

SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

diplomat Garcia Granados mentions this in his book “ The Birth o f Israel.” NOTHER factor o f some impor tance was the following: among th e earliest settlers in the Latin American lands were the Marranos who eventually were submerged into the surrounding population; among their descendants, however, a con sciousness o f Jewish origin survived in a half-forgotten form which needed only some stimulus to be reawakened. This stimulus was provided, by the Jews o f Latin America who, though themselves w itho ut political influence, formed the pro-Palestine committees. Such Latin American statesmen as th e Brazilian Foreign Minister Oswaldo Aranha, who was then chair man o f the U.N. Assembly, Garcia G ra n a d o s o f G u a te m a la , la te r Guatemala’s Ambassador, who was a member o f the U.N. Investigation Commission in Israel, the Uruguayan diplom at Enrique Rodriquez Fabregat, a member o f the commission which reported favourably on the Jewish demands — all these men had a share in the recognition o f the Jewish home land by the United Nations. Some evidence o f the truth o f o u r hypothesis about the Jewish a n c e s try o f some leading South Americans is provided by the fo llo w ing story. When the Balfour Declara tion was proclaimed a newspaperman asked th e A rch b ish o p o f Chile, Monsignor Crescente Errazuriz, fo r his o p in io n . “ This act,” replied the churchman, “ has corrected a grave

injustice perpetrated on the Jewish people,” and he added: “ It is no secret that the head o f the Catholic Church here is o f Jewish descent.” Ten years after the historic vote when Abba Eban, Israel’s Foreign Minister, tendered a dinner in ho% nour o f Oswaldo Aranha, among those in a tte n d a n ce were leading Brazilian statesmen including Freytas Valey and Professor Hermas Lima, judge o f Brazil’s Supreme Court. A t one point in the proceedings Freytas suddenly asked: “ Who among us in your opinion has Jewish features?” He then pointed to Oswaldo Aranha, saying: “ We are cousins and I want you to know that we are descended from the Marranos who fled from Portugal to Brazil.” A cultural center in the name o f this Brazilian statesman has been built in the B’ror Chayil settlement, which was settled by the first chalutzim from Brazil. His daughter came to Israel to attend the opening o f the center. The little democratic republic o f Uruguay was the first to receive an ambassador from Israel immediately after the state came into being. When the ambassador, Yaakov Tzur, pre sented his credentials to the President of Uruguay Luiz Batlle Herrera and several thousand Jews came outside the presidential palace to attend, the distinguished Uruguayan statesman said: “ We, too, are a small country squeezed in between tw o large and powerful states and we cannot rely fo r our security on m ilitary might. Small states can exist only thanks to inter

national justice: this is their fate. Let us therefore extend a hand o f wel come, a sympathy and understanding to another small state. In November 1962, the then Chairman o f the Delegation o f Saudi Arabia to the United Nations, Ahmad Shukairy, made a statement before the Special Political Committee, expres sing the hope that the Argentine Nazi group Tacuara would spread in Latin America. This stirred the Argentine delegate to the Committee, Mr. Lucio Garcia del Solar, to reply: “ The contri bution o f Argentina to the strengthen ing and progress o f freedom o f man, his happiness and survival, are more w orthy o f mention than thegenocidal intention attributed to a group o f Nazis, on which the delegate o f Saudi Arabia saluted my country.” HIS friendly attitude to Israel on the part o f the Latin American countries persists to this day. When Z alm an Shazar, Israel’s President, visited South America he was received w ith fu ll honors and sympathy both by the official governments and by the public-at-large. A number o f projectsin-aid in South America executed by Israeli experts have strengthened this friendship. A t the last conference o f Latin American olim held in Beersheba Walter Sedwich, Assistant Secre tary o f the Organization o f American States (OAS), expressed appreciation to the Government o f Israel fo r train ing technicians and sending specialists to a num ber o f Latin American countries.

JEWISH LIFE

In several countries in South and Central America public schools have been given the name Estado^de Israel. This has occurred in Uruguay, Brazil, Guatemala, Costa Rica, and Argentina. Recently this favor was returned. A school in Kiryath Ha-Yovel in Jeru salem established by an Argentine Jewish cooperative was given the name República Argentina. The Weizmann Institute o f Science in Rechovoth has a section named after San Martin, the Argentine national hero. HAT are the facts on Aliyah from Latin America? The tenth c o n v e n tio n o f o lim from Latin America which was held in Beersheba during my recent visit to Israel pro vided im portant statistics which speak for themselves, giving a rounded reflec tion o f the movement from Latin America and the contribution this movement has made to the Jewish commonwealth. It becomes clear why Prime Minister Golda Meir spoke so highly in her words o f greeting o f the d e v o tio n o f the South American yishuvim to Israel. Since 1962, a total o f 21, 915 persons have arrived in Israel from Latin America. O f these, Argentina, the largest Jewish comm unity, pro vided 13,000, Brazil with its Jewish p o p u la tio n o f 140,000 provided 3,400. Uruguay has 50,000 Jews and 2,275 were from that country. Chile has 40,000 Jews and sent 1,500. 690 olim came from M exico’s 30,000 Jews. Colombia’s 8,000 Jews provided some w ha t more than 400; Venezuela’s

SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

12,000 sent 306; Peru’s 5,000 sent more than 200; from Bolivia just under 200, and from Cuba 131. In 1969 none came from Cuba, which is rather surprising as one would expect more from a country in its situation. In the twenty-year period from 1948 to 1968 the total number of immigrants from Latin America was 24,370, which is 1.8% o f the country’s total immigration. From the year 1965 the rate o f Latin American Aliyah was doubled. The heaviest influx particu larly from Argentina came in 1963. O f the 4,600 who came that year, most were from Argentina. The reason for this was the political change that took place in Argentina and the rise in anti semitism brought about by the eco nomic crisis. When one draws a comparison between these figures, in particular Argentina w ith its half m illion Jews who provided most o f the 3,000 Latin American olim in 1969 (most o f them y o u n g p e o p le ) and th e N o rth American community o f six m illion Jews, and the total Aliyah to Israel in 1969 o f 35,000, one can sense that the Latin American communities are more closely attached to Israel and more emigration can be expected in the future. LARGE part o f the Argentine olim are c o n c e n tra te d in kibbutzim close to the border. These are the children and grandchildren o f the early Baron de Hirsch colonists who are familiar with working on the

