Jewish Life October 1973 by Jewish Action

WHERE HAVE ALL THE LIBERALS GONE? TWO ARRIVALS MAN AS QUANTUM THE INTERMARRIAGE ISSUE CRISIS AND CHALLENGE SO OTHERS MIGHT FOLLOW THE STORY OF ABRAHAM MOSHE LUNCZ THE SHANGHAI JEWISH COMMUNITY AN HISTORICAL SKETCH IN PERSONAL VEIN OCTOBER 1973 TISHREI 5734

MAR- PARV KOSHER PARVE MARGARINE

Grace your table and your kitchen with Mar-Parv Kosher Parve Margarine. Marvelous for cooking, frying, baking. Light, soft and golden delicious. A holiday treat every day.

Cut

Yomtov!

Vol. X LI No. 4, October 1973/Tishrei 5734

THE EDITOR'S VIEW IN PERSONAL VEIN ................................... . J . f . . . 5

le w is li

J Life Saul Bernstein, Editor Editorial Consultants: Dr. Herbert Goldstein Mrs. Libby Klaperman Dr. Jacob W. Landynski Rabbi Solomon J. Sharfman Chairman, Publications Comm. Lawrence A. Kobrin Published by Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America Harold M. Jacobs President Joseph Karasick, Chairman o f the Board; Nathan K. Gross, Lawrence A. Kobrin, Julius Berman, Joel Balsam, Eugene Hollander, Marvin Herskowitz, Vice Presidents; Reuben E. G ross, Treasurer; Sheldon Rudoff, Secretary; Bernard Levmore, Financial Secretary; Rabbi Reuven Savitz, National D irector; Saul Bernstein, Administrator. JEWISH LIFE is published quarterly. Subscription two years (8 issues) $5.00, three years $6.50, four years $8.00. Foreign: add $.40 per year. Single copy $.75. Editorial & Publication Office 116 E. 27 St., NY, NY 10016 Second Class Postage paid at New York, N.Y.

ARTICLES WHERE HAVE ALL THE LIBERALS GONE? Ronald I. R u b in ........................... ............... .... 9 TWO ARRIVALS Efrem Zuroff ............................ ..

MAN AS QUANTUM Harry Faier ......................... ............. . . . . . . 28 THE INTERMARRIAGE ISSUE CRISIS AND CHALLENGE Ralph Pelcovitz .......................................... .1 38 SO OTHERS MIGHT FOLLOW THE STORY OF ABRAHAM MOSHE LUNCZ Mendel Kaufman ...........

THE SHANGHAI JEWISH COMMUNITY AN HISTORICAL SKETCH Josef Zeitin ..................

POETRY SHEMA Bernard Dov M ilians................................

BOOK REVIEWS THE DIET OF HOLINESS Boruch Horovitz ........................... OVER ZION AND JERUSALEM Nathaniel Zelikow

\ . .!V.............. 74

Drawings by Naama Kitov

Copyright 1973 by Union of Orthodox Jewish Congre gations of America. Material from JEWISH LIFE, including illustrations, may not be reproduced except by written permission from this magazine following written request.

a m DR. RONALD I. RUBIN brings his command o f political science to bear in exploring o n

g our

c 0

n t r 1

b u t o

r s

the Jewish situation. Among his several previous contributions to JEWISH LIFE was “ Israel’s Propaganda War” in the Tishrei 5731 /October 1970 issue. His published works include “ The Unrelated: Antisemitism in the Soviet Union.” Professor of Political Science at the City University o f New York, Dr. Rubin is a graduate o f New York University, where he received B.A. and Ph.D. degrees; he received M.A. degree at Bown University. In 1971-72, he served for a year as Visiting Senior Lecturer in Political Science at Haifa University in Israel.. .EFREM Z U R O FF is one of the young Olim from America who are making their mark in Israel. Prior to leaving fo r Israel and following graduation as an History major from Yhesiva University, he made a visit to Mexico which resulted in an article on Mexican Jewry published in our Shevat 5731/January 1971 issue. He is now assistant coordinator o f the Ulpan L ’Ha’arath Yahaduth in Jerusalem, an intensive ulpan for prospective proselytes conducted by the Ministry o f Religious Affairs, and is completing M.A. studies at the Institute o f Contemporary Jewry at Hebrew U niversity.. .RABBI M ENDEL F E L D MAN received Semichah at Mesivta Torah Vodaath and from Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, and is the Rabbi o f the Young Israel o f New Haven, Conn. He is a graduate o f Brooklyn College and the Graduate School o f Education o f Yhesiva University. Rabbi Feldman is the author o f the published work “ Perach S h o s h a n a h a commentary on the ”P ’ri Megadim” (Laws o f Shechitah).. .RABBI RALPH PELCO VITZ has contributed numerous studies o f contemporary Jewish problems to our pages. A Musmach o f Mesivta To ah Vodaath, he is the Rabbi o f Congregation Knesseth Israel, popularly called “ the White Shool,” in Far Rockaway, N .Y .. .PROF. H ARRY FA IE R contributed “ Voice o f the Halochah” to our previous issue. A theoretical physicist, he recently undertook Aliyah to Israel where a branch o f the Nuria Institute fo r Theoretical Studies, o f which he is the founder and director, is being established. Prior to Dr. Faier’s departure fo r Israel he taught at St. John’s University, Brooklyn College, and Touro College, and served fo r several years as editor o f Intercom, the organ o f the Association o f Orthodox Jewish Scientists.. . BERNARD DOV MIL IANS is known to our readers as a poet who gives voice to the Jewish spirit. His first contribution to JEWISH LIFE was the well-remembered “ Lunatic Songs” in the Tishrei 5730/October 1969 issue. He is now on the staff of Torah Umesorah, the National Association fo r Hebrew Day Schools.. .RABBI JOSEF ZEITIN spent his early life in Mainz, Germany, thereafter pursuing studies in Frankfurt, Worms, and Cologne until fleeing Germany follow ing the advent o f the Nazi regime. He found refuge in Shanghai, remaining there until its Jewish community, o f whose extraordinary story he tells here, came to an end after mainland China came under Communist rule. He is now spiritual leader o f a congregation in Odessa, Texas.. .REU BEN E. GROSS, an attorney by profession, is the Treasurer o f the Union o f Orthodox Jewish Congregations o f America, National Commander o f Nahal, the organization o f American veterans o f Israel’s War for Independence, and the author o f many articles which have appeared in this and other Jewish periodicals. In his writings as in his communal activities, Mr. Gross has ever been marked by independence of view. His educational background includes degrees from Yhesiva University and Harvard University.

JEWISH L IF E

TO OUR READERS HE current issue o f JEWISH LIFE marks the close o f a 27-year period o f editorial stewardship and guidance o f the Adm inistrator o f the Orthodox Union, Saul Bernstein.

During his entire tenure at the Union o f Orthodox Jewish Congregations o f America, one o f the principle responsibilities and enthusiastic loves o f Mr. Bernstein has been the development o f Jewish Life. It has been on the basis o f this publication that much o f the national image projected fo r the Orthodox Union and the orthodox Jewish comm unity in general can be said to have been built. Under his leadership, the publication became one which reached into thousands o f homes and presented in an attractive form at and readable setting a wide range o f im portant articles from the Torah viewpoint. Saul always aimed fo r a “ balance” which would reach the widest possible audience. Starting w ith his own well-thought-out and well-presented editorials on critical subjects o f the day, ranging to serious presentations o f Jewish philosophical themes, to travel articles, and to lighter presentations o f aspects o f world-wide Jewish interests, each issue o f Jewish Life was one o f which the Orthodox Union could be proud. There is always the temptation and tendency fo r a magazine publisher under the auspices o f an organization to become a house organ. This, Jewish Life has avoided, thanks to the perception o f its editor and the high standard he has always set fo r the magazine. As a result, the public has approached each issue w ith respect and w ith the anticipation o f reading high quality articles reflecting the thinking o f its authors, not merely the projection o f the U nions thinking. The form at and existence o f Jewish Life served another im portant function. Many talented writers in the orthodox Jewish comm unity were given the opportunity, and the vehicle, to express their point o f view, through its pages. This opportunity might otherwise have been denied at a tim e when many magazines sponsored by various Jewish organizations are inhospitable to articles submitted by those committed to Torah principles.

OCTOBER 1973

Frequently, it was a struggle. The pressures o f printing deadlines, financial problems, and the demands o f editorial meticulousness - all were met w ith the same calm and steady determination. The impressive series o f this magazine’s volumes, and the interesting, perceptive articles which they contain, are tributes to the success o f these efforts. Our best tribute to Saul Bernstein w ill be the continuation o f the efforts which he has made and which have given a strong foundation over twenty-seven years to the acceptance o f this publication by the public. To such continuation, the Orthodox Union and its Publications Commission are pledged. Saul Bernstein is now to embark upon a well-deserved retirement from his official duties. Knowing him as we do, it w ill not be an inactive or passive retirement, and we trust that Jewish Life and the Orthodox Union may continue to have the benefit o f his wise counsel, calm guidance, and enthusiastic assistance fo r the Torah comm unity. We wish him well. Harold M. Jacobs President

Lawrence A. Kobrin, Chairman Publications Commission

JEWISH L IF E

th e E D IT O R S V IE W IN PERSONAL VEIN T H E time has come fo r parting words. My tenure as Editor ■ o f JEWISH LIFE and Adm inistrator o f UOJCA now comes to a close, and I realize afresh what high privilege was accorded me in having been so entrusted through the past years. Within this time, great changes have come to the Jewish people and to the world. And w ithin this context o f historicity, the work o f the Orthodox Union and the message o f JEWISH LIFE have borne a significance which we today cannot mea sure. Yet we may surely feel that these endeavors have been deeply, creatively meaningful. The zechiah to have shared in tasks o f Torah purpose through so critical an era was ever a spiritual challenge. To all in the Jewish Life fam ily -- readers, contributors, Editorial Consultants, those past and present who worked w ith me here - I o ffe r heartfelt appreciation fo r their devotion to our magazine and what it stands for. Through them, the pur pose o f this magazine has been justified and fu lfille d. A ll o f them, I feel sure, share with me the belief that the career o f Jewish Life to date is simply a prologue to a greater Jewish Life. We foresee, w ith firm confidence, JL winning fresh distinction and ever wider influence in the coming period. So, im yirtzeh Ha-Shem, may it be. Through the opportunity o f this personal message, too, I tender appreciation to all whose association I have enjoyed in the channels o f the Union o f Orthodox Jewish congregations o f America. The Torah community is rich in men and women and younger people o f noble character. Immeasurably rewarding has been the experience o f comradeship w ith many o f these, among the wide UOJCA gamut: its successive Administrations, its Boards, Commissions, and Regions, the Women’s Branch, NCSY, related organizations such as the Rabbinical Council o f America, Yavneh, and the Association o f Orthodox Jewish Scientists, the Rabbis and lay leaders o f congregations across the U.S. and Canada, fraternal contacts w ith Kehilloth in Israel and overseas communities, and certainly not least o f all col leagues o f the U nion’s staff.

O CTO BER 1973

Here too we may feel confident that what was wrought by and through the Orthodox Unión heretofore is b u t the foundation for greater w ork. The saying has it: Some are born to greatness, while others have greatness thrust upon them. As I reflect upon the experiences o f the past years, it seems to me that, paradoxically, both these eventualities The apply to the O rthodox Union, by virtue o f its Core inherent function, the historic needs conimperative fronting it throughout its history, and the inescapable force o f events compelling re sponse to the needs. A t the heart o f all the imperatives o f American Jewish life is the upbuilding o f the Torah Com m unity as a definitively integrated force, encompassing and revivifying the broad ranks o f American Jewry. The labors o f the O rtho dox Union through the seventy-five years o f its history to date have kept this vista alive; we may have confident hope that in the coming period, please G-d, the goal may be brought w ithin attainable range. HESE have been years o f uphill struggle for the Union and the going has rarely been smooth fo r those engaged in its work. Understandably, there has been a liberal comple ment o f trying times, well compensated for by the sense o f service rendered to the comm unity, the gains seen in the ad vancement o f orthodox Jewish interests, and the progress o f the Union itself. Sometimes, understandably, targets have been missed and needed tasks inadequately met, but one may hope that results as a whole fu lly redress the balance. Certain governing m otifs have stayed w ith me through the years, enduring through the abrasion o f experience and the wear and tear o f tasks large and small. One is a compelling sense o f the meaning o f Jewish existence: Am Inner Segulah - we are the emissary o f Divine PurDirection pose. With this is joined a consciousness o f the fragmentation o f Jewry - fragmentation not merely o f mind and outlook and life-pattern but fragmenta tion o f self. The ultimate must o f our time, as I have ever fe lt it, is to make Jew and Jewry whole w ithin themselves. And, there have ever echoed these words: Meto K o l Ho-Oretz

Kevodo.

JEWISH U F E

Taking the measure o f the Jewish plight, one strove from the first to see beyond the o rb it o f present disarray, to perceive amidst the stilled remains o f yesterday the living cells o f a new day. To see in every-day tasks not narrow-bounded routine b ut the grandeur o f Torah ideal woven into the inner fabric o f Jewish existence, to reawaken the dignity o f the orthodox Jew and to guide him not into the morass o f apologetics and polemics but towards the recognition o f the creative force w ithin himself ~ these were, and have remained, the guidelines o f personal policy. IN viewing with optimism the potential ahead, I have ■every awareness o f the massive obstacles to Jewish better ment. The tension between the Jew - the essential Jew - and his world environment remains sharp and the challenge to the Jewish spirit is not likely to diminish in force. Nor are the factors dividing Jew from Jew likely to vanish, nor yet the divergencies and compartmentalizations w ithin the orthodox Jewish fold. From these facts o f Jewish life there spring mani fold practical problems. Those o f us who deal daily with these realities have no room fo r illusion. Yet a pesimistic view can sometimes be more unfounded than an optim istic one. As I look back at the scene that presented itself when my work here began, over a quarter-century ago, and compare it w ith that o f today — with all its dark areas - I find in this contrast ample reason fo r confidence in what lies ahead, for Torah Jewry at least. The Union o f those first post-World War II, postHolocaust years was hardly visible, w ith the merest skeleton o f organizational structure, a single professional executive, but the elements o f a program, with a little voice and less weight on the Jewish and public scenes. It reflected, Then... rather than led, an orthodox Jewry that was a faltering, shrunken, demoralized aggregation o f crumbling fragments. The very word "O rth o d o x” had become a term o f derision; there was a pervading sense o f defeat, even despair. Be it remembered - can it ever be forgotten! ^ t h a t at that time all that was left o f the Jewish people after the Holocaust nightmare was battling for the very breath o f life, w ith Diaspora Jewry truncated and the new-born State o f O CTO BER 1973

Israel, pillar o f new hope, under mass siege that threatened to cut o ff its brief existence. Thus was climaxed a generations-long era o f mortal attack upon Jewry from w ith o u t together w ith near-fatal spiritual disintegration w ithin. Yet, how wondrous, how tru ly miraculous the sequel. Med math Israel has withstood every assault, hundreds o f thou sands have been welcomed to its fo ld , it has b u ilt a strong society and stands as bastion o f Jewish resurgence. And if w ithin Israel’s roster o f the wondrous there stands out the phenomenon o f a burgeoning Torah life, surely no less phenom enal is O rthodoxy’s rebirth in America. Today we see a wealth o f organizational and institutional achievement, continuous growth in the Torah ranks, an enhanced popular standard o f Shemirath Ha-Mitzvoth, expanded means o f observance, a rein vigorated synagogue scene, an undreamed-of profusion o f day schools, major yeshivoth, and educational inand stitutions o f every kind. We see a revoluNow tionized morale, vibrant ideological awareness and commitment, a sense o f potent strength. And we see the O rthodox Union rising to foremost stature, with a powerful program, purposeful leadership and zealous national and regional staff, giving strong voice and effective representation to Torah Jewry, winning recognition fo r the Torah Jew as the basic force in Jewish life, bringing cohesive direction to synagogue ranks, reaching out dynamically to youth and, as the program continues to broaden, bringing Torah meaning to the life o f the individual Jew. F all o f this has come about in redemption from utterly shattering loss, shall we not justifiably see in the Jewish people, and certainly in Torah Jewry, the capacity, under Divine guidance, to master the challenges that now loom before us rn an era o f constant shift and the problems that ever beset

us from within? A great era lies behind us; in it was formed a crucible fo r Jewish spiritual achievement; may it be w ritten and inscribed, as we enter upon the Days o f Awe, that we emerge now into an era o f high fulfillm ent. To all who read this, and to all the House o f Israel, go my wishes fo r a Kethivah Ve-Chathimah Tovah.

Where Have All The Liberals Gone? by RONALD I. RUBIN IDNEY HOOK, the New York University philosopher, used to say, “ Only the person wearing the shoe could tell whether it pinches.” What Hook meant was that despite the notions o f social engineers, the man in the street, in his common wisdom, knows where his interests lie. For American Jews, liberalism by and large was long regarded as the shoe that fits. And everyone knows this tenet o f American politics: scratch a Jew and find a liberal. For instance, Mark Levy and Michael Kramer in their work “ The Ethnic Factor: How America’s Minorities Decide Elec tions” (Simon and Schuster) title their chapter o f Jewish voting patterns, “ The Jews: Forever Liberal Wherever They Are.” Whether the movement

O CTO BER 1973

was fo r trust-busting, fo r the League o f Nations, fo r the New Deal, fo r nuclear disarmament, fo r Federal aid to education - all such causes have won mass Jewish support and in numerous instances have drawn much on Jewish brains and means. And through election after elec tion, whether local, state, or national, Jewish voters have gone overwhelm ingly to the candidates marked liberal. Recent developments, however, have brought into question the future relationship between American Jews at large and the liberal establishment. Are their paths diverging? Among white Americans, only Jews in 1972 gave so high a proportion o f their votes to Senator McGovern two-thirds. This heavy margin was

despite some forecasts that the Jewish well-to-do, allegedly concerned about McGovern's far-out economic schemes, would forsake the Democratic Party's bellwether liberal candidate. Closer to the mark were predictions that the Jewish rank-and-file, recoiling from the New L eft tinge o f McGovern's campaign, were more likely to turn from him than those follow ing the fashionable lead o f the limousine liberals. However much McGovern scares America's rich, one observer shrewdly put it, the Jews o f Scarsdale would give more o f their votes to Sen. McGovern than the Jews o f Brooklyn. Although “ B rooklyn" departed from its long-inured electoral allegiance to a lesser extent than was envisioned, the fact remains that a much larger pro portion o f Jews voted fo r the Re publican candidate than ever before since pre-New Deal days at least. President Nixon's Jewish votes came from “ B rooklyn" rather than from “ Scarsdale." It was apparent that a significant change in Jewish political stance was emerging at the grass-roots level. Was th is a c tu a lly but a momentary variance, or does it point to a cleavage between Jews and liberals that is likely to persist and grow? An examination o f this question requires a view o f the factors motivating, re spectively, the Jewish political course and that o f present-day liberal forces.

