Jewish Life May-June 1971 by Jewish Action

ADVERTISING A N D THE JEWISH PROBLEM * A T ALE OF AFFLUENCE “A SABBATH UN TO THE LO R D ” * A R E A L “ROSHAH YESH IVAH ” THE JEWISH D A Y SCHOOL’S CONTRIBUTION TO AM ERICAN PUBLIC EDUCATION

SIVAN-TAM M UZ 5731 MAY-JUNE 1971

m o

The name o f DR. W ILLIA M W. BRICKMAN is familiar both to readers o f JEWISH LIFE and to the world o f educational science. He was introduced to this publication's readership in the issue o f February, 1958 w ith “ A

Visit to Soviet Jewry," long before the subject came into vogue. It was as a

Comparative Education Society — and others to all parts o f the world. His

recognized educational authority that he made that trip — on behalf o f the

our

many writings on Jewish education have helped earn fo r him

his

prominence in the Torah community. He is Professor o f Educational History and Comparative Education at the Graduate School o f Education o f the University o f Pennsylvania, and is Editor o f School and Society, a

c 0 n

professional jo u rn a l------Ben Torah, w riter, and figure o f the advertising community, BERNARD M ERLING often comments on aspects o f “ the synthesis," as reflected in such articles as “ A Dialogue on Davening" and “ The Ben-Torah Businessman" plus reviews o f books that touch on the same sphere. He is a musmoch o f Mesivta Torah Vodaath and a graduate o f Brooklyn College . . . .

When JEWISH LIFE readers read “ Religious

Progress in South A frica " in the issue o f June, 1959, they were introduced

South Africa. Since taking up residence in Jerusalem shortly after, his

to DR. LOUIS I. RABINOW ITZ as the Chief Rabbi o f Johannesburg,

involvement with the printed word has brought him to the Encyclopedia Judaica as Deputy E ditor-in-C hief___ RABBI SAMUEL A. TU R K has contributed significant thoughts in various issues o f JEWISH LIFE on

ways to address classic Jewish concepts and institutions to contemporary social ills. Rav o f the Kingsbridge Center o f Israel in the Bronx, New York, he is a past president o f the Rabbinical Alliance o f America . . . . A

collection o f short stories by ELKA N A H SCHWARTZ was published in

Editor o f JEWISH LIFE, and Director o f Communal Relations o f the Union o f Orthodox Jewish Congregations o f America.

r s

1967 (“ American Life: Shtetl S tyle," Jonathan David). He is Assistant

Vol. X X X V III, No. 5/May-June 1971/Sivan-Tammuz 5731

THE EDITOR'S VIEW PRIORITY NEED: MORE R ABBIS................... 2 Saul Bernstein, Editor

THE “R0SH CH0DESH” PLAN .................. Dr. Herbert Goldstein Libby Klaperman Dr. Jacob W. Landynski 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, fo u r years $8.00. Foreign: A d d 40 cents per year. Editorial and Publication Office: 84 Fifth Avenue New York, N .Y . 10011 (212) A L 5-4100 Published by U N IO N OF O R T H O D O X JEWISH C O N G R E G A T IO N S OF A M E R IC A Joseph Karasick President Harold M. Jacobs Chairman o f the Board Samuel C. Feuerstein, Honor ary Chairman o f the Board; Benjamin Koenigsberg, Senior V ic e President; Nathan K. Gross, Harold H. Boxer, David Politi, Dr. Bernard Lander, Lawrence A. Kobrin, Julius B erm an , V ic e Presidents; Eugene Hollander, Treasurer; Morris L. Green,' Honorary Treasurer; Joel Balsam, Secre tary; Daniel Greer, Financial Secretary

T 0 U R 0 COLLEGE........................................... 8

ARTICLES THE JEWISH D A Y SCHOOL’S CONTRIBUTION TO AMERICAN PUBLIC EDUCATION/ William W. Brickman............................... 10 ADVERTISING A N D THE JEWISH PROBLEM/ 22 Bernard Merling............... A R EAL “R0SHAH YESHIVAH”/ Louis I. Rabinowitz............................ .....28 “A SABBATH UNTO THE LO R D ”/ Samuel A. Turk...................................... 43

FICTION A TALE OF AFFLUENCE/ Elkanah Schwartz............. ......................31

BOOK REVIEW A MOVEMENT IN PERSPECTIVE/ Israel D- Lem er................... ...................51

DEPARTMENTS LETTERS TO THE E D IT O R ......................... 54 AM ONG O UR CONTRIBUTORS.......inside cover

Dr. Samson R. Weiss Executive Vice President Saul Bernstein, Administrator Second Class Postage paid at New York, N.Y.

Cover and drawings by Naama Kitov © Copyright 1971 by Union of Orthodox Jewish Congre gations of America. Material from JEWISH LIF E, including illustrations, may not be reproduced except by written per mission from this magazine following written request.

the EDITOR'S VIEW

PRIORITY NEED: MORE RABBIS N the past quarter-century, American Jewish life has been vastly enriched by the effloresence o f the major yeshivoth, mesivtoth, and kollelim . Year by year, increasing thousands o f students flock to these great centers o f Torah learning, bringing a new dimension to the American Jewish scene. Strangely though, this phenomenon o f such exciting promise is coinciding, more and more markedly, w ith a contrary turn in the equipment o f the American Jewish comm unity, namely the shortage o f rabbis. Never before was the American Jewish Torah community any thing like so well endowed with facilities fo r the nurturing o f religious leadership, but as perhaps never before has the want o f practising rabbis been so acutely felt. Across the country, in communities large and small, congre gations seek in vain fo r men w ith the requisite rabbinic compe tence and — no less important — the requisite dedication to undertake the spiritual leadership o f their synagogues. In the smaller communities distant from the major centers o f Jewish life, the need has o f course long been felt. Today it is more critical than ever before, to the point, in come cases, o f tragic finality. But now congregations in the larger communities find

JEWISH LIFE

Changed Laity

increasing d iffic u lty in securing replacements fo r their incumbents who are retiring, undertaking Aliyah to Israel, or leaving fo r other posts. The atrophying effect o f the situation, long visible in the smaller and more distant communities, is now beginning to be evident in the principle cities where Torah life is otherwise flo u ri shing. Unless decisive steps are taken to reverse the trend, what has been happening in the smaller communities w ill be dupli cated, and on a larger scale, in the major centers and w ith more disastrous effect upon American Jewish life. A particular irony o f the situation is that it occurs at a time when the stature o f the rabbinic office has been radically en hanced in the eyes o f the baale-battim at large. A welcome change has taken place from the time when congregants were all too apt to look upon the rabbi as a sort o f all-purpose synagogue functionary whose duties ranged from diverse ecclesiastical activi ties to administrative and fund raising work. The congregant, and certainly the congregational lay leader, o f today is not the ignora mus o f yore. He has been awakened to Jewish meanings. He has become aware o f Torah values, and o f their supreme sanctity and eternal sovereignty. It is .precisely out o f this grass-roots revolu tion in the synagogue world that the yeshivoth have found support and it is precisely from it that their student bodies have so wondrously multiplied. And from it has come the layman's regained understanding o f the role o f the rabbi as authoritative interpreter o f Torah law, as mentor in the path o f Jewish life, as teacher and expounder o f the treasures o f Torah learning. While it is true that in many congregations conditions fo r the rabbi still fall all too far short o f the ideal, and that under the best o f circumstances the rabbi faces onerous tasks, the fact re mains that the rabbinic calling is regaining its honored status in the eyes o f the Jewish public. The potential o f this progress, however, seems not to have been grasped in certain circles. It has become widely known that in some o f the major yeshivoth not only are the students not encouraged to undertake rabbinic careers but they are actually discouraged from doing so. HE complex o f reasons fo r this attitude cannot be ex amined in any detail here. It must o f course be understood that the training o f rabbis is not the core function o f the yeshivah. Its task, rather, is to propagate Torah learning and to nurture

MAY-JUNE 1971

YeshivahCommunity Interdependent

B’ney T ora hS B to train, equip, and motivate men for a totally Torah way o f life. The essence o f this exalted concept is that the entire composition o f the Ben Torah’s life shall be that o f Torah learning and Torah living, with his economic occupation serving only to provide his material sustenance. In today’s world o f rampant materialism, the importance o f the Ben Torah ideal, always pivotal in Jewish life, was never more crucial. No less vital is the corrolary function o f the Ben Torah as Jewish leader. Whether or not assuming formal professional, organizational, or institutional responsibilities in the comm unity, it is to be ex pected o f the Ben Torah that he shall be a positive force in the community, contributing the fullness o f his Torah knowledge and Torah purpose to the shaping o f its direction and to the solution o f its problems, as well as to the spiritual progress o f its populace and to its overall elevation in Jewish fulfillm ent. While it is thus clear that the contribution o f the yeshivoth is not to be measured simply by their production o f practising rabbis, this service, historically, has always been encompassed w ithin their bounds. This is natural, because no other institution can serve the purpose and because the rabbinate offers the fullest setting for the Ben Torah life. Here occupation and the life o f Torah learning and Torah living are integral with each other rather than being in dichotom y. Here is the challenge, the oppor tu nity to mold lives and to serve all in the comm unity, the poten tial for Torah achievement w orthy o f the Ben Torah. And here is the field o f activity which precisely complements, in a practical as well as a moral sense, that o f the yeshivah. The very existence o f the yeshivah and o f the comm unity or congregation are depend ent upon each other: the one fo r its social base, financial support, and student recruitment, the other for its rabbinic leadership and educational resource; the rabbi is the point o f personal juncture between the two. LLU STR ATIV E o f the career pattern o f yeshivah graduates as seen over a longer span o f years, in contradistinction to that o f today, is the picture which emerges from a recent survey o f 1,014 living graduates o f the Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary o f Yeshiva University . The survey, which embraced all who had graduated from this great institution since its inception in 1897, provides this continent’s most outstanding example o f

JEWISH LIFE

ÿeshivah contribution to practical comm unity need. It was found that 35.5% o f the graduates are serving as rabbis o f congregations throughout the United States and Canada and in overseas countries. 25.1% are in Jewish education (including 8.4% who are members o f the faculty and administration o f Yeshiva University), 4% are in Jewish organizational and youth work, 2.1% are in the m ilitary and civilian chaplaincy, and 4.4% are working in Israel. Thus the great m ajority, over two-thirds, o f all now living who have graduated from the Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary since 1897 are in the rabbinate and other community service vocations, as compared w ith 21% who are in business and professional fields. The remaining 9.7% are in graduate studies, retired, ill, or unclassified. While the other older-established Torah institutions probably cannot offer records o f equal distinction in this regard, a study covering a comparable span o f years would reveal that a like trend prevailed among them too. And in the case o f all o f these great schools, over the longer period, those o f their graduates who did not enter the Rabbinate or communal fields have been characterized by dedication to the Ben Torah ideal in private life and public endeavor. Obviously, the proportion undertaking careers as rabbis today falls markedly short o f that indicated above. Increased numbers, however, are serving indispensibly in the key field o f Jewish education, although the vastly expanded needs in this area are far from being fu lly met. A higher proportion than before, too, are serving as valuably in professional capacities w ith local and national Jewish organizations and in other fields o f com munity service. In behalf o f those undertaking other careers, there can be cited the profusion o f yeshivah graduates who are fu lfillin g the Ben Torah ideal whilè pursuing business and profes sional occupations. Many communities benefit by the presence o f these men, by the example o f their lives, by their lay leadership role. A ll in all, these men — and their women counterparts H are a precious leaven in American Jewish life. Each year adds to their number and to their impress on the American Jewish scene. There are, o f course, exceptions to this vista o f dedicated character. There are those upon whom the mantle o f Ben Torah sits lightly, those whose Limmud Torah practice and Shemirath Ha-Mitzvoth are perfunctory and whose concern with Jewish endeavor is minimal. Human limitations and contemporary social

MAY-JUNE 1971

pressures being what they are, and w ith m ultiplied enrollments bringing a wider diversity o f student material, it is not to be expected that the yeshivoth can successfully imbue every one o f their talmidim with lifelong Ben Torah commitment. Viewed in the light o f the present-day environment, the degree o f success that has been achieved is remarkable.

Serving Key Mutual Need

HERE remains, however, the critical need to encourage more to enter the rabbinate. In aiming, as they undoubt edly are doing, to guide the entirety o f their students to highest fu lfillm en t, it is to be hoped that yeshivah leaders w ill find ways to join this objective to the solution o f the communal need. Persuasive arguments can be and have been raised in favor o f bringing into being a self-contained world o f yeshivah-leit walled o ff from the ills o f the rest o f Jewry. Historically, how ever, the yeshivah has flourished as mentorship source o f the Jewish to ta lity in which it is rooted. Today as ever, the interests o f the yeshivoth themselves as well as the interests o f Jewry at large lie in their most effective fu lfillm e n t o f this role. The ortho dox Jewish community has achieved providential growth in development and stature in recent decades. If what has been achieved is not to be lost, the flo w o f qualified religious leaders must be replenished. A ll who are concerned w ith what is at stake must look to our great institutio ns o f Torah learning fo r a fuller focus on the primary need: the nurturing, training, and inspiring of men dedicated as rabbis to a life o f Torah service to the Torah people.

THE "ROSH CHODESH PLAN" HE plan initiated by Rabbi Norman Lamm fo r observance o f Rosh Chodesh as an official public holiday in Israel has gained wide support. Deservedly so. It offers benefit to all ele ments o f the Israeli public, w ith disadvantage to none. The thoughtfully conceived proposal H applicable to one day when Rosh Chodesh is o f two days duration H would draw upon a religious and historical resource to meet a contemporary social need. In the time o f the first Beth Ha-Mikdosh, the celebra tion o f the appearance o f the New Moon, manifestation o f the

JEWISH LIFE

Divine governance o f the universe, was a monthly festival o f cen tral importance. Ever since, the significance o f Rosh Chodesh has been marked in liturgical observance, w itho ut its ranking as a non-working holiday. In investing it now with civic recognition, the deeper meaning o f the lunar cycle is re-emphasized while providing a m onthly holiday not subject to Shabboth and Yom Tov restrictions and thus free fo r travel, sports, and similar activi ties which play so weighty a role today. O f course, the holiday is foregone when a one-day Rosh Chodesh falls on Shabboth. Allowing fo r this and for Rosh Hashonah, the holiday would be observed an average o f nine times per year. The six-day working week being the rule in Israel, the urge fo r indulgence in the above-mentioned activities impermissible on the Sabbath has been made the occasion fo r widespread Chillul Shabboth. Desecration o f the sanctity and peace o f the Sabbath, defacing the Israel scene, is an intolerable degradation o f the very character o f the Jewish State. Together with this ugly blemish goes continuous planned agitation against Sabbath observance in the institutions and facilities o f public life. While not eliminating these problems, the “ Rosh Chodesh Plan” would certainly allevi ate them. Obviating in a measure the ostensible grounds fo r the agitation against respect fo r the Sabbath in public life, it would, hopefully, defuse tensions. In any event, the plan would serve to diminish public Chillul Shabboth, at least among those who, while deficient in religious observance, have regard fo r what the Shabboth Kodesh means in Jewish life.

To Erase a Blot

HERE is thus ample warrant for the plan and it is much to be hoped that the legislation embodying it which has been submitted to the K ’nesseth w ill be duly adopted. Passage o f the measure is dependent on the attitude o f the Labor parties, which have a m ajority in the K ’nesseth. Present indications, unfortu nately, are not promising, fo r expressions o f opposition to the proposed legislation have come from these circles. If this in fact becomes the official position o f Mapai and Mapam, even those under their ideological sway can be under no further illusion as to the prompting o f the recurrent clashes on issues o f Jewish life in Israel. Opposition to an added monthly paid holiday can hardly be squared w ith the professed rationale o f labor parties as serving the economic and social interests o f working people. Obviously,

MAY-JUNE 1971

Changing Attitudes

such opposition must rise from other considerations, exercised at the expense o f the interests o f their constituents. As obviously, such position must reflect the intent to prevent the narrowing o f the cleavage between the religiously observant and non-observant in Israel. It is in the nature o f things that the very air o f the Land-of Israel should kindle the Jewish spirit. Diaspora-born attitudes o f subjecting Jewish criteria to non-Jewish values, however deeply ingrained, are not lastingly impervious to the upsurge o f Jewish spirit. Thus concurrently with massive growth in the ranks o f the Torah-committed a subterranean current has moved others in a Torah direction. The tw in phenomenon is viewed with apprehen sion among diehard secularists and de-Judaizers. It points to an ultimate end to their hegemony in Israel affairs and to an even tual supremacy o f Jewishness in the Jewish State. The fomenting o f ideological hostilities on religious issues has long served to block the process so feared by the anti-religious. They are loathe now to permit this weapon to slip from their grasp. There are evidences, though, that among the leadership echelons o f the Labor parties men and women o f different o ut look are now to be found. They are aware o f the obsolescence o f philosophies and dogmas born o f a foreign clime in a past era. They are sensitive to the message o f Jewish experience. Will these fresh voices bring a positive stance on the Rosh Chodesh plan? If, as is so fervently to be hoped, this proves to be the case, a turning point w ill have been reached in the evolution o f the Jewish State.

TOURO COLLEGE

HE establishment o f Touro College introduces a type o f degree-granting institution new to American Jewish spon sorship. It offers “ a curriculum and atmosphere which would combine academic excellence and a concern fo r the betterment o f American society w ith an emphasis on Jewish heritage and cul ture.” While having a specific Jewish focus, the new college is secularly constituted. It is addressed to the needs o f students seeking what heretofore has not been available: a college mean ingfully Jewish in atmosphere and commitment not entailing a double program o f Talmudic and academic studies.