s o il. A t the convention o f Latin American olim in Beersheba mention was made o f more than a dozen young men and women who were killed in the fighting in the 1948 War o f Libera tion and the Six-Day War o f 1967. A monument has been erected to them on M ount Carmel. Symptomatic o f the high regard in which Jews from Latin America are held were the remarks made by Prime Minister Golda Meir addressing the Convention at Beersheba in which she stressed the contribution and the p a rtic ip a tio n o f Jews from Latin A m e ric a , th e ir d e ve lo p m e n t o f kibbutzim , their part in the growth o f the land and its defense. Defense Minister Moshe Dayan in his greeting stated that Israel needed this devoted and vital element. A whole complex o f factors play a motivating role in this Aliyah. First o f all, local conditions must be borne in mind. The communities are in close contact w ith the candidates fo r Aliyah and maintain this contact after they settle in Israel. The Kehillah o f Buenos Aires announced a campaign to raise a m illion dollar Aliyah fund to assist emigrants to Israel through the sale o f shares, and the Kehillah itself made a major donation to this campaign. All th e organized Kehilloth in Latin America are linked w ith the Associa tion o f Latin American Immigrants in Israel and at the last convention o f Latin Jewish communities in Lima, Peru, a resolution was adopted that each Kehillah allow a subvention in its budget toward the association o f Latin

American olim in Israel. One reverse factor which, the emigrant from Latin America faces must be noted: When he prepares for Aliyah and sells his house or his busi ness, because o f the inflation from which the country suffers hfs purse is much thinner than in the case o f the North American immigrant, who has a harder currency and a more favorable rate o f exchange. i n a n c i a l l y , to o , L a tin America’s jew s have made vital contributions to the Jewish state. This cannot, o f course, be compared to that o f the wealthy North American com m u n ity . T he g a llo p in g inflation endemic to many o f these lands plays havoc w ith their currency, a factor that reduces this contribution. However, taking into account the number o f Jews and comparing the figures proportionally, the Jews o f C e n tra l and South America have measured up well. The very procedure in announcing fund raising campaigns for Israel is quite different from the means used elsewhere. It bears much more o f a festive character and a much less official nature. When I was in Buenos Aires I saw crowds o f more than 100,000 Jews assemble in the c ity ’s largest park to listen to the late Moshe Sharett and once to listen to David Ben Gurion. The opening o f a fund-raising drive fo r Israel is trans formed into a real folk-festival. Nor are the Latin American Jews backward in the area o f creating new industries in Israel and making capital

JEWISH LIFE

investments which aid Israel’s eco nomic growth. A whole series o f enter prises have grown up in the last few years initiated by Latin American new comers: the Mekoroth company, the p ro d u c tio n o f plastics, furniture manufacturing on a small scale, tex tiles, etc. T w o large scale enterprises initiated by Jews from Latin America deserve particular mention. One is the textile factories in Kiryath Gat which were established in the Lachish area, where in 1948 the Jewish National Fund purchased land fo r the settle ment o f North African immigrants who arrived in Israel on the project “ Magic Carpet,” By 1953 there were fifteen kibbutzim , six moshavim, and six shitufim (collective moshavim). What the district needed was more industrial development to enable the new arrivals from Morocco, Tunisia, Iraq, Turkestan, and T ripoli to earn their living. HE president o f the Zionist Federation in Santiago, Chile, Israel Poliak, is a warm, nationalminded Jew w ith a broad sense o f business enterprise. In 1962 he initiated his plan o f building modern large-scale textile factories in Israel. Today when visiting the plants named Polgat the visitor is impressed by a number o f new structures, divisions o f m a n u fa c tu re , weaveries and wool preparation, and a series o f retail out lets where the finished products are sold. More than 1,500 persons are employed in the various divisions o f

SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

the Polgat plants. Attached to all this is a school where the children o f the new immigrants are trained in the trade. The products o f this enterprise are exported to a number o f countries. Great Britain, which is known fo r her own historic textile ¡ndustry,f||buys fifty per cent o f the production. Other countries that are customers are the U n ite d States o f America, South A fr ic a , West Germany, the Scan dinavian states, Iran, and Rumania. The annual production sales amount to fifty m illion dollars o f which 70%-is for export. In 1969 Israel’s textile industry gave “ textile king” Poliak its highest award and his staff received the Kaplan Prize fo r the most produc tive output. Every year the Edith and Israel Poliak Prize is awarded fo r the best story, essay, or poem appearing in D i Go/dene Keit published in Tel Aviv. His home on Weizmann Street in Tel Aviv is a sort o f literary workshop, frequented not only by artists but by notables o f all kinds, including cabinet ministers. A second important investor who should be mentioned is Dr. Jacob Eisler o f Argentina. In association with a number o f other Latin American Jews he undertook the construction o f a number o f popular priced hotels in various parts o f Israel. The first is now being b uilt in Haifa on Mount Carmel, a second on the seashore in Eilat and a t h ir d , c o n ta in in g 500 rooms, in Jerusalem. He is now looking for a suitable location in Tel Aviv. This

project has required an investment o f twenty m illion dollars from Dr. Eisler. He has also concluded an agree ment w ith the M inistry o f Culture to erect a cultural center fo r soldiers in Sharm-al-Sheikh at a cost o f $200,000. It was Dr. Eisler who a few years ago put up the building at the Weizmann Institute in Rechovoth named after the A rg e n tin e national hero San Martin. He also invested half a m illion d o lla rs in a marine company to transport fru it. In partnership with Israeli firms he set up a project in Raananah fo r the manufacture o f dye coloring to which he contributed half a m illion dollars. And now Dr. Eisler is preparing to settle in Israel. Mr. Milles Shirower,the owner o f a steel m ill in Venezuela, transfered a large part o f his enterprise to Israel, and contributed $1,000,000 to build a theater in Jerusalem. Mrs. Shirower was born in a kibbutz and is a close friend o f Mrs. Eshkol, the wife o f the late Israeli Premier. In science and scholarship and even in the young state’s diplom atic corps, the Latin American element is quite visible. Dr. Jacob Blejer, who is president o f the Association o f Latin American Olim, is a professor at the University o f Tel Aviv. Dr. Nathan Ben Hillel is also a university professor. O th e rs w ho are m e d ica l m en, engineers, and technicians occupy im portant posts in hospitals and other institutions. Dr. Abraham Drabkin and his brother are from Santiago, Chile. The former is Israel’s Ambassador to Mexico, the latter was Ambassador to