W 10

HY Jews have been identified w ith social and political liberal

ism is not an elusive question. Whether as a result o f religious teachings or as a result o f their having been victimized so often, Jews were drawn to the messianism o f American Liberalism. Liberals wanted to perfect the world, to eliminate injustice, and so did the Jews. Liberalism stood fo r change, fo r social experiments. Jews, so often up rooted and forced to learn quickly the rules o f survival in each new country, were not socially hidebound. A ll the more so fo r non-religious Jews in search o f some secular raison d'etre after having rejected the disciplines and ordering o f life followed by the religiously orthodox. In liberalism, Jews also saw a chance to escape their numerical marginality; by working hand in hand w ith well-meaning people o f all backgrounds, Jews who had given up religion saw themselves as part o f the idealistic mainstream devoted toward advancing the com mon good. And as has been voiced on many occassions, the Jew is like every one else, only a little more so. Given the fashionability o f liberalism, the dominant sympathy o f the media fo r liberalism, the opportunities presented to immigrants and the children o f immigrants in an open society, and the presence o f le g itim a te social, economic, and political grievances in the United States, one understands why Jews eagerly manned the liberal ramparts. The particularly strong liberal a ffin ity o f American Jews during the past several decades is also easily

JEWISH L IF E

understood. The Depression wrought havoc among the masses o f American Jews, whether wage workers, store keepers, professionals, or businessmen; the New Deal, offering vista o f a better day and way, won the allegiance o f all. Then came the black specter o f Nazi dom, and it was in the forces o f liberalism that Jews saw the w ill to summon America to the defense o f freedom. Too, from a practical stand point, America's Jews before World War II were essentially an “ o u t" rather than an “ in ” group. They suffered from medical school quotas, antisemitic hiring practices in the corpor ate world, restrictive real estate covenants. When it came to interna tional matters, the liberals, still smart ing from the Senate's defeat o f the League o f Nations treaty under Woodrow Wilson, were more sympa thetic to an ordering o f things globally (thus offering solution o f problems burdening Jews) than were the more is o la tio n is t conservatives. Being wealthier in general, the conservatives were more sympathetic to the claims o f America's oil companies when it came to the Middle East than were the liberals. However, in matters involving the Communists, conservatives, being rather absolutist in their views o f the world power balance, were more skeptical o f the Kremlin than were the liberals. Although in the 1950's there still existed an anti-Communist left, tim e has mellowed much o f the liberal truculence to the Soviet Union, total

O CTO BER 1973

itarian police state though it was and is. Nonetheless, conservative umbrage with the Kremlin in the 1950's through the present only took super ficial note o f the problems o f the Jews in the Soviet Union. Whether this situation came to bear because Jews were not conservatives or involved in conservative movements, or because the Jewish plight ranked less in the minds o f conservatives trumpeting the ills o f the “ Captive Nations,” or a little o f both ingredients being present this verdict belongs to history. But fo r that matter, liberal forces through the same period too seemed little concerned about Soviet persecution o f Jews, and their reaction to the Kremlin's trampling o f free dom-seeking Hungary, Poland, and Czechoslovakia has been not at all impassioned.* Th is notwithstanding, Jews persisted in seeing liberalism as the torchbearer o f democracy and social advance and as committed to its very roots against antisemitism. To be sure, the liberals them selves up until the 1967 Six-Day War (as good a date as any to arbitrarily delineate substantial defections from

*No less an authority than Alexander Solzhenitsyn has recently called public attention to the liberal establishment's double standard in condemning rightwing regimes fo r certain crimes while refusing to do so in similar situations when they apply to the Communist nations.

which decreed that Jews in Tennessee must leave the area w ithin tw enty-four hours, Lincoln quashed the order. Grant apologized, and Jews stayed with him in the election o f 1868. From the Civil War through W orld War I, the Republicans dominated the White House and a succession o f Republican Presidents interceded on overseas situations o f grave concern fo r Jews. For example, President Rutherford B. Hayes warned Romania that the United States was concerned about the fate o f Foreign Jews. In 1882 President Chester A. A rth ur demanded that the Czarist Rus sian government end the pogroms. The Historical Process President Theodore Roosevelt, NTERESTINGLY, Jewish sup himself a New Yorker, received much port fo r liberal positions in the Jewish affection. Roosevelt was the earlier years o f American history did first President to welcome to the not automatically mean backing o f the Democratic Party's Presidential candi White House a delegation o f the United States Rabbinical Conference. dates as it has come to be seen today. He continued his successors' concern In view o f the tolerance and openness w ith the plight o f East European o f Jefferson, it was not surprising that Jewry. Earlier, as New York C ity's Jews found themselves happy w ith his Police Commissioner, Roosevelt had Democratic Party. The Federalist assigned only Jewish policemen to Party in 1815 passed a resolution guard the German antisemitic Herman prohibiting naturalized citizens from Ahlw ardt when he visited the city. serving in Congress; this message was By the tim e o f Woodrow Wilson, not lost on Jewish voters. Jews started however, many Jews had moved over moving over to Lincoln's Republicans to the Democratic Party. They were after failure o f attempts to persuade attracted to the humane quality o f President James Buchanan to renego Wilson's programs. Wilson's Repub tiate an antisemitic commercial treaty lican predecessor, William Howard with Switzerland which allowed Swiss cantons to expel American Jews in Taft, refused to renegotiate a dis crim inatory treaty w ith Russia. Also, accordance with Swiss law. Although Wilson's successor in the Presidency General Ulysses Grant during the Civil was a Republican, Warren G. Harding, War issued the notorious Order No. 11

liberalism) fe lt fo r the Jews1 predica ment. The Jew from World War II through 1967 was seen basically as an underdog in America and the world, and accordingly as motivating liberal support. The literature and drama o f the period when portraying Jews, drew them as outsiders, people who wanted in and had been unfairly victimized. Moreover, the Holocaust experience had not been lost on liberal America. Americans o f all persuasions, fo r ex ample, supported the 1948 birth o f Israel not so much on logic as a way to atone fo r Nazi Germany's atrocities.

JEWISH L IF E

who as a Senator was accused o f anti-Jewish prejudice as a result o f his having voted against the confirmation o f Louis D. Brandeis as an Associate Justice o f the United States Supreme Court. By 1928, when Alfred E. Smith unsuccessfully ran fo r President, most Jews elected to Congress were Demo crats, whereas ten years earlier the Jewish Congressional delegation o f eleven consisted o f ten Republicans and one Socialist. RESIDENT Franklin D. Roose velt’s New Deal and President Johnson’s Great Society mark the high points o f the Jewish consensus for liberalism. Although fewer than one o f five Jews voted fo r Nixon for Presi dent in 1968, this election must be seen as a watershed in the Jewishliberal marriage. Significantly, Repub licans expected to pick up greater Jewish votes in 1958, but fo r the wrong reasons. The GOP hoped that the Jewish penchant fo r liberalism would push them away from Senator Humphrey’s Democratic candidacy be cause Humphrey was not liberal enough and because while whose favoring America’s Vietnam policy might see him as too non-commital, those opposing it would judge his as saddled w ith Johnson’s Vietnam past and the behavior o f the Chicago Democratic convention. Such anticipa tions would have proven logical, o f course, if Richard Nixon himself had a liberal identity. But in 1968, the Nixon Jews knew wasn’t one they liked.

OCTO BER 1973

By 1972, it was clear to all that Jews and professed liberals were not as inseparable as in the past. While Jews had certainly not embraced conserva tism as a formal movement, and re mained governed by a liberal outlook, many o f them now viewed w ith doubt the trends which had emerged among the banner-bearers o f liberalism. It was not so much that they had moved away from liberal basics as the feeling among them that the liberal establish ment had itself done so. How many Jews we are dealing with here is unclear. What is known, however, is that organizations o f Jews espousing stands contrary to the current line o f liberalism have formed, that urban, wage-worker, middle income, ortho dox, and more ethnic-conscious Jews are the Jews disenchanted with liberalism. In a sense, a growing Jewishliberal dichotom y represents a new Jewish ethnicism, similar to the move ments among other white ethnics to beat out an identity. But in terms o f the Jews, this phenomenon is more basic. To appreciate what has hap pened, it is necessary to explore what is meant by liberalism. Liberalism’s Turnabout HAT is known as political liberalism today stems from the ideas expressed by the british u tilita r ians, Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart M ill, that man is essentially good, and the best government provides the greater happiness to the largest

concepts as freedom o f expression and numbers w ith each person determining in moral judgments, Jews began to what it is that makes him happy. doubt the bonaTides not o f liberalism Liberalism philosophically has great proper but o f those bearing the liberal confidence in individual reason. It is banner. an optim istic faith, much more o ri To many Jews, the campus ex entated to change than conservatism plosions and New Left turm oil o f the because o f this positive view o f man as 60’s were ominously reminiscent o f governed by a tempering reason. Class the scenes that had paved the way to ical liberalism also emphasized free initiative, economically as well as Auschwitz. The tendency o f professed liberals to condone and in many cases politically. Although John Locke (Jefferson’s spiritual father) posed a to actually lend themselves to the orgy o f disruption, riot, and terror, to the case fo r revolution in England, he fe lt that revolution would not be incessant wholesale intim idation o f those of different view and the suppression o f because man still has enough good sense to differentiate basic grievances academic freedom, was bitterly disil lusioning. The fact that Jews were from petty nuisances, the latter being prominent in the ranks and leadership amenable over time. o f the “ campus revolution” and Over the years* however, the evolution o f liberal thinking in re among its apologists and supporters added a sense o f shame to the revul sponse to unfolding events has brought sion among Jews at large. So too in it far from some o f its original tenets. world affairs, when political realities as The concept o f the Welfare State, perceived by concerned Jews made it today a staple o f liberalistic doctrine, essential fo r liberalism to grasp the is scarcely to be reconciled w ith the dynamics o f power politics, liberal teachings o f Bentham and M ill. The all-encompassing role o f government in forces failed to meet the test. The fact the form ulation o f contemporary, o f the matter is while liberals, in liberalism is the antithesis o f what was creasingly espousing an accommoda espoused by classical liberalism. Since tion with the Soviet dictatorship, were Jews at large shared in personal experi intent upon winding down AmericanSoviet rivalries at practically any cost, ence the social crises which prompted the change from an individualistic to a the Kremlin was tightening its ruthless collectivist philosophy, this in itself grip on surrounding nations, spreading its grasp to the Middle East and could not breach their a ffin ity to liberalims. But when liberals swept by beyond, moving fo r the destruction o f Israel, and attempting to crush the last the collectivist current were drawn vestiges o f Jewish life in the Soviet toward an authoritarian concept o f society, and became increasingly selec tive in the application o f such liberal

Union.

JEWISH L IF E

Jewish Policy not at all so is that o f today's liberal Considerations establishment. Who, then, has in fact u n d a m e n t a l to the Jewish deserted liberalism? world outlook must be the It is no coincidence that any premise that Jewish security in general advances for Communism represent and the security o f Israel in particular setbacks for the cause o f democracy, are conditioned on the survival o f for the United States, and fo r Israel! Western democracy and the building Now that the Vietnam War is part o f o f real world peace, and that a strong history, more and more people are United States is the key to these taking a fresh view o f its pros and imperatives. Basic to Jewish interest is cons. Jews who refused to be blud a world climate in which democracy geoned into falling in line w ith anticannot be ousted by autocracy and in Vietnam War propaganda were form er which the Communist powers cannot ly apt to be denounced -- by fellow indulge the lust for world conquest. Jews, too - as governed by no other Distant as most Jews are from the consideration than Israel's welfare. In “ Cold Warrior” outlook, they, unlike sofar as Israel's welfare is inseparable the new order o f liberals, cannot fail from that o f the Free World, the to vieW Communist Russia's course o f charge is one which no Jew, or nonconquest and subjugation with less Jew for that matter, need hesitate to concern than Nazi Germany's course bear, although few if any o f those so o f conquest and subjugation. They scorned would have been o f different cannot, again unlike supposed liberals, opinion had Israel not been affected view Communist penetration across by the Vietnam situation in any way. the world, whether it be the Middle As for Israeli support o f the United East, Cuba, or Vietnam, with any less States position, practical as well as dismay than Nazi subversion o f a lesser moral considerations were decisive. span o f lands. Nor can they react w ith As the only country in the world less horror to the Communist mass lacking a dependable ally, Israeli butchery o f the Tet “ offensive” than security depends in large scale on an to the Nazi mass butchery in Lidice. equilibrium o f international power And surely Jews cannot ignore the forces, Israel felt that a precipitous present reality that Communism d in withdrawal from Vietnam by the ectly threatens the spiritual existence U n ite d States would undermine o f Soviet Jewry and the physical America's commitments to small existence o f Israel — together com nations including itself. In such an prising nearly half the Jews o f the atmosphere, Arab nations would be world. In all of. these matters, the more likely to undertake a fourth Jewish stand is entirely consistent with round in the Arab-1 sraeli conflict, be liberalism’s stand in the H itler era; but lieving that since , the United States

OCTOBER 1973

failed to follow to its conclusion its commitment in Vietnam, it would likewise abandon previous pledges to

ing: The Cairo Mission o f the Viet Cong is

Israel. In addition to this philosophical underpinning fo r Israeli backing o f American purposes in Vietnam was the more immediate fact o f the ties and pledges o f support between Com munist Vietnamese leaders and her Arab enemies. For historic purposes, it is worth citing some references. The Vietcong Afro-Asian Solidarity Com mittee sent the follow ing telegram to Ahmed Shukairy, head o f the Palestine Liberation Organization: We strongly condemn imperialist in tervention which uses Israel to de stroy the national liberation front and thus endangers the peace and welfare o f the inhabitants o f the Middle E a st We back without reser vation the Palestine Liberation Or ganization in her struggle against the twin

enemy-American

imperialism

and its lackey. H o Chi Minh, depicted by many Amer

ican liberals as the George Washington o f Vietnam, in an interview w ith the Egyptian newspaper A l Matzor noted the rights o f the Arabs “ to the return o f their stolen homeland from the clutches o f the Zionists and the im perialists.” Ho referred to Israel as “ a base fo r aggression used by imperi alism to weaken the Arab states and to create tensions in the area.” Another reference to the antiIsrael stand o f the North Vietnamese and the Vietcong was a news story in

the Christian Science M onitor o f March 29, 1967 reporting the fo llo w

the largest and m ost active in the area. Its members have met with Palestinian Arabs to arrange for com bat training in North

Vietnam for

Shukairy followers.

A June 1, 1971, news report o f Premiere Golda M eir’s visit to Sweden well illustrated the reasons behind Israel’s support o f American policy. In a moving message to young Swedish Jews, the Premier urged them: “ Stand upright and tell the world what it means to be Jews. Tell them that Jews have fought and died fo r thousands o f years to remain Jews. Tell your friends about this people that has refused to be trampled down fo r thousands o f years.” Then, referring to a prior meeting w ith a delegation o f Swedish Jewish youth who, echoing the official S w edish antagonism toward the United States role in the Vietnam War, criticized her support o f President Nixon, Mrs. Meir said: “ But no one helps us like Mr. Nixon does. He enables us to buy arms and even speaks up for us, which no one else does. Here they don’t even want to sell us arms.” The overwhelming drum fire o f agitation and propaganda swept a good many Jews and their organizations in the United States into support o f the anti-Vietnam War movement, despite the implications such a policy held, just as it did all but a steadfast few

JEWISH L IF E

among liberal forces themselves. But other issues were coming to the fore in which the gap between the Jews and the new-day liberals was visible. One in particular related to the plight o f Soviet Jews, especially when Soviet Jews made the basic policy decision to risk everything in their desire to emi grate. ROM any standpoint, the situa tion o f Soviet Jewry ranks as one o f the major human rights tragedies o f the day. Here we have the remnant o f East European Jewry, a people who today live w ith the mem ory o f the Holocaust to ll o f their own families, a community that suffered the programs o f the Czars and Stalin’s insane schemes, and that has suffered ruthless suppression throughout the past fifty-five years. A ll that they ask is the right either to go to Israel or to be granted the religious and cultural rights granted to other groups in the Soviet Union and spelled out in the Soviet constitution. And where are the liberals? True, the suffering o f Bangladesh is a great tragedy and the struggles fo r self-rule o f the indigenous peoples o f Southwest Africa and Portuguese Angola merit deep sym pathy. And liberals are justifiably con cerned about the air we breathe and the food we eat. They are right in seeking to end discrimination against women, American Indians, Chícanos, Blacks, and Hispanics. Soviet Jewry? Liberal concern for Soviet Jews occupies a very sub

O CTO BER 1973

ordinate position to the above when judged by the comparative quantity o f articles in liberal publications, talk shows, fund-raising, and the overt pro test activity such as picketing and demonstrations. O f course, this is not to discount the resolutions and other public statements on behalf o f Soviet Jewry issued by established liberal groups. Nor is this to overlook the support for the Jackson Amendment which ties future American-Soviet trade to free emigration fo r Soviet citizens. Such support, it should be remembered however, has stemmed in large measure from Jewish politcking and the dramatic, courageous risks o f Soviet Jews to secure emigration per mission. Previous to the Six-Day War, liberals provided Israel with much moral and political support. Now, however, when Israeli and Diaspora Jews fall victim to Arab highjackings, kidnappings, and assassinations, liberal outrage remains muted. Although liberals still refer to the United Na tions as the “ last best hope o f man,” informed Jews know the type o f ju s tic e the Co m m u n ist- A r ab -A f roAsian coalition renders to Israel. This author remembers, in this connection, a joke heard in Israel: What is the lowest point in the world? Answer: The Dead Sea? Wrong--The United Nations.

Lines o f Divergence HE divergence between the liberal m entality and jewish

self-interest is best shown by the stands o f Senator J. William Fulbright, chairman o f the Senate Foreign Rela tions Committee. Adm ittedly, Ful bright represents an extreme case, but inasmuch as the Arkansas senator is regarded as one o f the stalwarts in the liberal pantheon, his views are worth noting. Had Eugene McCarthy been elected President in 1968, Fulbright would likely have been named Secre tary o f State. In a McGovern Adm ini stration, Fulbright would also have figured prominently. Senator Fulbright has been the Senate’s most outspoken critic o f al leged Jewish pressure on Congress to back the Jackson Amendment. Ac cording to Fulbright, such Congres sional action on behalf o f Soviet Jews signifies a basic conflict w ith the pro fessed United States national aim o f fostering detente. In 1952, Fulbright opposed Point IV aid to Israel, but he urged Secretary o f State Dulles to go along w ith Nasser’s plans for building the Aswan Dam. When there was a move in Congress to cut o ff aid to Saudi Arabia because o f its discrimina tion against Jewish m ilitary personnel stationed at American bases there, Fulbright defended the Saudi Arabians as “ our friends.’’ Following the SixDay War, Fulbright in an interview with the Christian Science M onitor claimed that the chief obstacle to peace in the Middle East was Israel’s refusal to compromise its occupation o f Jerusalem. Such occupation by Israel, he asserted, resulted in denials

to the Arabs o f access to their holy places. Senator Fulbright, needless to say, has never signed a petition on behalf o f Soviet Jews. When President Nixon nominated political scientist Robert Strauz-Hupé as United States Ambassador to Morocco, Fulbright in the Foreign Relations Committee con firm ation hearings maintained that Strauz-Hupé was too involved w ith Israel to carry out his job effectively. N pressing domestic issues, the liberal voice has similarly failed to be raised on Jewish behalf. Original ly, the m erit system bringing about civil service was a liberal reform. Symbolic o f the notion o f a faceless applicant for a post was the statue o f lady justice, her eyes blindfolded in order to eliminate preferences. But preferential treatment programs at all levels o f government negate the merit principle and the equal rights provi sions o f the Constitution. Under such preferential treatment “ A ffirm ative A ctio n ” programs, institutions, es pecially educational institutions, were to set up numerical timetables in terms o f future hiring. A t first government officials denied it, but eventually the Secretary o f Health, Education and Welfare, Casper Weinberger, acknowl edged that the distinction between numerical goals advocated in A ffirm a tive Action programs and ethnic quotas was slight. One w riter pungently described liberal criticism o f Jewish protests against Affirm ative

JEWISH L IF E

Action programs as making it appear that the merit system was a “ Jewish conspiracy.“ Stemming from Thomas Jeffer son, liberals, in the American experi ence, have shown an interest in local government. Only recently in urban areas has the notion o f community control been advanced as a means o f involving citizens in neighborhood matters and secondly as a way o f reducing bureaucratic inefficiency. The record o f the Forest Hills Scatter Site housing project has been well documented elsewhere. What was par ticularly onerous fo r Forest Hills resi dents was the liberal hypocrisy in their selective advocation o f community control. On the one hand, liberals advanced the notion that those who wear the shoe deserve to decide whe ther it pinches, but when it came to participatory democracy for Forest Hills residents, their communal w ill was overruled. Antisemitism, ideologized Jewhate, is one evil which liberalism has denounced unequivocally thoughout modern times - until it emerged in radical Black circles. Diatribes o f Jewhate from the mouths o f Black ex tremists at public meetings and con ventions, in radio programs and in published articles, have found at most but mild rebuke from liberal channels and more often than not have actually received extenuation from these sources. Fighting poverty is an issue in tegral to Jewish ethics regardless o f