JEWISH LIFE

In view o f the great number o f Jewish college students and o f the adverse impact o f the typical campus environment on so many o f them, the establishment o f Touro College is a develop ment long overdue. In the case o f some enterprises launched under Jewish auspices, the feeling evoked in the community is a dubious: “ Why?” The inception o f Touro College, to the con trary, is met not only w ith instant welcome but w ith wonder as to why such an institution and numerous more o f the kind were not created before in the generations o f American Jewish history. In For contrast, no less than seven hundred colleges and universities are Student sponsored by Christian denominations in this country. The de Needs fault o f the Jewish community has been costly. Generations o f Jewish students have been subject to a process o f alienation from Jewish beliefs, moral standards, and loyalties. Now, at last, a positive, concrete approach to the problem has been undertaken. It merits the fervent good wishes o f all. Dr. Bernard Lander, president o f Touro College, has earned the gratitude o f the entire Jewish community in having initiated and founded the new institution, to whose establishment Mr. Eugene Hollander, chairman o f the Board o f Trustees, lent his abilities and devotion. In a message to those enrolling fo r the opening o f classes in the Fall, Dr. Lander has set fo rth the col lege’s aim: “ ... -to imbue the lives o f contemporary students with a sense o f meaning and purpose based on the Maimonidean ideal o f intellectual and moral achievement.” May the objective be achieved in the fullness o f success.

SB.

MAY-JUNE 1971

The

J e w is h

C o n trib u tio n P u b lic

D ay

S c h o o l’ s

A m e ric a n

E d u catio n

by WILLIAM W. BRICKMAN

HE American Jewish day school, or Yeshivah Ketanah, is essen tially an elementary-secondary institu tion offering a dual program o f reli gious and secular studies during a lengthened daily time span. As such it has been identified with orthodox Judaism since the eighteenth century. In recent decades, probably in recog nition o f the effectiveness o f this type o f education, secular and Conservative groups have established schools on this plan, but, naturally enough, w ithout the extent, depth, and total com m it ment typical o f the orthodox schools. More recently, thé Reform community has begun to consider more seriously the possibility o f opening day schools in order to itensify their work in the teaching o f religion.

The Torah’s mandate to teach one’s children sufficed fo r the early American Jewish settler; he did not require any prodding by communal or state legislation. Education o f children constituted the tradition o f three millennia, the fundamental teaching by the Torah, the Talmud, and subse quent religious classics. In the Christian community o f the North American colonies, educa tion was also a requirement, but o f more recent date B the period o f Martin Luther, John Calvin, and other re fo rm e rs . T he Dutch Reformed Church o f New Amsterdam, the locale o f the earliest American Jewish settle ment, specified in 1661 the teaching o f reading, w riting, and arithmetic in addition to instruction in religion. In

JEWISH LIFE

Massachusetts, the Law o f 1642 called upon town officials to inquire into children’s “ ability to read & under stand the principles o f religion & the capitali lawes o f this country.” N ot satisfied w ith the results, the legisla ture enacted the Law o f 1647 to confound the designs o f “ Ye ould deluder, Satan, to keepe men from the k n o w le d g e o f ye Scriptures” by re q u irin g elementary education ^ reading, w riting, and religion V r' in every township o f fifty'fam ilies. These facts indicate a parallel situation in the tw o religious communities, Christian and Jewish, both o f them contributing to the founding o f the religious-secular system o f education in the American colonies. In this way, the Jewish day school, in its earliest form , served as an e le m e n t in the form ation o f the American educational system which retained its religious complexion until the early twentieth century at least.

ORIGINS IN THE COLONIAL ERA HE earliest documents o f Jewish day schools date from the first part o f the eighteenth century. This type o f school had its ups and downs, owing to the changing socioeconomic climate, during the first half o f the nineteenth century, but it reemerged in permanent form w ith the founding o f Yeshivath Etz Chaim in 1886 in New Y ork C ity. Since then the Jewish day school movement has grown in num b ers, geograph ical spread, and

MAY-JUNE 1971

impact on Jewish life in America.* It is instructive to take note o f the American cultural-educational set-i ting o f the Jewish day school. Its religious-secular program represents a combination o f the Torah tradition and the subject matter derived from secular civilization from the classical period to the modern scientific era. The emphasis on Hebrew and Aramaic in the day school recalls the scholar ship and teaching o f Christian teachers in New England, not merely o f the Latin and Greek, but also the Hebrew at Harvard and colonial colleges and schools. It is especially pertinent to recall the association o f colonial American education w ith the Hebrew and other Semitic languages. The first printed *F o r the decades prior to and follow ing the American R evolution, see "T h e Earliest E xtant M in ute Book of the Spanish and Portuguese Congregation Shearith Israel in New Y o rk , 1 7 6 0 -1 7 8 6 ," Publications o f the American Jewish Historical Society, No. 21 (Baltim ore: Lord Baltim ore Press, 1 9 1 3 ), and Hym an B. Grinstein, "T h e Rise of the J e w is h C o m m u n it y o f N e w Y o r k , 1 6 5 4 -1 8 6 0 " (Philadelphia: Jewish Publica t io n S o c ie ty of Am erica, 1 9 4 5 ), pp. 2 2 5 -2 5 9 , 5 6 2 -5 6 7 . For a historical overview until the m id-1960's, as well as a detailed description and perceptive analysis of the American Jewish day school, see Alvin I. S c h i f f 's " T h e Jewish Day School in A m erica" (N ew Y o rk : Jewish Education C om m ittee Press, 1 9 6 6 ). For a running yearb y -y e a r account of the developments, achievements, and problems of the Jewish day school, see th e annual reports of Torah Umesorah (N ew Y o rk C ity ), The Jewish Parent, and the many writings of Joseph Kam inetsky in various Jewish and general educational periodicals.

account o f the instruction at the earli est colonial college, Harvard, reported in 1643 that the third-year class studied “ Hebrew, and the Easterne T on gu e s . . . Chaldee .. . (and) Syriack.” The inclusion o f Hebrew, Aramaic, and Syriac in the collegiate curriculum was inspired, no doubt, by the conviction brought by Separatist Calvinists from Holland that a good knowledge o f Hebrew was essential for th e u n d e rs ta n d in g o f w h a t to Christians is the “ Old Testament.” ft was in Amsterdam that the English Brownist refugee, Henry Ainsworth (1 5 7 1 -1 6 2 3 ? ), issued his popular “ Book o f Psalmes” (1612), which remained popular reading until dis placed by the colonially published “ Bay Psalm Book” (1640). Also'help ful to Calvinists were the commen taries on the Pentateuch, prepared by Ainsworth, an outstanding Hebraist in Europe, on the basis o f the Targum, the Midrash, Rashi, Maimonides, and other fundamental sources o f Judaism. This scholar was the European fore runner o f such New England Hebrew scholars as John Cotton, John Eliot, and Cotton Mather.

EBREW retained a place in colo nial education and subsequently in the nineteenth century. Possibly one o f the most impressive proponents o f the language was the Rev. Ezra Stiles (1727-1795), ecclesiastical his torian and president o f Yale College from 1778 to 1795. A ll through his presidential career, Stiles taught and 12

promoted the study o f Hebrew. His w e ll-k n o w n diary is replete with references to Hebrew instruction, as well as interest in Jews, in rabbinical writings, and in Arabic and other Semitic languages. Stiles notes in his diary on January 1, 1771: “ It has been my manner fo r some years daily to read a chapter more or less in the Hebrew. With this I have lately joyned the read ing or Examination o f the Rabbinical Commentators, particularly at present o f Rabbi David Kim chi.” On Novem ber 10, 1772, he reported the visit o f Rabbi Moses ben David o f Poland: “ We had much Conversation both o f his Travels and on the Talmud and Rabbinical literature. I shewed him the Zohar . . . he told me if I could com prehend that Book I should be a Master o f the Jewish Learning & o f the greatest philosophy in the w orld.” A gain, on January 1, 1773, Stiles stated: “ It is my manner every day, to read a chapter or more in Course in the English Bible in my Study: to examine some Texts in the Hebrew Bible; and besides this to read a portion in some Rabbinical Author, I am now reading the Zohar.” On March 8, Purim eve, he attended the syna gogue service in Newport, where he was pastor and librarian. On March 28, he n o te d th a t he was “ reading A in s w o rth .” Three days later, he wrote about the visit o f Rabbi Raphael C haim Issac C a rig a l o r Karigal (1 7 3 3 -1 7 7 7 ), th e H e b ro n -b o rn meshulach from the Holy Land. “ We

JEWISH LIFE

conversed largely on the Gemara, the 2 Talmuds (of which he preferred the B a b y lo n is h ), the Changes o f the Hebrew Language in different Ages . . . . We talked upon the difference o f the Dialects o f the Chaldee, Syriac, and ra b b in ic a l H ebrew , on the Targums & c.” S tile s ’ c o m p e te n ce in the Hebrew language reached a high level. On December 3, 1773, he wrote: “ Finished a Hebrew letter o f 22 pages to R. Hajim Isaac Karigal.” His diary fo r July 19, 1775 reported that he was “ w riting a Hebrew letter to Rabbi Carigal o f Barbadoes.” One cannot find evidence in the diary to what extent or depth Stiles was fam iliar w ith the Talmud. It is cle a r, however, that he possessed ample knowledge o f the Semitic lan guages, as well as an abiding interest in and deep understanding o f the Judaic tradition and lore. There is little doubt that the education, culture, and reli gion o f America were enriched by the le a rn in g o f Stiles and o f other Christian scholars.

EXAMPLE TO PUBLIC EDUCATION

HE rather lengthy case study indicates that there is a correla tion between the teachings o f the Jewish day school w ith the highest scholarly experience in America. There were other learned men in the Semitic and rabbinical studies in the United States during the nineteenth and twen tie th ce ntu rie s. One immediately

MAY-JUNE 1971

thinks o f Professor William Rainey Harper, later president o f the Univer sity o f Chicago, Professor George Foot M oo re o f Y a le U n iv e rs ity , and Professor William Foxwell Albright o f Johns Hopkins University. To analyze the achievements o f these and others in relation to American culture and education would require far more than the available space. In addition to the sacred and classical tongues, the Dutch, French, German, Spanish, and other modern languages have played a role in the course o f studies at various times from th e seventeenth century until the present. Thus, the study and usé o f Hebrew, Aramaic, and Yiddish in day schools, plus the teaching o f Latin and modern foreign languages, is paralleled by d e v e lo p m e n ts in the general American educational system. Unfor tunately, the study o f languages no longer permeates the public school program. The day schools continue their stress on languages and, by this process, serve as examples to public education w ith regard to the possibi lity o f intensive and extensive language learning. In the linguistic aspects o f education, the yeshivoth resemble the polyglot programs o f the academic secondary schools o f such countries as Netherlands and Denmark. O f particular interest is the use o f Hebrew and Yiddish as media of instruction in many day schools. This is especially noteworthy at the present time, inasmuch as the vast m ajority o f these p u p ils ’ homes are English-

speaking. Such instruction is extreme ly rare in the public and private schools o f the United States and other countries. Even more significant is the teaching o f Talmud in some day schools through the medium o f the Hebrew or the Yiddish language. Since the Talmud is w ritten in Aramiac, then a most unusual educational situation d e ve lo p s: prim ary and secondary school pupils whose everyday language is English are learning a te xt in one foreign language and discussing or translating it into another foreign language. It is very hard to think o f a s im ila r situation anywhere in the world. Another point may be made in this connection. The content o f the Talmud comprises law, ethics, fo lk lore, history, and other subjects. These are commonly taught in the United States at an age level much higher than that represented by the Jewish day schools. Property law, damages, per sonal status, and other types o f legal education are rarely taught in detail until the post-graduate professional school. Not many in the general field o f education and even in the Jewish community are aware o f the advanced nature o f the curriculum o f the Jewish primary-secondary day school.

URING the 1960’s, American educational leaders were con cerned w ith the quest for excellence. This was the theme o f numerous con ferences and committee reports. The

former Secretary o f Health, Educa tio n , and Welfare, Dr. John W. Gardner, devoted an entire ‘book, “ E xcel le n c e ,” to th is problem. Repeated efforts have been made by individuals, organizations, institutions, and various governmental units to upgrade the content o f American education in the primary and second ary schools. It is at this point that the Jewish day school can make a valuable contribution. Some o f the American educators have become aware o f the exemplary nature o f the Jewish day school curriculum, especially with regard to language teaching and intellectual content. Some, indeed, have become familiar w ith the fact that Jewish youngsters in the day schools learn to read simultaneously from left to right and from right to left. It is a well-known fact that some children have difficulties in even learn ing to read from left to right. An analysis o f the type o f learning in Jewish day schools might prove to be instructive to educators in the United States. N ot to be overlooked, further more, is the learning o f the special Hebraic script used in Rashi’s com mentaries on the Bible and Talmud. Also o f interest is the incidental learn ing o f Medieval French and their Ger man e q u iv a le n ts in Biblical and Talmudical Rashi. It should be empha sized that some pupils acquire such knowledge and skills in the primary school.

JEWISH LIFE

YESHIVAH ROLE IN NON-PUBLIC EDUCATION

T this point, it is fittin g to con sider the private, independent nature o f the Jewish day school w ithin the milieu o f American educational development. The independent school has been defined as “ an educational institution which is unsupported by public taxation, and free from political control, and which selects its own aims, staff, curriculum, and p u p ils/’* This category o f school has been in existence from the earliest times in colonial American history. By 1630, shortly after it was settled, there were private teachers in Boston. Since then, a number o f influential independent schools made their appearance in the various colonies and some o f them are in existence at the present. Among these are the Collegiate School (1638) in New York C ity, the Roxbury Latin School (1645) in Massachusetts, and the W illiam Penn Charter School (1689) in Philadelphia. The private schools o f the colonial era taught a wide variety o f subjects. A t Michael C. K n oll’s school in 1750 in New York City, pupils could learn French, Greek, Hebrew, Latin, and philosophy. The private evening schools, during the eightee nth century, offered many subjects, from astronomy to surveying, *W illia m W. Brickm an, "T h e Historical Background of the Independent School in the United States," in "T h e Role of the Independent School in American Dem oc racy" (M ilw aukee, W is.: M arquette Univer sity Press, 1 9 5 6 ), p. 63.

MAY-JUNE 1971

many o f which were not available in the town or public schools. A t John Walton’s evening school in 1723 in New York C ity, Greek, Latin, Hebrew, mathematics, and other subjects were taught. W ithout going into too much detail at this time, it suffices to point out that the independent school and the public school together constituted the educational system o f the colonial period, as during the later eras o f American history down into the pre sent. The independent schools, then as now, utilized their freedom to provide instruction and service which was not available in the public educational institutions. This they did in addition to the regular work accomplished in the public schools. What the Jewish day school teaches, likewise, is over and above that offered in the schools supported by governmental author ities. The private school under the auspices o f religious denominations also has a long history in America. As early as 1640, a Catholic school was in existence in Maryland. The various Protestant groups also set up, through out the colonial period, -their own independent schools which taught both religion and secular learning. In many instances, these schools served as exemplars fo r the development o f pub lic educational institutions. It is appro priate to mention that the first record ed, organized Jewish school was opened in 1731 in New York City. Named M in h a t Areb, it offered in s tru c tio n in sacred - studies and

Hebrew. Later educational programs also included arithmetic, reading, writing, and Spanish by 1755.* By the time o f the Revolution o f 1776, the pattern o f American education was clear: public and independent; secular, religio-secular, and religious. This was the milieu in which the Jewish day school began its career as an educa tional institution in the New Republic. The public school, as is well known, flowered during the nine teenth century, becoming the major medium o f education fo r children and adolescents. However, there was con siderable activity in education on th e p a r t o f th e lea-ders o f the different religious groups. The Presbyterians maintained 264 paro chial schools from 1845 to 1869. The Catholics, rebuffed in the 1840’s along with the Presbyterians and Jews in obtaining support from the New York State government for their schools, laid the foundation fo r their extensive parochial school system. Their net work o f schools was established more firm ly following the decision in 1884 by the Roman Catholic bishops at the Third Plenary Council in Baltimore to open a school in each parish and to order all Catholic parents to send their children to the parochial schools. This decree was reinforced in 1918 by

*A lexander M . Dushkin, "Jewish Education in New Y ork C ity " (N ew Y ork: Bureau of J e w is h Education, 1 9 1 8 ), pp. 40 , 73; Grinstein, op. cit., pp. 22 8 -2 2 9 .

Canon 1379 o f the revised Code o f Canon Law promulgated by the Vatican. No other religious group has been able to enroll as large a percent age o f its children in religious schools as the Catholics. To a significant extenty The growth o f the Catholic schools was due to the fact that the nineteenth-century public schools — and frequently the twentieth-century schools as well ¿- were Protestant in teaching and spirit in many commu nities. This was also one factor in the interest o f some Jews in the establish ment o f Jewish day schools, especially in the brief flu rry o f activity in the 1850’s.