Greece and continues to serve in the dip lom atic corps o f Israel. Itzhak H a rk a v y o f A rgentina is Israel’s Ambassador to Brazil; Leib Dultzin o f Mexico was treasurer o f the Jewish Agency and is now a member o f the Israeli cabinet. Benno W eiser (Varon) o f Ecuador is Israel’s consul in Santo Domingo. HE major reason fo r the likeli hood o f increased Aliyah, quite aside from the other factors men tioned, is the growth o f antisemitism in the countries in question. For years now the overall situation in the Latin American countries has been one o f continuing chaos. The day to day p o litic a l upheavals and instability bring about economic crises. These in turn provoke envy o f the “ foreigner” who has succeeded in establishing him self economically because o f his ability and hard work. However, the envy o f non-Jewish foreigners is less intense since they attend the same church, their children intermarry, and they mingle and merge more easily w ith the rest o f the population. The Jews are different. They conduct their own schools, are opposed to permitting their sons and daughters to marry the others, and are more aloof from the predominant population.

INCE the defeat o f the Arab states in the Six-Day War o f 1967, a new element has been added to this local antisemitism - r the antiJewish propaganda disseminated by the Arabs. Argentina has 500,000

JEWISH LIFE

Arabs; in nearby Chile there is the Central Committee fo r Palestine Liber ation and not long ago it was the locale fo r the first Arab Congress in South America. There are sizable Arab settlements in the other countries o f Latin America. This Arab-inspired anti-Jewish a c t iv it y has in te n s ifie d hostility towards the Jews and has created a serious problem especially fo r Jewish professionals and youth as a whole who do not feel accepted by the upper classes. They cannot integrate or estab lish relationships w ith the lower classes who are extremely backward. A con siderable portion o f Jewish student youth in Argentina are active in the New Left — a result o f the neglect o f Jewish values and the exclusive con centration on the Yiddish language minus Yiddishkeit. During a visit I made to Mexico, some Jewish youths established a group named Neged H azerem (Counter-Current) whose slogan was: either Aliyah or total

SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

assimilation. Anyone who knows the situation in these countries can fore cast that the former is more likely to come about, fo r even in radical circles Jews are not regarded in too friendly a fashion... Serving in support o f this is the statement recently made in New York by the president o f Buenos Aires’ Kehillah that 1,400 Jewish young men and women who had been totally estranged from Jewish life had emi grated to Israel. On my last visit to Israel a conference o f Jewish profes sionals coming from Latin America was held (including doctors and engineers) sponsored by the Associa tion o f Latin American Immigrants. On analyzing the situation in Central and South America and the Caribbean area and on learning the facts o f the increasing tension in rela-. tion to Jews stemming both from the Left and the Right, one comes in evitably to the conclusion that an increased immigration to Israel should be anticipated.

Booh

A CODE IN ALL TONGUES by RALPH PELCOVITZ ORCHOT TZA D D IK IM : THE WAYS OF THE RIGHTEOUS, translated by Seymour J. Cohen; Jerusalem H New York: Feldheim Publishers, 1969,629 pps., $10. H E E n g I i s h -r e ad i n g p u b lic , interested in books written on ethical Jewish subjects, for many was denied access to some of the classical works which served as sources of infor mation and inspiration to many Hebrew reading generations. In recent years Feldheim Publishers have made available a number of these Torah classics translated in to E n g lis h , such asg^'M esilloth Yeshorim” (The Paths of the Just) and “ Shaarei Teshuvah” (Gates of Repen tance). These major works by Luzzatto and Rabbenu Yonah of Gerona, with an excellent English translation by Shraga S ilverstein , are now augmented with “Orchot Tzaddikim,”* (The Ways Of The Righteous) translated into English by Seymour J. Cohen. The ethical works of the pietists, of which the aforementioned are perhaps

RABBI PELCOVITZ is Rav of Congregation Knesseth Israel in Far Rockaway, and past president of the Rabbinical Alliance of America.

the best known, were studied by Torah scholars and students in various European yeshivoth as sources of reference and text books of Jewish religious philosophy, as well as a means toward personal spiritual gro w th . In many yeshivoth, especially with the advent of the Mussar movement, these texts would be studied regularly in years the Beth Hamedrosh in addition to which the Mashgiach Ruchni would deliver a weekly ethical discourse. The curriculum of the Yeshivah, concentrating as it did upon Talmudic studies, was greatly en riched and enhanced by the introduction of these Mussar studies which broadened the horizons of the- students and gave them much-needed insight into the character-molding qualities of the Torah. O rchoth Tzaddikim was not as popular in the Lithuanian yeshivoth as were M esilloth Yeshorim and Shaarei Teshuvaih. The style and content of these two works appealed more to the learned intellectual mind than The Ways Of The. Righteous, which was written by an un known author in the 15th Century and printed in the latter part of the 16th Century, aimed at a larger and more aver age readership. It is interesting to com pare this work with that of Luzzatto and Rabbenu Yonah. Luzzatto in his Mesilloth Yeshorim builds his entire sefer upon the

JEWISH LIFE

statement of Pinchas ben Yair “Torah leads to watchfulness; Watchfulness leads to zeal; Zeal leads to cleanliness, etc.”, culminating with “ Humility leads to fear of sin; Fear of sin leads to holiness.^ Based upon this ladder leading to the ultimate, Luzzatto examines these various principles, rung by rung in a very analytic manner. Rabbenu Yonah, who is a “ Rishonji one of the early Masters, con centrates, as the name of his book im plies, upon repentance. He discusses the principles of, and the ways leading to, repentance — as well as including exhor tatio ns, expositions of the nature of transgressions, and a concluding analysis of atonement.