O CTO BER 1973

whom contemporary advocates o f this issue might be. Given current estimates o f Jewish poor as numbering between 400,000 - 800,000, poverty guidelines from the federal Office o f Economic O pportunity were not very applicable to indigent Jews. Since most Jewish children are born to wedded couples, and Jewish poor are generally dis persed rather than concentrated in particular districts, their poverty, in the eyes o f liberal bureaucrats who drew up these guidelines, was found wanting. Criticism against government policy makers in this connection, how ever, must be tempered by the realiza tion that Jewish agencies themselves only belatedly called attention to the plight o f the Jewish poor. Historically, the widening o f the franchise has stood o ut as a commend able goal o f liberalism. Yet when Jews complained against poverty elections being set on the Sabbath, rather than on a day convenient fo r all voters, the American Civil Liberties Union was nowhere to be heard. Similarly, Jewish groups nearly exclusively protested New York Stated 1973 voting registra tion laws, which because o f designated resignation days falling on Jewish holi days would serve to disenfranchise otherwise eligible Jewish voters. HUS current liberalism appears to be moving away from funda mental Jewish political interests just as it has departed from positions funda mental to liberalism proper. Jews in their turn, having taken the cue, are

leaving liberalism. In the 1973 Mayoral Democratic primary in New York C ity, the most professed liberal candi dates failed to win the great Jewish majorities they would have expected in the past. In the 1969 New York C ity Mayoral election John Lindsay, candidate o f the liberal forces, failed to win a m ajority o f the Jewish votes. Although in New Left circles Senator Henry Jackson o f Washington may be condemned as a “ Cold Warrior” (de spite his leadership in social and economic reform), Jackson numbers a substantial follow ing among informed Jews. While many white ethnics are moving away from what passes fo r liberalism today, because o f liberal ism’s apparent failure in answering the questions it posed, its apathy toward middle class problems and social naivete, Jews have reasons o f their own. Certain events have spurred Jews into becoming more ethnic and less secular in assessing social ¡sues. Israel’s example since the Six-Day War, the brave defiance o f Soviet Jews, and the coming o f age o f the children o f the post-World War II Jewish immigrants to the United States, Jewishly com mitted in large part, these are factors which have served to weaken the Jewish embrace o f current fashionable social outlooks and to turn more inward. As American Jews become more ethnic-conscious the attraction o f present-day liberalism wanes. To be sure, such dim inution would be true

not just o f liberalism but any political policy seeming to conflict w ith greater group assertiveness and its sense o f right. Jewish ethnicism is new and should be contrasted with ethnocentrism, the latter signifying a concern for one’s group and its own welfare. Jews have always been ethnocentric because they have always worried about fellow Jews. What is taking place now, by comparision, in Jewish ethnicism goes beyond the concern and worry fo r other Jews expressed by ethnocentrism. Ethnicism stands fo r the pursuit o f Jewish strength and the use o f Jewish political clout. Ethni cism is the aggressive use o f the p o liti cal process on behalf o f Jewish con cerns. The View Ahead HE growing cleavage between the current direction o f the liberal establishment and Jewish con cerns stand in mark contrast to the contributions that liberalism has made in the past to Jewish well-being, from the New Deal through the Great Society. As a result o f the policies o f these programs in widening and cut ting down on discrimination, Jews share with other segments o f the A m e ric a n populace strengthened security. Furthermore, there are many specifics on the liberal agenda which are o f direct benefit to Jews, as to others, such as greater funding o f poverty programs, increased aid to education, and the channelling o f more funds fo r public housing. Nor

JEWISH L IF E

should Jews as a result o f confronta tion tactics w ith Black extremists sub merge that compassionate part o f their heritage which in the past, to their credit, found them in the vanguard o f movements to achieve racial equality. Finally, the increasingly bitter experiences w ith liberalism does not mean that Jews w ill or should auto matically do a complete about face and enlist en masse in conservative ranks. There is much lacking, from a Jewish political standpoint, in the stance o f American conservatism. From the philosophical elitism o f con servatism to its lukewarm attitude toward social welfare programs which only now are beginning to trickle down to Jewish agencies, conservative interests and Jewish interests are not identical. Conservatives in general stand fo r a fixed ordering o f classes and react w ith a turned up nose to the social diversity which is basic in order for Jews in the United States to remain inconspicuously competitive. And as has been pointed out by others, extreme conservatives and radical liberals, alike marked by dis

trust or reason, intolerance, and dogmatic insistence on positions based on a supposedly higher moral order, share many o f the same values. HAOS and upheaval are not foreign to Jews in the Diaspora. It is safe to say that in the minds o f many Jews there is underway a re assessment o f previously accepted political norms. In fact, the main characteristic o f this phenomenon is not the establishment o f new patterns o f political affiliation among Jews but the weakening o f existing ones w ith out the clear cut substitution o f new attachments. Ideally, Jews, after this realignment is concluded, should come away with enough leverage so that their worries and needs are taken seriously by both liberal and conserva tive camps-or whatever new groupings might emerge. As with nations, so Jews or any other group seeking power and influence should be guided in external relationships by the timetested premise that there exist neither permanent friends nor permanent ene mies, only permanent interests.

RARE JUDAICA ANTIQUE JEWISH ART ^

¡¡y

10 King David St Jerusalem

( L O u C C t O r (02)234511

O CTO BER 1973

by EFREM ZUROFF Jews all over the world are awaiting the conning o f the Messiah. They w ill be startled to hear that a claimant has arrived. As a matter o f fact, he was in my office a few weeks ago. Not that he received instructions that I was THE man to talk to. It seems that he tried to get an appoint ment w ith Dr. Wahrhaftig, the M in ister o f Religious Affairs, but was told that he had to speak to my superior first. In the M inistry, this is common procedure. Anyone from an ‘Anglo-Saxon” country who comes in w itho ut having made an appoint m e n t o r does not know exactly whom to turn to is referred to our office fo r a preliminary examination or counseling or both. It just so happened that my boss was not in at

the time, so I was given the oppor tu n ity o f welcoming this long-awaited individual. To be perfectly honest, our initial meeting did not go so well. It probably can be attributed to my lack o f experience in dealing w ith self-proclaimed messiahs. The young m an, who appeared to be about 1 8 —2 0 , dem anded to see th e Minister, and I simply refused to oblige him. The conversation went something like: I:

“ Well, you know, the M in ister is very busy and cannot see everybody.” He: “ I got to see him. This place is the M inistry o f Religion. Right, and th a t’s what i t ’s all about religion — right?!”

JEWISH L IF E

“ Right, but the Minister is busy. *

came from Dayton, Ohio, and in b etw een traveling throughout the He: “ Now you gotta understand. land and studying the Torah, he I used to be a prophet, but I stayed at the Diaspora Yeshivah on cut that out a year ago. Now M o u n t Z io n , an institution well I m the Messiah and I gotta known for the heterogeneity o f its see the M inister.” student body. In short, if he hadn’t I: “ Well, I am very sorry, but told me that he stayed there, I would I ’m afraid you can’t see him have guessed as much as this yeshivah now.” is well known fo r its “ open-door” p o lic y . Anyone who expresses a That more or less ended the sincere interest in studying Torah is conversation. His glazed eyes showed admitted regardless o f his origin (as a m ixtu re o f disappointment and we shall see) or past. While this anger. He hiked his knapsack up on lenient approach has succeeded in his back, and strode out. bringing back many lost souls to Judaism, it has also turned the insti f t e r w a r d s , i fe lt badly that tution into a veritable youth hostel I hadn’t helped him in some for countless hippies and drifters who way. He cut such a p itifu l figure. He pass through Jerusalem. had fairly long hair parted down the This time the “ Messiah” was middle. His face had a very sallow more candid about the reason he had line, which gave me the impression to see the Minister fo r Religious that he was probably suffering from Affairs. During his travels, he chanced m alnutrition, a very distinct possibil upon the “ graven images” in the it y . H is pants were stained and churches at Bethlehem. Incensed at patched, yet still maintained some this violation o f the Torah he came semblance o f respectability. By the to Jerusalem to demand, with much clothes he wore and his English, it righteous indignation, that those re was o b v io u s th a t he was from sponsible at the Ministry see to it America, a fact that was verified dur that these abominations be destroyed. ing his second visit. I calmly told him that we cannot It seems that messiahs are per resort to such tactics, that even if sistent. Sure enough, about three Jew ish synagogues had been de weeks later he showed up again. This stroyed on various occasions through time I was more prepared fo r him. out the ages, it does not mean that This time I also had the peace o f we should lower ourselves to retaliate mind to ask him several questions in such a fashion. I also told him that a b o u t his background. As I had I was deeply sorry, but I was afraid guessed, he was from America. He that I could not help him to get an

OCTOBER 1973

would certainly not have surprised me, but I was prepared fo r something completely different. The communication which pre ceded Brian’s appearance was a some what cryptic telephone call from the him all the best. secretary o f the regional rabbinical Sitting and reflecting on the court o f Jerusalem. Our office is in story a short while ago, it suddenly charge o f arranging Tevilah, ritual h it me, that the ‘Messiah’ did not immersion, for conversion candidates even look Jewish. Nonetheless, we “ await him any day he should choose w h o have been accepted by the rabbis o f the court. Unfortunately, to come.” my superior who takes care o f such matters was on vacation at the time, * * * so we were unable to prepare the immersion. I told this to the secre HE “ Messiah” has not appeared tary but he insisted that I arrange it, again, but interestingly enough, suggesting that I try to recruit a I later found o ut that, as I suspected, he was not Jewish. My source o f in different rabbi fo r the task. I agreed w ith great reluctance as I did not formation was a young man who had made his acquaintance at the Mount want our prospective Jew’s prelude to his entry into the Jewish fold to Zion Yeshivah. This person, Brian, entail getting sent from one rabbi to was a story in himself. A t the time another w ith each demurring the per he reached my office, he looked like fo rm a n c e o f a function that he the typical yeshivah student -- closely normally would not have to conduct. cropped hair crowned by a large In any event, I accepted the respon black skullcap made o f fabric (the sibility and 9hoped that the young knitted ones are the trademark o f the man involved would have a lot o f “ modern orthodox” which are looked luck and patience. down upon to some extent by most When Brian walked into my ele m e n ts o f the stricter yeshivah office, it never dawned upon me that circles) and wearing singularly simple, this was the person who was about to c o n s e rv a tiv e , and o ld-fashioned convert to Judaism. I f anything, 1 clothes. With his black horn-rimmed had the distinct impression that be glasses, he looked as if he had just fore me stood a strictly observant stepped out o f the Beth Medrosh Jew, whose observance o f the com after spending countless hours puring mandments might well exceed my o ver esoteric texts in the sacred own. It was only when he spoke up to m e s. Had I been expecting a in his heavy American accent and I yeshivah student, his appearance

appointment w ith the Minster as I was only a “ small fish” in the office and that even I could not see the Minister whenever I wanted to. I then accompanied him outside, wishing

JEWISH L IF E

realized that he spoke practically no Hebrew did the thought enter my mind that perhaps this was our pro spective Jew. In fact, even when Brian himself confirmed this fact, I still had a b it o f d iffic u lty believing it. This was, I believe, the prime m otivation in my questioning him as to what brought him to Israel and Judaism. His story, liberally spiced w ith the phrase “ Boruch ha-Shem” was re la te d during the time we waited fo r one o f the rabbis to arrange his immersion. Thus, I have to thank the usual bureaucracy fo r a lengthy opportunity to listen to a fascinating story o f how a young American came to the Middle East in search o f hashish, and found a brand new way o f life. RIAN was raised in a fairly large city in New England. Like many o f his contemporaries, he was introduced to drugs in his teens, and in his senior year o f high school he began to ‘ get into the drug scene.” A fter graduation, he went south for college. There, he slowly but surely sank deeper and deeper into the morass o f the drug habit, as he pro gressed from “ so ft” to “ harder” drugs. According to Brian, he was “ strung o u t’ fo r a good portion o f the time he was at college, and still d o e s n ’ t understand how he ever managed to graduate. In addition to drugs, Brian took a serious interest in th e movement opposing America’s involvement in the Vietnam War, and

O CTO BER 1973

follow ing graduation he returned to New England and began working as a draft counselor. Despite his vocation, Brian himself found it increasingly d iffic u lt to avoid the draft and when he felt that “ they were breathing down my neck,” he “ split,” and set out to explore the world w ith no set destination. A fte r spending some time in Europe, Brian and his travelling com panions set out fo r greener pastures. Not greener in vegetation but rather in the accessibility and price o f drugs. They reached India and stayed there fo r about three months. When I asked him what he did there, he looked at me as if the answer was o b v io u s , “ I smoked.” Apparently sensing my amazement, he explained that as already mentioned, his goal in coming to India was not to see the T aj Mahal or the waters o f the Ganges, b ut rather to find unadultera ted cheap drugs. Brian and his mates found w hat they w£re looking fo r in a small Indian village, and spent their tim e s m o k in g , immersed in the hallucinatory experience. From India they set out fo r Afghanistan and set up residence in a cheap hotel in Kabul, the capital. By now, I did n ’t have to ask what fascinated them so in the sleepy Afghan town. Brian, nonetheless, volunteered the infor mation that Kabul was a veritable haven for drug addicts w ith prices rock-bottom and quality sky-high. What interested me, however, was how he had reached the decision

to undergo conversion. What had brought him to Israel and subse quently to the M inistry o f Religious Affairs? Brian’s response was charged with emotion. He related that it was strictly by chance that he had be come acquainted with Judaism. By the tone o f his voice and his constant use o f the phrase “ Boruch ha-Shem” at all the critical junctions o f the story, it was obvious that he con sidered himself to be very lucky to have been able to get to know what Judaism was and thus make the de cision that would put his life on a completely new course. He related that during his travels, strictly by chance he had reached Israel. While in Jerusalem, a friend suggested that they go up to the yeshivah on Mount Zion to visit an acquaintance o f his. Brian agreed, and has been there ever since. He told me that fo r him, life at the yeshivah represented a whole new meaningful way o f life, something w ith real content. Though it was hard fo r him to forego the drugs, Judaism proved enough o f a motivation to do so, and he succeeded in doing so w ithin a short time after his arrival. Looking at Brian, and listening to his story, I sensed what a transfor mation he had undergone. It was obvious that before me sat a person who had on his own initiative given up material and sensual pleasures, and had reached out fo r the Torah way o f life , a person who had been searching fo r truth and meaning fo r a long time and had finally found it in

Judaism. It was as if Brian’s prophecy about the Gentiles o f the world com ing to Zion to seek out G-d’s word was being fulfilled before my very eyes. A t this point I asked him if he knew someone who went around calling himself the Messiah, and de scribed the fellow who had been in my office previously. Brian replied that he knew him, and that despite his claim to messiah-hood he was not even Jewish. The boys at the yeshi vah had had p ity on him, and had allowed him to sleep in their quart ers. But they had insisted that he “ stay clean’’ (o ff drugs), a condition he refused to comply w ith. In the end, they were forced to turn him out. Just as he was finishing his story, the rabbi entered. He agreed to arrange the ritual immersion, and a happy young man left the Ministry that day to join the Jewish people. HE story o f the tw o non-Jewish boys who came to Israel is in dicative o f one aspect o f Israel’s appeal to young people the world over. Israel, even in the eyes o f many Gentiles, is a land o f promise and fu l fillm ent, and that is why very often youths come to her to look fo r answers to all sorts o f questions — to search. Even many o f those who come by chance and w ith no such intentions, often end up searching — amazed and interested as they are by the land, the people, and the religion.

JEWISH L IF E

Som e, lik e Brian, find satisfying answers and the long-sought inner

peace. Others, like just go on searching.

the

“ Messiah,”

Orthodox Couples ADOPT A Jewish Child with Special Needs!

C A L L OH E L CH ILD REN 'S HOME Adoption Service

(212)851-6300 The only O rthodox child-caring agency in New York

O CTO BER 1973

Man As Quantum

by HARRY FAIER HE scientific limelight is being focused today on questions that touch upon the question o f man's uniqueness: Is man a discrete jump apart from all else in nature, or is he just a more complex configuration o f electrons and atoms and DNA mole cules in an overall natural order that is fundamentally continuous? In the Bible we read that Adam was made “ in the tzelem o f E lo k im ” This is usually understood to mean that man is a very special creation; that he is imbued w ith certain G-d-like qualities or ingredients which set him apart from all other organisms and objects in nature. N ot only that he is unique in his complexity, but that there is a gap - a discontinuity -between him and everything else.

The climate o f scientific opinion is that nature is continuous and that there is no basis fo r assuming other wise when it comes to man. Even so concerned and articulate an advocate o f man's uniqueness as Jacob Bronowski begins his quest fo r that unique ness, in his “ The Identity o f Man," by noting that “ there is no break in the continuity o f nature...An unbroken line runs from the stone to the cactus and on to the camel, and there is no supernatural leap to it." The consensus is that when science w ill have found all the laws, mechanisms, and substances which de scribe every non-human object and process - man too w ill be completely explained in terms o f these same laws, mechanisms, and substances. “ What is

JEWISH L IF E

pays what and under what circum stances, it is immediately evident that these fixed sums are in no way meant to reflect a cash value o f the “ person.” Thus, if the man offered in the vow has no marketable economic value, the fixed sum due is the same as for another, economically valuable, man. What emerges is that the fixed sums are symbolic substitutes fo r “ per sons” ‘ - and that a conception o f “ person” can be deduced from the detailed laws and regulations. This Torah conception o f man as “ person” is exhibited in the following analysis o f the laws o f Erchin. The term erech itself, which w ill recur below, has the literal meaning o f “ value” or “ valua tio n .” In the present context, it specifically denotes the fixed amounts that the Bible mentions as the (sym bolic) monetary substitutes ¥ “ re demptions” - fo r the “ persons” o f fered in the vow. The laws o f Erchin quoted be low are taken from the tractate Erchin o f the Babylonian Talmud, and from the compilation o f the laws o f the Torah in the Mishneh Torah by Rambam (Maimonides). As given be low, they are phrased as to reflect the distinction to the “ person” ; the latter is what, in practical consequence o f the vow, one becomes obligated for. A. I f David says, “ I vow myself to G-d” - he must submit the fu ll erech to the Temple treasury. B. I f David says, “ I vow one half o f me to G-d” -- he must submit the fu ll erech to the Temple treasury.

OCTOBER 1973

There is no quantitative relation ship between David and one half o f David - between “ me” and “ half o f me.” Saying “ half o f me” is saying nothing - it is a meaningless phrase ~ or else it is another way o f saying “ me.” B declares that saying “ half o f me” - in this context o f the vow o f Erchin - is the same as saying “ me.” A “ person” is not composed o f halves which have their own identities. In contrast, if David were split in two physically, neither half would be a “ person” - a living human being. Each half would then be quantitatively re lated to the whole. Each half would then also have its own identity. C. I f David says, “ I vow my head -S I vow my liver - to G-d,” he must submit the fu ll erech to the Temple treasury. The relationship o f David's head ~ or liver-- to David, as “ person,” is not the relationship o f a separately identifiable part to a whole. David as “ person” has no liver as a distinguish able part. There is no quantitative or other relationship between “ my head” i or “ my liver” - and “ me.” Saying “ my head” - or “ my liver” - is saying nothing, or else is saying “ me.” C declares that saying “ my liver” is the same as saying “ me.” David with a liver is David as “ person” - and David w ith his liver excised would not be a “ person.” I f David's head was severed, or his liver removed, neither the head nor the liver nor the torso would be a “ person.” Each would bear a quantita-

man?” is a question that w ill be answered by: man is just a kind o f complex machine w ithin a continuum o f possible machines and organisms that nature can accommodate. This is the judgment o f many men o f science, basing themselves on extrapolations from present biological and physical knowledge. Even if, as human beings, they may not delight in this conclusion, the evidence fo r it would seem to them to be irresistibly compelling. It is, nevertheless* a verdict that is compelling only insofar as one is committed to a particular habit o f thought. Only if one accepts that man is to be equated with the sum o f fragments which are served up by the physical, chemical, biological, ana tomical, physiological, psychological, and neuroelectrical measures o f human beings. And only if, furthermore, one agrees to ascribe ultimate significance to certain similarities found to exist between such measures o f human beings and corresponding measures o f non-human objects and organisms. That these similarities are today given such compelling weight, is due, o f course, to the frame o f thought engendered by the theory-seeking scientific method o f inquiry. Within this generalizing and abstracting frame o f reasoning, the identity o f the in dividual man is obliterated and re placed by a sum o f fragments -- o f non-uniquely human fragments, at that. Man then becomes a “ complex o f D N A,” or “ just a more complicated

computer,” or “ a naked ape,” and so on. But another perspective on man exists - and its elucidation is the purpose o f this writing. An analysis o f certain Torah sources.-- more specifi cally, o f sources in the Talmud - w ill be seen to yield a perspective on man th a t transcends that o f man-asfragments. The same Torah which speaks o f “ tzelem Elokim ,” w ill be seen to point to a new conception o f man -- albeit from an unexpected direction. The Vow o f ‘Persons’ HE Torah (Vayikra/Leviticus 27:2) speaks o f the vow o f Erchin: “ When a man shall utter a vow o f valuation o f persons to the Lord...” When a man, fo r whatever personal reasons, makes a vow to offer himself -- o r another human being - to G-d, he must redeem his vow by submitting a fixed number o f shekels to the “ sacred domain” - the treasury o f the Holy Temple. The amount due in each case is e xplicitly stated in the Bible. In other words, the vow o f Erchin places the object offered - the “ person” - in the “ sacred domain.” The Torah, however, has chosen to substitute a fixed sum o f money as exchange fo r the object-“ person.” The Talmud provides elabora tion, in detail, o f the laws and regula tions pertaining to this Torah legisla tion o f making payments in lieu o f the “ person” offered. From the discus sions o f practical questions as to who

JEWISH L IF E

tive relationship to the whole body ~ is artificial or not. Hence, in relation it would be a fraction o f it. Then the to David as “ person,” the hand does liver, or head would be individually not exist. It has no identity o f its own, identifiable parts -- distinct objects. and saying “ my hand” is saying And if that liver was implanted again nothing. or the head reconnected -- and David I f David’s hand is severed was a living human being, a “ person,” physically from his body, it becomes a the liver — or head - w o u ld lose its separately identifiable object. It then separate identity again. bears a fractional relationship to the And were a liver transplant per whole body - but only if David has, formed on a human being, the excised for some reason, ceased to exist as a liver would become a separately living human being, as “ person.” If identifiable “ part” - or distinct object David as “ person” exists, then the - and the implanted liver would cease severed hand still has its individual to be separately identifiable. Likewise identity - but it does not bear a fo r an implanted liver that is con part-to-whole relationship to David the structed from synthetic materials: it “ person.” Indeed, that hand is not would lose its separate identity as soon that “ person” - David’s hand, as such. as it was implanted in a human being ?- And if that severed hand is connected as long as the “ person” would exist. back again to David, it would lose its D. If David says, “ I vow my individual identity. hand to G-d” - he owes nothing to the Temple treasury. He has said nothing. HE implication is becoming The relationship o f David’s hand clear. The Torah here conveys to David, as “ person,” is not the the conception o f a living human being relationship o f a separately identifiable - a “ person” - as not being differen part to a whole. “ My hand” is there tiable into physical parts. Moreover: fore not a numerical fraction o f “ me.” E. I f David says, “ I vow to offer Saying “ my hand” is saying “ me,” or Benjamin to G-d” - David must sub it is saying nothing. D declares that m it the full erech o f Benjamin to the saying “ my hand” is saying nothing. A Temple treasury. The sum is the same “ person” has no hand as a distinguish whether Benjamin has beauty o f face able part. or is unsightly even is he is horribly

The logic o f D is as follows. David is a “ person” -- w ith or w ithout his hand physically attached to his body. His being a “ person” is there fore to ta lly independent o f whether the hand is severed or is unsevered or, fo r that matter, whether the hand

OCTOBER 1973

ugly and covered w ith boils so that no one would hire him. The logic o f E is as follows. Benjamin is a “ person” and, as such, he has no identifiable features. The eyes that see the “ person” Benjamin are blind to the existence o f features.