LEGAL STATUS

HE renaissance o f the Jewish day school movement began in the 1880’s w ith the arrival o f the refu gees from the Russian pogroms. Many Jewish parents were, or had to be, con tent w ith the public schools in the large cities, either because o f their ignorance o f the American tradition, indifference to religious education in depth, inability to pay for private Schools, or desire fo r assimilation to A m e rica n society. However, there were those who felt strongly about a maximum Jewish education, and these formed the stubborn core that under took to found the yeshivoth especially after the turn o f the century. The situation o f the religious milieu 0 King James Bible readings,

JEWISH LIFE

Protestant hymns, Christmas obser vances was a critical one fo r the American Jews who were devoted to Torah Judaism. In point o f fact, the Catholics were also troubled by the Protestant complexion o f the public schools, especially the readings from the Protestant Bible translation. Dur ing the nineteenth and twentieth cen turies there were several serious con troversies in the courts and in various communities concerning this issue. One example o f this was the decision by the Wisconsin Supreme Court in 1890 forbidding compulsory Bible reading after the Catholics initiated a suit. However, in other areas, the prac tice o f Bible reading continued w ith out abatement and challenge. How the force o f law operated against religious minorities may be observed in Massachusetts. The com pulsory school act o f 1852, the first in the n a tio n , required all children between the ages o f eight and fourteen to attend a public school or to receive an equivalent education. The Massa chusetts law o f 1855 ordered compul sory Bible reading each day in the pub lic schools all over the state. Taken together, the laws o f 1852 and 1855 “ made religion in the schools compul sory in the sense in which it had not been before, and this could be avoided by a tte n d in g p riv a te schools.” *

Parents with economic means, o f course, could send their children to private schools. On the other hand, those whose financial status did not permit them to pay the tu ition fees o f the independent schools were forced by law to expose their children to reli gious ideas and practices w ith which th e y did not agree. W ithout day schools, Jewish parents o f moderate means had to enroll their children in such religio-secular public schools. From the standpoint o f the United States Constitution, this situa tion was doubly anomalous. According to the First Amendment, “ Congress shall make no law respecting an estab lishment o f religion, or prohibiting the fre e exercise thereof.” First, the Massachusetts law o f 1855 certainly c o n s titu te d an establishment o f Protestantism, and second, the child ren o f economically disadvantaged parents were deprived o f their religious rights. In the twentieth century, the United States Supreme Court declared nonsectarian prayers in public schools and compulsory Bible reading uncon stitutional. In spite o f the fact that these decisions forbid the traditional religious teachings and practices in p u b lic education, there are com munities where the people continue as they have done heretofore. In any case, “ secularization has not as yet taken place in the United States.” *

*State ex rel. Weiss et al. v. District School Board o f Edgerton, 76 Wis. 177 (1 8 9 0 ), as reprinted in M ark D eW olfe Howe, com piler, "Cases on Church and State in the United States" (Cam bridge, Mass.: Harvard Univer sity Press, 1 9 5 2 ), p. 33 2.

•W illiam W. Brickm an, "T h e History of the Secularization of the Public School in the U .S .A .," in George Z .F . Bereday and Joseph A. Lauwerys, editors, "T h e W orld JVear Book of Education, 1966: Church and State in Education," (London: Evans, 1 9 6 6 ), p. 158.

MAY-JUNE 1971

HE church-state-school relation ship remains a complicated one in America. Even in an era which has seen changes in the structure of Christian churches and a weakening o f belief, it is too much to expect that the American people will give up all connections between religion and pub lic education. There are many latent interests and movements to bring about a shift in direction, and it is entirely possible that, in a number o f areas at least, there might be a return to religious teachings and practices. For the Jewish parents concerned w ith the integrity o f Torah teachings, o f course, this means that they w ill have to look to their own educational resources ra th e r than to public education. The legal status o f the private religious school was strengthened by two United States Supreme Court decisions. The first invalidated on con stitutional grounds a Nebraska state law w h ic h prohibited instruction through the medium o f a language in the primary schools. This law had been passed in 1919, while the passions unleashed by World War I were still high. A Lutheran parochial school, in which the Christian Bible was taught in German, challenged the law and was upheld by the highest tribunal in the United States because “ it is the natural duty o f the parent to give his children education suitable to their station in life,” the teacher had a right guaran

teed under the Constitution to teach foreign languages, and the parents had the right “ to engage him so to instruct their children,” whereas “ the legisla ture has attempted materially to inter fere with the calling o f modern lan guage teachers, w ith the opportunities o f pupils to acquire knowledge, and with the power o f parents to control the education o f their ow n.” (Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 [1 9 2 3 ]) Thus, the Court supported the power and freedom o f the parent to control the education o f his children insofar as the content o f the curriculum was con cerned. This seemed to mean that the status o f the independent religious school, to which parents sent their children, was also safeguarded.

OWEVER, it was the decision o f 1925 which solidified the status o f independent religious and secular schools in American society and w ithin the educational system. The U.S. Supreme Court decided unani mously that Oregon's amended com p u ls o ry education laws o f 1922 requiring parents to send their children only to public schools was unconstitu tional. The Court emphasized that “ the child is not the mere creature o f the State; those who nurture him and d irect his destiny have the right, coupled w ith the high duty, to recog nize and prepare him for additional obligations” (Pierce e ta l. v. Society o f Sisters, 268 U.S. 510 [1 9 2 5 ]). In the

JEWISH LIFE

history o f American education, this ruling is frequently considered the Magna Carta o f the religious and secu lar independent school. Moreover, as interpreted by the eminent historianphilosopher o f American education, “ This decision obviously declared that the state is but one among other agencies interested in the education o f the child. Thus, the United States Supreme Court definitely committed this country to a pluralistic rather than monistic or totalitarian view o f public education. Furthermore, the decision was in line with the principles implied long ago in the Massachusetts laws o f 1642 and 1647. It recognized, as they did, that the primary obligation to education rests on the shoulders o f the parent” (John S. Brubacher, “ A His tory o f the Problems o f Education” ). It is interesting to note that L o u is M arshall, the distinguished leader and counsel fo r the American Jewish Committee, presented the argu ments fo r the independent school in a brief amicus curiae. In his words, “ The nation is no more preserved by the public school than it is by the other agencies. The Fathers o f the Republic and a large proportion o f our finest c itiz e n s never attended a public school, and today a large number o f the best exemplars o f Americanism have received and are receiving their education outside o f public schools.” * ‘ D ocum ent in Charles R ezn iko ff, editor, "Louis Marshall: Champion of L ib e rty ," V ol. II (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society o f A m erica, 1 9 5 7 ), p. 9 6 3 .

MAY-JUNE 1971

This tribute to the historic contribu tion o f the independent school to American society made it clear that the welfare o f the nation required both public and private schools. As a well-known specialist in the history and philosophy o f American education put it, “ Today, there is general accept ance o f the idea that each type o f school has a place in a democratic society. Certainly, a state monopoly o f education would be no more desir able th a n a c h u rc h m onopoly” (William E. D r a k e ,“ The American School in Transition” ). One clear and present danger is that the persistent financial difficulties that plague the private schools may, if unchecked and unsolved, lead to the closing o f many institutions and to a virtual, if not actual, state monopoly o f education. A number o f Catholic schools have closed down in the 1960’s. The financial problem presents a serious obstacle to the further deve lopment and even survival o f the Jewish day schools in America. One suggested alleviation, if not solution, is the finanical aid by the government to the teaching o f secular subjects in reli giously oriented schools. This is a con troversial issue and many influential n o n -o rth o d o x Jewish organizations oppose any such* assistance, as well as any other form o f cooperation be tw e en g o v e rn m e n t and religious schools, as violative o f the Religious Establishment Clause o f the Constitu tio n and as a threat to religious freedom . On the other hand, an

increasing number o f voices outside the orthodox Jewish fold are calling fo r a reexamination o f the question.

ACHIEVEMENT T is also appropriate to call attention to the level o f achieve ment in the Jewish day schools. There have been numerous observations by educators and qualified laymen as to the fact that pupils in a yeshivah ketanah have by far a more intensive knowledge o f the Jewish curriculum than those in other types o f Jewish schools. This widely held view was supported by the results o f a compara tive national survey o f educational accomplishment published in 1959 by the American Association for Jewish Education, an agency not involved with day schools.* With regard to the success o f day school pupils in secular studies, there is abundant evidence in the form o f numerous scholarships obtained for high scores on New York State Regents Examinations, National Merit Scholarships, and other national and local scholastic awards. One need only consult the annual compilations to

♦ A le x a n d e r M . Dushkin and Uriah Z. Engelman, "Jewish Education in the United States" (N ew Y o rk: American Association for Jewish Education, 1 9 5 9 ), pp. 2 0 3 -2 1 2 . See also W illiam W. Brickm an, "T h e State of the Jewish School in A m erica," Jewish Life, V o l. X X V I I , December, 19 59, pp. 41 -42; and Judah Pilch, "F ro m the Early Forties to the M id-S ixties," in Pilch, op. cit., pp. 14 3-144.

note the frequency with which names o f yeshivah students appear on these lists. There has been, fo r some years, an increasingly visible presence o f graduates o f Jewish day schools in public and private colleges, universi ties, and professional schools all over the United States, as students, faculty members, and administrators. More over, large numbers have been active in the various professions, as well as in industry, commerce, culture, and gov ernment, in the capacity o f practi tioners and leaders. Many are active as professionals and informed laity in Jewish re lig io u s and educational callings. The Jewish day school move ment is constantly concerned with removing the imperfections in the system and in enhancing its service to society and to the Jewish community. The numerical growth o f the day school in the United States has been described by observers as phenomenal. But quantitative development is not necessarily qualitative, and day school leaders know this well. With some sense o f financial security, there is no telling how much more these schools can benefit the spiritual, cultural, intellectual, economic, and other as pects o f life in the United States. N summary, historical as well as contemporary evidence reveals that the Jewish day school has been performing a unique function on the American scene. Its nature, aims, acti vities, and potential mark it as a per-

JEWISH LIFE

tinent, productive, and hopefully per manent feature o f American society and education. By being itself — non ap o I ogetic and non-defensive with regard to Jewish traditional learning

MAY-JUNE 1971

and values, and by its quest for scholarship in sacred and secular studies — it is an exemplar toward the enhancement o f educational excel lence everywhere.

ADVERTISING AND THE JEWISH PROBLEM or You d o n 't have to be Jewish to worry about Madison Avenue

by BERNARD MERLING

S a practitioner o f the art of advertising (and it is an art; there are no set rules to insure success) and as an orthodox Jew, I am frequently asked whether this is “ a job for a nice Jewish boy (or g irl).” Doting mothers, apprehensive fathers,| conscientious teachers and principals ask me from time to time to see their “ talented” children and advise them whether they should “ go into advertising.” Fre quently, the question is no more than rhetorical. To the caller, the untrained youngster has a “goldene h o n t,” the world o f advertising is waiting fo r him, and l am either lacking in perception or an unfeeling clod fo r not hiring him on the spot! One such incident must be re corded fo r posterity. This young man

came self-propelled and unannounced. He must have been all o f twenty or tw e n ty -o n e , bearded, black-hatted, and long caftaned. (Please don’t get me wrong — some o f my best friends are . . .) He told me how the previous summer he had been “ stranded” in a bungalow-colony in the mountains with nothing to read and about the only “ kosher” book he happened to come across was David Ogilvy’s “ Con fession o f an Ad Man.” He read all about the advertising business, the young Chossid related, and “ esiz m ihr zehr gefollen.” I couldn’t help but notice his accented and untutored command o f the language, so I asked if he was an artist. No, he was quick to admit, but he had “ ideas.” Could he write? Well, his wife was born in

JEWISH LIFE

America and she could write things down fo r him. What did I think o f his prospects o f getting a job in advertis ing? I think he was angry when I told him, as gently as I could, that he should forget about it. Advertising as a Career

HERE is, however, a serious side to the question. Does a career in advertising present special problems for an orthodox Jew? Naturally, the question is pertinent only to those positions peculiar to *the advertising business — art, copywriting, and account service. Clerical and admini strative positions are not different from those in other businesses. Prejudice. While in years past advertising was considered a profession that welcomed only “ Ivy League” Waspish types, and Jews pretty much excluded de facto, this is no longer true. Today, ability and “ creativity” are the passwords, and many Jews are to be found in very top positions. Shabboth. There is no reason why a Shomer Shabboth cannot func tion effectively in advertising. While it is a business that is largely based on meeting deadlines (“ closing dates,” a fte r which a publication cannot accept ads fo r a specific issue), and the pressures o f meeting these deadlines produce many o f the ulcers that ad men are noted for, schedules can be worked out so that Chillul Shabboth is avoided. The fourteen-year record o f our own growing agency, which is

MAY-JUNE 1971

completely closed down on every Shabboth and Yom Tov, proves that it can be done. Much credit for this goes to the business acumen o f my partner, a ben Yeshivah and shomer Torah u ’m itzvoth in the fullest sense o f those terms. O f course, a Shomer Shabboth w ill have a much more d iffic u lt time in the ordinary agency and much w ill depend on an understanding boss. On the plus side it should be pointed out that “ creative” and account-service personnel in advertising are generally more idiosyncratic, are allowed more freedom, and are less bound to strict clock-punching hours than in most other businesses. In short, if there is a w ill, there is a way. Kashruth. This is o f particular concern to the account man in adver tising. Unfortunately, clients do not always judge their agencies on the merits o f the latter’s work alone. Much wining and dining o f non-Jewish or n on -o b se rva n t decision-makers (of p rim a ry , secondary, and tertiary importance) is customary. This is done by the account man in some fancy, impressive, non-Kosher eatery (why not, i t ’s expense-account money?), and his only out is to feign an upset stomach or an eccentric belief in vegetarianism. While it is conceivable that the wining-dining syndrome can be avoided completely, or that it can be carried o ff w itho ut violating the laws o f Kashruth, as a practical matter neither is likely, at least in the big leagues. O f course, there is plenty o f money to be made in the little leagues

where costly frills o f any kind are neither offered nor expected. “ Jewish” Advertising 1 J E W IS H ” advertising generally U falls into two categories: “ instit u t io n a I ” (“ selling” concepts and ideologies) and “ product” (foods, services, hotels, etc.). Both categories appear w ith increasing frequency in non-Jewish as well as “ Jewish” publi cations. Examples o f institutional ad vertising would be the Barton’s Candy holiday ads (some o f which are very well done) in The New York Times; organizational ads that speak out for Peace, Brotherly Love, Israel, Freedom for Russian Jewry, etc.; and instructive and exhortative messages such as those by the Lubavitcher Rebbe and the Rabbinical Alliance o f America. Some are more professionally polished than others, some are more representative o f the Torah viewpoint than others, but all add to a greater general aware ness o f what Judaism is about, and to th a t e x te n t they are a valuable contribution. There are other forms o f insti tutional advertising o f more question able value 4'j specifically, when one faction in the Jewish community casti gates another in paid advertisements (usually in The New York Times). There are those among us who are quick to condemn such public washing o f d irty linen, and apply the strictures against Chillul Ha-Shem to justify their

position. On the other hand, the aggrieved parties feel that they have no other recourse but to “ shame” their opponents in public, and frequently point to policy changes effectuated by such ads to justify their position. Needless to say, and w ithout taking sides, we can all agree that such adver tising is deplorable and should be utilized only as a last resort upon the determination o f serious, responsible, and authoritative leadership. The other form o f Jewish adver tising — product advertising — is a mixed bag o f blessings. On the one hand, it performs a legitimate func tion, for both the advertiser and the consumer, in that it informs the Jewish public o f the availability o f things that it needs or wants: Jewish and/or kosher foods, resorts, services, books, etc. But on the other hand, much too often it is done in appallingly poor taste, pandering to Jewish sensibilities on the lowest level, making incorrect and irrelevant associations o f certain products to sacred holidays, presuming customs and celebrations that never were, misleading trusting souls as to the reliability o f certain products and hotels B In short, prostituting our re ligious heritage fo r a buck! It is all the more painful because it is unnecessary. It is indisputably possible to create effective advertising w ithout resorting to the cheap, tawdry, and disrespectful techniques* utilized by those who *Some recent resort ads, for example, used

JEWISH LIFE

should — and do — know better. Perhaps a few hundred letters o f out raged protest, directed to the adver tis e r (not the publication or the agency), would curb this commercial desecration o f religion. Truth in Advertising UCH has been written recently about truth in advertising. I may be accused o f bias, but I honestly believe that advertising is no worse, and no better, than most other busi nesses in this regard. The outright lie. is illegal and is prosecuted by all levels o f government. M isleading price comparisons (“ Save 50% o ff regular prices” ) are also illegal but more d iffic u lt to pro secute, because they are based on unrealistic “ Suggested Retail (or List) Prices” set by manufacturers. In such cases, advertising merely reflects an unscrupulous business practice estab lished by others, which, technically speaking, is not untrue. In the matter o f false product claims, the advertising agency is less guilty than most people think. Few agencies conduct their own product tests or create their own claims. The manufacturer or the retailer tells the agency the product’s (or service’s) out standing features, and it is the agency’s

a headline “ Enjoy two holidays in one — Easter & Passover” and were embellished with a buxom bikini-ed lass and a spray of lilies!

MAY-JUNE 1971

task to project these claims in the most effective manner. If the supplied information is not true, then the agency is no more than an unwitting accomplice. Which is not to say that it is im p o s s ib le for an agency to be “ crim inally” involved in false adver tising. No doubt yo u ’ve read about the marbles in the bottom o f the soup bowl (to make the vegetables seem so th ick' that they protruded above the soup), or the shaving o f the sandpaper (which was really not sandpaper). But it need n o t be so. It is possible to produce creative, effective advertising w ithout resorting to such tricky ruses. And clients can be reasoned w ith. Just the other day, one o f our clients suggested that we advertise one o f his products as a solution to a particular problem. A fter we analyzed the situa tion, we pointed out that, w itho ut additional components, his product alone could not solve that problem. And he gracefully backed o ff! If there is anything that advert rising as a technique can be accused of, it is n ot telling the whole truth, high lighting the advantages while ignoring the disadvantages, putting a product’s “ best face” forward. But which o f us does n o t do that? Whenever we want to “ sell” somethingB- a businessman his piece o f merchandise, a profes sional his services, a preacher his ideas, a; prospective marriage partner himself, and so on ad in fin itu m H- we project its best possible qualities and con veniently overlook its shortcomings.