Rabbinic teachers. These include subjects such as pride, modesty, shame, envy, and tru th . He also includes within the “gates,” the name given to the various chapters, a number of subjects which are quite unusual, since one would not ext pect to find them in the average Mussar Sefer. These include items such as worry, laziness, remembering, and silence. He does not follow a specific order but he does have an excellent sense of balance, dealing with a specific subject and then its opposite. Through this contrast he is able to underscore the virtues as opposed to the vices covering a wide and far ranging field which is of lasting interest to all generations even 400 years after it was written. If there is an order it would HE author of The Ways of The be in the gates which lead from a dis cussion of the various character traits of Righteous uses a much broader approach than that of Rabbenu Yonah man through the gates ,of repentance, and a more popular style than that of Torah and fear o f Heaven, thereby Luzzatto. He does make liberal use of coming full circle Trorn “ the beginning of Biblical phrases and Rabbinic homilies, as wisdom is the fear of G-d” to that of do all authors of Mussar works, but he is “ the end of the matter, all having been especially fond of parables which are very heard: fear G-d and keep His command tellin g at times and most useful in ments; for this is the whole man,” with making a forceful point which can be which the author begins the introduction understood by every reader. The one used to his book. in his introduction, for example, is an The purpose of the Sefer was to excellent parable to arouse the interest of give those tools necessary for man to de the reader, prodding his mind and termine what characteristics to accept, awakening his soul to his shortcomings. which to discard and which to use He speaks of a man who doesn’t recog sparingly. The intent is to turn man from nize or refuses to recognize his faults, as folly, to love admonition and accept it compared to one who does, but does not graciously and gratefully. Only in this manner will man be able to face up to search out his own good qualities and great potential. He compares this to his weaknesses and shortcomings and re MReuven’;’ seekingf^'Shimon.” Should turn to the path which leads him to the Reuven not know Shimon, even if he ways of the righteous. does chance upon him will be unaware of it and therefore will not find him; while, HE translator has by and large if Reuven knows Shimon but does not done very well in his rendering. He search him out with patient diligence, he is guilty however of one major oversight. will in this case also never find him. In the original Hebrew there is a subtitle The author of The Ways of the which for some strange reason has been Righteous addresses himself to those traits deleted in the English. This is most un fortunate since it is the key to the entire that ever engage the attention and con work! The subtitle is “Sefer Hamidoth”, cern of Torah, the Talmud, and all great

SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

which means the book of ethical conduct, total behavior, attributes, virtues, or vices (when qualified as such, i.e., evil midoth). All of these English phrases are wrapped up in the simple Hebrew word “Midoth.” It is unfortunate also that in the body of the text the translator uses “ qualities” for the word “Midoth”. The word should be literally translated as “ measures.” This is the very heart of the true meaning as well as the concept of Midoth. There are no absolutes in man’s behavior pattern. Each emotion, every tendency, every act of man must be measured out carefully 3 when, where and how to use it, whether it be seemingly a “good” characteristic, such as, modesty, love, zeal — or “ bad”, such as/, pride, cruelty, hatred, and laziness. The anonymous author of Orchoth Tzaddikim is well aware of this relative nature and character of Midoth. Hatred, which js obviously prohibited by the Torah, is nonetheless at times a mitzvah as he points out regarding a wicked man who will not accept correction. Cruelty is certainly far removed from the ideal Jew ish character, nonetheless there are places where it is necessary to conduct one’s self with cruelty as the author proves quoting the sentence in Job (29:17). Pride and laziness are traits which one must avoid but “arrogance against the wicked is exceedingly to be praised,” as he points out in his chapter on laziness. From the above selections we see that Midoth in themselves are never good or bad, to be embraced or rejected, but rather to be measured and this is the thrust of the entire book as indicated in the subtitle. As it is true in the chapters regarding evil traits; it is also true in those chapters dealing with seeming vir tues, that one would expect to be so without exception. For example, modesty is, as the Orchoth Tzaddikim puts it, “ in deed a good quality and he who possesses this quality has already turned away his soul from all sorts of evils.” Nonetheless,

he hastens to point out that there is a modesty which can be as evil as arro gance in the case of those who use a false modesty to impress people and thereby deceive and mislead them. Love is doubtless commanded by the Torah and according to one of our greatest Sages the phrase “and you shall love your friqnd as yourself” is the most important sentence in the entire Torah. As our author puts it, “the quality of love in volves more deeds than all the other qualities.” And yet, he also points out that love can spoil good deeds when love is stronger than wisdom, for there is no emotion that can destroy and distort as much as love, just as there is no emotion which can bring a person to constructive deeds and sacrifice as much as love. Again, one must know how to measure out this Midah. In general, although the translation is adequate, it is also quite stilted due to the evident desire to be extremely faith ful to the text. This is regrettable, for in many cases the style would have been greatly enhanced if the translator had allowed himself to use a more literary and graceful English which would capture the spirit if not always the letter of the text. It is most interesting to note that the translator is a graduate of the Jewish Theological Seminary and one might say it is gratifying to find one who is not identified or connected with the orthodox Torah community dedicating himself to such a wonderful project of bringing this Mussar Sefer to the English-reading pub lic. Perhaps this in itself should be a mussar to us who are guilty of ignoring, too often, the ethical treasures of our people which are so desperately needed today. HE relevance and currency of a book written in the 15th century must not be questioned by a generatipn that has enthroned relevancy as a new god. There are eternal truths, unchanging

JEWISH LIFE

problems, and above all human nature which is no different today from what it was thousands of years ago. The weak nesses, foibles, and shortcomings of man, the virtues and traits that can bring to happiness, stability, and serenity, are ever operative. Today’s climate and environ ment presents a strange mixture. It is one of rebelliousness and yet despair best described in Lincoln’s phrase “destitute of faith, but terrified of skepticism.’’ In such a climate the classic ethical books are exceedingly relevant. The question may be asked whether they can be effective. In this reviewer’s opinion they can be, providing there are teachers who can properly transmit the teachings of these master works and students who will lend a sensitive ear. Yeshivoth today, elementary, secon dary and gedoloth, have been most negli gent in imbuing their students with the ethical spirit of Torah. Concentration

upon Halochah is commendable, but the character-building qualities of Halochah were more effective when people were steeped and immersed in Torah. At a time when learning is usually superficial and knowledge is also only skin-deep, the transmission of Mussar becomes impera tive and must begin at an early age con tinuing through the Mesivtoth and Yeshivoth Gedoloth. We must ever re member th at although the school of Shamfnai was intellectually superior to that of Hillel, the Halochah is according to Hillet because Beth Hillel possessed finer qualities of character and greater ethical virtues (Eruvin, Daf 13). Hope f u lly , the publication of these Torah classics, with English translation, will serve to awaken the need for serious study of these great works, as well as granting an opportunity, Tor those who failed to pursue these studies in their school years, to do so now.