They have therefore no way o f know ing if particular features are beautiful or ugly. F. If Benjamin is healthy or if he is ill, if he is deaf or blind or dumb, if he is lame or has every deform ity David must still submit the fu ll erech. Benjamin as “ person” has no separately distinguishable body func tions and senses. There is therefore no way to distinguish a Benjamin who is healthy from one who is ill - or one who is deaf from one who hears well, or one who is blind from one who has good vision, or one who is dumb from one who is eloquent, or one who is lame from one who can run fast. And since a “ person” also has no identifi able physical parts, there is no way to tell if they are straight or deformed. G. Whether Benjamin is sane or insane, David must submit the fu ll

erech. There is no way to isolate the mind; to speak o f the mind separately as being sound or unsound, normal or abnormal. “ My m ind” has no more distinguishable meaning in Benjamin the “ person” than does “ my hand” or “ my liver.” (Attention need hardly be drawn to the implications o f this fo r the so-called “ mind-body problem.” Nor shall we dwell here on the relation o f this to the most advanced insights o f “ psycho-somatic” views o f the human organism.)

T 32

HE conclusion is clear. A living man - the “ man o f erchin, ” or

“ person” - is conceived o f as an undifferentiated to ta lity. He cannot be considered as being composed o f physical parts, nor characterized by a listing o f features and functions, nor by characterizations o f his mental faculties alone. He is neither body nor mind separately distinguished. He exists as "person” -- or he ceases to exist as “ person” and becomes some thing else. He is an absolute to ta lity. A possible analogy with an elementary quantum - an absolute u nit - suggests itself. (Hence the title o f this essay.) Man as “ person” cannot there fore be described and circumscribed -“ captured ” - by measures that frag ment him. Neither by such measures that are quantitative nor those that are qualitative. Specifically, a “ person” cannot be captured by measures that are defined by circumstances and cri teria which are external to the “ per son.” Nor is a “ person” affected by the existence or non-existence o f other “ persons.'* The follow ing laws o f Erchin w ill illustrate, as an example. H. If David says, “ I vow to offer the follow ing one hundred individuals to G-d” — he must submit one hundred times the fu ll erech to the Temple trea sury. This, notes one o f the com mentaries on the Talmud, is to be contrasted w ith a vow to offer the monetary value o f these one hundred adults. Then David would submit no more than the amount that would be realized if all one hundred were sold into servitude, as it were, en masse.

JEWISH L IF E

The wholesale price per man would evidently be less than if only one were being sold. Morever, in the case o f Erchin, David cannot offer a group o f one hundred people; he must point to each one individually. There is thus such a thing as “ retail” and “ wholesale” economic value o f a human being. When man is transformed into a comm odity, he becomes subject to the practices o f the commodity market. The more such men offered fo r sale, the smaller the price per man. Man as “ person/* how ever, is not subject to such arithmetic. His individual identity is always intact, as “ person.” But every living human being -irrespective o f personal endowments or lack o f them, as we have seen ~ is a “ person.” r As such, he is not made less in a crowd. Economic man is therefore man de-“ person” -alized - man trans formed into an object w ithout in dividual identity. This means that he is transformed into an abstraction. As such, he is completely interchangable w ith other economic men o f equiv alent cash value -- or w ith a machine o f such cash or productivity, value. And when the crowd o f econom ic men is large enough fo r the arith metic o f statistics to come into play, economic man becomes a statistic. This too is logically inevitable, since a statistic is not less o f an abstraction than is an economic man. And when a man has no economic value - as in the case o f one who is so afflicted that he cannot find

O CTO BER 1973

or hold employment, and whose pro ductivity value is therefore zero -- he is inferior to another economic man. As “ person,” however, he is neither more nor less than any other “ person” - as was seen in E. Thus, economic measure is a measure that is foreign ^external -- to the conception o f the “ man o f erchin” - o f “ person.” External, likewise, are any and all measures which de“ person” -alize man. Such measures may be equated to each other, they may be related to each other through mathematical formulae and equations, they may be fragmented into parts and aspects and qualities. They may be given in inches or meters or pounds or life spans. They may be analyzed and synthesized physically or chemically or electronically. But these measures and procedures would not grasp man as “ person,” but as something else. Whatever that something else is, it is not “ person.” Indeed, as we have seen, missing body parts and “ non-human” appear ance and artificial limbs and missing parts o f the brain - and perhaps an extra brain - do not mean that the status o f “ person” is voided. And the converse, as well, holds: “ Human” appearance and functioning limbs and capacity to think need not imply* the status o f “ person.” This indeed may be the significance o f the story in the Talmud (tractate Sanhedrin 65b): “ Rovo created a man-like creature (gavra) and he sent him over to Rebbi Zeira. He (Rebbi Zeira) spoke to him

and he did not answer. Whereupon Rebbi Zeira said to h im /‘You are one o f those creatures, go back to the earth.” We saw above that the lack o f speech is not enough to take away “ person” status from a human being. Hence, the implication here is that despite possession o f almost all human characteristics by the gavray this man like creature was not a “ person.” T follows therefore that when a human being - a “ person” -- is found to possess all the ingredients which are common to many other creatures and objects in nature, it does not mean that man is no more than ~ or not different from , fundamentally ~ such other objects and creatures. The Torah specifically insists that, as “ per son,” man is apart from any such objects and creatures in a foundational sense. This is the conception o f man deduced from the “ vow o f Persons.” Application o f its implications, in de tail, to many o f the questions posed by contempory science, vis-a-vis man, could now be attempted. Questions about individual identity that arise *or that w ill arise - in connection w ith genetic engineering, brain or body transplants, cloning, the “ double con sciousness” phenomenon, and so on, w ill be taken up elsewhere. A few considerations o f general scope w ill now be summarized in the follow ing part o f this writing.

Man and Distortions o f Man ODERN physics has taught us that the tools we use to probe and measure aspects o f reality can uncontrollably distort that which we wish to gain knowledge of. We can end up d e s c rib in g our own distortions rather than the actual reality.. Many o f the concepts about man that are in vogue today are distortions. For the most part, they are distortions o f what the Torah calls “ persons.” The distortion is sometimes so violent that many analyses o f “ man” provide us w ith knowledge o f the distortions studied - or o f the distortions these analyses themselves create - rather than w ith insight into man as he is in his living reality. Thus, man as “ naked ape” is a distortion o f person, and man as Skinnerian “ complex o f conditioned responses to stim uli” is a distortion o f person, and man as “ complex o f D N A ” is a distortion o f person. Man as conglomerate o f the trin ity o f id, ego and super-ego is a distortion o f person -- as is man “ the social u n it” and “ citizen o f.” And it is upon such distortions o f man that the learned p f today - and the not-so-learned - make pronounce ments on, and define new ethical standards for, and experiment on, and legislate for, and damn and extoll, and so on. And thus it is upon man

JEWISH L IF E

distorted to a “ complex o f DIMA” that outer part o f that galaxy. Morever, the co-discoverer o f the structure o f that there are ten billion other galaxies DNA pronounces: “ We cannot con in a universe that is inconceivably vast. tinue to regard all human life as The angst about man’s self-image sacred.“ His eyes do not perceive man began. Man saw his earth as a speck o f as person. He also has no Torah to tell dust - and the essence o f himself him that every living human being is a seemed reduced to a speck. person, a to ta lity that is different in It was forgotten, however, that kind, in a fundamental sense, from the spatial position is an external -- a sum o f its DNA molecules. So perhaps foreign - measure o f man, as person. It we cannot even blame him fo r his was forgotten that man’s status in consistency o f outlook. Creation can therefore not be de For he too is only a victim o f pendent upon such a measure. the environment in which he lives. An Then came Charles Darwin and environment that is too deeply loaded evolution. Man’s parts were examined, w ith the distortions o f man fo r even a and those o f apes and those o f dogs pioneering biologist to see through. It and those o f fishes and those o f birds. is an accumulation o f distortions And it seemed that all these sets o f that has been going on for a long time. parts could be arranged in a pattern And they all came about because that lent itself to the hypothesis that external measures o f man were one set could have “ evolved” from equated w ith man as person. Let us another. Alt that was necessary was for now trace a few o f these distortions. Charles Darwin’s brain to supply the An earJy distortion took place mental glue w ith which to close the whén man was measured by the spatial gap that, logically, exists between an position he occupied vis-a-vis the rest observed ordering o f a hierarchy o f o f the cosmos. When the earth was parts and the conclusion that these thought to be placed in the center o f sets o f parts are descended from each the universe - w ith all o f celestial other. creation in a perpetual dance o f The angst was magnified. Man’s homage around man and his earth special lineage Was being called into this was taken as proof that man was question. Man as the sum o f his the essence o f Creation. It then was individual parts was being reduced reasoned as if therefore man was in stature even on his speck o f an “ lower only than the Divine.’“ earth. But then man lost his positional prominence. It was discovered that there are One hundred billion stars, just like the sun, in our own galaxy; that our solar system is located at the

OCTOBER 1973

It was forgotten that a measure o f man as a sum o f individual parts is not a measure o f man as a person. Indeed, that it makes no difference what his parts are. It was also

forgotten that the status o f man as person is independent o f his physical origin, or terminus - the germane statement about a person being: he exists! Then came Freud. He focused on man's psyche and saw every act, thought, and motive o f man -- sacred or profane - as the manifestation o f a universal drive shared by all organisms. To account fo r any and all facets o f man, he then fragmented man into id, ego, and super-ego. Here the angst took on a new dimension. The private domain o f man’s mind and feeling and w ill - the heretofore special and “ mysterious” depository o f “ the higher nature o f man” - was breached and degraded. It was forgotten that measures o f man which fragment as they de scribe, measure only the distortions they themselves create. They do not account fo r man as person. Then came cybernetics - the age o f the computer. The attack on man’s self-image was tw ofold. The manipula tive and calculational features o f man’s brain were duplicated and improved upon. Moreover, automata, working on the principles o f feedback, seemed capable o f directing some o f their activities towards a “ goal” - a kind o f purposeful action. Man seemed sud denly not so unique. Man seemed suddenly just a different kind o f elec tronic computer f | and not even as good as a computer, in some respects. Man saw himself being replaced by machines. He even saw himself

being enslaved by a generation o f super-computers o f the future. Flesh and blood and feelings and thought and imagination saw itself replaceable by nuts and bolts and transistors. Man began to see himself, in a literal sense, as “ lower than the dust o f the earth.” The cumulative angst became so great that man began to turn away from the desire to think. The relentless logic o f the situation o f man seemed such that it was far better and safer not to contemplate it. Drugs to kill the mind o f man became the quest o f many ~ and escapism into primitive forms o f life, the solution fo r many others. It was forgotten that a computer was first created by the mind o f man. It was forgotten that every computer, sooner or later, must be plugged in. 11 was forgotten or never realized, that man as person is not to be firs t distinguished in terms o f brain capacity, or lack o f capacity. It was forgotten that when such divisions are made and such a measure taken, it does not mean that man as a person has been measured. Or that a compari son w ith a computer has been estab lished. It was forgotten that no such comparison is valid. As we have seen, an object that can think is not auto matically a person; nor a person only he who has the capacity to think. There is no relationship between an electonic computer and a person. Neither a relationship based on quali tative similarities, nor one based on

JEWISH L IF E

quantitative similarities. In the case o f a person , the Torah specifically tells us that arguments based on sim ilarity harbor an inherent fallacy. And when this fallacy is over looked and man is seen as a computer ~ a distortion is seen. That distortion is seen as being replaced by nuts and bolts and transistors. And it is this distortion which is seen as being “ lower than the dust o f the earth.”

ODAY the angst persists among men. But the Torah persists too. It is the vision o f the Torah which proclaims man to be “ but little lower than E lokim ” - even today. It pro claims it today when man, with his new powers over body and mind and nature on earth and nature outside the planet earth, may be distorting himself out o f existence.

Hagerty Silversmiths' Polish • • • in convenient aerosol spray or lotion, is © certified. Clean, pol ish, and protect silver for months. Available in fine stores everywhere.

W. J. Hagerty & Sons, Ltd. Inc. South Bend, Indiana 46624

O CTO BER 1973

The Intermarriage Issue C risis And Challenge

by RALPH PELCOVITZ T ATISTICS are not always' necessarily correct nor do they reflect the true picture o f society’s problems. Indeed, ;we have learned over the years to be wary o f jumping to conclusions based upon statistics which at times can mislead us rather than pointing the way to proper solu tions. Nonetheless, they do s#ve a purpose, that o f focusing our attention upon a problem which is projected into our consciousness in a most direct and dramatic manner. Whether the figure which has been reported re cently, that one-third o f Jewish young people who marry in the United States marry out o f their faith, Is authentic or not, we cannot escape the gravity o f this plague o f mixed marriages which has become o f paramount

concern to seridus-minded Jews o f all degrees o f religious persuasion and commitment. We may quibble w ith the accur acy o f these figures presented to us by various experts but we cannot argue w ith the reality o f the situation, one that has been experienced or sensed by rabbis and lay leaders throughout the country. We are in the throes o f a crisis which affects the strength and vita lity o f the American Jewish com m unity, if not its survival. When we consider that this matter o f mixed marriages spills over from the Goluth to Israel, it serves but to compound its seriousness and increases our alarmed concern. What has brought Jewry to this perilous point? What are the Halachic

JEWISH L IF E

considerations and is there a way out? The patient lies before us, ill and debilitated, but what is the cause, what virus brought about this disease? It is to these questions that we must address ourselves fo r although much has been said and w ritten on this painful subject, it is important fo r us to analyse the root causes, foresee the eventual consequences, and suggest some remedies from the Torah point o f view.

marriages and proclaim in public that they are serving the comm unity by granting ecclesiastical sanction to a union which otherwise would be but a civil marriage.) The Rambam (Hilchoth Issurey Biah Chap. 12) is the only one who is o f the opinion that there can technically be marriage w ith a non-Jew which is valid in the sense that they are husband and wife but the one who enters into such a marriage has violated the prohibition o f the Torah mentioned above. It is perhaps The Halachic and Historical Context for this reason that the Rambam finds ET us examine first the source it necessary to stress the seriousness o f o f the prohibition o f intermar this violation in the follow ing words: riage which fo r so many centuries was “ This transgression even though it accepted by all Jews; even those who does not carry w ith it a death penalty were lax in other observances nonethe to be administered by the court, none less accepted the stricture against theless, let it not be treated lightly for marrying out o f the Jewish faith. The there is a greater loss incurred by such Talmud (Kiddushin 68) bases the pro a union than even those prohibited hibition o f intermarriage with nonrelationships which carry w ith them a Jews upon the Posuk in the Torah more severe punishment. (The reason “ Neither shall you make marriages is) that the offspring o f a prohibited w ith them; you shall not give your union (aroyoth) is still considered his daughter unto his son nor shall you son and is included in the K ’lal Yisroel take his daughter unto th y son. For he even though he is a mamzer (an w ill turn away your son from fo llo w illegitimate child). The son born, how ing Me, that they may serve other ever, from a non—Jewish woman is not gods” (Devorim/Deuteronomy 7: 3-4). considered his son as it is w ritten “ fo r A ll Torah authorities, w ith a single he w ill turn away thy son” which exception, are o f the opinion that the means he w ill be removed from the marriage with a non-Jew is not a valid community o f G-d. This transgression one and is inoperative. This means that causes one to cleave to the nations unless conversion takes place we can (goyim ) from whom the Alm ighty has not even consider the couple as separated us and causes one to desert married in the eyes o f Jewish law. (We his people and his G-d” (Ibid, stress this point since there are Reform Halochoth 7-8). clergymen who perform such mixed Maimonides also refers us to the

O CTO BER 1973

period o f Ezra when the exiles re turned from Babylonia and found that many Jews had intermarried during the period o f the Babylonian exile. Ezra, who was a most charismatic and powerful leader o f his people, was successful in convincing the m ajority o f those men to set aside their nonJewish wives and the Elders, together with the people, entered into a solemn convenant to adhere once again to G-d's Torah. Included specifically in their renewed commitment was the pledge “ and we shall not give our daughters to the nations who dwell in our midst nor shall we take their daughter fo r our sons.” It is interesting to note that according to the Jeru salem Talmud, the eighty-five Elders who signed this covenant were the men o f the Great Assembly o f whom it is said that they “ returned the crown to its original glory.” We see from this moving historical episode that even in this quite early period o f Jewish history the problem o f inter marriage plagued us but we also can learn that only vigorous, uncom promising religious leadership was able to stem the tide. ROM the time o f Abraham who refused to allow his son Isaac to marry one o f the daughters o f Canaan, Jews have resisted intermarriage fo r a number o f reasons. Before the giving o f the Torah the objection would perforce not be a Halachic one since all were considered to be “ children o f Noach.” The objection, therefore,

would be due to the fear that the wrong wife or husband would lack basic midoth - personality traits and nobility o f character - which would militate against the establishment o f a proper home and fam ily. The fear o f idolatry was also great and the weak ness o f Jews in being prone to ape the ways o f their neighbors was always recognized, hence the danger o f inter marriage. Obviously, before the giving o f the Torah, the choice o f one's mate would be from w ithin the small fam ily o f Abraham's descendants or with those individuals who observed the seven Noachide laws and were o f good character. With the giving o f the Torah the prohibition was set forth therein as one o f the negative commandments. As already observed, although this prohibition is not as severe as some o f the other sexual prohibitions, nonethe less, it carried w ith it a great psychol ogical impact over the ages, especially w hen Jews found themselves a m inority in various lands and were concerned for the perpetuation of their identity as a people. O ve r th e centuries Jewish history has taught us that in addition to the inner strength and self-discipline o f Jews in adhering to the Torah commandment against marriage w ith non-Jews, the many external barriers erected by the non-Jewish world also served to prevent assimilation through intermarriage. We realize that in many countries o f our long dispersion the rate o f mixed marriages could have been much higher at times when the