As if it needs restating, any segment of a society is a reflection o f the total society. If the ethical and moral tone o f our society were on a higher plane, so would our advertising be. In short, it is possible to work in advertising and remain technically truthful. However, if one is a Chofetz C h a y y im , to whom the slightest nuance o f untruth is disturbing, he should not go into advertising. Nor, for that matter, into most other con temporary avenues o f business. The Real Problem HICH leads us to the real prob lem. If there is anything wrong with our society (and who would deny it?), advertising magnifies it and gives it immediate currency. The vast mon s tro u s communications system we have fabricated fo r ourselves, with its millions o f eyes and ears and billions o f voices, which advertising feeds on and feeds in a sickly symbiotic rela tionship, tends to promote and per petuate the stereotyped society. It projects the values and goals o f the masses’ commonest denominator and makes the m inority groups’ values and goals seem more out o f place than ever. This is all achieved w itho ut con scious intent. No individual, no group o r agency, intends to mislead or cheapen or corrupt. However, as a con sequence o f each single-mindedly pursuing his own selfish interests, there results a monumental coinci dence that creates a behavioral pattern

— much like the individual instincts o f the lemmings resulting in a mass, blindly hysterical rush to death. In the interests o f promoting his particular p ro d u c ts , th e advertiser portrays hap py and successful people as smoking Brand X, drinking Scotch Y, and wearing Fashion Z. You may or may not believe him regarding his specific Brand, but at the very least it is d iffic u lt to shake o ff the impression that all happy and successful people smoke, drink, and wear mini-skirts (that particular year). By holding be fore our eyes a panorama o f desiderata E from foods to fashions, from furn ishings to fads, even to definitions o f fu n » - we are constantly reminded o f what is In, and made to feel uncom fortable fo r being Out. Imagine, then, the impact o f the society around u s d e d i c a t e d to maximum gratifications w ith m ini mum restraints — on a way o f life, our Torah way o f life, which minimizes th e m a te ria l and maximizes the spiritual. No longer can we shut out this world that is so antithetical to everything we believe in. A ll ghettoes have been torn down — geographical, political, social, educational. We are not what our parents were, our parents were not what their parents were. Even the kerchiefed ladies in Williams burg o r Monsey,*?;the side-locked youngsters in Boro Park or Crown Heights, are not what they would have been in ‘ ‘the good old days” in ‘‘the Old C ountry.” The world o f pleasureat-all-costs is full upon us, thanks to advertisements that stare at us from JEWISH LIFE

every nook and cranny, that bewitch Us with siren sounds in the air all around us, that wiggle and beckon to us from picture screen wherever we turn. Is advertising to blame fo r all this? In and o f itself, no. But it m ulti plies and aggravates the effects upon us o f a society we dare not emulate. Can We Protect Ourselves? OME months ago, in what is journalistically termed a “ human in te r e s t” s to ry | th e advertising columnist o f a leading daily wrote a piece about four clergymen in the advertising business. As a framework for his story, he developed the conceit that if the Alm ighty ever needed an agency, these would be the men to run it. A t the time, I wrote him a letter to

MAY-JUNE 1971

the effect that, from the orthodox Jewish point o f view. He already has an agency ^ K h e Jewish people | | whose mission it is to engage in the most e ffective form o f advertising ever d evised : demonstration. By living example, by a life that says “ taste and see that the Lord is good,” we are to show all the nations that only a Torah way o f life can create a better world. In effect, then, to counteract the dangerous effects o f advertising, we must improve our own form o f adver tising. We must come up with a cam paign that w ill beat out the competition. We must strengthen our education and our observance, increase the budgets where possible, and make ourselves spiritually impervious to the blandishments o f the opposition. In short, we must all work a lot harder on His account.

■ u

tva by LOUIS L RABINOWITZ

HEN I glanced at the table o f contents o f the issue o f JEWISH LIFE o f last Tishri-Cheshvan and saw listed there the article by Hedy Peyser, “ Roshah Yeshivah,” I breathed a sigh o f satisfaction. A t last, I said to m y self, Asenath bath Shemuel Barazani is coming into her own, and is being introduced to a wider public than has been her fate and fortune so far. Alas, it was only when I turned to the article that I realized my mistake, a lth o u g h m y disappointment was largely mitigated by the interest I found in the article itself. And I de cided to act as the impressario and introducer o f m y “ Roshah Yeshivah” myself. Before I do so, however, let me give a little note on Hebrew grammar

and semantics. In the course o f her article Mrs. Peyser refers en passant to Mrs. Golda Meir, the Prime Minister o f Israel. When she was appointed as the first woman Prime Minister o f Israel, the question was raised as to her d e s ig n a tio n in Hebrew ^ Rosh Memshalah, or Roshah Memshalah or, possibly, to be even more gram m a tic a lly correct, Roshath Mem shalah? It was decided that, although the word roshah does occur once in the Bible (Zechariah A \lu^'\even haroshah'm “ the top stone” ), the word is not to be regarded as the feminine o f rosh, that the word rosh in the mean ing o f “ chief” can be applied equally to man and to woman, and she is officially designated as Rosh Mem shalah and not Roshah or Roshath

JEWISH LIFE

Memshalah. From which one can deduce that a “ kop” is not confined to the male gender, that a woman can, as she has so brillia ntly shownJWhave “ kop” as distinguished and outstand ing as that o f a man! Nevertheless, I follow Mrs. Peyser’s nomenclature and proceed to tell the remarkable and fascinating story o f a real (with due apologies to Mrs. Peyser) Roshah Yeshivah. HE Barazani fam ily was one o f the most distinguished Jewish fa m ilie s in K urdistan, producing rabbis, scholars, liturgical poets, and communal leaders (to it, in modern times, belonged the Barazani who, together w ith Meir Feinstein, blew himself to death in the prison cell o f Jerusalem on the eve o f his execution, thus escaping the hangman). The name derives from a town in Kurdistan called Barazan. The most distinguished member o f that fam ily at the end o f the 16th and the beginning o f the 17th century was Samuel ben Nathanel Barazani who was the acknowledged leader o f Kurdistan Jewry o f his time. He brought abbut a religious revival in Kurdistan, establishing yeshivoth in B a r a z a n , A k r a h , M o s u l, and Amadiyah. He lived in the greatest poverty, was revered in his lifetim e as a saint, and after his death his grave in the last named town became a center for pilgrimage. Samuel was succeeded by his nephew Jacob ben Avrohom who m a rrie d his cousin Asenath, the

MAY-JUNE 1971

daughter o f Shemuel. Asenath was born about 1590. In a letter which she wrote to the community o f Amadiyah she states: “ Never in my life did I leave the door o f my home. I was like a princess.. . .1 was brought up on the knees o f the sages, I was bound to my father, who taught me no work except for the work o f Heaven.” And when the time came fo r her to marry her c o u s in , her fa th e r “ extracted a promise from him that I was to be engaged in no housework or any other a c t iv it y , e x c e p t study,” and he adhered to that! A t firs t this scholarly couple was childless, all the children born to them dying in their youth. Her husband Y a ’ akov carried on the pioneering missionary work o f his father-in-law and uncle, Shemuel, and when he went on his pastoral duties and came to a place where there were no scholars w ith whom he could have learned debates and discussions, he would sit with his gifted and learned wife and study together with her. Distressed at his childlessness, Ya’akov decided to go on a pilgrimage to Jeru salem to pray that they might be vouchsafed children. It was the only journey he took in which Asenath did not accompany him, but his prayers were answered. A fter his return their union was finally blessed, and Asenath bore him daughters and one son, Shemuel.

A ’AKO V predeceased his wife, and it was then that Asenath became the head o f the yeshivah o f

M o s u l, to w h ic h students were attracted from all the communities o f Kurdistan. Carrying on the work o f her distinguished father and husband, she sent letters o f exhortation and o f instruction to all the communities, and like Mrs. Peyser, the financial burden o f th e ye shivah was upon her shoulders and in her letters she solic ited financial support fo r it. Her letters invariably begin w ith a poetic intro duction which reveal her profound knowledge o f Torah literature and her command o f Hebrew. In one o f her letters she stresses the importance o f her work among the Jewish communi ties o f Kurdistan, “ t alone am left to teach Torah and give moral reproof. I preach on the importance o f Sabbath and p ra ye r/’ but as a woman she adds “ Tevilah and the laws o f Niddah.” The greatest scholars o f Kurdistan re sounded her praises. In 1664, Rabbi Pinchas Harari, one o f the greatest sages and kabbalists o f Kurdistan, who communicated w ith her and congra tulated her on the fe licity o f her Hebrew style, wrote to her that he and all the other scholars o f Kurdistan “ are ever at your service.. .but we beg o f

you, do not forget us in your prayers, fo r your prayers are surely as accept able on High as Peace Offerings and Whole Offerings.” As far as I am aware, she is never referred to as “ Roshath Yeshivah,” but an even more honorable title was accorded her, the “ tanna’ith ,” the “ Woman Tanna.” N her old age she was assisted in th e ye shivah by her son Shemuel, and nothing emphasizes her importance and that o f her yeshivah more than the fact that the leading community o f the Far East, Baghdad, approached her to recommend one o f her students to fill the position o f rabbi in the capital. She recommended and sent her son Shemuel. No works by Asenath have survived, though according to one account she wrote a commentary on the Book o f Proverbs. She was said to be expert in Kabbolah, and it is not surprising that miracles were ascribed to her and legends about her are still current among Kurdistani Jews in Israel. Asenath lived to a ripe old age, and died about 1670, at the approximate age o f 80. She is, to my knowledge, unique.

JEWISH LIFE

by EL KAN AH SCHWARTZ S the winds o f World War I blew over, Ephraim Fishel Horowitz took his wife and grown son Yisroel Mosheh on a fru it ship that sailed for America. For the hundreds o f im m i grants packed into the cargo hold, it was a rough crossing, but their hope was kept flickering by each wave o f the angry sea that brought them that much closer to der goldineh medineh. As soon as the Horowitzes got o ff Ellis Island with the help o f a lantsman, they moved into a tworoom, sixth-floor coldwater walkup that this same savior found fo r them on the Lower East Side. A fter affixing the Mezuzah, Ephraim Fishel took Yisroel Mosheh by the arm and to gether they went looking fo r jobs. The son being physically stronger soon got

MAY-JUNE 1971

a position as a pushcart loader, while his father groped fo r a few days until a basement operation took him in as an all-around helper. By the time the two attended th e ir fir s t Sabbath services, their address in America was established and their incomes, though p itifu lly small, were secure. The father then addressed his son: “ I am an old man in a new land. I don’t expect to learn its language or its ways. I w ill be happy to stay the way I am. You, though, are younger. This is a land o f opportunity. Make good use o f it. Only remember this: every time a man sees something new, he gets excited about it and thinks he has a right to change himself. If that ever happens to you, remember Kohelles: he tried everything under

the sun and concluded there is nothing new. A ll that is worth the e ffo rt is fear o f the Lord. That, my son, I tell you. Be no slouch, but don’t get lost. Use the world. Don’t let it useyou. ” N the synagogue they attended, th e son found a few other greeneh his own age, and gravitated towards them. One had a sister who had friends, and one Motzoi Shabboth the brother and sister made a gathering in a rented loft. They charged admis sion to cover expenses, and the p ro fit they gave to charity. A t that party, shy Yisroel Mosheh was approached by a girl who wasn’t. She asked.him to see her home, which turned out to be, in the accordion-like world they lived in, a block away from the Horowitzes. She suggested that if he’d come calling some evening, she’d give him a guided tour o f some o f the fringe areas o f the neighborhood. He did come back, with a box o f candy, in fact, and met her mother (her father had passed away on the boat coming over) who had a rela tive, so she claimed, who had lived in a town not far from where an uncle o f Yisroel Mosheh had lived in Europe. “ Surely,” said1thé lady, trying to establish some relationship, “ they must have known each other.” « The young couple took a walk, and some evenings o f the follow ing weeks they spent at outdoor concerts, at political meetings, and on holiday boatrides, and she started to attend the same shool as the Horowitzes. It wasn’t too long till they made up to

stay together, only they needed more money. She was working as a seam stress and her earnings were' not being squandered. He took an additional part-time job fo r three nights a week, during which time she sewed and embroidered fo r her trousseau. Eight months after the arrival o f the Horowitzes under the shadow o f the Statue o f Liberty, Ephraim Fishel and his wife announced the engage ment o f their son Yisroel Mosheh, who by now had become Irving Morris. There was a kiddush in the synagogue that week, and after Havdolah the five principals i-|th e three Horowitzes and the fiancee and her mother — went to visit a catering hall on the other side o f Houston Street. A week later, they returned to sign a contract and leave adeposit. Two months later, the hall went bankrupt and the deposit was lost. They shrugged their shoulders, and the g irl’s mother said to the couple: “ This should be the kappureh for whatever was bash ehr t you should suffer,” and they answered “ Omeyn.” They went then to rent a synagogue hall, as they fe lt a house o f worship never goes broke. A month before the wedding, the couple took a two room, fourthfloor cold water walkup about four blocks from their folks. The girl quit her job to prepare the apartment and the wedding, and on that bright Sunday afternoon o f the affair they looked splendid. The rest o f the week was spent, naturally, in a grand

JEWISH LIFE

manner: rowing in Central Park one day, orchestra seats at the Roxy the day after, visits to a few museums, and the last evening they walked all the way home from Times Square. HE next day, Irving Morris re turned to his job where he got a token raise, and his wife went looking fo r a new job fo r herself, which she quickly found. Two months later, he came home one evening to find his wife in tears. “ We’re going to have a b a b y ,” she said. “ Then why the tears?” he asked. “ Because I ’m so happy,” she replied. He sat down next to her. “ You know we don’t have much,” he said, “ but this is our castle. I am the King, and you are my Queen. Soon we’ll have some Princes for me and some Princesses fo r you. And fo r them ” % he leaned closer $£ “ we should have more than we have now.” She smiled in agreement, and the next morning he said to his boss: “ If I ’m good enough to work for you, I ’m good enough to work fo r myself.” So he took his belongings home, and w ith his wife, whom he persuaded to quit her job, went looking fo r a store they could call their own, where they could work together and if necessary live in the back o f so she could take care o f the children. They took the trolley car into Brooklyn a number o f times until three weeks later they signed a lease for a candy store w ith a three-room apartment in the back on a sunny street in Brownsville. In tw o weeks

MAY-JUNE 1971

they would move in, but meanwhile Irving came in every day to learn the business. A t first it appeared confus ing, this being his first adventure into Rockefeller’s w o rld p b u t the thought o f the prince-or-princess-in-waiting cleared his head. They moved in, the greenhorn with his pregnant wife, according to schedule. Ephraim Fishel came in the evening to put up the Mezuzah, not because his son d id n ’t want or know how, Heaven forbid, but because the father had asked fo r the honor. Friday afternoon, Irving closed the store in time to wash up, help his wife light the candles, and go to shook Some o f the customers were caught unprepared, but they quickly got used to the new arrangements. During that first week, a religious-looking Jew had come in for a Yiddish paper, and Irving had asked him fo r the location o f the nearest synagogue. To that address he now walked quickly, and beat the sun to the door. Being the owner o f a candy store gave him something not everyone had: a telephone. Every day, he got a call from his parents and one from his mother-in-law. When his wife gave birth, he closed up a half-hour earlier to visit her in the hospital. Since it was a girl, he was denied the pleasure o f making a B’rith. OnThursday morning in the synagogue he was called to the Torah so as to give the girl her name: Dvorah Malkah. On the birth c e rtifi cate he had filled in Doris Marlene. When the two women returned home, 33

escorted by the three elders from the East Side, the apartment in back o f the candy store was spotless. Y the time Doris Marlene was ready fo r school, she had a brother Fred, named after Ephraim Fishel who had passed away a year after the relocation o f his children, and a younger sister Sharon, named a fte r her m a te rn a l grandmother Shifrah who died not long after her mechutan. On opening day o f school, proud Mrs. Horowitz joined a horde o f Polish, Negro, Italian, and Jewish mothers who together smiled through their tears as their children left their apron strings for the first time. Ten years later, Mr. and Mrs. Horowitz took the liberty one evening o f taking stock o f themselves. The discussion lasted through tw o packs o f king-sized cigarettes and a fu ll perco lator o f coffee, coming to an adjourn ment at three in the morning. A t six, Irving would have to open the store and take in the morning papers fo r the blue-collar people already on their way to the subway and their daily bread. Doris had by now been grad uated from the public school, a local Talmud Torah, and the local junior high school, and was now in her third year o f daily commuting on the Pitkin Avenue bus to Thomas Jefferson High S c h o o l. She was neither a prize student nor a cause fo r complaint, rather very much the anonymous face in the crowd that breaks out o f New York C ity ’s schools every day at three

in the afternoon. She mingled well w ith all her classmates, preferring the Jewish ones whom she would bring home on occasion fo r a licorice or pretzel. Shabboth afternoon was for meeting her neighborhood friends, first at the Shomer Hadati, and then graduating to the independence o f L in c o ln Terrace Park. During her f if te e n th su m m er, she had been initiated, via the Green Bus Line, into th e Wednesday evening fireworks watching on the Boardwalk corner Eighty-Fifth Street in Rockaway, and on Sundays, more often than not, she enjoyed cavorting on the nearby sands o f “ Yarmulkeh Beach.” And earlier this same evening that her parents were having their cigarette s-and-coffee session, Doris had received her first in v ita tio n — via a grapevine-fed “ secret” — to an upcoming Sweet Sixteen party o f a friend in East Flatbush. This had sent her into a tizzy about her own party, about which she had until now only dreamed. Her parents well knew that in six months’ time, there would have to be a real one for their daughter, and the back o f a candy store in Brownsville was no place for one. REDDIE was just about getting over sending “ Thank Y o u ” cards for the gifts received fo r his BarMitzvah simchah. He had been well treated, and responded in kind. In the synagogue he had read the entire Sidrah, recited the Haftorah, made a short speech as befitting a yeshivah

JEWISH LIFE

boy., and surprised everyone by being the cantor fo r the Mussaph service. Then everyone had gone downstairs for the works: pickled herring, gefilteh fish (with chrayn)#T>eer and soda, besides, o f course, shnapps with sponge and honey cakes. A t the apart ment the same afternoon, as many relatives and friends who permitted themselves to be squeezed at the tables sampled Mrs. H orow itz’s kugels and cholenty and Mr. Fabrikant, the presi dent o f the congregation, led the I ’chayyim (and he knew how). Sunday afternoon there was open house|j§ in the synagogue. They had run out o f punch and chopped liver before some cousins could arrive from the Bronx (they had taken the wrong subway), but enough o f everything else re mained. Although it was a nice loca tion for a Bar-Mitzvah celebration, it was not fittin g for a Sweet Sixteen. W h ile Freddie was attending yeshivah, Sharon was in the same public school her sister had graduated from . The teachers were mostly the same (they seemed to be eternal) but the clientele had changed radically, just as did the clientele o f the C & D Luncheonette. While Doris used to come home about once in two years in a state o f tears because some boy had pulled her hair, Sharon came home the same way about once a month. Irving wasn’t surprised: he could observe the invasion o f the “re lie fn icke s'^from behind his apron.