REDISCOVERY OF THE LAND by HERBERT GOLDSTEIN A DESCRIPTIVE GEOGRAPHY AND BRIEF HISTORICAL SKETCH OF PALESTINE, by Joseph Schwarz, translated by I. Leeser (1850); reprinted by Hermon Press, New York, 1969, $13.75

American traveller E. Robinson who pub lished in 1841 his “ Biblical Researches.” Between that time and the emergence of the very recent crop of Israeli scholars and scientists, the Land of Israel has been considered the preserve of gentile geogra phers and historians. Certainly the con ODERN exploration and systematic tributions of American, British, French, description o f Eretz Yisroel is and German investigators laid the foun usually dated from the surveys of the dation of our present knowledge of the land. But there have always been those amongst our Talmudic chachomim who DR. GOLDSTEIN, Professor of Nuclear thirsted to know more about the physical Science and Engineering at Columbia characteristics of the land which is our University, and a past president of the heritage, and who used whatever sources Association of Orthodox Jewish Scientists, and means were available to them. In lives in Flushing, New York.

SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

This picture was taken in Borough Park, Brooklyn, when Nelson A. Rockefeller visited the area re cently. We wish we could repro duce the sound of the enthusiastic welcome. Why is the Governor always greeted with so much fervor when he meets the Jewish public? First of all, because he has been an excellent administrator with a record of progress and equal treat ment of all segments of the population. And as for the Jewish community, consider these facts:

Governor Rockefeller supported the repeal of the Blaine Amend ment, which had denied state aid to non-public schools—such as yeshivos. The Governor helped to make State University facilities for Kosher food available to Jewish students. Under Rockefeller's guidance, the Sabbath Law was passed, giving State-City University students the right to demand alternate classes and tests originally scheduled for the Sabbath and Jewish holidays. Governor Rockefeller won the hearts of all good people... espe cially Jew s... when he visited the

Yeshiva of Eastern Parkway after the fire set by hoodlums. It was the Governor's way of showing sym pathy and indignation at the same time. And busy as he i s ... especially now in the midst of an important political campaign... he still found time on September 11th to visit the families of two hostages of the Arab Commandos. Nelson A. Rockefeller has been a friend of all of the people. Let's send him back to Albany to keep up his good work.

Friends of Rockefeller/575 Madison Avenue/New York, N.Y.,iQ022/James G. Helmuth, Treas.

1833, shortly before Robinson began his e x p lo ra t io n s , a young German rabbi, Joseph Schwarz, settled in Jerusalem and started a small yeshivah, known as Eduth b’Yoseph. In due course he began pub lishing parts of a rabbinical i^sefer’’ to which he gave the collective title “Divrey Y o s e p h . ” T h e se con d part, entitled “ Tevuoth Ha-Aretz,” appeared in Jeru salem in 1845, and contained the fruits of Rabbi Schwarz’s lengthy travels and patient investigations into the geography and history of what was then known as P alestine. Evidently a man of wide reading, Rabbi Schwarz was acquainted with Josephus, the surviving works of the Greek geographers, and even some of the reports of medieval Christian pilgrims. In addition, he knew intimately the Mishnah and both Talmuds, and had available to him later Jewish sources of which his ge n tile co n te m p o ra rie s were scarcely aware. T h e w o rth of his book was apparently quickly appreciated, for a Ger man translation appeared in short order. In 1850, Isaac Leeser published in Phila delphia his own English translation, which has now been reprinted through the effor^ of the Hermon Press. Just as the b o o k represents a milestone in the Jewish rediscovery of the Land of Israel, so the translation was something of a landmark in the history of Jews in America. To judge from his preface ^ Leeser had misgivings about his co m p e te n ce as a translator, admitting difficulty with both the language and the subject matter (a sad reflection on the in tellectual level of the American Jewish community then). But he pointed with pride to the publication as being almost entirely a Jewish production — translation, printing, even the lithography, all in fact except the maps. There is an appearance of syste matic exposition to the book. Somewhat over half of the contents is devoted to the topography of the land. The question of the borders of Eretz Yisroel is con SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

sidered first, followed by a description of the principal geographical features of the land — rivers, lakes, mountains, plains. M uch effort is expended in trying to locate the cities mentioned in the Tanach fo r each -tribe. A Short discussion of trans-Jordan and a long chapter oh Jeru salem wind up this portion of the book. In classical geographical tradition, the next section considers the flora, fauna, mineral products, and climate of the land. The rest of the book consists of a short history of Eretz Yisroel from the de struction of the Second Temple to the author’s period, with a few miscellaneous appendices thrown in. Closer examination, however, reveals a considerably less-thansystematic exposition. As is the way with much rabbinic literature, there are lengthy and le isu re ly side trips, determined, apparently, by a chain association of ideas. A discussion of the mountains of Lebanon — then as now the habitat of terrorists ••- leads by insensible degrees to anecdotes about Arab outrages against the Jew ish population of Safed. A truly lyrical description of the Jordan plain is abruptly followed by an attempted identi fication (probably erroneous) of the hill tops on which beacon, ..fires were lit to announce Rosh Chodesh. thousands of place names are mentioned or discussed; h u n d re d s o f references to Tanach, Mishnah, and both Gemorahs are given. One might therefore have hoped that this b o o k could fulfill the functions of a “ Handbook of Talmudic Geography” so urgently needed by students today. But two features of the book disappoint this hop«,. Incredibly, there are no indices of any kind in the original publication, and the reprint publishers could not supply the defect. Because of the rambling inter nal structure of the exposition, it is therefore impossible to find out what Rabbi Schwarz has to say about any given place name or Talmudic reference. it e r a l l y