JEWISH L IF E

animosity o f the non-Jewish world toward us subsided and there was a lowering o f the many walls, both physical and cultural, which separated the Jews from the outside world. Ours is not the first instance in Jewish History where a projection into an open society has undermined our traditional defenses and catapulted us into a world where both the internal disciplines eroded and the external fences have come down. As was true at times in various European and Asiatic societies, the Jewish community is disarmed by the willingness o f our “ hosts” to embrace and welcome us. There are, however, two major d iffe r ences between our tim e and society and those o f comparable stages in past eras. One is the extent o f the erosion. Never in Diaspora history as today was so large a portion o f the Jewish com m unity divorced from observance o f Jewish tenets and Jewishly illiterate. The other is the existence o f organized denominational groupings -who have given not only sanction but respect ability and legitimacy to the practice o f intermarriage. The Sowing o f Defection HE advent o f the Reform move ment w ith its minimal demands and requirements and its obsession w ith leveling the barriers between the Jewish and non-Jewish world planted the seeds, the harvest o f which we are now experiencing in this country. In an open society where there is a climate o f tolerance, and w ith the

OCTOBER 1973

emergence o f an “ ecumenical” spirit in the Christian comm unity, it is most d iffic u lt to impress upon young people the passionate opposition to intermar riage which has played so prominent a role in Jewish consciousness over the past thousands o f years. Relationships which are entered into between boys and girls in the public school systems, especially between young men and women on the college campus, w ill often blossom into romantic love against which the arguments o f Jewish identity, continuity, and loyalty are quite impotent. Nonetheless, there had always been one major deterrent, namely, the realization that the Jewish community did not accept intermar riage as part o f its life style. Even among the non-religious, or those whose religiosity was marginal, there was a lack o f acceptance fo r such a radical step and certainly awareness o f the onus to be incurred w hith the Jewish community should one's child cross this real though invisible line. T h e re lig io u s p h ilo s o p h y preached and practiced w ithin the Reform community and especially as articulated by the Reform clergymen gave a new dimension o f respectability and what is even more important, legitimacy, to mixed marriages. Many in Reform temple leadership them selves intermarried and even the o ff spring o f Jewish couples were not provided w ith a strong Jewish home environment, to say the least. By establishing a Jewish version o f Protestantism, it became more and

more d iffic u lt to convince young non-existent except fo r a nominal people whose homes were devoid o f identification or an insubstantial senti Jewish observance that there was any ment attachment to one's ancestry. thing wrong in marrying a non-Jew especially when the religious a ffiliation T is interesting to note that even o f the latter was as tenuous as their as the “ establishment” and its own. Although many Jewish parents, standards have been rejected w ith conwhose own life style was far removed tempt by many o f our youth, the from the Jewish way o f life, objected American image o f love and marriage to the intermarriage o f their children, has been embraced by Jewish young this attitude was looked upon by the people. Historically, Jews did not younger generation as being intellect idealize romantic love to the extent ually dishonest and atavistic. It is that the western Christian world had. d iffic u lt to convince young people This was true especially regarding the that rejecting intermarriage is impor institution o f marriage where fam ily tant and vital to the Jewish people background, character, piety, and con when the counter argument is, “ what sideration o f security and scholarship w ill be the difference between my o f one's mate were far more impor home life and that o f my parents?” tant. There was a realistic perception The past decade w ith its permis that marriage based on romantic love sive environment and ambience o f alone is most vulnerable as it affects its openness, where all restrictions and long-range viability. Yet our hardrestraints are under attack, has led headed and often cynical young peo inexorably in a widening circle o f ple o f today w ill protest that religious acceptance o f mixed marriages fo l considerations are o f small importance lowed by approval. This climate o f when one has fallen in love, which approval has been fostered by opinion they are convinced w ill conquer all. makers who have access to the eye and This attitude is buttressed by the ear o f the public. So many Jews in the image projected by famous men and media who control the communication women who feel constrained to con channels are themselves intermarried stantly proclaim and protest their out and have been able, through T V talk standing success and happiness with shows, newspaper feature articles, and non-Jewish spouses. The recent T V magazine pieces to create an attitude series “ Bridget Loves Bernie” is one o f normalcy and legitimacy regarding example o f how the media attempt to intermarriage. The secularization o f demonstrate the unimportance o f Jewish life during the past half century religious barriers which crumble and has also been a contributing factor in fall gloriously when confronted by reducing the resistance to marrying “ true love.” o u t o f one's faith, since that “ fa ith ” is For many years the organized

JEWISH L IF E

If m

Reform m inistry accepted w ith only mild discouragement the practice o f so many Reform clergymen who were w illing to officiate^ or co-officiate w ith a Christian clergyman, at mixed mar riage ceremonies. N ot until a survey revealed that close to half o f their membership was w illing to officiate at mixed marriages did the national o r ganization o f Reform clergy, the C en tral Conference o f American Rabbis, become alarmed and finally pass a resolution this year opposing the performance o f mixed marriages. In spite o f this seemingly strong stand, the C.C.A.R. could not bring itself to go all the way and coupled its opposi tion w ith an amendment recognizing that “ historically its members have held and continued to hold divergent interpretations o f Jewish tra d itio n ” which in simple English means that no sanctions w ill be applied to any Re form o ffician t who continues to per form mixed marriages. This same spirit o f equivocation was manifested by the New Y ork Board o f Rabbis when they passed a resolution denying admission to those rabbis conducting mixed mar riages but permitted the continued membership o f those guilty o f this practice, who are presently members. The question is, how effective w ill these resolutions be in stemming the tide? NE can also question how ef fective the resolution on this subject o f the Rabbinical Council o f America, passed at its last convention,

OCTOBER 1973

w ill be and how successful its -pres sure approach” w ill prove to be, con sidering its own ambivalent approach to the non-orthodox m inistry. A l though many w ill applaud the vigorous stand taken by the R.C.A. in their determination to compel the removal from leadership in Jewish communal affairs o f those who are g uilty o f this transgression, and their refusal to “ sit w ith rabbis” who participate in mixed marriage ceremonies, it would seem that this commendable stand presents some perplexing questions as well. For many years the Rabbinical Council o f America has adhered to a policy o f cooperation w ith the non-orthodox clerical and congregational organiza tions, arguing that while disagreeing vehemently w ith the religious philo sophy o f these groups, the welfare o f the American Jewish comm unity is more im portant than the theological differences which divide us. They have rejected the argument that their mem bership in mixed groups lends legiti macy to the deviationists. The ques tion therefore arises as to why this particular transgression o f sanctioning mixed marriages is considered so abhorrent, that they are w illing to abandon their traditional stance and become as m ilitant in this regard as those in the orthodox camp who have for years refused to sit w ith non orthodox clergy in such bodies as the New Y ork Board o f Rabbis and the Synagogue Council o f America. Cer tainly denial o f G-d*s existence, rejec tion o f fundamental beliefs such as

Torah Min Hashomayim (Divine Re velation), personal violation o f the Shabboth and other fundamental Mitzvoth, are more grave transgres sions than that o f officiating at mixed marriage where even the participant is but violating a negative command ment! It remains to be seen whether the R.C.A.’s refusal to sit down w ith such “ rabbis” (whose title even they have now put into quotation marks!) or join those who give them honor and status” w ill be carried to its logical conclusion: to refuse to join with those who may be innocent o f this particular transgression, but are guilty o f yet more serious ones!

religious fervor or revival o f interest and yet we now observe reducio ad absurdum where officiating at mixed marriages is supposed to help retain the Jewishness o f the Jewish partner! It is interesting that a similar argument was presented recently in a newspaper article by a young Jewish woman who stated that her Jewishness had “ inten sified and m ultiplied” since she mar ried her husband who is a non practicing Roman Catholic. We may well have stumbled upon a new potent weapon fo r our Jewish survival k i t . . . .

The Shocked Awakening That spiritual leaders o f various VERY crisis, however, presents a persuasions are illogical in their reason situation that is dangerous but ing can also be seen in the arguments also carries w ith it the seeds o f oppor used by some Reform figures to justify tu n ity which may blossom into solu their officiating at mixed marriages. A tions to the problem at hand. The number o f them have publicly argued furor surrounding intermarriage has that only by performing such cere served to awaken and arouse some monies w ill they be able to “ work latent feelings o f loyalty among w ith the couple” and have an oppor secular Jews who are nevertheless con tu n ity to explain Judaism to the non- cerned fo r Jewish continuity. While Jew while holding on to the loyalty o f content to live fu lly in a non-Jewish the Jewish partner. This has a strange world, still they identify themselves yet fam iliar echo o f arguments used w ith Israel and American Jewish fo r so many years by the Reform activities. For many years they have movement, that by making things believed sincerely that one can divest easier we w ill insure retention o f Jew himself o f most Jewish trappings while ish loyalties, be it a shorter Service in retaining basic loyalties to one’s peo the vernacular, removal o f religious ple. The statistics o f intermarriage, restrictions, or rejection o f the M itz however, have shocked many o f these voth as being too antiquated and individuals into a realization that irrelevant to our times. something must be done beyond History has proven that reduc superficial affiliation and identifica tion does not carry with it increased tion, which apparently cannot be

44 JEWISH L IF E

transmitted as meaningful values to one’s children. Jewish education, fo r example, may be one o f the beneficiaries o f the mixed marriage plague. Jewish welfare fund Federations are being jarred out o f their complacency and are consider ing seriously the need to fund more liberally those Jewish institutions o f Chinuch which have a better chance o f producing young men and women who w ill adhere to their faith and people. Many who were insensitive to the threats posed by an open society and ecumenical spirit have begun to speak out w ith vigor and refreshing frankness regarding their opposition to intermar riage. Indeed, it is imperative to create a climate once again o f abhorrence and total rejection by the Jewish com m unity o f mixed marriages, fo r only in this manner w ill Reform clergymen back away from their insistence upon officiating at such ceremonies. Only by such counter-force w ill more and more young Jewish people realize that the m ajority o f the Jewish community refuses to grant respectability and legitimacy to marrying out o f our faith. The non-orthodox communities have also been shocked, to a degree, into a position o f agonizing selfappraisal and self-recognition. A l though the Conservative clergy has been notably less vociferous in their opposition than have the orthodox, still there are indications that they are beginning to feel a degree o f doubt as to how closely they can associate

OCTOBER 1973

themselves w ith the Reform branch and how intimate their relationship can continue to be in light o f the increasing percentage o f Reform mentors who are indulging in spiritual genocide. The more traditional minded Reform clergymen, as well as some younger colleagues who are less ashamed o f Jewish particularism and the uniqueness o f our people, have obviously been propelled into action as reflected in the recent resolution passed at the C.C.A.R. convention, already mentioned above. Although this is not to be construed as an admission o f bankruptcy on their part, hopefully, it may indicate a reassess ment o f their “ derech” and perhaps even a “ hirhur teshuvah” - the begin nings o f a repentant spirit. They cannot have failed to observe the rampant alienation o f so many o f their young people who seek religious ex pression elsewhere, including mystical p h ilo s o p h ie s and Jesus-oriented groups. The loss o f so many through increased intermarriage must have im pressed upon the Reform clergy that superficiality w itho ut substance, form w ithout content, and affiliation w ith out commitment, have resulted if n o t in conscious rejection o f Judaism then in casual and unconscious defection. It has been said that pretense often hides not evil but emptiness, and perhaps the plague o f mixed marriages w ill cause many in the non-orthodox camp to realize how long so many have lived w ith the emptiness o f a pretended Judaism, which must develop into a

more substantial Judaism if the new generation is to be saved. There has been a laceration o f the soul w ithin the Jewish comm unity and who knows whether this may not have awakened many to a much-needed confrontation w ith the truth o f Judaism and the Jewish people. As was said in the time o f Lincoln, there is an age when people are “ destitute o f faith but terrified o f skepticism/* so we may be witnessing a similar spirit in our Jewish comm unity today. O N T IN U IN G this theme o f “ from the strong comes forth honey” (borrowing a phrase from Samson’s riddle in the Book o f Judges), we may point to a few other areas where the issue o f intermarriage is an much a challenge at it is a crisis. We have already mentioned the shift ing stance o f the liberal orthodox rabbinate in their relationship to the non-orthodox religious community. We detect a more m ilitant spirit on their part, fueled by the intermarriage crisis which they recognize not as an isolated issue but a manifestation o f the dangers inherent in non-Torah isms fo r which their leaderships must be held accountable. The inevitable cool ing o ff o f cordiality between them selves and the non-orthodox camp may well bring them closer to the other forces w ithin the orthodox com m unity whose ongoing m ilitancy has created cleavage between themselves, as moderates, and those they consider to be the “ right wing.” U nity between

the various orthodox rabbinical groups w ill certainly be beneficial to the total Torah comm unity. E must not permit ourselves to panic and fall into a state o f despondency regarding the persever ance o f our people in the open society o f America and other tolerant, liberalminded countries. It would seem that there is always one major weapon left in the arsenal o f Jewish survival which is not o f our making, but is part o f the never-changing Goluth. I refer to the attitude o f the non-Jewish community itself toward us and how they envision the Jew. During the week that Reform religious mentors Were meeting and the newspapers were filled w ith stories and articles about intermarriage, there appeared another newspaper item which was most ironic. This news item came from London where a leading Jewish merchant had instituted a court action to restrain the Oxford English Dictionary from continuing to present as its secondary definition o f “ Jew” the follow ing: “ A name o f reproba tion; specifically applied to a grasping or extortionate money lender or usurer; o r a trader who drives hard b a rg a in s or deals c ra ftily .” In cidentally, the p la in tiff lost the suit and this definition was retained. Lest we think that American dictionaries are more understanding and concerned

fo r our sensitivities, Webster’s Third New International Dictionary carries as a definition fo r the noun “ Jew” :“ A person believed to drive a hard

46 JEWISH L IF E

bargain/1 and as a verb form : “ To cheat by sharp business practice usually taken to be offensive.“ With potential “ mechutonim” looking upon us in this manner, the inclination to marry outside the Jew ish fold w ill be restrained if not voluntarily, then under a degree o f external duress. There w ill no doubt be some who w ill marry out o f their faith, to be lost to us in most cases. They w ill have to live w ith an added dimension o f the confusion which plagues modern man in general and their children w ill sadly lack a firm , definable shape and form . Most Jews, h o w e ve r, w ill not accept with equanimity, not to speak o f approval, the course which these adopt. Even among us who tend to extenuate mixed marriages w ill recoil when con fr o n te d w ith th e s y n c re tis tic absurdities to which mixed couples are moved to resort in the attempt to reconcile the contradictions o f their situation. An example is the device adopted by the daughter o f a Jewish father and Catholic mother who told an interviewer recently that she had

OCTOBER 1973

designed a necklace consisting o f a silver Star o f David superimposed on a cross... The American dream o f free dom, equality, and success w ill never be so enticing as to destroy the greater vision that Jews have always had o f themselves as special, unique, historic people. It is doubtful how happy those intermarried couples w ill be who have “ succeeded“ in realizing what they envision as the American dream. In the final analysis, success is getting what you want while happiness is wanting what you get. E have come to a moment in our history where many have gone beyond the historic Jewish outer limits. As a community we have come to the precipice and have seen the deep abyss which lies below. Most Jews w ill pull back and take a hard look at themselves and their future. Then, we prayerfully hope, those who might otherwise have been swept over the brink w ill hold fast to their roots, rediscover themselves, and eventually recapture the sublime heritage which is to be preserved through all time.

The Story of Abraham Moshe Luncz

by MENDEL KAUFMAN HE young man stood on the roof o f the Great Synagogue and looked out upon the face o f his beloved Jerusalem, the C ity o f G-d. It was the year 5638 - in the calendar o f the Occident 1878. Jerusalem was huddled behind its ancient walls, t h ir t y - s ix thousand souls, Jew, Moslem, and Christian, living side by side in white stone houses crowded together along dark and narrow streets.

In the distance he could dim ly see the Hills o f Judea, empty and forbidding. A t one point the emptiness was broken by a small cluster o f houses, the beginnings o f the New C ity that Jews were building outside the walls o f the Old C ity. But this New C ity was still a dream fo r the distant

future. The C ity o f Jerusalem he knew and loved was beneath his feet and now he had come to say goodbye. Though but 24 years old then, fo r the past year his eyesight had been failing. Jerusalem was blessed with scholars and pious men but not with an eye specialist. He must travel to Vienna if he wished to save his sight. As precious as sight is to anyone, to him it was doubly precious. For he was Abraham Moshe Luncz, w riter, scholar, and visionary. Luncz was born in Kovno, Russia on the first day o f Chanu kah, 5614 (1854). His father, Zvi Hersch Luncz, was the scion o f a prominent scholarly fam ily and him self was a scholar o f note. Young Abraham Moshe received the tradi-

JEWISH L IF E

tional Cheder education, in which he excelled. His father also provided him w ith a private tu to r who taught him Russian, German, Hebrew, and the sciences, which was unusual fo r that day. But it was his mother, Chiyena Luncz, who exerted the greatest in fluence upon his future. Abraham Moshe was born to her when she was at an age late fo r motherhood. A t his birth, she vowed that if G-d would permit her to rear him through child hood, she would bring him to Jeru salem to study Torah. When Abraham Moshe reached Bar Mitzvah, his mother decided to fu lfill her vow. Her husband refused to go w ith her be cause he was opposed to such a d iffi cult and dangerous journey. She would not be dissuaded and despite the fact that it was winter, Chiyena Luncz set out, on her own, w ith her son, for Jerusalem. The severe Russian winter proved too much even fo r her. Bitterly dissappointed, she returned to Kovno. By spring, Reb Zvi Hersh finnally succumbed to his w ife ’s en treaties and agreed to go with her. It was before Pesach, 1869, that the family arrived in Jerusalem. Abraham Moshe im m ediately entered the Yeshivah Etz Chaim. Soon, because o f his brilliant mind and boundless energy, he became one o f the prize pupils o f the Rosh Hayeshivah Rabbi Moshe Nehemia Kahana.

w ith his pursuit o f Torah learning, Abraham Moshe ogether

OCTOBER 1973

on his own, his studies in languages and the sciences. He expressed a desire to travel to a European university to complete his education but his mother would not permit it. Slfe could not bear the thought o f parting w ith her only son, all she had left in the world, (his father had died soon after their arrival in Jerusalem), nor could she bear the thought o f his leaving the Holy C ity for the Diaspora. Fearing that he would go anyway, she en deavored to marry him o ff as soon as possible. So it was at the age o f 18 that Abraham Moshe Luncz married 1 5 -year-old Devorah Ritavsky o f Kovno. Luncz continued his studies at the Yeshivah despite the fact that his interest in secular studies had aroused the wrath o f the zealots in the com munity, who considered any secular study a threat to religion and the study o f Torah. It was only through the intervention o f the Rosh Hayeshi vah that he was able to continue at the Yeshivah to all. Luncz made no secret o f his strong conviction that secular studies posed no threat to Torah. He en couraged his fellow students, along with their Torah studies, to aquire a general education and vocational train ing. He fe lt this was the only way they could break their independence on the Chalukah (charity dole) which was the main support fo r the community in those days and which had, in his view, kept it poor and backward. The op position to him grew until finally even

the Rosh Hayeshivah could no longer protect him and he was forced to leave the Yeshivah (and its stipend) to seek his livelihood elsewhere. He tried teaching but w ith o u t success because few parents would permit their chil dren to be taught by the “ heretic” Luncz. Luncz then turned to writing. He became a regular correspondent fo r Jewish publications in the Diaspora in a variety o f languages. He also pub lished articles about his researches into the history and geography o f the Land o f Israel. Writing became fo r him a holy mission. The political Zionism o f Herzl was still tw enty years away but al ready a small but steady stream o f Jews was coming to the Land o f Israel, then under Turkish rule. New com munities, such as Petach Tikvah and the New C ity o f Jerusalem, were being founded. Luncz saw a new era dawn ing fo r the Land o f the Jewish people. He envisioned a Land that would be reborn and returned to its former glory through the efforts o f its return ing children. Through his reportage he sought to inform Jews throughout the world o f the problems, needs, and progress o f the Yishuv o f Zion so as to enlist their aid in the sacred work o f reb uildin g. Through his research articles he sought to reveal the past and present glories o f the Land so as to inspire his brethren to strive harder for its revival. He was particularly distressed by the fact that research into the history and geography o f the

Land was almost exclusively in the hands o f non-Jews. He threw himself into his work w ith the same boundless energy that had brought him distinction in his student days. N 1876 Luncz published his first book, “Nethivoth Tziyon VeYerusha/ayim” (The Paths o f Zion and Jerusalem), describing the topography and life o f Jerusalem and its environs at that time. The quality o f the p rint ing was poor (reflecting no doubt the very limited means o f the author) and the subject was covered in a limited way. But despite its faults, the book was hailed by the Jewish papers o f the day as the beginning o f a new era in the study o f the Land o f Israel. Here for the firs t time was a book, w ritten in Hebrew by a Jew fo r Jews, which could serve as an inspiration to others, particularly young people, to expand and deepen their knowldge o f the Land. Greatly encouraged, Luncz then began the preparation o f a projected three-volume work about the Land o f Israel and its people. He was only able to eke out the barest living from his writings and he was forced to live and work under the most d iffic u lt conditions. The long hours he spent reading and w riting under poor lighting took their toll. He found his eyesight becoming pro gressively worse. He sought treatment from the doctors in Jerusalem w itho ut success. He must go to Vienna if he was to save his sight. And so at the age