MAY-JUNE 1971

HE toll was apparent to anyone who bothered to look. In the shool, there were now more seats e m p ty than occupied, the former occupants leaving either fo r another world or another neighborhood. In the Prospect Place market, the pushcart peddlers who were born to complain ing found something legitimate to complain about now: their customers were decreasing in number. In the yeshivah, Freddie was able to get a seat up fro n t w ithout his mother coming up to ask fo r it, because there now was room fo r everyone up front. Doris could see the reduction o f the crowd that showed up every year for Tashlich in Highland Park on Rosh Hashonah. Although a Shabboth after noon constitutional on Eastern Park way still showed many Shabbesdik faces, th e numbers were visibly dwindling. And besides which, Mrs. Horowitz claimed over the fifth cup o f coffee, times were changing. The same War that had brought destruction to the Jews in Europe brought prosperity to the Jews in America. She could count the number o f former neighbors who were now ufgekumineh negiddim in Crown Heights, who paid their children’s tu ition handsomely when in the o ld neighborhood they had pleaded poverty. She insisted that loading a pushcart had been good fo r a greeneh, and running a candy store proper fo r a budding capitalist, but the handwriting on the wall showed it was

time for a change. As long as things had been tight, she claimed, she was ready to swallow what she had to. Now, however, there were opportuni ties, and she did not wish to be the one to be swallowed. Irving Morris Horowitz took it all philosophically, recalling his late f a t h e r 's w o rd s to h im a b o u t Kohelleth: “ He tried everything under the sun and concluded there is nothing new. A ll that is worth the e ffo rt is fear o f the Lord.” And to Irving, it was just as well to fear the Lord in Brownsville as it was in Crown Heights. He had neither cause to complain nor desire to change. He lived by a code o f “ live and let live." He worked hard, but that was nothing to complain about. In fact, it was something to be proud of: idleness breeds destruction. He was making enough to feed, clothe, shelter, and educate his fam ily, he had no debts, he gave carefully to charity, and, above all, he enjoyed a good name. He had no interest in going into battle against the world. He liked it where he was: it was heymish, he had his shool and friends, he could take a walk or go to a movie or a Second Avenue theater benefit whenever he chose to; he got along fine w ith whom ever he met, joining in many community activities; he was, in his own unassuming way, a contented soul. But if he had chosen to live and let live, not all others had similarly chosen. He blamed the ones who moved out. He could not understand why the rattle o f some coins in the

pocket made them leave. In Europe, if a poor man came into money, he didn’t leave town. He b u ilt himself a nicer home, bought nicer clothes, ate better food, gave more charity, and enjoyed a more significant position in the comm unity. But he stayed put. Instead o f a kabtzan, he was an oysher — in the same city. The nouveau riche o f Browns ville could have and should have done the same thing, he reasoned as he opened the second pack o f cigarettes. There were houses in the area where he wished he could be living instead o f where he was. He would have enjoyed a car to take his fam ily on a spin or an occasional visit. His wife wanted so much to have a Persian lamb coat, but she humbly held out as long as she didn’t have w ith what. For his children he would have bought a nicer phono graph, so they could better enjoy the m usic o f the world and o f the centuries. A ll this — all this and more — couId have been in Brownsville. Instead, his neighbors were changing colors and languages. From all over, from all the synagogues and shtibelech and kioisiech in the area, the story was the same: “ So-and-so made money, s’h u tt zey mehr n it geposst, so they moved o u t.” And who moved in? T first, the splash o f the War b ro ug ht an avalanche o f re fugees. The HIAS discovered Browns v ille , and Bergen Street suceeded Bergen-Belsen: fo r the first time in years, its graduates blinked their eyes

JEWISH LIFE

in the sun o f human dignity. Grown men and women walked w ith a crude step as o f a child first learning to walk. Their children flooded the yeshivah, and none o f them could pay tu ition . But they began putting the pieces to g e th e r. Some found good jobs, others found or were found by a relative or some lantsleit, and the flow o f reparations soon plugged the holes that remained. In another splash, they were all gone. Brownsville, Jewishly speaking, became a ghost town. By now, Irving had no choice. His wife was right. This was no longer a neighborhood fo r a fifteen-year old Jewish girl. Although he d id n 't like it that way, he couldn't help himself. Later the same morning, after the customer rush was over and the kids were in school, he began to scan the “ Business O pportunities" sections in the Yiddish and English papers. Six months later, he walked into a small synagogue in Rego Park in Queens introducing himself as a new neighbor and owner o f a luncheonette on the Boulevard. He wasn’t happy about having to move, but Brownsville had already become like the Europe o f his youth. From Europe the Jews left because they were thrown out; from Browns ville they left because they threw themselves out. Although Rego Park looked like a fair replacement, he wondered how long it would take before the children o f the smiling tenants o f “a llrig h tn ik” Queens would desert it for other pastures. Already in

MAY-JUNE 1971

the Bronx, the northern extension o f M a n h a tta n , w here pennypushers b a ttle d fo r a w in d o w on th e Concourse, one could see the slowing o f the wave at the crest, ready fo r the nosedive in to b lo c k b u s tin g and oblivion. Irving couldn't help but feel that Jews had gotten so used to D.P. camps they insisted upon sparing others the burden o f creating them. They fe lt they could do a better job o f it: find a lily-white neighborhood, move in with the necessary commu nity institutions as a camouflage, give the children a better education than the parents had and then fig ht fo r their right to use it, and then, when the kids have the money and the freedom to spend it, watch them move on to create their own D.P. camps, bigger and better than their folks had, and run through the same cycle from the other end. And in the whole tz im is , innocents like Irving got caught: though content where they were, the rebels had created such a vacuum that it drew the Irvings into their wake.

II E was happy, at least, that in 1 Rego Park he found many re fugees like himself: refugees from Williamsburg, refugees from Washing ton Heights, refugees from Bushwick, refugees from other camps. Mrs. Horowitz also found herself: an old acquaintance she had once worked next to on a sewing machine in a dark and damp lo ft on Seventeenth Street near Sixth Avenue was now vice-presi-

dent o f the Mothers League o f a local yeshivah and chairman o f its annual bazaar, only now she denied ever having worked at a sewing machine in a dark and damp lo ft on Seventeenth Street and Sixth Avenue many years ago. That lady's son attended the yeshivah she was active in, and Freddie enrolled in the same school. The con trast between this school and the one he had been nursed in was too confus ing fo r him. For the remainder o f his tenure in that institution he fought a losing battle against speaking the Holy Tongue in a dialect he found strange, and fo r the rest o f his life he never lost his disdain fo r that “ impressive" way o f acting as if yo u ’re learning. Doris quickly succeeded in fin d ing a group o f her own, after phoning a girl she used to meet on the Spring boatrides, up the Hudson to Bear Mountain. She had in fact hardly finished hanging up her dresses when she was escorted to a Sweet Sixteen o f a girl she didn’t know by a boy she didn’t know but who was o f the practice o f being the first to meet every girl who set fo o t on the Paradise Island o f Jewish New York. Sharon had some slight d iffi culty at first, because she had never before sat through a whole school day with nobody else but Jews — and a Jewish teacher, too. However, by the tim e M rs. H o r o w itz got herself appointed co-chairman o f the annual luncheon o f the Mothers League (she would get the soda and the paper goods free, and many other things

wholesale), all the Horowitzes had all but forgotten that Brownsville and the East Side and all o f Europe had ever existed. Rego Park was Heaven, and they had arrived. IVE years later, the scene in the Horowitz home was way beyond the most extreme fantasies ever enter tained in the back o f the C & D Luncheonette on Saratoga Avenue, even farther beyond any thoughts from the courting days on Madison Street, and impossibly beyond any hallucinations capable o f “der a/teh heim ” in Rooslond. They made their peace w ith the New O rthodoxy: any thing went as long as the required observances were maintained. Since activities conveniently classified as “ religious” still left plenty o f free time, everyone fell into the pastime o f trying to find new kicks fo r the new money and new frontiers o f social activity and m obility with which to kill the free time. Because the size o f th e luncheonette demanded three workers and the management was more complex than it had been in the shadows o f St. Marks Avenue, Mrs. H orow itz never entered the store. What’s more, her comm unity activi ties, which by now came to include, in addition to the Mothers League, an orphanage in Tel Aviv and a day a week as a volunteer in a local hospital (besides every Thursday afternoon in the beauty parlor), left her no time fo r the business, except fo r a convenient partnership she had formed w ith her

JEWISH LIFE

husband: he made the money while she spent it. When he wanted to take in his mother into the apartment, his wife refused. He spent six months trying to get her into a home. He succeeded, and she was there fo r tw o years until — Doris's Sweet Sixteen had prov en so popular that she ran a party every year after that. Even as some o f the fellows and girls dropped o ff into the dishes-and-diapers routine, they were always replaced. She was a grudg ing employee o f the City's Board o f Ed, complaining about all the paper work with the exception o f the cash ing o f the bi-weekly paycheck. She fe lt it a sin to let money lie around, and her clothes and her car and her vaca tions proved it. As long as she showed up on occasion in a synagogue, arriving late and gossipping much, she fe lt her s e lf cleansed o f any personality aberrations. REDDIE took his diploma from a yeshivah high school, and fe lt he’d be more comfortable as a fu ll time student at a local college. Once he would take o ff his T efillin every morning, he would feel his obligation fulfilled and later free to do as he wished on campus. The anonym ity o f student life helped cover up any deed or misdeed that the men o f the syna gogue, with whom he prayed reli giously, might have found irregular, and his reverent pose on those reli gious occasions was assurance enough — to them, at least — that Freddie-boy is bringing respect to the “ tarnished”

MAY-JUNE 1971

Jewish reputation. People like Freddie, these transplanted Orchard Street people felt, show the world that an orthodox Jew is not a shnorrer, a shlep, but a proud and capable indi vidual. Freddie proved it too, in his own way. He was not attending a Russian university o f the Twenties, where a Jew had to stick w ith his own because the others wouldn’t let him get close to them. In the America o f his day, a Jew on campus could get as sociable with the non-Jews as he wished. Sharon remained the most sub dued o f all. She was a good student, and concentrated so on piano fo r her own enjoyment that she gave private lessons while still in high school. In this temperament, she was like her father, while her sister and brother took after the mother. Basically, the difference was th is: Mrs. Horowitz, her daughter Doris, and her son Freddie believed that one should live w ithin one’s income to the extent, to the fullest extent, o f that income. No stealing and no cheating, o f course, but no overdoing on the jsaving. Money, they felt, was meant to be spent — and used. If the goyim let one get around, then he should get. Something that is available is to be used. As long as everything was w ithin the rules, it was kosher. In this they found many others for company, and together created new ways around the tradi tional four cubits. T h e Ita lia n s have pizza?

Kosherize it and eat it. The Protestants have country clubs, gaudy hotels, nightclubs, posh catering? Take your money and build your own, even outdo them. Catholics travel? Arrange for kosher provisions and fo llo w them. Irish run the government? Run in a Jewish neighborhood and create an impression o f righteous indignation, and you’re in the same ballgame. Wasps drive nice cars, wear nice clothes, buy nice furniture, show o ff jewelry? Money isn’t antisemitic. These people fe lt that whatever gentiles have, Jews should have too, as long as the basic image Is retained in the bargain. UT Irving Morris Horowitz and daughter Sharon and many other people were not happy about these developments. They, too, fe lt that a person should live w ithin his income, but not necessarily to the extent o f it. Extra cash in the pocket and the bank is an opportunity to breathe easier, to get things that help make life easier, to give more charity, and above all, to use the leisure time in pursuit o f the traditional Jewish avocations o f read ing and learning and m a’asim tovim. In Europe, on the East Side, and in B ro w n s v ille , wherever there was poverty, study halls filled at night with workers taking their scholarly licks. Now in affluence, when more money should mean more time fo r more study, everyone was too busy either making money or spending it to come together fo r a bout with the books.

Now that Tevye was a rich man, he wasn’t keeping his word. The trait o f hum ility was being sacrificed on the altar o f affluence. A girl like Doris, Irving felt, who was making good money, should be saving it fo r her home and perhaps to help her husband finish school or get started in some profession. Instead, her money made her feel that she would marry only someone who was a lready well established and who would provide her w ith a standard o f living even higher than the high one she was now enjoying. Freddie seemed to be making up for lost time, not only fo r his own tranquil boyhood days but fo r his father’s immigrant days as well as the years o f passive life his whole line o f g ra n d p a re n ts had led across the Atlantic. He managed to put some m oney away. Although he found opportunities to marry, he wasn’t prepared to give up “ the good life.” He had a keppel and an intelligent way o f h a n d lin g h im self, which had prompted his firm to take him away from the computer and send him to business school at their expense, and his current activities as a junior exec took him jnto environments that he himself would have revolted against had it been suggested at his BarMitzvah. His father had compared his children to some others he knew who disappeared in Europe: those others had been killed w ith gas, while his own were being killed with kindness. He had put himself out fo r them, his

JEWISH LIFE

Prince and Princesses, and now they had gotten beyond the boundary he had set fo r them. No wonder, then, that three years later, after Doris had taken her own apartment on the West Side and Freddie was spending more time on the road than at home, Irving learned o f her weekly trips to the analyst. Looking at her, one would never have known it, but his own fears were being all too unfortunately borne out: her obsession w ith finding outlets fo r her money and freedom made her lose her own identity. She still called herself religious, though more in the technical sense than in the emotional. Freddie, too, always the gadfly in his professional set because o f the food he w ouldn't eat and the week ends he insisted on, was not the Ephraim Fishel that his mother had had in mind when she walked him to yeshivah in the old Brooklyn winters. Although she never planned fo r him to be a rabbi, she had hoped he would fin d his peace in the utilitarian domestic life such as her husband was living. But she learned too late that times were different because circum stances were different. Irving had wanted his Freddie to have greater opportunities than he himself had, but the boy, his kadishl, had overdone it. He was almost a stranger in his own home. S it turned out, their mezinik, their Sharon, was the first to get married. Mrs. Horowitz remembered

MAY-JUNE 1971

th a t her grandmother had never approved o f a younger sister marrying before an older one, but now Mr. Horowitz said that if necessary he'll hire the catering hall w itho ut her. The wedding came o ff very well, and Doris and Freddie sparked the celebration for their kid sister. Perhaps the regi mentation o f a strong Jewish atmos phere at such a tender moment moved them into realignment, because when the Horowitz son-in-law made a B'rith Milah some ten months later, Doris attended w ith her fiancee, a quiet attorney who agreed to follow her religious ways even though they were more demanding than his own, and even Freddie was spending more time at home now. His fling was flung by his own choice, and he now had his eye set on establishing his own con sulting firm in the aerospace business. He had a good contact near Boston, and spent his time in New York look ing fo r a wife who would help him feather his nest. When some six years later Irving passed away from complications from his second heart attack, he had already seen fu lfille d, at least in part, the aspirations fe lt on his trip to America those many decades ago. He had cast his line into the river, together w ith so many others, knowing not what, if anything, he might reel in. No orie knew then how things would turn out, and no one knew even now what the fu tu re would bring. Every change creates opportunity, and also creates confusion, which reproduces itself

faster. Irving had had his problems, and his children now had theirs; the two sets were hardly related. He could have never forseen what they would be up against, nor would they ask him, nor others like him, to guide them: their circumstances in America had no antecedents. Though his children d id n 't know it, Irving Morris Horowitz fe lt till his last breath that his grandchildren would have it even more confusing. Their America would be remote from that o f Doris, Freddie, and Sharon. The religious ones would be more religious, the irreligious more so, and the lines between them more sharply drawn, even w ithin families. But if he had not personally succeeded entirely, he was at least able to console himself with the knowledge that it had all been beyond his control, and that he was fortunate fo r even the little he had. IS son scrupulously kept the Kaddish for him, and Doris, in an apparent expression o f remorse,

brought a greater emotional depth to the religious atmosphere in her home. Right after the Shiveh, Sharon invited her mother to come live w ith them in Spring Valley. First Mrs. Horowitz sold the business, then threw herself into community work, but it lacked the old flavor. Three years later, she took a srnall apartment near where Sharon lived. Through the medium o f the tele phone, she kept in touch w ith Doris in Los Angeles and w ith Freddie in Silver Spring. Once a year she took a trip to each, and once a year each took a trip to her. She watched as her grand children blinked at the glitter o f American life that grew shinier every moment, and she thought back over her own life which had bounced along the migratory Jewish trail. Where and how her eyniklech would wind up, she hadn't the faintest idea — but in keep ing with tradition, she looked hope fu lly forward to its turning out well. “Many are the plans in a man's heart, b u t i t is the Lord's counsel that shall stand.'' (Proverbs 19:21)