THE P E N T A T E U C H with T argum O nkelos , H aphtaroth and R ash Ts commeyitary translated into English and annotated By R ev. M. R osenbaum and D r . A. M. S ii .bermann The commentary of Rashi is the most popular of all Jewish commentaries on the Pentateuch. Rashi is distinguished by his simplicity and directness. His masterly use of brev ity* his skill to make clear the meaning of the most difficult passages, is unrivaled. The present edition, designed for teach ers and students as well as synagogue use, consists of the five books of Moses with Targum Onkelos, an English translation of the Torah, and the entire Rashi com mentary vocalized and translated into English. Five volumes $20.00 Padded Leather, gilt edge $40.00 At your bookdealer or HEBREW P U B LISH IN G C O M P A N Y 79 D elancey St., N ew York

please

■ MENTION THIS PUBLICATION WHEN YOU WRITE FOR YOUR FREE COPY OF TH E ...

27-YEAR HEBREW-ENGLISH CALENDAR!

INTERIORS I SYNAGOGUES ALBERT WOOD & FIVE SONS.* PORT W ASH IN G TO N

This calendar is free for the readers of our publication. The calendar gives you the Hebrew date and day of the week for every day from Rosh Hashanah of 1946 to the day before Rosh Hashanah of 1973. The book helps you to find Yahrzeit dates at a glance. Bar Mitzvah dates, too! Also all important Jewish holidays! A val uable book to have on hand! To obtain your FREE copy, send a letter or post-card (mentioning this publication) to: H E IN Z HEBREW-ENGLISH CALENDAR P.O . Box 28, D -22, Pittsburgh, Pa. 15230

L I- N E W YORK

Gold’s HORSERADISH

in o itr

M R

p U fjiM jd [g f

MjowiudLtk

But perhaps this is fortunate, for the neo phyte at least, as the second disap pointing feature is that a good deal of the author’s conclusions are now con sidered incorrect. Any random sampling of the pages reveals a flock of errors. Ramah, the home of the Prophet Samuel, is located in Gallilee north of Shechem instead o f much closer to Jerusalem. Rabbi Schwarz makes the astonishing sug gestion that at the time of the Exodus, the Jordan must have flowed to the Gulf of Aqaba (which requires that in the interval since, the plain of the Jordan has fallen over 1,000 feet)! He locates the City of David on Mount Zion instead of the hill south of Har Habayith. Josephus’ tow er “ Hippicus” is placed near the Temple instead of being in the Citadel near Jaffa Gate. And so on. For these mistakes Rabbi Schwarz is not to be blamed. His so-called scientific contempo raries propounded as many wild and even wilder theories, and in several instances, as for example on the age of many of the monum ents in Jerusalem, Rabbi Schwarz is notably more sensible than they. But these defects do diminish the practical usefulness of the book today. The value of the book for us, be sides being a historical achievement, lies rather in other directions. It is primarily Rabbi Schwarz’s side-notes and rambling anecdotes which have significance for us. Out of them shines an intense love of the Land of Israel. He concludes a factual de scription of the plain of the Jordan with a moving tribute to its beauty. He is at

SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

pains to disprove the authenticity of the legendary tomb of Samuel in the village of Nebi-Samwil. In the course of the dis cussion he reports that he gained entrance to the mosque built over it and with much labor climbed the muezzin’s tower, and he relates the emotions that filled him as he saw the magnificent sweep of the land from the Mediterranean to the mountains of Moab. Many of Rabbi Schwarz’s vignettes bear on today’s headlines. On P. 277f, he relates how it was that the synagogue founded by Ramban in 1267 became a raisin mill. It is only within the last few months that the Ramban synagogue was restored, after 300 years, to its original and proper use. The details given here of the capricious and tyrannical Arab rule over Palestine in the 19th century will probably be new to most readers, and here Rabbi Schwarz spoke as an eye witness. Wild and bloody acts of Arab terrorism are nothing new, it seems. N these days, when Israel is central in our thoughts and emotions, we can be grateful for having this book again available. W ould that some publisher might similarly make available some of the epoch-making books that appeared later in the century, when the land was b eing scientifically explored! Especially valuable would be a reprint of Warren’s books on his excavations in Jerusalem, which to this day serve, as it were, as a guidebook for further archaeological ex ploration in the Holy City.

Come with us to ISRAEL for CHANUKAH Sunday, December 20, 1970 — Sunday, January 3, 1971 ENJOY 14 days o f unforgettable travel experiences forging a lifetime of friendships. SEE Modi'in and retrace the footsteps of the Macabees. REVEL in the magnificent Israeli winter climate, as a guest in the finest first class hotels. CELEBRATE Chanukah as it can only be celebrated in ISRAEL.

Complete Special Price: $670.00 Our price includes: * Economy jet air transportation * All transfers and luggage handling Comprehensive sightseeing in comfortable motorcoach *Rooms with private bath in select first class hotels ^Fabulous world-famous Israeli breakfasts and delicious dinners *Personal attention and the warm friendly atmosphere of Orthodox Union Tours

Make your reservations now! Orthodox Union Travel Service 84 Fifth Avenue New York, New York 10011 (212) 255-4100 Enclosed is a check for $100 per person payable to the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America, f o r ________ reservation (s) on your Chanukah Tour, departing December 20, 1970. Mr. Name Mrs. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __________________ Miss Address__________________________________________________________________ City and State Home P h n n p

7 i p _____________ ;___

Bus. Ph n n p

WHA T FUTURE

/ ^

FOR■THE ZIONIST FEDERA TIONS?