JEWISH L IF E

o f 24 he stood on the roof o f the Great Synagogue, to gaze, possibly for the last time, on his beloved city Jerusalem. Would he again be per mitted to see it? And what would become o f his great plans to research and w rite o f the Land o f Israel that had become his whole life? It was with these chilling thoughts and the prayers o f his fam ily that Luncz le ft for Vienna. A fter three months in a Vien nese hospital, the doctors pronounced their terrible verdict: he would never see again. A t first the young man was in despair. His dreams o f showing others the paths o f Zion had turned into a nightmare. But soon his courage asserted itself. In a stirring “ Letter from Vienna” published in the Jerusalem Chavatzeleth in 1878, Luncz expressed his determination to carry on with his work, no matter how d iffic u lt it might be. He announced his intention to publish a multi-lingual yearbook, printed in Vienna, devoted to the study o f the past and present o f the Land o f Israel that would provide a reference source fo r the best research produced by scholars alt over the world. BRAHAM MOSHE LUNCZ re turned to Jerusalem and w ith the same vigor he had displayed before his blindness set about turning his dream into a reality. He now needed someone to read to him and take dictation but his enthusiasm and

OCTOBER 1973

mental agility were undiminished. He was not able to publish as soon as he had hoped because he lacked the financial means. Undaunted and de spite his blindness, he made another trip to Europe to secure support. Finally in 1882, after two years o f intense e ffo rt and struggle LunczY “ brainchild” saw the light o f day. The yearbook, called “ Yerusha!ayimy” had Hebrew and English sec tions and was mostly w ritten by Luncz himself. It was a combination o f the scholarly and practical, a combination that would characterize his work throughout his life. Along w ith scolarly articles the book included price lists for food, currency exchange tables, and other useful information fo r the visitor or settler. In fact throughout his life Luncz served as a one-man Aliyah informa tion bureau. In 1891, fo r instance, with immigration to the Land growing steadily, he published a book called

“ M oreh Derech B 'Eretz Yisroel V'Surya” (Guide to the Land o f Israel and Syria) which was a detailed hand book fo r immigrants. It included practical information on the Arabic language and customs, business and government procedures and regula tions, working conditions and wages, price lists, places o f interest, and much more. Finding it too d iffic u lt to have his work printed in the Diaspora, Luncz set out to establish his own publishing house. This posed problems in turn, not the least o f which was the

need to secure a permit from the Turkish government. To obtain the necessary permit, he had to go to Constantinople, where he had to spend no less than seven months before accomplishing his mission. He was not able to implement his original plan o f publishing the Yerusha/ayim each year, but all in all, between the years 1882 and 1919, thirteen volumes appeared (the last one after his death). The first four issues were in Hebrew, German, and English but all the others were in Hebrew alone. In 1896 Abraham Moshe Luncz began a new series called “Luach Eretz Yisroel” (Land o f Israel Calendar) that comprised the calendar and religious customs fo r the year and a literary supplement. This Luach appeared each year until his death, twenty-one issues in all between 1896 and 1917. IS output over the fo rty years o f his blindness would be notable fo r a sighted person, and coming from a blind person was nothing short o f amazing. He wrote four books, the Moreh Derech mentioned before, Hebrew 1891, and translated into Yiddish, 1907; “ The Jewish Colonies o f Palestine,” German, 1902; and

“Beth

Rothschild

V ’Yerushalayim”

(The House o f Rothschild and Jeru salem), Hebrew 1905. He also wrote hundreds o f articles and extensive re portage fo r his two annuals, Yerush a/ayim and Luachy as well as dozens o f a rtic le s f o r Jewish publications

throughout the world. In a d d itio n , his publishing house, under his active direction pub lished im portant research and Halachic works by other authors dealing with the Land o f Israel, including “K aftor V’Ferach” (Knop and Flower) by Rabbi Ishturi Haparchi, W!>99)“ Tevoth Ha-Aretz” (Harvest o f the Land) by Rabbi Joseph Schartz, 1900; and “Peath Hashuichan” (Edge o f the Table) by Rabbi Yisroel IVTShklov, 1911-1912. One o f the books he published almost cost him his life. This book, “Kinor Tzionn (Harp o f Zion), was a collection o f Zionist songs that went through five editions. The last edition, published in 1915 during the First World War, was confiscated by the Turkish authorities as Zionist sedition and Luncz was arrested on charges o f treason. Despite his advanced age and delicate health he was subjected to a grueling and merciless interrogation by a Turkish m ilitary court, during which he was forced to stand for nine hours straight. His courageous defense o f the book was to no avail and he was fined heavily and his publishing house was ordered closed. In 1903 the blind scholar under took another major project related to his deep love for Jerusalem and the Torah. He traveled to Europe again to collect manuscripts o f the Talmud Yerushalmi in order to publish a new, corrected edition. He managed to publish, from 1907 to 1919, only six volumes that covered the first half o f

JEWISH L IF E

the order Zeraim (Agriculture). His devotion to his work was total. Before World War I when every one was storing food fo r the d iffic u lt days ahead, Luncz was borrowing money to buy... paper, so his publish ing would not be interrupted by the War. ‘T h is is my bread/1 he said to his daughter. ESIDES his literary work Luncz was active in communal affairs and a member o f a number o f civic and national committees. In 1902, together w ith Dr. Yitzchak Krishevsky and Rabbi Nachum Natanzhon, he founded the School fo r the Blind in Jerusalem, the first o f its kind in the Land o f Israel. A fter Dr. Krishevsky died and Rabbi Natanzhon left the country, Luncz administered the school alone. He devoted much o f his energies and resources in maintaining the school even during the most d if fic u lt days o f the war. H is a lre a d y fragile health worsened due to his suffering as a result o f the war but this did not

OCTOBER 1973

diminish his devotion to his Work. He continued w riting and publishing dur ing the darkest days o f the war and as he saw peace coming he formulated ambitious plans fo r the future. But he was not destined to see them realized. On April 14, 1918 (2 lyyar 5678) he passed away at the age o f 63. He was survived by tw o sons and tw o daugh ters. His wife Devorah, who had been a source o f strength to him throughout his life, had died before him in 1909. Abraham Moshe Luncz was honored w ith streets named after him in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv. In 1928 the Jewish Palestine Exploration Society published an anniversary volume o f Yerushalayim in honor o f his tenth Yortzeit. In 1917 Mosad Harav Kook in Jerusalem reprinted his “Netivath Tziyon Ve-Yerushalayim” (Paths of Zion and Jerusalem) with a long intro duction by G. Kressel. But the greatest monument to this extraordinary man is the miracu lous revival o f the Land o f Israel that he helped to begin with his courage and vision, his initiative and his faith, so that others might follow .

The Shanghai Jew ish Community An Historical Sketch by JOSEF ZEITIN HE story o f the Jewish com m unity o f Shanghai during the last hundred years is in many ways a unique chapter in Jewish history. The development o f the com m unity re veals to us the relationship which arose between a distant outpost o f Jewry and the Chinese people. Each, through a century-long contact in fields o f mutual interest, honored in the other its dedication to the preser vation o f its own characteristics, its individual culture, and its historic background. Sephardic Jews were the first Jewish settlers in the city o f Shanghai, coming in the middle o f the Nine teenth century. They devoted un sparing e ffo rt to the establishment and functioning o f the Jewish com m unity.

Their devotion to Jewish interests, whether o f religious, educational, liter ary, or charitable character, together w ith the cultural and philanthropic work done by them fo r the Chinese people in Shanghai and in other cities in China and their outstanding activ ities in civic affairs, constitute a b ril liant era in the annals o f the Jews in China. A t the same time, the Seph ardim o f Shanghai were marked by early interest in and exemplary work fo r the Yishuv in Eretz Yisroel before World War I, in the time o f the Mandate, and in particular in the years after World War II, both before and after the birth o f the new state in 1948. The fru itio n o f their endeavors was to be seen in the development o f

JEWISH L IF E

Shanghai into a blooming cultural, commercial and industrial center until the beginning o f World War II. Another facet o f the Shanghai story is the development o f the Rus sian Jewish component o f the com m unity, from its emergence at the end o f the nineteenth century until reach ing its culmination after more than four decades o f existence. The third section o f the com m unity, composed o f those coming to Shanghai was the immediate effect o f the Nazi siezure o f power in Germany in 1933. The number o f that group grew rapidly w ith the conquest o f one European country after another by the Germans in the years preceding the outbreak o f the Pacific War. Having served in Shanghai in the years before, during, and after World War II as Executive Rabbi o f the Shanghai C ity Rabbinate, ministering to the religious needs o f the three independent congregations comprising about 25,000 persons and representing them in religious matters before the authorities, the w riter had the oppor tunity to share the life o f the diversi fied Jewish populace and to become familiar w ith the m ultifarious institu tions created by them through periods o f ups and downs in the annals o f the Jewish people. The Shanghai Sephardic Community HE first Jewish settlement in Shanghai comprised mainly Jews from India and Iraq. They came to Shanghai after the opening o f the

OCTOBER 1973

treaty ports in 1843, giving freer scope to foreign trade with China. The first Jew who arrived in Shanghai was David Sassoon, who, in 1850, opened a branch o f his father’s Bombay estab lishment. The Sassoon generations and the Kadoorie fam ily from Irak, upon whom high honors were bestowed by the British Crown and the Chinese Government, and esteemed names like Hardoon, Ezra, Abraham, and Hayim, were part and parcel o f almost every segment o f cultural, philanthropic, and civic life in Shanghai. A t the turn o f the 20th Century, the number o f eastern Jews in Shang hai had grown to about five hundred. This gradual increase required or ganized provision fo r religious, educa tional, and cultural needs. The purpose was met by the erection in 1900 o f Shanghai’s first synagogue, bearing the name Sheerith Israel, established by Mr. and Mrs. D.E.J. Abraham. Further growth o f the community in the fo l lowing years led to the establishment o f another sanctuary, completed in 1917, named the Ohel Rachel Syna gogue. A beautifully designed struc ture, it had a modern school wing which was the home o f the Shanghai Jewish School, a day school, ac credited by the School Department o f the Shanghai Municipal Council and entitled to give its students the Cam bridge certificate. Funds fo r this building were donated by Sir Jacob Elias Sassoon, o f Bombay, in memory o f his wife

Rachel. This devout figure had his own worship service in his private residence every day throughout the year. Another outstanding leader in the Jewish community was Ezra Moses Ezra, the editor to the m onthly Israel’s Messenger. This journal, whose readership extended to Britain, the U.S.A., and other countries, was published from 1904 up to the outbreak o f the Pacific War in 1941. A bly edited, Israel’s Messenger achieved much in fluence. The importance o f the pre servation o f Jewish tradition in syna gogue and daily life was constantly stressed in its pages. It was also the official organ o f the Shanghai Zionist Organization and the Jewish National Fund Commission fo r China. This fact may be interpreted as evidence o f the existence o f a strong belief in the philosophy o f Zionism by the hetero geneous Jewish population in Shanghai and in some other cities o f China. The Shanghai Zionist Association was formed in 1903 and was fo r the first time represented at the sixth Zionist Congress held in Basel in the same year. Moses Ezra was the second mayor o f the French Concession in Shanghai, and he was also a member o f the Shanghai Municipal Council o f the International Settlement. A street in downtown Shanghai was named for him. He led a group o f Shanghai Jews in 1900 to Kai Fung Foo, the ancient Chinese Jewish comm unity, to help them and to organize the comm unity particularly in the field o f education,

and arranged that some children from Kai Fung Foo were invited to attend the Shanghai Jewish School. Despite this contact, sad to say, the Kai Fung Foo comm unity, after many centuries o f to ta lly isolated existence, eventual ly disappeared. The first spiritual leader o f the S e pa rdi Syangogue was Hacham Abraham Abraham, who was called from Iraq to Shanghai. He was highly respected by the Jewish com m unity at large and worked efficiently fo r them. With the expansion o f all sec tions o f the Communal Association, it was necessary to erect a new syna gogue in the downtown area, the Beth Aaron Synagogue. This was achieved by the philanthropic Mr. and Mrs. S.A. Hardoon. Mr. Hardoon, fo r whom a street in the International Settlement was named, was a member o f the Shanghai Municipal Council, and also o f the French C ity Council. Deep interest in the realm o f Jewish education was evinced by Sir Elly Kadoorie, whose public services brought him an array o f high honors including: Knight Commander o f the British Empire; Commandeur de la Legion D ’Honneur; Grand Médaillé d ’or de l ’Academie Française; Médaillé de la Recommaissance de France; First Class Gold Medal o f the Chinese Na tional Government; Médaillé d ’Hon neur de Mérité Syrien de Premiere Class o f 1933; and Order o f the Brilliant Jade (1933/4). He also served as presi dent o f the Union Sephardite in Paris and as vice-president o f the Anglo

JEWISH L IF E

cultural, and benevolent institutions and thus became the second focus o f communal life, taking part in the development and direction o f the Jewish community at large. In 1926, the first rabbi o f the Russian Jewish congregation, Rabbi M.Z. Ashkenazi, was called from Harbin. He headed, until 1949, the Beth Din , the rabbin ical court, which was enlarged in 1939 by the inclusion o f the Sephardic spiritual leader Rev. Mendel Brown, and Rabbi Dr. Josef Zeitin as the rabbinical delegate o f the Central European Jewish Community. The plan o f erecting a Com m unity building was realized in 1927 by the Ohel Mosheh Synagogue; this building served as a Jewish Center fo r several The Shanghai Ashkenazi Association HE second phase in the Shanghai decades. Mr. S. Tukashinsky, the father Jewish story is marked by the emergence o f the Russian Jewish com o f Joseph Tekoah, the Israeli Ambas sador to the United Nations, assisted munity. This began in 1890 when the the w riter graciously in the establish building o f the East China Railroad ment o f the Talmud Torah. His fine brought some Jews from Russia to secular and Jewish background en China. Thereafter this new Jewish abled him to become a good counselor settlement gradually developed, with sharp growth after the Russo-Japanese and a strong supporter in the develop ment o f this new Jewish religious War in 1905 and again follow ing the outbreak o f the Russian Revolution in school in Shanghai. Much impetus and enthusiasm in the founding, maintain 1917. ing, and expansion o f the Talmud A further gradual increase oc curred in the 1930’s and even during Torah School was given by Mr. Brailovsky, who devoted fo r many World War II, when a large number o f Russian Jews came to Shanghai. The years much o f his time to this noble majority o f them were former resi purpose and the general welfare o f the students. dents o f Harbin, the main Jewish It is appropriate to record, w ith center in Manchuria. much appreciation, the interest in the R u ssian Jewish settlers too established their religious, educational, community shown by Dr. Robert

Jewish Association in London. He participated in the opening ceremony o f the Hebrew University in Jerusalem in 1926. Together w ith his sons Lawrence and Horace, and his brother, Sir Ellis Kadoorie, he founded schools and hospitals in all parts o f the world, particularly in the Near and Far East, with the cooperation o f the Alliance Israelite Universalle. It is noteworthy that such dis tinguished Israelis as Defense Minister Moshe Dayan, General Itzchak Rabin, former Ambassador to the United States, and Yigael Yadin, noted soldier and scholar, attended the Kadoorie School in Israel.

OCTOBER 1973

Gordis, Professor o f the Jewish The freedom, a fraction o f the Jewish ological Seminary in America, who population from Germany and the visited Shanghai after World War II. countries occupied by the Nazis also His visit in 1946 was an appendage to found a haven from tyrannous oppres an official mission fo r the War and sion in that most cosmopolitan place. Navy Departments o f the United This led to the third influx o f States in conjunction w ith the Nation Jews starting in 1933 and continuing al Jewish Welfare Board, to survey the .until June, 1941. It is to be noted that Jewish situation in the Far East gen after the outbreak o f World War II in erally and the proper assignment o f 1939, it was possible fo r some Jews to chaplains in the Pacific and Asiatic leave fo r Shanghai via Russia, since the theaters after the withdrawal o f the Soviet Union did not enter the war bulk o f American personnel. A fte r Dr. until June 1941. However, Russia did Gordis had completed his official mis not recognize stateless passports, and sion, he undertook to visit Shanghai to hence, many Jews from Germany and see what assistance he could render. other countries who were already He had funds available which were stateless before 1933 could not avail secured in his congregation in New themselves o f this last chance o f es York. The Kadoorie School, the Jew cape. ish Day School fo r the refugee chil Shanghai’s Central European dren b u ilt just before Pearl Harbor, comm unity was formed in 1939, and benefited by Dr. Gordis1 thoughtful its population reached nearly 18,000. and noble attitude. He left with the In religious composition, it was made representative o f the American Jewish up o f two sections. Originally a tradi Joint Distribution Committee, the late tional congregation was established Charles Jordan who was later mur and thereafter, in 1941, another dered in Czechoslovakia, a substantial German-style congregation, but this sum fo r specific projects in the field o f time o f the Reform persuasion, came Jewish education. The Joint Distribu into being. The m ajority o f the Ger tion Committee also did charitable man Jewish settlers belonged to the work in support o f needy and sick latter group and the practices o f their students by instituting a special Bikur synagogue were entirely strange to the Cholim Sick Fund. local congregations. In all matters o f Kiddushin and The Central European Jewish G ittin , the Central European group Community was under the jurisdiction o f the Beth UST as Czarist persecutions and Din o f Shanghai, headed by Rabbi the convulsions o f the Russian M.Z. Ashkenazi. Revolution both brought to Shanghai A variety o f religious, educa jews seeking religious and political tional, cultural, literary, social, and

JEWISH L IF E

sport institutions as well as daily and weekly journals sprang up w ith the German influx, adding to the under pinnings o f the Shanghai community, whose total number had risen to some 25,000. The added numbers posed a challenge which the older established groups could hardly meet from the outset and certainly not after Pearl Harbor until the end o f World War II, since many o f them as enemy aliens were exposed themselves to much tr i bulation and distress at this critical time. The Shanghai Political History and the Jewish Community HE history o f the Shanghai Jew ish comm unity in its variations is a reflection o f the political history o f the Far East. Its five chapters cor respond to the five different eras o f Shanghai’s political status during the hundred years o f the com m unity’s existence. Up to Pearl Harbor, December 1941, Shanghai was divided into the International Settlement, the indepen dent French Concession, and the sur rounding Chinese area o f the city. The European population lived predomi nantly in the Settlement and the French Concession. There extrater ritorial rights were held by citizens o f the U.S.À., Britain, France Italy, Switzerland, Portugal, and all o f the other states that were participants in the International Settlement Treaty. These rights gave to the respective consulates jurisdiction in civil and

OCTOBER 1973

criminal cases over their citizens. Those not endowed w ith such privi leges, whether citizens o f any state or stateless, were subject to the jurisdic tion o f the Chinese courts. A fter World War Pfj both Germany and Russia had lost their rights to maintain troops, and their citizens, at the same time were deprived o f extraterritorial rights. In that first era, the SinoJapanese War must not be overlooked in relation to its repercussions on the Jewish community That struggle started in 1932, and ended w ith the surrender by Japan in September, 1945. It gave rise to a mass emigration o f Jews from Manchuria and in par ticular, from Harbin and such other places in China as were invaded by the Japanese during that war. The m ilitary rule and the curtailment o f economic life and diverse restrictions imposed upon the population, impelled many residents o f the occupied districts to leave there and settle in Shanghai. The second era began on Pearl Harbor Day, December 7, 1941. The impact was fe lt strongly in the Jewish community, many o f whose members were o f American, British, or other Allied citizenship and who accordingly now became enemy aliens. From that day on all sections o f the city were controlled by the Japanese m ilitary forces. The Proclamation o f February 18,1943 HE third era was the period beginning February 18, 1943,

the day on which the proclamation o f a designated area to which stateless refugees were to be restricted was publically announced in the various newspapers. It lasted until the sur render o f Japan in 1945. Although announced as taking effect three months after its publication, the Pro clamation was actually not enforced until August 1943. The “ designated area“ , estab lished on grounds o f m ilitary neces sity” , was a modified version o f the ghettos o f Nazi-ruled Poland. The word “ Jew” , however, did not appear in the text o f the Proclamation.* The P ro cla m a tio n unquestionably o ri ginated w ith the Nazi Government in Berlin, as was apparent from the first and as was confirmed by various re ports in the newspapers soon after the war. The Germans imposed upon their occupied areas the same inhuman laws that were in effect in Germany, and undoubtedly, it was the Germans who urged their Axis partner, Japan, to introduce laws paralyzing the Jewish population ignoring any human rights or international law. Presumably, the pressure o f the Germans upon the Japenese grew stronger after the defeat o f the Germans in Africa, and very soon thereafter in Stalingrad on

*The post-war appeals courty in Frankfurt ruled that the Shanghai refugees were entitled to the compensation provided for the survivors o f the concentration camps.