JEWISH LIFE

"1 sabbath Onlo Ihe lord

by SAMUEL A. TURK OTHING in Jewish life is so widely misconstrued, generally ill conceived, and inadequately fu l filled as is the Sabbath. Most people refer to the Sabbath as “ the day o f rest.” This appellation is derived from a faulty and misleading translation o f the Biblical te xt “ ...A n d on the seventh day G-d finished His work which He had made and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had made. And G-d blessed the seventh day and hallowed it; be cause that in it He rested from all His w o rk which G-d in creating had m ade.. . ” (Bereshith 2: 2,3) The word “ restate implies the presence o f physical fatigue resulting from to il and labor. To impute fatigue — a physical experi ence — to the Creator o f the Universe is both ridiculous and sacreligious,

MAY-JUNE 1971

bespeaking an anthropomorphic con ception o f the Deity. While it is true that “ The Torah speaks in the lan guage o f men,” we cannot talk o f rest from labor in connection with the creation o f the world. The Torah de liberately records that G-d created the world by Divine utterances and not by an act o f labor, a fact emphasized by the Rabbis: “ By ten Divine utterances was the world created.” (Ovoth 5:1) We must conclude, therefore, that the Torah does not speak o f G-d as having “ rested,” but rather as having ceased th e process o f creating. Indeed, Samson Raphael Hirsch so translates it: “ G-d completed with the seventh day His work that He had made and with the seventh day He ceased from all the work that He had made.” T h e re is a vast difference

between G-d having rested and G-d having ceased the act o f creation. This becomes most significant in connec tion with the commandment to ob serve the Sabbath. I f the rationale o f Shabboth is rest from physical exhaus tion, so as to enable us to recoup our d epleted energies fo r the coming week’s work, then the Sabbath be comes a means toward a puny and mundane end. Such a spurious concept debases Shabboth and dethrones it from the central and exalted position it occupies in Judaism’s fabric. Is this the “ Sabbath Queen” so glorified by the Torah, poets, and prophets? Such a prosaic concept o f the Sabbath ineluctably leads to the fallacious conclusion that only tiring work is prohibited on Shabboth, while any non-strenuous and pleasurable activity which relaxes one from the tensions o f daily toil is permissible and even desirable: “ So long as we do not go to our daily job or business, we are Sabbath observers.” Reasoning from such a premise, we cynically begin to question the relevance and meaning o f the numerous restrictive Sabbath laws. We ask, “ Is it not more restful to ride rather than to walk to the synagogue; to take an elevator rather than to climb stairs? And what is so strenuous about putting on a light or w riting a n o te ? ” Yet, does not the Torah specifically forbid this: “ Ye shall kindle no fire throughout your habita tio n s u pon th e S a bbath Day.” (Shemoth 35:3) So we begin to ration alize that while having been valid in ancient times when kindling a fire

presumably involved laborious effort, such a prohibition is no longer mean ingful. Furthermore, most labor has been rendered so much easier through the use o f machines that many cate gories o f work form erly prohibited can and should now be allowed. With such faulty reasoning, one can understand the readiness o f so many to embrace the path o f least resistance and violate the laws o f Sabbath. Since true Shabboth observance might interfere with our convenience, it must give way to our needs and our desire fo r comfort. N F O R T U N A T E L Y , one can find such shoddy thinking all too prevalent even among the observ ant. Ignorance o f the laws o f Sabbath is so widespread that flagrant Sabbath desecration can be seen where you would least expect to find it. One need not necessarily go to work in order to violate the Sabbath; it can be done easily and deliberately while staying at home. While working on the Sabbath can perhaps be attributed to a fear o f survival, what excuse can be offered fo r turning on the radio or television. I have known yeshivah graduates who, unfortunately, had not been taught how to properly observe the Sabbath. A ll too often, Jewish women are woe fu lly lacking in such knowledge. It would therefore seem to me that the true meaning and importance o f the Sabbath and the laws o f its observance should constitute a most im portant and integral part o f the curriculum o f th e Yeshivah and Talmud Torah.

JEWISH LIFE

Rabbis should devote more time to teaching, explaining, and clarifying proper Sabbath observance to their congregations, sisterhoods, and men’s clubs. Parents must acquire a sound knowledge o f the laws, so as to impart it to their children at an early age. True Shemirath Shabboth observance is a lifetim e task and it is imperative that we transmit a better perspective o f the laws and correct erroneous impressions. If the Torah equates w il ful and flagrant Sabbath desecration with idolatry and w ith a break w ith the whole o f Judaism, we can do no less. In the past, our approach in explaining the Sabbath has often been wrong. It should not be presented as simply a day o f rest and relaxation. From early times — in the desire to apologize fo r a Torah commandment — self-defeating explanations and argu ments have often been used. Philo o f Alexandria, in his attempt to counter act the accusations that the Torah encourages Jewish indolence, explains the Sabbath by saying: Its [th e Sabbath’s ] object is rather to give man relaxation from continuous and unending to il, and by. refreshing their bodies with a regularly calcu lated system o f remissions to send them out renewed to their activities. For a breathing spell enables n o t merely ordinary p e o p le , b u t athletes also to collect their strength w ith a stronger force behind them to u n d e r t a k e p r o m p t l y and

MAY-JUNE 1971

patiently each o f the tasks set b e f o r e t h e m . ( P h i l o de Specialibus Legibus 11:60, Loeb Classics Philo VII) But the Shabboth o f the Torah is most certainly NOT meant to be simply a breathing spell to enhance our capaci ties fo r work in the week to come! In the Torah the Sabbath is presented as the goal o f the w orld’s creation. The liturgy recited on Friday evening pro claims the Sabbath as “ . . . Last in the order o f Creation, but firs t in thought [mind o f the C reator].” The Midrosh (Bereshith Rabbah 10) compares G-d’s creation o f the world to that o f a King who b uilt and decorated a beautiful wedding-hall. A ll that was missing was thje bride. The Sabbath is the bride fo r whom the hall was b u ilt and w ithout her all o f the work is in vain. In our Friday evening prayers we recite, “ . . . Thou didst consecrate the seventh day unto Thy name as the goal o f Creation o f heaven and earth and didst bless it above other days and s a n c tify it above all seasons...” Hence, observance o f the Sabbath is a sanctification o f G-d’s name — the fu lfillm e n t o f the greatest uKiddush Hashem.” Sabbath observance is also a “ . . .memorial to the work o f Crea tion. . . ” (Kiddush fo r Friday evening). It is living and visible testimony that heaven and earth are not mere mech anisms which have evolved, but that they were purposefully created by the Alm ighty. “ Thus shall the Children o f Israel keep the Sabbath, to observe the Sabbath throughout their generations as a perpetual covenant. It is a sign

between Me and the Children o f Israel forever, that fo r six days G-d created the heaven and earth and w ith the seventh day ceased to create and withd re w u n to H im s e lf.” (Shemoth 31:16,17) Were we to use the world and its resources fo r productive pur poses seven days a week, we could easily forget the fundamental principal o f Judaism: that G-d is the Creator o f the world and that it does not belong to us. Complete cessation o f the productive process even in the most minute degree is the greatest manifes tation o f this all-im portant concept. HE th irty -n in e categories o f work prohibited by the Bible are concerned w ith the production o f the basic needs o f life, i.e., food, shelter, and clothing. Any human action, no matter how effortless, is part o f a productive process if its purpose is to change matter from one form into another. A good example is that o f cooking on the Sabbath. It is fo rb id den to place a pot o f raw food which was prepared before the Sabbath on a stove whose fire was lit on Friday. The only e ffo rt expended on Saturday is that o f actually placing the pot on the stove; the process o f cooking takes place w itho ut any further exertion on the cook’s part. But by the small act o f putting the pot on the stove and allowing it to remain until the food is done, one is instrumental in starting the process which transforms the raw food from one state into another. On the other hand, the most d iffic u lt o f tasks, if not productive in nature and

purpose and not involving a change o f matter, is permitted. While it is a Mitzvah to avoid strenuous e ffo rt on the Sabbath, even though it may not involve a violation o f the law fo r bidding creative work (Nachmanides, Vayikra 23,24), this is not unique to Shabboth. The same holds true fo r any o f the Yomim Tovim, since rest con tributes to the joy and peace o f mind which enables one to delight in his Lord. However, if strenuous e ffo rt — such as walking up many flights o f stairs or climbing a mountain to get to one’s home — is necessary fo r the better enjoyment o f the Sabbath, it is p e rm is s ib le . H o w e v e r, forbidden categories o f work may never be per formed, even though they result in pleasure and relaxation. Desecration o f the Sabbath is a major sin and if performed w ilfu lly and flagrantly is a capital offense, because it involves a denial o f G-d as the Creator o f the world. (Mechilta Shemoth 20:8) With such denial, all responsibility fo r our behavior and actions becomes meaningless and all religious commandments lose their foundation. The Rabbis considered the desecration o f the Sabbath as making one suspect o f denying the entire Torah (Chullin 5a). Yehudah Halevi, the great poet and philosopher, said: The observance o f the Sabbath is itse lf an acknowledgement o f His omnipotence and at the same time an acknowledgement o f the Creation by Divine word. He who believes in the Creation believes in the Creator. He,

JEWISH LIFE

however, who does n o t believe in i t falls prey to doubts o f G-d’s eternity and to doubts o f the existence o f the world's Creator. The observance o f the Sabbath brings one nearer to G-d than m o n a s t i c r e t i r e m e n t a nd ascetism (Kuzariy 11:50). It is im portant to understand, however, that only by observing the laws o f the Sabbath in all their ram ifi cations and details is the declaration o f G-d as Creator clearly manifested. When one refrains from putting on a light, from carrying to a public from a private domain, from w riting, he pro claims the Sabbath as a memorial to Creation. He does not necessarily do so by not going to his daily job, fo r it is perfectly natural to take a day o ff from work to relax. G-d commands us in the Decalogue, “ Six days shall you labor and do all your work; but the seventh day is a Sabbath unto the Lord your G-d.” The Or Hachayyim paraphrases this commandment as “ the Sabbath shall be observed unto the Lord your G-d and not fo r rest or relaxation.” Yet many o f us believe that even though we may be violating important Sabbath laws, so long as we do not go to work, eat a sumptuous Shabboth meal, and take a nice nap, we are observing the Sabbath. I refer to this as the “ Gefilte Fish” concept o f the Sabbath. NOTHER significant aspect o f the Sabbath is that it is holy. “ You shall keep the Sabbath therefore for it is holy unto you.” (Shemoth

MAY-JUNE 1971

31:14) The Rabbis assert that the Sabbath invests the People o f Israel with holiness (Mechilta). The holy Sabbath was given to Israel to make o f them a holy people. “ Verily you shall keep your Sabbath, fo r it is a sign between Me and you throughout your generations, that you may know that I am the Lord Who sanctifies you” (Shemoth 31:13). To sanctify is to clothe w ith a meaning and purpose. And so the Sabbath hallows the other six days o f the week and all o f G-d’s C re a tio n . The story o f Creation teaches us that the world did not re s u lt from the blind operation o f forces, but rather that it was created by Divine Intelligence Who guides the universe toward a Divine goal. Matter is blind; the spirit is illuminating. While Judaism does not look upon matter as something s in fu l|| since it, too, was created by the Lord M we realize that if not guided by His Spirit, matter can indeed lead us to destruc tio n and annihilation. The Torah demands that matter be hallowed by the spirit and that the spirit guide it to the fu lfillm e n t o f its goal and destiny. Observance o f the Sabbath is an ex pression and an affirm ation that the universe has a meaning and a purpose. Human life, too, becomes meanin gfu I w hen it is sanctified and hallowed. The Sabbath is Judaisms answer to the philosophy o f material ism and existentialism. The Sabbath Minchah service says, “ . . . A day of rest and sanctity You have given to Your people.. . ” We were not given a day to rest merely from physical

fatigue, but rather a period in which to sanctify our lives. By observing the Sabbath laws do we declare G-d's Kingdom and His sovereignty. By fillin g the day with spiritual exercises such as prayer and the study o f Torah do we increase the sanctity o f the day. “ On Sabbaths and holidays,. even though one is obligated to eat and drink, one should also learn the Torah and frequent synagogues and studyhalls and remain idle, fo r there is no greater joy than the study o f Torah, as it is said, The law o f the Lord is perfect, restoring the soul; the testi mony o f the Lord is sure, making wise the simple; the precepts o f the Lord are r ig h t, rejoicin g the heart' ” (Menorath Hamaor). Sabbath is the day when one should experience G-d’s love and delight in His being. This was beautifully expressed by Nachmanides in his book “ Faith and T ru st": To what may we compare the sign o f the Sabbath? I t may be likened to tw o lovers who estab lished a covenant between them so that they may n o t forget their l ove f o r each other. They promised themselves that one day a week they would celebrate and enjoy themselves together as intim ate friends. This then is the meaning o f the Sabbath sign. Six days a week everyone is occu pied with his olive grove and his vineyard and man is laden down with material pursuits; therefore the Lord established the Sabbath day so that we refrain from m a te ria l pursuits and engage

ourselves in Torah and worship. Thereby G-d dwells in the m idst o f the People o f Israel to delight w ith them. The great Maimonides, w riting to his son in the Iggereth Hamussar, echoes similar thoughts: Know yo u , m y son Abraham, may the Lord be m erciful unto you, that i t is befitting fo r us that we tru th fu lly perceive that th e f i r s t th in g the Creator commanded Israel through the t r u e P r o p h e t Moses, o u r Teacher, o f blessed memory, was the Sabbath day, establishing i t as an everlasting covenant. The A lm ighty said, The Children o f Israel shall observe the Sabbath and keep the Sabbath unto their generations as an everlasting sign that in six days G-d made the heaven and earth and on the seventh day He ceased to create a n d w ithdrew unto himselfV This is meant to teach us that we shall repose ourselves and refrain from things that would disturb us and prevent us from perceiv ing the Alm ighty. These disturb ing elements refer to mundane m a t t e r s o f this world. The Sabbath enables us to concen trate on serving G-d and prevents us from substituting the work fo r Pharoah, the king o f Egypt; fo r the service o f G-d and this is what the Torah says, \'And you shall remember that yo u were a slave in the land o f Egypt and the Lord extricated y o u from

JEWISH LIFE

there w ith a strong hand and outstretched arm; therefore the Lord y o u r G-d commanded yo u to keep the Sabbath Day. ’ The other significance is the one wherein i t is said that in six days G-d made the heaven and the earth and on the seventh He ceased to create and He w ith drew unto H im self The secret o f this is that we shall sanctify ourselves w ith G-d’s creations. The Sabbath shall be a day o f fu lfillm e n t unto His creatures, in i t we shall enhance and fu lfill o u r souls by ceasing to be engaged with w orldly matters and desist from work and move ments, in order to serve G-d and understand Him. This consti tutes true rest, fo r then rest is both physical and spiritual. HUS we see that observance o f the Sabbath is to be a G-dly experience through which we acquire spiritual delight and completeness. The Sabbath laws are meant to distract not only our bodies, but our minds as well, from material pursuits and to enable us to experience true joy in our Lord. The Prophet Isaiah says (58:13,14): “ If you turn away your fo o t because o f the Sabbath from pursuing your business on My holy day; and call the Sabbath a delight and the holy o f the Lord honorable; and shall honor Him, not doing your wanted ways, nor pursuing your business, nor speaking thereof; then shall you delight yourself in the Lord, and I w ill make you to

MAY-JUNE 1971

ride upon the high places o f the w orld.” How, then, can we today en hance the Sabbath in our midst and observe the laws thereof in the truest sense? We must first constantly in crease our knowledge o f the laws o f Sabbath. The application o f these laws to modern technology makes the study o f Sabbath observance addition ally fascinating. Secondly, we must fill our Sabbath days with spiritual con tent. The day must become one for the study o f Torah. While the Rabbi's sermon can and indeed should be inspiring, it is no substitute fo r actual study, fo r it rarely can increase greatly one's knowledge o f Torah. We read in Shemoth: “ . . . .And Moses assembled all the congregation o f the Children o f Israel and said unto them, These are th e w or ds which the Lord hath commanded, that you should do them. Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you a holy day, a Sabbath o f solemn rest to the L o rd .. . ' ” The Midrash Yalkut Shimoni comments, “ Our teachers said that from the beginning o f the Torah to its end there is not a chapter which begins w ith the word ‘Vayakhel' — 'and He assembled' — except this one. G-d said, ‘Make large gatherings on the Sabbath and teach them the laws o f Shabboth in public. They w ill learn from you in generations to come to gather large groups on Shabboth and to enter the synagogues to study wherein the Jewish people w ill be taught the words o f Torah as to what is prohibited and what is permitted, in

order that My great Name w ill be exalted among My c h ild re n /” We must never view the Sabbath negatively B as a day o f restricted activity and possible boredom. Rather

should we rejoice in the Sabbath Queen, G-d’s g ift to us and His way o f enriching our lives and giving us true spiritual fu lfillm ent.