We have criticized the Jews in America but we need to criticize ourselves as well. There is nothing to fear from young people speaking out their minds, for this is much better than apathy. Maybe there is some justice in the younger generation’s lack o f faith in us. The basis o f Zionism was a negation o f the Golah, and this was proved tragically'in the holocaust, and is still being proven in all sorts o f places even without pogroms. Yet our crisis o f Zionism is so deep that it cannot be overcome by a plastic operation, but only a radical change. In my Party I also have difficulties in bringing new blood into the leadership, and instead o f basic solutions, we tend to go in for organizational and administrative changes. Surely among students, intellectuals, leftists, and assimilationists we need a Membership Drive. But who will carry it out? I know that the Chalutz Movement cannot win over all o f Jewish youth, but Zionism must be a Vanguard Movement, and if there will be a strong Chalutz Movement there will be student movements, younger people in the parties etc. and they will inspire each other. I f the Chalutz Movement will be the step-son o f organized Zionism I see no chance o f a Zionist revival. V- from a statement by Chaika Grossman in Zionism in Action

ON DAY SCHOOLS If American Jewish organizations understood what is at stake, they would expand all the Jewish educational and religious facilities that now go begging. They would establish a few model private high schools that would offer a mature and challenging program of Judaic as well as general studies. They would seek to

SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

give those schools all the prestige of a Choate and Groton and they would encourage the establishment of a network of day schools and yeshivot on the elementary levels. Until recently such ideas have been anathema to the leaders of most American Jewish organizations, including the Conservative and Reform religious groups. They would have denounced it as a desertion of the public schools, and hence a betrayal of America’s promise. But in point of fact, the “public” school never really existed except in theory. In most communities where they could afford it, Catholics sent their children to Catholic parochial schools; the public school was really the Protestant parochial school. It wasn’t simply a matter of Christmas and Easter celebrations or the recitation of the Lord’s Prayer every morning and at assemblies; it was the content and slant of ordinary textbooks and teaching materials. It was the cut and flavor of the whole school itself. Jewish organizations tried to “de-parochialize” the public schools, but they never fully succeeded. They won all the battles, including one in the Supreme Court, but they lost the war. Public schools in most of the nation’s cities are still essentially Protestant in outlook, even where the Supreme Court’s directives on prayers are obeyed. In a great many places, of course, they are still ignored. la from “Bring Forth The Mighty Men” by Howard Singer

O f special significance is the Israeli student fs importance in the country fs defense effort, says Shohet, editor and chief o f the Technionfs publication, adding: “Every student, before beginning his education must spend three years in service and enrolls for his college education at about 21. “He is mature, balanced, and knows exactly what he wants. He just has not time to indulge in political pranks or social somersaults. ” Because Israel is a country o f immigration where population, including teachers and students is continually changing, its institutes o f higher learning must be “sensitive to changes and alert to new ideas. ” The universities in Israel are young and progressive in their outlook and policy, Shohet points out, with neither the administration or faculty tied to rigid tradition Shohet says the Technion is a “good case in point” because it was the first Israeli university to invite student representatives to sit on its Board o f Gover nors, an advance American students are still striving to accomplish. Student advances at the Technion include two students sitting on the student affairs committee o f the university; joint representatives o f faculty and students act as advisory committee to Faculty committees on curriculum and

JEWISH LIFE

teaching Also, at the administrative level students have representation and partici pate in the management o f student hostels the cooperative store and organize their own cultural and sports activities.

— from a press release on the Technion — Israel Institute of Technology

SCHECHTER & HIRSCH’S

CaRiBBEAN

HOTEL

glatt

í f á f f j f á f f BB ü m Í

ENTIRE OCEANFRONT BLOCK — 37th t* 31th St. M IA M I BEACH

. . . is a GREAT Kosher Hotel — you'll love it!

9 DIAL M IA M I

For Reservations Speak to SAM SCHECHTER

BEACH Q O O

FREE!

- 3 2 7 -

FREE PARKING

8 1 6 5

Or Call N.Y. Off. PL 7 - 4 2 3 8 Evenings & Sunday FA 7 - 1 7 4 2

PRIVATE POOL AND SANDY 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 ÇOAST-TO-COAST

The Most Trusted Name in Kosher Poultry

SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

L e tte rs to th e E d ito r ‘Y .U .’ Newton, Massachusetts I read with great interest Rabbi Alex Weisfogel-s review of “The Story of Yeshiva University” by Rabbi Gilbert Klaperman in your May-June 1970 issue. I do, however, take exception to an assumption stated therein. The review er, w hile discussing whether the philosophy of synthesis at Y.U. has actually borne the fruit that its mission aries promised, writes: “We send into the field rabbis who have spent their yeshivah years acquiring academic degrees with math ematics or chemistry as their majors, but who cannot preside at the issuance of a get. Hilchoth T ’reyfoth, the launching pad of Yoreh Deyah studies in European yeshivoth gedoloth, has, for example, been dropped from RIETS’ Semichah program. What does a new rabbi in the field do when a sh’eylah comes his way?”: Rabbi Weisfogel created the impres sion that the study of Shulchon Oruch and Poskim was part of the curriculum of the Lithuanian yeshivoth and that all the stu dents, after accepting rabbinic positions, were prepared to make Halachic decisions. I would like to know which Roshey Yeshi voth from these great centers of learning lectured and said sheurim on Shulchon Oruch Even Ho-Ezer? Which great Torah

luminaries from Lithuania taught Yoreh Deyah with the Turey Zohov (Taz) and the Sifsey Cohen (Shach)? The main emphasis was to learn as much of shas as possible. Poskim and rabbinic responsa literature the young rabbi mastered after he was holding a rabbinic position. In fact, there were certain volumes of the Talmud that were taught at all yeshivoth and were known as “yeshiveshe mesechtos,” like Bova Kamma, Bova Metziah, Gittin, Kidushen, etc. In some great yeshivoth (Brisk and Radin) Kodshim (Zevochim and Menochoth) was popular. How to preside at the issuance of a get was never part of the curriculum of yeshivoth, even though no part of the day was devoted to secular studies. Cantor Abraham Shonfeld

RABBI W EISFOG EL REPLIES: Cantor Shonfeld has taken the liberty to re-arrange the order of statements in my review of Dr. Klaperman’s book. This new juxtaposition implies a parallel between the system of instruction and curriculum objec tives of Lithuanian Yeshivoth and those of RIETS. Of course the good Cantor is right. No total parallel is valid and in fact none was intended. Each period and place has its own specific needs. Let us agree, the con temporary American orthodox rabbi, with out secular culture and a fluent command of the language of the land, would be most