January 30, 1943. These eventualities probably account fo r the date o f issuance o f the Proclamation. This development was an aspect o f the curious relationship between the Japenese and the Germans in the Far East and in particular in Shanghai, after the outbreak o f the Pacific War. In the warfare in the Far East, no German forces were involved and in no area did Japanese and German soldiers fig ht together against their enemies. Significantly too, the Germans failed, in spite o f various attempts after Pearl Flarbor, to regain the extraterritorial rights which Germany had held prior to its defeat in 1918, and after which there was no longer a German section o f the International Settlement. In order to substantiate their demands to get council seats, as Japan's ally, in the International Settlement, the Germans included among their nationals the Jews who held German passports which were still valid w ith the out break o f the Pacific War. In this respect also they failed to gain their end. As I understand it, the Japanese did not reject their demands—they simply disregarded them. A factor to be taken into account in the attitude o f the Japanese toward their German allies was the aim o f the Japanese to eliminate the influence o f the white man in the Far East not only from the political and m ilitary areas, but also from the economic, cultural, and tech nological provinces. The 1943 P ro c la m a tio n p e n a lize d a ll “ stateless refugees,”

JEWISH L IF E

including those stripped o f German national status by Nazi decrees either before or during the war, and those stateless who came from Central Europe to Shanghai after 1937, among whom were Jews from Poland and other territories occupied by the Ger mans. The designated area referred to in that decree extended to ‘ ‘Greater Shanghai.” Stateless refugees outside o f Greater Shanghai were not in cluded. No change o f residence was possible after the Proclamation was made public. According to international law the refugees from Germany by their denaturalization in the year 1942 be came by this act stateless. As such they were neither allies nor enemy nationals o f the Japanese. As long as they kept aloof from any political activities—and this did apply to the refugees in Shanghai—no restriction whatsoever should have been imposed upon "them. For that reason the Pro clamation was not in accord w ith the stipulations o f international law Japan was expected to adhere to. Likewise lacking any legal basis was the continuation o f the designated area from the defeat o f Germany in May, 1945 until Japan's surrender in September o f the same year. No change in relation to the restricted district occurred then. However, one should envisage the psychological and emotional effect which rescinding the Proclamation, upon the crushing de feat o f Germany, could have had on

OCTOBER 1973

the Japanese people still fighting desperately against a mighty and in vincible enemy. Such a prospective reaction might explain the reluctant attitude o f the Japanese to free the refugees from confinement to the designated area. The ostensible motivation for confining those stipulated to the designated area was the assumption that the refugees might have joined any kind o f resistance movement. Yet though the same could have been suspected o f the Russian Jews, they were not subjected to the decree. The reason fo r this is to be found in the status o f Japanese-Soviet relations at the time, when the two were not at war with each other. The Japanese avoided taking any measures against Jewish Soviet citizens that would have restricted their rights as neutral nation als. I f this had happened, then the Russians could have taken counter measures against the Japanese citizens in Russia. Be that as it may, the Japanese did not act as if they would have taken into account the German racial policies. Even though the stateless Rus sian Jews and the White Russians as well, who possessed the same passports issued by the White Russian Com mittee in Shanghai, were devoid o f any protection by any power, nevertheless the Japanese apparently considered them as a group belonging to the Russian people. Consequently, they were not made subject to the regula tions o f the Proclamation. It was the

status o f neutrality between Japan and Russia, almost to the end o f the war, that made possible the exclusion o f the stateless from Russia from the Proclamation. Thus they enjoyed the same freedom as did the Soviet c iti zens in Shanghai during World War II. In this connection it may be noted that Tientsin did not have a designated area fo r stateless refugees. I am informed that in Tientsin until 1942, the refugees from Germany holding German passports actually re ceived relief from the German Con sulate there and the amounts were quite substantial. The Consul General was F ritz Wiedermann, who was H it ler’s captain in World War I.

applied to business establishments as well as to housing. Thus many were deprived o f their livelihood because in most cases no smooth transfer was possible. The designated district en compassed an area o f about a mile and a half in length and about threefourths o f a mile in w idth. The major ity o f the refugees had lived there before the war together w ith many Chinese and Japanese, but pursued their occupations in the areas under extraterritorial privilege. In order to get to the Inter national Settlement or the French Concession, that is, to the outside area, one needed a special pass, and this frequently entailed insurmount HE unique situation o f the able difficulties, having to w ait in vain, Jewish comm unity in Shanghai for many hours, then starting again the during the war, and in particular in the next day and perhaps yet another day time when the Proclamation became in order to get—if one was fortunate law was that the comm unity as such enough-- such a special pass. In 1944 retained legal status and thousands o f however, there came a change o f o f Jews were entirely free as they were ficers in charge o f issuing such passes. before World War II, whereas others The long waiting line was then elim in had to bear the fearful consequences ated. It is surmised that a high o f the war, even though there was no Japanese officer employed at his home warfare in the city o f Shanghai. a refugee who prevailed upon his The Jewish population was div employer to intercede w ith the com ided w ith regard to their legal status petent authorities, bringing successful into the follow ing groups: result. 1. First o f all stateless refugees-2. The second group o f Jews this was the official term in the Pro- were those who had White Russian clamation--were subject to the new stateless passports or who held Soviet restrictions. They had to move w ithin citizenship. They were not subject to three months from the International any special restrictions and could Settlement and the French Concession move around freely, as previously to the newly restricted area. This noted. The same applied to those who

JEWISH L IF E

held French citizenship or had pass ports o f neutral countries. 3. The Jews who were enemy aliens had to go to internment camps in 1943. However, not all o f them were subject to this regulation. For instance, those who were Iraqi citizens could move around comparatively freely, and they could even live in their homes. 4. Most unique was the regula tion in the Proclamation stating that stateless refugees who came to Shang hai after 1937--most o f them had arrived in 1939 and later--from Ger many and other countries were subject to the Proclamation. Consequently, those who came to Shanghai before 1937 were, like the Russian Jews, entirely free, and could live in any section o f the city o f Shanghai and could acquire property in any area o f the city. The question naturally arises as to whether those Jews in Shanghai living under no restrictions during World War II aided those who did not share their fortunate condition. It can be said that many o f them did assist the refugees in the restricted area. However, much more could have been done by individual support considering the fact that the economic status o f many o f those not subject to the Proclamation was good during the war period and in some cases much better than before the war. Much tragedy could have been averted if they would have seen fo r themselves, on the spot, the terrible condition o f many Jews in

OCTOBER 1973

the designated area. This was indeed a gloomy chapter in the history o f the Jewish community in Shanghai. N the story o f the Shanghai Jewish community, the chapter w ith the profoundest meaning for world Jewry is that in which Shanghai became the temporary home and re fuge o f pillar institutions o f Torah learning and Torah life. When the Germans invaded Poland in 1939, leaders and students o f several o f its great yeshivoth succeeded in escaping a terrible doom by fleeing to the part o f Poland which had fallen into the hands o f Soviet Russia. A fter untold tribulations, haven in Japan was af forded them, which they reached after an epic journey across the vast expanse o f the Soviet domain. From there they were permitted to go to Shanghai, where they remained until the end o f World War II. Thus the most illustrious Torah colleges, such as the Yeshivoth o f Mir, Telsh, Lublin, and Lubavitz, perpetuated their historic existence and continued their program o f studies in Shanghai, many thousands o f miles distant from their original homes and in a setting inconceivably different from that amidst which they had been born and had flourished. A pproxim ately five hundred students and rabbis attended the re constituted yeshivoth in Shanghai. Thus this remote community had be come, almost toward the end o f its history, the most active place o f rabbinic studies in the years o f World

War II and continuing thereafter until 1947; a strong pillar o f Torah was thus added to its other basic foundations. The Mirer Yeshiva and also some others could use the magnificent Beth Aaron Synagogue o f the Sephardic Com m unity located in the downtown area o f Shanghai, that is, outside the d esig n a te d area. The Japanese authorities granted them repeated ex tensions until they could find suitable facilities in the restricted area in 1944. In this connection, it is worth mentioning that the Kadoorie School was opened just after Pearl Harbor fo r the refugee children and being enemy alien property, the students could still use the building in 1942, and also in the time o f the Proclamation from 1943-1945 w ith special passes for children and teachers. The Chinese and Japanese and the Jewish Community HE relationship between the Jewish and Chinese peoples goes back to Biblical times. We find some references to China in the verse Isaiah 49:12, prophesying the return o f the captives to Jerusalem “ from the land o f Sinim ” which is identified w ith China. Another source which seems to relate Jews o f the Biblical era to China is a stone tablet recording that Jews entered China during the Chow dynasty (1120-220 B.C.E.). A docu mentation o f the Jewish settlement in the community o f Kai Fung Foo, the capital o f the province o f Honan, contains an inscription in the Chinese

language on the marble tablets in their synagogue bearing a date correspond ing to the year 1552 C.E. The inscrip tion recorded that “ Those who prac tice this religion honor the sacred writings. These sacred books concern not Jews only, but all men, kings, and subjects, parents, and children, old and young, and they d iffer little from our laws.” The liberal and tolerant spirit o f the Chinese was thus manifested from tim e immemorial in that they per mitted Jews to settle among them and to observe their own customs and traditions. In 1900, Dr. Jon Lehmann, an officer o f the imperial German occupa tion army in Kiatchow, a former Ger man concession in China, visited Kai Fung Foo and the leader o f the Jewish comm unity related to him “ that never had man’s hand wasted or demolished what the Lord commanded us to hold sacred.” The officer reported his fin d ings, w ith all the historical material he had gathered, to the German emperor Wilhelm II in the expectation that he might take up the matter. Dr. Lehman, a son o f the well known Rabbi Dr. Markus Lehmann in Mainz and a brother o f my revered teacher, Oskar Lehmann, a fine Torah scholar, was editor and publisher o f the Breslauer Zeitung and the Breslauer Morgenzeitung. His visit to Kai Fung Foo, like that o f the Shanghai group cited earlier in this article, did not succeed in staying the dissolution o f the ageold isolated comm unity o f Chinese

JEWISH L IF E

Jews. This noble heritage o f respecting the tradition and culture o f other peoples could still be witnessed and fe lt in China throughout the Tw enti eth century. What was the situation in this regard in the city o f Shanghai -which did not have an indigenous Chinese Jewish comm unity - during the time when Shangahi was made up o f the International Settlement and the French Concession and in the subsequent era o f World War I I under Japanese rule? EFORE Pearl Harbor, no acts o f violence against Jewish religious institutions, schools, synagogues, or cemeteries were ever committed, nor was there any other anti-Jewish mani festation. No change in this respect could be seen after Pearl Harbor and also not in the time o f the Proclama tion from 1943 to 1945. No wmdow o f a synagogue was broken, no prayerbook was destroyed, and no vandalism o f any kind in Jewish religious places was ever seen. This applies to Jewish homes also in the various areas o f the city. Japanese soldiers were customers in Jewish homes in the designated area. There were also White Russian, Chinese, and Japanese stores in the area. There was not visible any symptom o f inherent prejudice against the Jews. Apart from this, the terms “ Judaism,” “ Jewish religion,” and the word “ Jew” were in general unknown to the Chinese and likewise to the Japanese people. The Jews just be

OCTOBER 1973

longed to the white population in the cosmopolitan city o f Shanghai whose nationality was based on the language they spoke. An indication o f this was shown in an odd episode when the prison in the French Concession, w ith the abolishment o f the Concession in 1943, was reorganized and the wardenship o f the jail was given to a Chinese official. When I introduced myself to him as the Jewish chaplain fo r the last four years who wanted to visit one or two inmates, he remarked that he had never heard anything about this reli gion. He asked me where our “ church” was located, and I replied to him that our house o f worship was some blocks away on Rue Tenant de la Tour. He made some notes about the location o f the synagogue. This official gave me the impression o f a well-educated ad ministrator. The result o f our conver sation about Jews and Christians was that he sent all white people to the chapel fo r a worship service just before Pesach! I addressed myself to all o f them. The warden also attended the service. He probably thought that all white people had one basic religious philosophy. It may also be noted that the French Concession, after the collapse o f France in 1940, never promulgated during the time o f its existence until August 1943, any anti-Jewish laws which were put into effect by the Vichy Government. However, no land ing passes fo r Jewish families whose re la tiv e s liv e d in the French 65

Concession were issued after May, 1940. These, however, were still avail able from the Shanghai Municipal Council o f the International Settle ment against payment o f $400, but most o f the refugees did not possess such a sum. The French authorities attended the opening ceremony o f the Russian Synagogue on Pesach, 1941, and they also participated in the dedication o f the Jewish Hospital in the French Concession in 1942. A representative o f their administration spoke con gratulatory words on this solemn oc casion and also was present at the festival meal. The com forting feeling resulting from the experience that all religious activities were at no tim e hindered and interfered w ith by the authorities or the Chinese or Japanese people was at least a ray o f hope in the otherwise dim, dismal, and dreary atmosphere in the fearful years during the war.

A fte r the Defeat o f Japan FTER the surrender o f Japan in

1945, a new period began in the history o f the Shanghai Jewish com m unity. Most o f the Jewish families which had been living in Shanghai for many decades had at first the inten tion to stay on. However, fo r the refugees Shanghai was only a transient haven. The political development was such that finally all Jews were pre pared to leave China. the 66

The civil war in China between Communists and Nationalists

loomed in many sections o f China, and the fear that it would spread to Shang hai, and the uncertainty as to whether the American forces were going to stay in Shanghai, transformed the spirit o f rebuilding and reconstructing the Jew ish comm unity into an emmigration era starting in 1946 and continuing through the subsequent years up to 1949, when the Communists occupied Shanghai, Most Jews o f the community succeeded in emigrating from Shanghai before the Communist takeover. Thus the Jewish comm unity in Shanghai experienced the only mass exodus in its history. The American Joint Distri bution Committee undertook the almost impossible task o f repatriating and resettling the thousands o f Jews who had found a haven o f refuge in China. This w ill go down in history as a great humanitarian deed, and the Joint w ill long be remembered fo r untiring efforts which culminated in the success o f the mission. Even in the follow ing years o f the Communist regime, emigration had been going on, as stated in the report o f the Council o f the Shanghai Jewish Com m unity, which was regularly sub mitted to the authorities in Shanghai up to the year 1958, when the Council ceased to exist. The report fo r 1953/54 states w ith regard to Matzoth that the local office o f the Food Adm inistration Bureau displayed an exceptionally sympathetic attitude toward the reli gious needs o f the Jewish community

JEWISH L IF E

by allotting the highest grade o f wheat flour at a low price fo r the purpose. Also mentioned in the 1953-54 report is the release o f blocked funds and the Council expressed its gratitude to the People’s Government fo r reducing taxes on several communal properties in Shanghai and fo r the unsolicited action on behalf o f the Public Security Bureau in protecting one o f the Jewish cemeteries from trespass. The positive attitude o f the authorities concerning the emigration o f the Jews from Shanghai made it possible fo r them to leave on a legal basis. Summary HE foregoing outline o f the establishment, development, and functioning o f the Shanghai Jewish community w ifi, I tru st/ Indicate to the reader the exemplary attitude which it encountered on the part o f the governing authorities and the Chinese people. Testifying as it does to the cooperation, mutual trust, and mutual confidence through almost a century between peoples differing so widely fróm each other in religion, nationality, and culture, the ex perience o f the Shanghai Jewish com munity must be recorded inThe annals o f both China and the Jewish people. The Shanghai Jewish community did indeed instinctively put up the pillars fo r the schools and rabbinical colleges by having b u ilt their syna gogues, study and communal facilities beyond their immediate needs. No less meaningful and memorable was the

OCTOBER 1973

warm Jewish atmosphere that pre vailed there fo r many decades, created by men among whom traditional Judaism was visible in every area o f their way o f life. Even though most o f the bene factors are no longer among us, the institutions they built, such as hospi tals, schools, and charitable institu tions, are still, as it were, alive, witnes sing through the lives o f those they served the noble spirit that penetrated the hearts and minds o f people o f the Jewish community in Shanghai. The striking absence o f any hos tile or negative attitude towards Jews and their religion among both the Chinese and the Japanese made pos sible the religious, educational, and cultural activities o f Shanghai’s Jews before World War II and likewise during the war years, when not only those Jews not subject to the restric tions laid down in the Proclamation o f 1943, but also those who experienced daily grim effects o f the loss o f the right to freedom o f movement could enjoy fu ll freedom in their religious practice and their communal activity. This should be chronicled, since it was in such total contrast to the diabolical policy o f Japan’s Axis partner, Nazi Germany, and in resistance to the Nazi pressure to adopt anti-J ewish mea sures. The religious philosophies as laid down in Confucianism, Buddhism, Taoism, and Shintoism did not teach hatred or contempt fo r any religious groups nor did they impose upon their 67

adherents any hostile attitude toward those who belonged to another reli gious faith. In the Analects, a collec tion o f Confucius’ teachings, China’s greatest sage is quoted thus: “ A disciple asked ‘ Is there one word which may serve as a rule o f practice fo r all one’s life?’ Answer: Is ‘re ciprocity’ not such a word? Do not to others what you would not do to yourself - this is what the word

means. I f you act thus your public life w ill not, nor w ill your private life, arouse ill w ill.” I f history is to teach us an ethical lesson, then the presentation o f this unique chapter o f Jewish history w ill perhaps serve, beyond the chronic ling o f its events, to strengthen the hope fo r an age o f lasting brother hood.

TORAH AND TRA D ITIO N by WALTER ORENSTEIN and HERTZ FRANKEL This Bible textbook for religious schools of all trends has a new and creative approach to the teaching of CHUMASH by emphasizing the ethical teaching* ot the text, while laying due stress on the understanding of the Hebrew. ™ ¿ 9 N received much acclaim for their volume TORAH AS OUR GUIDE, which is used in hundreds of schools. TORAH AND TRADITION is the textbook Jewish teachers have long been hoping for. It is highly recommended by prominent educators who have o f CHUMASH°PieS ° f thiS UniqUe tOQl for the effective and enjoyable teaching Bereshis—$2.50 Shemos —$2.50 Vayikrah-Bamidbar—$2.50 A L L JEW IS H B O O K S T O R E S

— or —

HEBREW PUBLISHING CO. 79 Delancey Street, New York 2, N.Y.

Look for the H. P. C. When Buying Hebrew Greeting Cards

JEWISH L IF E

SHEMA by BERNARD DOV MILIANS Shem a, O Israel, hear The breathing o f a w ish, The seething o f desire Whose fire M ay reach Y our heart and teach: “A n d th o u shalt kn o w and love Thy G-d — The M aster o f Y our spirit — w ith th y m ig h t.” A n d let y o u r love fo r the All-seeing, Through day, through night, Sear Y our being, Drive y o u ever on to love and love So m en w ho d o n o t hear, O Israel, do n o t care, Will share Leviathan.

OCTOBER 1973

Shem a, O Israel. Hear and see The pleading o f a dream, The seeding o f a prayer Whose flare M ay reach Y our soul, beseeching: “L e t these M y words be ever as a sign B etw een thine eyes that thou art M in e...” T hat y o u fo rever w ith y o u r m ight Will seek to light Tom orrow , so the sons o f man Will see The po w er o f a prayer, The flow ering o f a dream, The bursting o f the seed Forever free O f pleading, A n d fa n The flare Till all will share Leviathan.