JE W IS H L IF E

Booh

MOVEMENT

PERSPECTIVE

by ISRAEL D. LERNER zations, such as the Board of Jewish Educa tion of New York City, have and are con tributing to yeshivah education. What is, however, important in the work before us is the concern with the child and his mentors, with the school and the community. An emotional involvement and commitment H IS volume is more than an overview. permeate this work. With a Torah viewpoint It is an insight into the processes and at the outset, in the section titled progress of yeshivah day school education projected in “ Foundations,” we proceed to “ Dimen America. sions” of yeshivoth on the American scene, The processes are more fascinating. to “ Inter-Relationships” of school and Indeed, this anthology of some of the better home, to the “ Curriculum” of both Hebrew articles culled from The Jewish Parent and secular departments, and finally to the emphasizes these. We are not overwhelmed “ Special Concerns” with gifted pupils, with a parade of figures and statistics, nor a slow-learners, and yeshivah high schools. repetitious recital of dry facts, to indicate There is much in this volume for the the growth of yeshivoth ketanoth on this professional Hebrew teacher, “ rebbe,” and continent. layman. Names of obscure scholars and We are made aware of the outstanding esoteric footnotes are noticeable by their accomplishments of Torah Umesorah. We absence. Yet these articles are not merely know from other sources what other organiorganizational talks put on paper. There are essays from Gedoley Ha-Torah o f our time, R A B B I L E R N E R is the Educational Con which writings unto themselves are worth sultant for the Talmud Torah Council of our time. There is much soynd educational Queens of the Metropolitan Commission on Talmud Torah Education and the Board of psychology which is applicable at home and Jewish Education of N ew York City. at school. And there is much distilled experH E B R E W D A Y SC H O O L E D U C A T IO N : An O v e r v ie w , Edited by Dr. Joseph Kaminetsky, Compiled and Annotated by Rabbi Murray I. Friedman; New York: Torah Umesorah, 1970

MAY-JUNE 1971

ience in the fields of curriculum and methodology which can stand all Hebrew educators in good stead, even those who labor primarily in the Talmud Torah field. E R E and there one may question a particular emphasis or lack of em phasis. For example, how practical or advisable is the screening of books, let us say school readers, on the basis of the authors’ personal commitment to Torah living? Aside from the difficulty of investi gating and evaluating this, is it not far better to train our youngsters to judge whether the literary material itself is in keeping with Torah standards? And what about differ entiating between Torah and literature? Thus we will be helpful to them when pernicious secular literature comes their way. It is true that we already have a T a lm u d ic p re ce d e n t in Rabbi Meir’s studying from a renowned teacher who turned apostate, which episode in Chagigah is interpreted in the “ Lechem Mishneh” on Hilchoth Talmud Torah as applying to Rabbi Meir alone. This concerns Torah study. But the task of investigating and screening authors, and subsequently of barring our pupils from reading literature penned by unworthy personalities, is a tooinvolved one in our open society of news papers, magazines, public libraries, and colleges and universities. The point is that literature may be “ bittul Torah,” but it is not Torah, and this is what has to be stressed, the evaluation of the works more than th a t o f the authors, and the “ havdolah” between “ Kodesh” and “ Choi.” Admittedly, the advocated screening pro cedure is but the opinion of only one author. T h e re is some b ut insufficient emphasis on Jewish youth’s responsibility to our p e o p le ’s survival, to helping our brethren in Israel and Soviet Russia. To be sure there are two fine articles on love for Eretz Yisroel arid an interpretation of the

Holocaust period, but they date from 1956 and 1967 respectively. It would have been better were the order reversed, for Israel has changed since 1956 even if our love for the Holy Land, as rooted in the Bible and Talmud, is constant. We are faced \yith an unprecedented barrage of Arab propaganda. Early history plus the history of Eretz Yisroel in the post-Talmudic era unto the present times would be helpful. There are q uestions o f boundaries. In addition, Halachic questions agitate the State and Jews everywhere. All this requires us to instill in our pupils firm but loving Torah attitudes toward Israel. Certainly the upsurge of interest and involvement with Soviet Jewry deserves illumination. However, anthology editors cannot order articles to fit a current need as a journal might. M ONG the most meaningful contribu tions for the Jewish education of the future are those which concern themselves with our adolescent youth. Torah education needs the foundation of the yeshivah ketanah, but it can only rise to yearned-for heights as we build secondary education, yeshivah high schools. Here Rabbi Yaacov Kamenitzky’s observation, in his Halachic discourse “ Aims in Jewish Education,” is most pertinent: “ This mitzvah (studying Torah) upon which Torah places so much stress has continuously changed in form and content from age to age.” One wonders if our mesivtoth and yeshivah high schools, with their rigid curricula, are aware of this, and are meeting the needs of our adoles cents in today’s very troubled world. We do not enter herein a plea for less Gemora. It may be for more, but taught aright with breadth of vision and knowledge, meaning ful in relation to principles and practices of Halochah. Under any circumstances, the concern w ith secondary yeshivah education is commendable. We need not have the testi-

JEWISH LIFE

mony of Jerome S. Brunner in his work, ‘T h e Process of Education,” that the peer group and society at large impinge on the identity and ideology of the adolescent except where we have a better student with more knowledge and built-in motivations and goals for better action. The Gemora in Bova Bathra speaks of the emphasis in earlier times on the education of the 16-17 year olds in the influential environment of Jerusalem. The limitation to those years may have been born o f necessity, but the emphasis on those years may now be made of choice.

LL in. all we have an excellent an

thology, within its own dimensions and concerns. Even its fluid form of trans literation, with which one may quarrel pedantically, has the virtue of making the H eb ra ic terms easily recognizable. Dr. Kaminetsky and those who assisted him in this endeavor have chalked up yet another debt which the Jewish community at large, and the Jewish education community in particular, owe them.

S C H E C H T E R & H I R S C H ’S

Cj R/BBEAH

HOTIl

... is a GREAT Kosher Hotel DIAL MIAMI *

beach

FREE!

you'll love it!

—

For Reservations Speak to SAM SCHECHTER

Q o o

- 3 2 7 -

FREE P A R K IN G

8 1 6 5

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

MIAMI BEACH

E N T I R E O C E A N F R O N T B LO C K — 37th t t 31th St.

P R IV A T E POOL AND S A N D Y BEACH

Cleaned, Fresh-Eviscerated Soaked & Salted R E A D Y - T O -C O O K F re s h a n d F re s h -F ro z e n Supervised and endorsed by The Union of Orthodox Jewish Congre gations of America. Inspected for wholesomeness by the U.S. Dept. Agriculture. SO LD CO AST-TO -CO AST

The Most Trusted Name in Kosher Poultry

MAY-JUNE 1971

Letters to the Editor ON ROTHKOFF New York, N. Y. JE W IS H L IF E is probably the only Anglo-Jewish periodical on both sides of the Atlantic which provides a home for so in fo rm a tiv e a feature article as Aaron Rothkoff’s “ The Baal Torah Temimah,” in your Shevat-Adar issue. Though we in the States of course already boast a Talmudic prodigy (Hui) or two in the various methivtoth east and west, I doubt if these promising lomdim have had the spiritual joy of personally knowing a “ godol” of “ Torah Temimah” stature, of such modern rabbinical prolificacy * and “ geonuth.” Only the yeshivah world of Eastern Europe ante-Holocaust seemed to have turned them out. And though we’ve been so fortunate here as to personally bask in the sun of Rav Aaron Kotler and, “yl-bu-deyl fe-chayyim, ” Rav Mosheh Feinstein, we owe our good fortune still to the yeshivoth that went up in smoke. Therefore we are grateful to Aaron Rothkoff’s profound but felicitously written vignettes on the dedicated lives of the “ gedolim” of a world passed by. And grateful of course, too, to the editor of JE W IS H L IF E for them. Charles Raddock

‘R A V M E L T Z E R ’ D r. Aaron Rothkoff writes from Jerusalem to request a correction on “ Rav Isser Zalman Meitzer“ (March-April 1971). On page 54, reference is made to Rav Meltzer’s having founded a Torah periodical Yagdi! Torah, “ aided in this venture by his s t u d e n t , R ab b i M osheh B in y o m in Tomashoff.” Dr. Rothkoff asks this be c o rre c te d to in d ic a te th a t “ Rabbi Tomashoff was not a student of Rabbi Meitzer, but rather a younger colleague. Together they founded and edited the Yagdil Torah in Slutsk.” The corrected information was conveyed to Dr. Rothkoff by Mrs. Celia Blidstein, the daughter of Rabbi Tomashoff. — Editor

‘SEPHARDIC CULTURE’ Brooklyn, New York I ’ve just concluded reading the article “ Sephardic Culture in America” (MarchApril 1971) by Rabbi Marc Angel. I feel that I must take issue with many of his o b se rva tio n s regarding the decline of Sephardic culture in America. As Rabbi of the leading Sephardic (origin Syria) congregation in Brooklyn,

JEWISH LIFE

Shaare Zion, I resent the exclusion of our c o m m u n ity , numbering approximately 20,000 souls, from his study. In our own community, Sephardic culture is vibrant and alive. Our congregations — some seven in number — are filled to capacity and to over flowing on any ordinary Sabbath. We enjoy several well attended Minyanim each week day morning and at afternoon and evening services. We have two full-day Yeshivah elementary schools with a total enrollment exceeding 1400 boys and girls. In Septem ber, we shall open a Yeshivah High School. We enjoy a post-graduate High School Seminary for boys and young men with an enrollment of over fifty. And in addition, we have numerous youth, social, and cultural programs, and a senior citizen’s program. In all of these programs, the “ pure” Sephardic flavor is retained throughout. The Hazanim with their songs, Pizmonim, pro nunciation, and melodies, and the teachers at the Yeshivah all place special emphasis on the Sephardic tradition which is stressed constantly. None of our membership has been made to feel the need to “ become Ashkenazic.” On the contrary, most of our constituents feel a sense of inner pride and self-worth. In fact, it is part of the warp and woof of every member of the community to be cognizant and appreciative of his heri tage. I see no profaneness in calling a syna gogue “ Shul” instead of “ Kahal,” a matter which seems to bother the author. In fact, in our community we call the synagogue Knis, an Arabic description. No strange Ashkenazic melodies are introduced and most of the sermons draw from the endless wellsprings of Torah, be they Sephardic or Ashkenazic. Again, it matters little which sources are quoted in lectures and sermons, so long as they are Torah-oriented and inspired.

MAY-JUNE 1971

A sh k e n a z ic Rabbis and scholars haven’t ever been taught to discriminate against any of the two mainstreams. In fact, most students don’t know or care where the Ram bam or Rashi were born or lived. This applies to all the Rishonim. What matters is that they were great and saintly men of spirit and towering knowledge. Before we blame external (Ashkenazic) forces for the alienation of the Sephardic Jew from Jewish tradition and culture, let us be honest with ourselves. Thank G-d for the Ashkenazic yeshivoth, scholars, and students; and yes, rabbis and teachers too. They have helped the Sephardic community immensely. We should be appreciative of their role and c o n trib u tio n to the preservation of Sephardic culture through the preservation of Torah-true Judaism. We are one people, united in diversity, and we pray for the day when the Messiah will bring us all together again, serving G-d with a united heart and mind. In the mean time, let us each build in our own respective communities and help develop the pride each group should take in its own personal heritage and background. The Torah was not proclaimed in Spain or in Eastern Europe. There are no geographic lines in the desert where the Torah was given. Let us not point out and elaborate on what divides us. Rather, let us find the common denominator which unites us, and obliterates the invisible boundaries of countries of different origins and differ ent customs. May that day come near when we shall all be one. A critical review of some statements is most necessary. Rabbi Angel writes: “ The key to the solution (a renaissance of Sephardic culture and consequent return to orthodox Judaism) rests in the acknowl edgement that Sephardim have a right to exist as Sephardim. They have a right to have a Sephardic Jewishness/’

I ’m amazed at these remarks. Has any one in the Ashkenazic community ever even as much as intimated that they don’t have such a right? He further states: “ Day schools and yeshivoth could establish Sephardic studies programs.’’ Well, for his information, the Mirrer Yeshiva, Yeshiva of Brighton, and Y e s h iv a University all have Sephardic studies programs in their schools. He says fu r th e r: “ T e a c h in g could help their Sephardic students to appreciate their heri tage.’’ They do! But first, bring us the Sephardic student. The Spanish-Portuguese Synagogue is in existence over 300 years. Who stopped them from developing their own yeshivoth for their youth? And the same is true of the other Sephardic com munities out of town. It is utterly ridiculous to place the blame for their own inade quacies onto the Ashkenazic community. A ludicrous conclusion is contained in his words: “ Ashkenazic Rabbis and leaders could make serious attempts at understand ing the Sephardim and their past. The Ashkenazic laity could encourage the exist ence and development of Sephardic culture and not doubt Sephardic Jewishness because Sephardim do not necessarily eat gefilte fish, wear kippoth in public, or have the same liturgy as the Ashkenazim.” To me, all of these remarks appear as trite and extremely weak apologies for their admitted failures. If Rabbi Angel were to look through the roster containing the names o f the largest benefactors of Sephardic cultural (Torah-oriented or affili ated) institutions or movements, he will find Ashkenazim prominently involved finan cially and in other ways. Lubavitch in North Africa, France, and Israel, Mirrer Yeshiva and its emissaries in North Africa, the various Ashkenazic institutions in Israel which cater to and embrace Sephardic students and the legendary efforts of the Kolelniks in outlying settlements of Israel containing Sephardic immigrants, all dis

prove the contention that Ashkenazim do not consider the Jewishness of Sephardim. Eth La'asoth Lashem. It is time to unite our efforts for Torah and not to engage in polemics, semantics, and invalid recriminations against one another. Rabbi Abraham B. Hecht

RABBI ANGEL REPLIES: I did not intend to slight the Rabbi of Shaare Zion by excluding his community from my article. The reasons for exclusion are obvious: 1) I could not possibly deal with all Jews who follow the Sephardic rite, so I limited myself to a discussion of those Sephardim who constitute the large major ity in America, the Sephardim of JudeoSpanish background; 2) I was not interested in dealing with any particular community, be it in Brooklyn or elsewhere. I wanted to draw a general picture of Sephardic life in America. As I pointed out in my article, the L e v a n tin e Sephardim have established communities throughout this country, and it is they who face the greatest cultural problems. I would suggest to Rabbi Hecht that he write an article about the Syrian com munity of Brooklyn. I for one would be happy to read such an essay. Rabbi Hecht must certainly agree that his community is worthy of an article. Because Rabbi Hecht is not himself of Sep hardic background, there are some things which he does not fully understand. If he sees nothing wrong in Sephardim call ing a synagogue “ shul,” or if he sees no par ticular necessity for drawing on Sephardic sources for sermons and lectures, then he does not completely grasp the needs of the Levantine Sephardim. He does not under stand the urgency of giving Sephardim pride in their background and knowledge of the Sephardic contributions to Judaism. Rather than causing divisiveness among Jews, this

JEWISH LIFE

can ultimately cause greater unity. The thesis of my article was that a return to Sephardic roots can result in a revitalization of Jewish roots. I, too, Rabbi Hecht, look forward to the day when all Jews are observ ant and united. But unity does not mean uniformity. Rabbi Hecht asks if anyone in the Ashkenazic community has denied the Sephardim the right to have a Sephardic Jewishness. If he will refer to my article, the following paragraphs offer answers: p. 7, paragraphs one and two; p. 8, top para graph; p. 10, paragraphs one, two, and three; p. 11, paragraph four. The denial of Sephardic Jewishness does not usually stem from overt discrimination, but rather from ignorance of Sephardic culture. By treating Sephardim as «if they ought to be Ashkena zim, some in the Ashkenazic community de facto deny Sephardim the right to have a Sephardic Jewishness. This is also the point of my comments concerning Ashkenazic rabbis and teachers who work — albeit unintentionally — against Sephardic culture. I did not say that they were “ taught to discriminate,” a phrase which Rabbi Hecht attributes to me. As a Sephardic Jew who went through Ashkena zic schools, I can assure Rabbi Hecht that teachers and fellow students do indeed even if unknowingly ? work against Sephardic culture. This is a fact of life. It should be changed. M y purpose was not to denigrate Ashkenazic schools and institutions. I recog nize their contributions to Jewish life and appreciate whatever they have done for Sephardim. And yet, Rabbi Hecht, we cannot placidly say that things are as they should be. They are not. If three schools of the hundreds in America have Sephardic programs, this is not terribly impressive. For Rabbi Hecht’s information, I am well aware of these programs, and was, in fact, the first graduate of the Sephardic Studies Program of Yeshiva University. I think that inter

MAY-JUNE 1971

ested readers should contact these three schools mentioned by Rabbi Hecht, and d eterm in e the c u rric u lu m , teachers, Sephardic content, etc., of each school. I stated in my article that “ the main problem in the preservation of Sephardic culture is the Sephardim themselves.” It is up to them to make improvements. The rise of the American Sephardi magazine, the publications of the Foundation for the Advancement of Sephardic Studies and Culture, are steps in the right direction. So is the Sephardic Studies Program of Yeshiva University. If the Ashkenazic institutions w ill cooperate, orthodox Judaism will benefit. Rabbi Hecht finds it necessary to attack the Spanish and Portuguese Syna gogue of the City of New York, although I specifically excluded all such synagogues from my discussion. They, are not of Levantine Sephardic origin. Why Tie does so can only be guessed. However, for his in form ation, this synagogue provided all Jewish education for every Jew in New York City from 1654-1825. It did have a day school at one time, the first in America. It presently runs a high quality Talmud Torah, dating from 1802. Its late minister, the Rev. Dr. H. Pereira Mendes, was co fo u n d e r o f the Je w is h Theological Seminary, originated, of course, as an ortho dox institution. This congregation has cooperated to an extraordinary degree in the fo u n d in g and developing of the S ep h a rd ic Studies Program of Yeshiva University. It also founded the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America and the Union of Sephardic Congregations, not to mention dozens of welfare and community institutions. It also has begun to revitalize Sephardic drama, and successfully presented ^*The C ontroversy of the Mountains” on May 23, 1971, to a capacity audience. Our synagogue has no cause for shame in its remarkable 317-year history of accomplishment.