JEWISH LIFE

ineffective. However, realism tells us that the more we expand in the secular area of the rabbinic curriculum in a given time span, the more the sacred area must be contracted. This is tire era of the information explosion. No one but an intellect of genius propor tions can develop true expertise in more than one field. In most areas of knowledge, specialization by an individual is limited to only part of one discipline. As illustration, the list of sub-specialties in medicine would fill this page. The information explosion is, however, not confined to the secular. To develop high competence in the Kashruth of the super-market shelf alone, for example, is of a scope exemplified by a recent case in which, for a single product, manufactured in a separate plant, more than five hundred individual ingredients had to be traced to their point of origin and the services of food chemistry consultants had to be called upon repeatedly before the product could be given Kashruth certification. Packaged food product endorsement is today an area of sub-specialization within the arena of the Halochah of Kashruth. This is what makes the Orthodox Union’s© Kashruth service so important to the American Jewish com munity. The East European Rav of pre-war days never shared this enormous burden. Similarily he did not have to research the problems involved in the one hundred and one pieces of electrical equipment used in the home, or hotel and synagogue kitchens, which infringe upon Hilchoth Shabbath. Yet, without the burden that the demands o f secular education places upon his American counterpart, he was able, within the same period of study, so to develop in Lomduth that he could navigate through all the necessary sources and act as a Posek When the need arose. It was a rare Sh’eylah of complex nature that he found necessary to refer to higher authority. The question and the answer, because of their unusual nature, were precedent setting and deserved to be recorded in rabbinic literature and frequently were. His American counterpart, SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 1970

by contrast, finds it necessary to refer routine matters back to his Rosh Hayeshivah. We have accepted the idea both here and in England that the average rabbi must refer Gittin to those with special com petence. We have learned to live with it. With the dropping of Hilchoth T ’reyfoth from the Semichah program, American Jews must also learn to live with the fact that their orthodox rabbi is now no longer an expert in that area. How far will this go? In those Yeshivoth or Kollelim in this country where the total emphasis is on “Yeshivishe Masechtas,” it is true that a greater degree of Lomduth is developed but, at the same time, the rabbinic calling is held in disdain. For myself, I wonder whether this is not because both the Roshey Hayeshivah and their students, not nurtured in secular culture also, find th<ey cannot cope with the American Jewish community as rabbis. We are on the horns of a dilemma. Rabbi Klaperman’s book, it seems to me, invites discussion.

‘WHO IS A JEW?’ Detroit, Michigan It is difficult to understand why Rabbi Norman Lamm (May-June 1970) has now adopted such a despairing, pessimistic, Satmar-tinged evaluation of the meaning of Eretz Israel. Has the Supreme Court’s decision on “Who is a Jew?” really changed so much the eschatological status of Israel? After all, Israel was never a Medinath Halochah. Even when it adopted the laws of Shabbath as the national holiday, granted Rabbinical courts jurisdiction over marriages and divorces and other laws that coincided with Halachic observances, it did so by act of K’nesseth, as the expression of* a democratic majority, and not as a submission to Halochah as an authoritative principle. In other words, the government is secular, even when it adopted 71

Halachic norms. Eretz Israel as a Medinath Halochah cannot be attained until religious Jews form at least a majority and declare the Shulchon Oruch as their constitution. But does this detract from the Land's messianic dimensions? I do not believe so. For one thing, the government is not synon ymous with the Land. The Land has its own significance, independent of the actions of its leaders. For another, it is fallacious and injurious to compare the Land to pseudomessiahs of the past. These were demon strable imposters with no substance or truth to their claims, while the Land is our patri mony, the promised soil, and admits to no duplicity. Upon it will unfold the messianic age, in spite of some aberrant action of its Supreme Court. Rabbi Joel J. Litke

TO T H E E D IT O R

are the ones that are in current use. You point out quite correctly that the letter J*1was once correctly pronounced th. What that has to do with our correct pro nunciation is hard for me to understand. If you take the point of view that what was once correct centuries ago is correct today — down that road lies linguistic madness. We ought to speak the way Shakespeare did, no, Chaucer, no, the Anglo-Saxons. In Hebrew I suppose you’d go back to the pronunciation in the days of Avraham Avinu, in the days of the Canaanites. Of course you are right — the pronun ciation of the kamaz as “aw” has historic dignity. Actually it was the Israeli pronunci ation, as evidenced by the fact that the Tiberian nikud names it kamaz , which means a pursing of the lips in the “aw” sound. So please, either Shabbat, or Shabbos, or Sabbath, but not that combination, Shabboth. Dr. Edward Horowitz

Jerusalem, Israel You’re an excellent editor, and here in far-off Jerusalem we enjoy JEWISH LIFE. “The Bachelor Chossid" in the last issue was a masterpiece. B u t. . . My good friend Dr.Saul Sigelschiffer had dinner with me a few weeks ago in Jerusalem. He asked me casually whether I had read his letter in JEWISH LIFE (MayJune 1970). I said no, and he didn’t pursue the matter, but then I got the issue and read his question about Shabbat, and then I read your answer. Now really someone ought to take you by the hand and teach you the aleph bet, the elementary facts and laws of linguistic science. You seem to be living in a sort of linguistic dream world — the world of the men who are pure. All living languages change. This is the elementary law of life in language. The only correct spelling, the only correct pronuncia tion, and the only correct meaning of words 72

JEWISH LIFE

Gefilte fish like mother used to make. »AMetherS) ¿ ¡ M t e f is h -

£ " s s i^ l f e l'oyjgjj bibite fis» 1

For the holidays, for any days, serve what Mother's knows best. Gef ilte Fish. (Traditional Old-Fashioned, New Sweet Old World, Whitefish and Yellow Pike, or all Whitefish.) Only the freshest fish. Just the right amount of spices. Slow-simmered to bring out the delicate flavor. Now in jars with easy-open, twist-offtwist on caps. Or cans. And

remember Mother's Margarine. And Borscht. And Schav. And Matzo Balls. For salt free diets: Mother's new Unsalted Gefilte Fish, Unsalted Borscht, and Unsalted Soft or Stick Margarine. All Pareve and Kosher.

Only if your mother made great gefilte fish.

Meet the Ketchup branch of the Heinz (Q) "mishpocho” Ketchup with Relish (NEW!) — Ketchup with Onions (N EW !)B H 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.for5 them in your community.

And here is the old-time all-time (Q) favorite.

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