In closing, Rabbi Hecht’s remarks are more emotional than rational. My article obviously touched a raw nerve of his, as it may have done to other Ashkenazim. I by no means want to cause dissention among Jews; I want Jews to understand and appreciate each other’s cultures. I fully agree with Rabbi Hecht’s closing paragraph, and only wish he would have practiced what he preached.

‘FROM H & V Oakland, California The remarks by Sandy Mills on “ How N C SY Has Affected Me” in your section “ From Here and There” (January-February 1971) were a most heartening report on current progress in the traditionally oriented Jewish youth movement, all along the West Coast, from Vancouver to San Diego. Many of your readers may not realize that this revival, carried on so well by N C SY, rests on the foundations and stimulus provided by the West Coast Torah Leadership Seminars organized by many elements of West Coast Jewry, under the auspices of the Com munity Services Division of Yeshiva Uni versity in New York City. The spiritual elan and the substantial learning program and curriculum of these Seminars brought to many teenagers on the West Coast the first contact with live Jewish existence. Since the now so popular Seminars occur but once or twice a year, N C SY meets the need for a continuing follow-up, for making daily life Jewish. The enthusiasm of Sandy Mills and of all the other students is a rewarding experi ence for all those who have so gladly supported the efforts of these two essential in s titu tio n s o f American Jewry: the Community Services Division of Yeshiva University and the NCSY. Mrs. Edith F. Bondi

‘FEDERATIONS’ Bayswater, New York Bravo; Right On; and all that. Mr. Missri introduces himself as “ a professional,” without further elucidation. It is my guess that he is a sociologist. Right? After reading the article I felt as though I had just completed a guided tour of Federation’s innermost heart and brain. To paraphrase the author: he has made Federation much more understand able — and much less palatable. Mrs. Rose Levine

‘JU DAISM ’ Brooklyn, New York In the March-April edition of JE W IS H L IF E there appeared a book review by Rabbi Isaac Sw ift about Rabbi Emanuel Rackman’s volume “ One Man’s Judaism*” Rabbi Swift, with his usual eloquence and succinctness, gives a concise sdmmary of Rabbi Rackman’s theology. This includes views which are certainly irreconcilable with some of orthodox Judaism’s most basic tenets. Thus Rabbi Rackman doubts the Mosaic origin of the Pentateuch, and inter prets the rules of the “ Oral Torah” so loosely that whole categories of Torah LaW are nullified or obfuscated. This denial of the integrity of Torah Shebichtav and Ba’al Peh is obviously anti thetical to the raison d ’etre of Orthodoxy. Hence Rabbi S w ift’s statement that “ they (Rabbis Rackman and Norman Lamm) are among orthodox' Je w ry’s mpst eloquent voices” is both puzzling and disquieting; as is his assertion that “ ‘One Man’s Judaism’ at once challenges and stimulates, and lays its claim upon the attention of every Jew to whom the survival of Judaism is a vital imperative of life.”

JE W IS H L IF E

S u r e ly the survival of orthodox Judaism will be assured only by our insistance upon authentic tradition and rejec tion of all travestied forms of Orthodoxy. Meir Newman

New York, N.Y. I am grateful for Rabbi Sw ift’s generally complimentary review of my book. I write only to clarify one point which he raised. Although many others have raised the same issue, I haye continuously declined to dignify them with a response, because I considered their attacks intellec tually dishonest and distortions of what I had written. Rabbi Sw ift, however, is not in that category. He is troubled by my refer ences to much of the Pentateuch having been written by different people at different times because of other quotes which reveal my unequivocal commitment to the tradi tional concept of Revelation. He merits an explanation of my readiness to entertain the notion that many people may have been the authors of different parts of the Pentateuch. I thought it obvious to readers of good will that I referred to Abraham or Jacob or others who may have committed to writing their encounters with G-d, their covenants, their prophecies. Is it not pos sible that these records were included in Torah Shebichtav in their original form by Moses A i p i Hashem, and that that is why their style and vocabulary differ from other portions, and are sometimes archaic? It would appear from Midrash Rabba that it was because the Hebrew slaves in Egypt had such Megilloth in their possession that they were able to endure their suffering: “ From Sabbath to Sabbath they delighted in these scrolls.” Indeed, it would be absurd and heretical to assume that Moses composed the words that Jacob spoke to his sons. Who then was the author of those words — Moses or Jacob? And was Moses the author of

MAY-JUNE 1971

Abraham’s responses to G-d? Of course not. Furthermore, there is at least one traditional view that the scrolls written by Moses by G-d’s mandate were also written over a period of decades and not at one time. Why is it necessary to make life diffi cult for students who are troubled by Biblical criticism, and who could answer ninety percent of the challenges by asserting that while the Bible was given finality by G-d about the time of Moses’ death, much of it reflects earlier styles of writing and speech over a period of many centuries? The sanctity of the Bible derives not from the earlier writing but from the final redaction by Moses “ by the mouth of G-d.” I am astounded that Christian review ers of my book have, without exception, understood what I meant. Only my co-reli gionists in Agudas Israel did not. Does that not reveal a hostile bias in some readers rather than my rejection of a basic belief? Rabbi Emanuel Rackman

RABBI SWIFT REPLIES: Mr. Newman’s uneasiness over my description of Rabbi Rackman as one of orthodox Jew ry’s most eloquent spokesmen should not be difficult to set at rest. Rabbi Rackman’s eloquence will surely not be gainsaid even by his severest critic; and that his voice is raised throughout the commu n ity in the cause o f orthodoxy is undeniable. Mr. Newman, and those who share his convictions, must realize that Orthodoxy is not monolithic. There is a wide spectrum of attitudes, and we may none of us say that our particular view is the only authentic one. True, some fundamentals must be unchallengeable — Torah min Hashomayim , for instance % but we do injury to Ortho doxy if we repudiate all else that a man writes because one aspect of his views vio lates one of our own deeply-held beliefs.

n m n ** p n S3

Ethics of the Fathers Translated and Annotated by H Y M A N G O L D IN The Hebrew Publishing Company is proud to present a truly new edition of the Pirke Abot. The translator and annotator, Hyman Goldin, a noted Talmudic scholar and author, enriched the work with a wealth of notes and explanations. A 'New Setting' for the precious gems of everlasting value contained in the pages of the Pirke Abot. One hundred and forty-four pages Tf-T beautifully printed and bound, three dollars

HEBREW PUBLISHING C O M PANY NEW YORK CITY Look For the H.P.C+ When Buying Hebrew Greeting Cards

Graciousness still lives . . . in England.

T O R S ■for

GREEN PARK

SYNAGOGUES

STOPOVER HOLIDAY

ALB ER T WOOD & FIVE SONS,«

PORTWASHINGTON LI- NEWYORK

Gold's HORSERADISH

p u fjtM jd

oWuutuii

KOSHER For the kosher traveler to and from Israel or Europe. A restful 3 or 7-days in the elegant Green Park Hotel in Bournemouth, on England’s richly-lawned South coast. Golf. Swimming. Holiday includes: ■ Luxurious twin-bedded rooms with bath. ■ First class rail transportation. ■ A choice of delightful tours of the English countryside. ■ Full board. T e a and coffee at all times. Contact G e lle r-H o w a rd Travel, Ltd., exclusive U.S. representa tives, or your travel agent.

qeLLeR how7*Rd TR*veL, Ltd. 75 East 55th Street, N ew York, N .Y. 10022 (212) PLaza 9-9115

Under supervision of London Beth Din

Thus, while Mr. Newman may feel it right to re je c t w ith the utm ost vigor Rabbi Rackman’s view of the composition of authorship of the Pentateuch, he does scant service to Orthodoxy if he rejects the remainder of the book. The latter does “ challenge and stimulate0 challenges those who, with deep and unquestioning sincerity, refuse to accept or even consider the suggestion of heterogeneous authorship of the Torah — even strengthening their faith by its very challenge; and at the same time it stimulates those who are willing to read on and to find that the work is, through much of its extent, a masterly vin dication of the Halachic process. We who feel that “ the survival of Judaism is a vital imperative of life,0 cannot but be rewarded by Rabbi Rackman’s ultimate fidelity to Halochah. To blind oneself to that is to do violence to Orthodoxy. But it is just because it was clear that committed orthodox Jews of Mr. Newman’s outlook would react in this fashion that I felt called upon to say in my review that many would regard Rabbi Rackman’s atti tude to the authorship of the Pentateuch as heretical. A thousand pities! For this pas sage in the book obscures for them so much else that is of enduring worth to them and to all others who would know the dynamics of the Halochah and can find it luminously expounded in the pages of “ One Man’s Judaism.” There are, it is true, serious Jewish students, orthodox in orientation and prac tice, who are, as Rabbi Rackman rightly says, troubled by Biblical criticism, and who may find his argument helpful. Nevertheless, those like Mr. Newman, who denounce the book because they consider its views on the authorship of the Pentateuch heretical, will not be persuaded to embrace the work by the circumstance that Christian reviewers have not challenged the author in this area. After all, the critical approach to Scripture has been widely accepted through most of Christendom, where Torah min Hasho-

MAY-JUNE 1971

mayim is not a Principle of their faith. A fin a l w ord — ab o u t Rabbi Rackman’s gratuitous reference to Agudas Israel. I am not myself a member of that organization, but I may not refrain from saying that the criticism of Agudas Israel is unwarranted and is unworthy of a man of Rabbi Rackman’s stature. Orthodox Jews of all parties and of no party cleave to the belief in Torah min Hashomayim , and if among them there be those who resist any hint of compromising that principle, we must assuredly concede that their sincerity is as free from “ hostile bias” as is that of other orthodox readers of Rabbi Rackman’s work who accept without challenge every word that he has written.

‘ABORTION' Forest Hills, New York T h e revered and limbless Rabbi Amnon of Mayence is mentioned by Dr. Rosner and Rabbi Grumet in “ The Morality of Induced Abortion” (January-February 1971). It is the sense of the authors’ text that the renowned Rav was born in that unfortunate condition, or lived a good part of his life so maimed. Many sources relate that the Arch bishop of Mayence about the year 1,000 C .E . continually urged Rav Amnon to convert to Catholicism. Exasperated by Rabbi Amnpn’s repeated refusals, we are told that the Archbishop ordered the Rabbi’s hands and feet be severed or muti lated. A ms. attributed to Rabbi Ephraim of Bonn is said to relate that the New Year was then approaching and that Rabbi Amnon, who was dying from his wounds, asked to be carried into the synagogue. According to the report, Rabbi Amnon stayed the Cantor and recited the extemporaneously com posed “ Unesaneh Tokef” prayer, which has formed a part of our people’s prayer since that time. This is all a long way from the

ORTHODOX UNION TRAVEL SERVICE

Summer, Fall, and H oly Days Groups to Israel and Europe

Israel : •

View the entire country from Negev to Galil

•

Finest Israeli Hotels Two-week all-inclusive package tours from Air only from

$844.00 $530.00*

HAVE YOUR SYNAGOGUE SPONSOR A GROUPTOUR * Requires a minimum land voucher

Orthodox Union Travel Service 84 Fifth Avenue New York, New York 10011 Please send me your full schedule of departures and rates for travel to Israel and Europe. NAME

____________ _______________ ______________________________

ADDRESS_____________________________ f i __________I_____________ PHONES_______________________

______________________________

implications and arguments pertaining to abortion, which was your authors’ subject! Bernard W; Levmore

DR. ROSNER AND RABBI GRUMET REPLY: It was not our intent to convey the impression that Rabbi Amnon was born limbless. On the contrary, the other handi capped people mentioned in our paper in clu d in g Helen Keller, Beethoven, Rav Shesheth, and Rav Yosef were also not born blind or deaf, yet reader Levmore singles out Rabbi Amnon. The story regarding the tragic demise of Rabbi Amnon as related by Mr. Levmore is essentially correct.

‘PORNOGRAPHY’ New Orleans, Louisiana I have just finished reading the March-April issue, and felt I had to make an observation to you about Rabbi Hecht’s article, “ The Other Pollution Problem — Pornography.” Rabbi Hecht’s outcry does not seem to be relevant to this time and to this place. The Rabbi’s overall concern with the need for maintenance of decent standards for literature and advertising in Arperica in 1971 must be divorced from his concern for the young Jewish boy with a yarmulke on his head attracted by a sex peep show. They are, or should be, two separate worlds. The evil of which the Rabbi speaks is but one manifestation of a totally changed American society, one where women’s liber ation, the adulation of the young and the Negro, and the denigration of conservative values have brought us the complained-of pornography accompanied by drugs, “ soul,” parental rejection, and the consummate evil, intermarriage (yes, even more odious than no marriage).

MAY-JUNE 1971

Protest demonstrations and boycotts by those of Rabbi Hecht’s persuasion serve no purpose of worth discernible to me and are not even valid Jeremaiads. A protest against displays of naked girls doesn’t even begin to recognize the problems inherent in the American culture. Jews who serve on committees and commissions to uplift the current American orgy will someday have to meet their Jewish counterparts, who are zealously rushing down the same street in the opposite direc tion, promoting liberalism, youth expres sion, and ecumenism. The confrontation can only serve to further erode Judaism, Rather had Rabbi Hecht noted a dif ferent tragedy about the Jewish boy with the yarmulke — that tragedy being his absence from a yeshivah, his swimming in the polluted main stream of the culture sur rounding us. Had he been attending asheur or hearing mussar, he would have had no occasion to see and be ogling lurid signs and photos of naked women. I would urge that those Jews who are so concerned about the emphasis on sex in public entertainments and in advertising might devote some of those considerable efforts to providing some realistic answer to Mr. Missri’s problem, the problem which' faces many, . many parents of yeshivah children. More children in day schools and more boys in yeshivoth and girls in semin aries is the one and only answer to this problem. A greater degree of withdrawal from the current scene and a greater reliance on our Torah will protect our children as no protest march ever could or would. Joseph W. Nelkin

‘H AGGO DAH’ Toronto, Ontario

“ T he

Rabbi H. Rabinowicz in his article Passover Haggodah” (March-April

1971) could ^ of course ^ not mention all the famous Haggodoth which have been printed in the last centuries but I believe he should have named also the following ones: The Haggadah of the Chinese Jews, of which two copies are in the collections of the Hebrew Union College, Cincinati(M ss. 927 and 931). These manuscripts might have been written in the seventeentheighteenth century and originate from the Jewish Colony of K ’fai Feng Fu. The writ ing is Oriental in character and looks a little bit like Chinese. The content is not identical with our traditional text and shows quite a lot of differences. The Tel-Aviv Haggadah written in 1771 by the scribe Nethanel ben Aaron Segal (Halevi). First in possession of a Berlin Jewish family for several generations, it “ survived” the Ghetto in Litzmanstadt (Lodz) and was finally acquired by Dr. Alfred Moldovan, New York who possesses a rich collection of Haggodoth. It was called “ The Tel-Aviv Haggadah” by the biblio grapher Dr. Isaac Rivkind, as he saw it first in this city. It has beautiful illustrations, m o stly co p ied fro m the Amsterdam Haggodah.

The Haggadah of the B'ney Israel of India, published for the first time in Hebrew with a Marathi translation in Bombay, 1846. The illustrations which do not deal with the historical events are not interspersed in the text, but put together on the first pages of the Haggodah. They show mostly the major ritualistic customs connected with Pesach. Here too the te^t shows some variation from the regular text in our Haggodoth. The Gunzburg Haggadah, an illumi nated manuscript, at present in the Lenin State Library in Moscow. This Haggodah was executed and illuminated by the scribe Rabbi Moses in Bingen (Germany) in 1725. Although written for a Gerftian Jew, Gimpel Pear in Frankfurt, it shows some Sephardic influence in the illuminations. The explana tions are in^Hebrew and in German (written

in Hebrew letters). A microfilm copy is in the collection of the New York University Library of Judaica and Hebraica. The Hamburg Haggadah written and illustrated by the scribe Rabbi rJacob ben Judah Leyb in Hamburg, 1731. Although at this tim e a great number of printed Haggodoth were available, the artist was not satisfied with a mechanically produced book and decided therefore to write his own Haggodah. On 43 leaves (9 Vi x 6Vi) he arranged it according to the two main Minhogim, the Ashkenazic and Sephardic, and explanations are in Hebrew, Yiddish, and Ladino. It shows seven different types of letters, each appropriate to the subject. The original manuscript is now in the New York Public Library. O f course there are some more famous Haggodoth but it would be impossible to describe them all in “ a letter to the Ëditor.” Herman Landau

‘EDITOR'S VIEW ' New York, N.Y. I was very pleased to read your forth right editorial in the March-April issue of JE W IS H L IF E . It truly is amazing that with all the effort extended to bring the Soviet Jews to Israel, very few individuals or organ izations have been concerned with educating them in their people’s tradition, customs, and religion. I would just like to point out that the Gesher Foundation will be sponsoring this summer, in Israel, the first two of a series of week-long seminars on Judaism for Soviet Jews. These two seminars are an experimen tal project for us and should you be aware of other individuals or organizations who would be interested in working with us, we would certainly be anxious to hear from them. David Trop per

JEWISH LIFE

This © certification is your assurance that a product is Kosher... backed by strict rabbin ical supervision, a service of the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America.

This Ann Page markkas well as theA&P seal, also symbolizes quality...quality so high that the products that bear these seals are guar anteed to be the equal of the famous national brands. Over 400 A&P and Ann Page products carry a ©endorsement. That’s right, over 400 prod ucts! A&P and Ann Page Kosher products range from mayonnaise to jam . . . from pud dings to candy. Yes, and detergents, too! Every © product is produced in A&P’s own modern facilities under the highest kashruth standards. Look for them at your friendly A&P.

AUtheseHeinzFoods bearthe(y)SeaL k m M *- fo fc T

-fcmotiff- ibfc/uAA? ’

'Tkbôld

fa to )

Quoût^AviM iôctoL, /tt A h to —

/UoJÿ'p 'flvUjJ

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