B ook R eview s THE DIET OF HOLINESS by BORUCH HOROVITZ THE JEWISH DIETARY LAWS by Dayan Dr. I. Grunfeld; London : The Soncino Press, 1972 2 vols. 244 pp. and 286 pp., $18.00. HE whole o f Jewry is indebted to Dayan Dr. Grunfeld fo r composing this most comprehensive up-to-date guide to the practical and philosophical aspects of Kashruth. The two volumes, showing the enor mous depth as well as the expansive width o f the Jewish Dietary Laws, both are given to the present-day reader in a beautiful style and in an excellent form at which is the mark o f distinction o f the Soncino Press. The fourteenth chapter o f Devorim begins with the words “ You are the children o f the Lord your G-d__ fo r you are a holy people unto the Lord your G-d and He has chosen you to be his own treasure out o f all peoples that are upon the face o f the earth.“ . This is the introduction to the major head ings o f the Dietary Laws both those that govern meat products and those that govern plants and vegetables with particular refer ence to the produce o f the Holy Land. The author has followed the same pattern as indicated in this chapter, beginning by a deep exposition o f the motivation behind the Dietary Laws. He shows the reader how

RABBI HOROVITZ is the Principal o f Yeshivath D’var Yerushalayim, the Jerusa lem Academy o f Jewish Studies. He pre viously lived in Manchester, England.

the philosophical and physical bases o f these laws, from an ethical, rational, moral, and mystical approach, influence the human character and train us to become children o f G-d and reach godliness. Especially by refer ence to the attitude o f the Torah to the psychosomatic unity o f the human being, he has shown how the soul o f man is in flu enced by that which he eats. As the desire fo r food is the most primitive drive and one that shows itself first in the life o f the human being, it is bound to have an overwhelming influence on the development o f the human personality. The author also shows the way in which the laws o f Kash ruth separate the Jewish people “ To be a holy people unto G-d and to be His special treasured people“ — not however, in a particularist sense but rather by living out “ Lemino,“ the religio-national law o f species — the particular elective role o f Israel — thereby to bring enlightenment and moral elevation to the whole o f mankind. One could add that this is a deeper signifi cance o f “ Am Segulah“ (Devorim 14:2) being G-d*s chosen people, fo r where this phrase occurs first (Shemoth 19:5) it is followed by the phrase “ fo r the whole earth is Mine,“ signifying, (see comment of Seforno), that the Treasure is thereby to transform mankind. O f particular interest is Dayan Dr. Grunfeld’s profound interpretation of the first revelation to Adam which hints at the Universal Code o f the Jewish religion (the Noachide Laws) as being basically a dietary law.

JEWISH L IF E

Come to M other's for th e H olidays. When it comes to the tradi tion al foods, M other’s knows best. Mothers makes delicious Old-Fashioned Gefilte Fish, Whitefish and Yellow Pike, All-Whitefish, Unsalted, Old-World (it’s a little sweeter like mother used to make). Some in jars, some in cans. Also regular borscht and schav, unsalted borscht and low calorie borscht. Also, Mother’s has the only soft mar garine for Passover plus stick margarine, both of them regular or unsalted, too. And they are all-vegetable products so you can eat them on milk-free or meat-free or salt-free diets. All Mother's products (matzo balls, too!) are Pareve and Kosher for Passover and endorsed by the © . Is it any wonder everyone goes to Mother’s for the holidays?

OCTOBER 1973

The deeper interpretation of these laws which precede their legal description draws upon hundreds o f sources, showing the width and depth o f scholarship of the author. As a disciple o f Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch, he has drawn largely upon his symbolic interpretation o f the M itzvoth, but in characteristic broad fashion, Dayan Dr. Grunfeld has included in his exposition rationalist philosophers as well as concepts of psychodietetics, and also Kabbalistic and Chassidic mystical interpretations. He has shown how Yashruth paves the road towards kashruth, uprightness. His most thorough description of the laws concerning Shechitah, forbidden and permitted parts o f animals, and the mixture o f meat and m ilk is followed by a similarly comprehensive exposition o f the laws of Pessach. HE second volume, like the four teenth chapter in Devorim, extends the same concept o f bringing godliness down to earth as indicated by the Kashruth o f meat products, to the products o f the earth and especially to the Holy Land of Israel. These have the specific purpose of dedicating the land and its produce to G-d and godly purposes, so that the Jewish people w ill learn to regard the aim o f their national life, not to be a building up o f the land as an end in itself, but to use the land and its produce fo r the service o f G-d. As it is said in verse 23 “ you shall eat before the Lord your G -d .. . so that you w ill learn (as a nation) to be aware o f the Lord your G-d always.“ With the return o f the Jews to the Land o f Israel in our own time, a deeper knowledge and understanding o f these laws is vital. Dayan Grunfeld has given us a very thorough Halachic exposition o f the heaveofferings, tithes, dues of the poor, first fruits, and the priests’ share o f the dough, as well as the laws o f Orlah, that is, fru it of

young trees, new grain and kilayim, diverse kinds. He has shown how these laws develop a moral society dedicated to the service o f G-d and the concern for the welfare o f those in need. O f especial topical interest are his lengthy chapters, which take up the greater part o f the second volume, concerning the laws o f Shemittah, the seventh year. Just as the weekly Sabbath teaches man to dedicate nature to G-d, so the seventh year teaches the Jewish people to dedicate the state to G-d, recognizing G-d's sovereignty above that o f the state. This is the most important challenge which faces the Jewish State today. The learned rabbi, philosopher, and lawyer has shown how the detailed laws o f the Shemittah are related to this most important universal ethical principle: that nations and states should regard G-d and His law as having sovereignty above themselves. A ll the practical aspects o f Shemittah obser vance in our time are discussed in very realistic fashion. It is shown that it is quite possible fo r the State to observe the Shemittah; not only that this is possible but that this would be the greatest Kiddush Ha-Shem, demonstrating that “ The earth is the Lord’s and the fullness thereof.*’ E may be sure that anyone who w ill study these tw o volumes in depth w ill grow in his conviction that the observance o f the laws governing the diet o f man w ill produce w ithin the individual and within the Jewish people as a whole a moral and spiritual transformation. Even more than the works written in earlier generations by great Jewish leaders and thinkers on this topic, this contemporary presentation o f the Jewish Dietary Laws w ill help to give added strength to the growing stream o f enthusi astic young Jewish people who are returning to the religion o f our forefathers, and who are preparing to build a brave new world, b u ilt upon the principles o f the Torah.

JEWISH L IF E

O rd er

now

for yourself — your friends — your congregation THE UOJCA POCKET CALENDAR-DIARY FOR 5734/1973-74 Combines a wealth of Jewish information of every day usefulness. Con tains the Jewish and secular calendars, a full daily diary section, explana tions of the holidays, candle-lighting times, weekly Torah and Haftorah readings, Yahrtzeit date record, Tefillath Haderech, Sefirath HaOmer, Daf Yomi, Mishnah Yomith, Torah Studies, information on the program of the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America.

HANDSOMELY BOUND IN RED LEATHERETTE U pJC A/116East 27th Street/New Y o rk, N.Y. 10016

Please enter my order(s) fo r____ UOJCA Pocket Calendar-Diaries ......... . individual name gold-stamped (one line only) at $1.50 each .......... individual uninscribed copy at $1.25 each ....... inscribed congregational bulk order at $ 1.00 each plus $4.00 per order, (Minimum order, 25 copies.) IMPRINT TO READ AS FOLLOWS: Send to: N ame............ 1......... .................................................................................................... Address

— ...................... | ......................... -------- .....— ......... - ——— --------

City..... ........ ................ .................................State.

........— ------ Zip Code..

All orders most be prepaid.

OCTOBER 1973

OVER ZION AND JERUSALEM by NATHANIEL ZELIKOW PALESTINE PAPERS, SEEDS OF CONFLICT, Compiled arid Annotated by Doreen Ingrams, New Y o rk: George Brasiller, Inc., 1973, 198 ppgs., $6.95. A RTH UR RUPP IN , MEMOI R$, DIA RIES, LETTERS,. Jerusalem: Keter Press, 1971. 332 pp, $6.95. LETTERS TO AN ARAB FRIEND, by Andre Chouraqui. Translated by William V. Gugli, Amherst, Mass: University o f Massa chusetts Press, I972, 271 pp. HE ecastic joy o f twenty-five years of Israel’s independence and six years of Jerusalem’s reunification is dimmed by the continuing conflict with our Arab cousins. Over Zion and Jerusalem, after 1,900 years, once again under Jewish dominion, hovers the long shadow o f Arab intransigence that has been sharpened, rather than softened, by three wars and three utter Arab defeats. A common thread o f all three vol umes under review and the theme central to two o f them is the continuing Arab-Jewish conflict. “ Palestine Papers 1917-1922“ con tains cabinet papers and foreign office mem oranda, the original documents, which after fifty years have been released fo r the public to view how the seeds o f conflict were planted. “ A Letter to an Arab Friend” offers a concrete solution, which religious Jewry probably cannot accept and the majority o f Israelis, as o f now, do not seem

NATHAN ZELIKOW has contributed to Jewish periodicals through the past years. A member o f the Executive Board o f the American-lsrael Public Affairs Committee and a former vice president o f Hapoel Hamizrachi, he practices law in New York City.

to be inclined to consider. The volume of Ruppin Memoirs provides valuable back ground fo r the years prior to 1917'and the events which were generated after 1922, by the British promises contained in the Bal four Declaration. Ruppin, during his life time, concerned himself with easing opposi tion o f Palestinian Arabs to Jewish settle ment and political independence. He was the leader o f at least one movement which sought to have Zionist and Arab leaders explore mutual solutions, with equal lack of success in either camp. One o f the most valuable ideas to emerge from these books, which helps better to identify the problem, is the dis tinction between the interests o f the foreign Arab countries who collectively becloud the problem by referring to themselves as the “ Arab Nation,” and the interests o f the Arabs who are local residents o f Palestine. The initial confusion seems to stem from the British and French. When freeing Arab countries from Turkey, and thereby creating the first politically independent Arab states, they referred to them as part o f the Arab “ Nation.” Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Jordan were states given to the Arab “ Nation.” These Arab entities thus fe lt emboldened to claim political rights fo r Arabs not within their boundaries as part o f a theoretical Arab “ Nation.” The Arabs o f Palestine, who neither on their own nor through the British attained political independence, deferred to the pressures o f the Arab “ Nation” in spurning independence when offered by the U.N. Partition Resolution. It was the nonPalestinian Arabs who launched the three wars against Israel’s independence.

HE “ Palestine Papers” compilation poses the thesis that the seeds o f

JEWISH L IF E

DEER PARK BAKING COMPANY Hammonton, N.J. Quality Cookies for all Occasions

Fund Raising Programs New YorK: (212) WA 5-2744 New Jersey: (609) 561-2900

hiemd&hip Fine Quality Dairy Products

OCTOBER 1973

conflict were not planted in 1948, but rather in 1917. In rallying Arab support throughout the mideast to the Allied cause against Turkey during .World War I, Britain through Sir Henry McMahon, High Commis sioner in Egypt, delivered a written commit ment to Sheriff Hessein to “ recognize.and support the independence o f Arabs in all regions demanded by the Sheriff o f Mecca...,“ with m inor exceptions which did hot mention Palestine by name. A t the very same time, to gain the support o f Jews throughout Europe and particularly in the United States and to forestall a similar move contemplated by the Germans, the Balfour Declaration was issued to Lord Rothschild in response to Zionist requests. It pro claimed that “ His Majesty’s Government view with favor the establishment in Palestine o f a national home fo r the Jewish people.”

to each, Jews increased their immigration, b u ilt social and economic institutions, and began to press for political power. The Arabs, while selling land to Jews on a large scale, nevertheless protested and rioted against the establishment o f Jewish political institutions which might in any way point to honoring any possible commitment toward creation o f an independent Jewish state in any part o f Palestine. The Cabinet Papers reveal that the Christian population o f Palestine was more fiercely opposed to the Jewish National Home than even the Arabs. The government, fo r its part, not always firm in administering its policy, nevertheless explained the policy with re spect to Zionism in the words o f the Duke o f Devonshire, successor to Churchill, as Secretary o f State fo r the Colonies in these words: ”... the A rabs as a whole have ac The debate as to the precise meaning quired a freedom undream ed o f be o f each o f the commitments has been fore the war. Considering what they endless. What the War Cabinet papers do owe us, they may su rely le t us have show is that the declarations were inten ou r way in one sm all area, which we tionally imprecise. Nor was it the words do n o t adm it to be covered by our which proved to be important, but rather pledges and which in any case, fo r the acts o f the British which through pole h istorical and other reasons, stands mics, sophistry, tortuous maneuverings, and on a w holly d ifferen t footing from inaction, tried to steer a stormy course the rest o f the Arab co u n tries..^ ” m between the commitments. Its policy was The “ Palestine Papers” after fifty finally wrecked at the end o f World War II. years, gives historian and layman alike the The Balfour Declaration was in part opportunity to reassess the friends and motivated by the personal religious senti opponents o f the Jewish National Home ments o f its supporters in the Government, w ithin the British Government. Their colors such as David Lloyd George, Herbert and hues have certainly changed. Lord Samuel, Lord Asquith, and A rthu r Balfour. Curzon, Sir Alexander Cadogan, Arnold Moreover, when the Palestine Mandate o f Toynbee, and even General Allenby were the League o f Nations was to be awarded, not staunch friends o f Jewish independence Britain sought Wilson’s consent fo r the in Cabinet debates. The glamour o f United States to administer it. Only after Churchill and Ormsby-Gore in this regard United States refusal did Britain reluctantly are somewhat dulled, although Churchill, in agree to assume the trusteeship over act and fact, basically defended the policy. Palestine. As might be expected, both the L T H O U G H A rth u r Ruppin in Jewish and Arab communities proceeded to “ Memoirs, Diaries, and Letters” ends act in Palestine in line with their own his account with the end o f World War I, his understandings o f the commitments made diaries fa ith fu lly record from first-hand in-

JEWISH L IF E

volvement the problem o f Arab and Jew living under the administration o f the British Mandate in Palestine. Ruppin came to Palestine and Zionism through a series of coincidences, not early conviction. By just happening to know Zionist leaders who needed his talents, he rose to become Director o f the Zionist office in Palestine and the leading sociologist o f the new Yishuv. His work in Palestine started in 1907. A t the very beginning o f the Man date, he wrote, “ It seems that the most d iffic u lt problem before us is our relation ship with the Arabs and w ithout a friendly relationship with them, all our work in Palestine is bu ilt on sand and this continues to cause me nightmares. On the other hand, we are not at all sure that such an arrange ment is possible or how it is to be achieved.” In addition to his most inconsider able achievements in the economic organiza tion o f the new Yishuv, Ruppin’s great anxiety on the Arab question made him a moving force in the establishment o f the “ Brith Shalom” movement. Initia lly, it sought only to educate Jews through courses in Arabic, but was soon caught up in airing, discussions on a bi-national State. Ruppin wrote: “ In founding the Brith Shalom, I was guided by the consideration that there is no parallel in history to the aim of Zionism - to settle the Jews in a country which is already inhabited.” Brith Shalom aroused no enthusiasm and was rejected by both camps. Palestine was an under-inhabited land. Arabs had never had political sovereignty over the country. They were quite willing to sell their lands to Jews fo r settlement and Jews continued to buy, cultivate, and build. Ruppin’s reputation was established on solid accomplishments in organizing economic institutions fo r Palestine. He ob tained from the world Jewish community needed capital fo r the upbuilding o f the land. His efforts persuaded the labor move

OCTOBER 1973

ment that a capitalist economy could not be prevented, but in order to reach a balance industry should be confronted with a strong labor movement. The Yishuv grew and prospered, w ithout stopping to solve poli tical problems. Indeed, the pattern seemed to be a portent fo r the future. Jews would produce and build. The solution o f political problems would await future events. These events could not have been foreseen. If political solutions had been thought through, it now seems apparent that they would have been cast aside by the march o f history. Jewish oppression under Nazism in Europe (extended by Arabs in and outside o f Palestine), World War II with Jewish independence in its aftermath, and the three wars brought on by Arab countries outside o f Israel, were all events o f such momentous consequences and critical pro portions that earlier accommodations with the Palestinian Arabs would have had little possibility o f altering the stream o f history. Committed Jews and mystic Zionists will call it destiny. HE theme o f political “ solutions” with Palestinian Arabs is pursued further in “ Letters To An Arab Friend.” Addressing himself to an Arab childhood friend, the narrator draws upon their com mon background, childhood experiences together, and loyalty to the country o f their birth. They were both men o f Jerusalem. Noting that the name “ Palestine” goes back to the Philistines, Chouragui points out that its use was the design o f the Roman conquerers to camouflage Jewish identity and to erase the memory o f vanquished Jewry from history. “ The land o f Israel suddenly became Palestine, the land o f the Philistines.” Jews and Arabs, he reminds his fr ie n d , were Hebronites, Nablusians, Haifans, and Jerusalemites. Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, and more so Iraq and Arabia were foreign lands to them. The tw o friends both went to Paris to study, and while at first captivated by

western secular culture, soon became disil lusioned by the widespread misery o f the Arabs in Paris, on the one hand, and by the deep-seated antisemitism in pre-World War II Paris, on the other. Chastened by the H itler era, and the failure o f western culture to curb human barbarism, the narrator returns to Israel fo r a reexamination and rediscovery o f 3,000 years o f Jewish culture and moral values. He emphasizes the simi larity o f values linking Bible and Koran, thus creating an indissolvable link between Jew, Moslem, and Christian who share the ideas o f peace, fraternity, love, and unity. The political solution, he suggests, is the creation o f tw o separate ‘‘cities,” one of Israel and one o f Ishmael. Two freely elected parliaments would be created and would legislate the laws to govern the tw o allied “ cities.” Other relationships would be predicated on federal type treaties. In short, the solution, says the author, lies in “ unity in diversity.” Its vehicle in the bhnational State. MONG them, the three books ident ify the problem. Two wrestle with paths to proposed resolution. Ruppin’s “ Memoirs,” which end before the three wars fought fo r Liberation and national defense, urges the need fo r a solution. Andre Chouraqui proposes a political solution, pre dicated on the assumption o f common moral and religious roots. Alas, his solution does no t seem to have stirred any softening o f political intransigence on the part o f the Arab world. Nor does it seem that the Palestinian Arabs alone are free to choose or desirous o f a solution w ithin the geographic boundries o f Palestine. Jewish destiny marches on. It is fueled by an ancient Divine promise or by present political and m ilitary reality, de

pending on one’s perspective. The propo nents o f either view are not likely to yield a dissection o f tbe Medinah, after the violent, historic rejection by the Arabs o f the UN Partition Plan in 1948. For those who believe that tough political bargaining may yet yield a peaceful solution, an anecdote recounted by Ruppin may reveal aspects o f the Arab mentality upon which they rely, despite all harsh extreme statements against any compro mise. In 1915, the Sultan o f Turkey dis patched Jemal Pasha from Damascus to govern Jerusalem. Upon his arrival he sum moned th irty Jewish notables to his hotel. A fter keeping everyone waiting fo r an hour, he walked into the room and announced unequivocally, “ You w ill all be deported to Brussa” and left. With typhoid then raging, this exile meant almost certain death. Albert Antebi, director o f the Alliance school, who spoke both Turkish and French and was a person o f great personal charm, was asked to intercede with Jemal to rescind his command. The notables waited fearfully. Antebi returned and announced: “ Unfor tunately I did not succeed in cancella tion o f the order. An order which Jemal Pasha has given remains in force forever. On a few minor points, however, the Pasha has changed the order: 1. You w ill be deported not to Brussa, but to Tiberias; 2. Nor forever, but fo r a fortnig ht; 3. Not all o f you, but only half o f you.” Perhaps Sadat’s “ complete w ith drawal” by Israel from the occupied terri tories may eventually become “ some” w ith drawal. Whether or not this becomes the fact, all three books recognize the fusion o f the people o f Israel with the Land o f Israel as Jewish destiny.

JEWISH L IF E

The MULTIMILLION DOLLAR

(

Eat in good health

Cftouin

Empire

H O TEL

ISNOWKOSHEB Completely Air Conditioned and Heated

Miami Beach's

The Most Trusted Name in Kosher Poultry

Number ONE KOSHER HOTEL

FIRST in Service Entertainment FIRST in Hospitality

Empire Kosher Poultry, ine., Mifflintown, Pa. 17059.

Social Host and M.C. SHOWTIME NIGHTLY AT THE

JOLSON CORNER NEW HEATED POOL AWhole Block of PRIVATE SANDY BEACH and Cabana Colony Daily Services in Our BEAUTIFUL SYNAGOGUE LUXURIOUS ACCOMMODATIONS at the LARGEST and NEWEST Oceanfront KOSHER Hotel With Every Modern Facility for a Perfect Holiday. Extra Spacious Oceanfront Dining RoomServing GLATT MEATS ONLY

From before sundown on Friday until after sunset Saturday Kosher King is happy not to serve you. We're closed. Because our food is Kosher and so are we. But when we are open, we dish up the most delectable Glatt Kosher beefburgers, frankfurters, fried chicken, french fries and fillet of fish. CHAR-BROILED FOR SUPERB FLAVOR AND GREAT TASTE. So strictly supervised that even the most observant people drive-in.

For Information Write Direct Your Hosts The B E R K O W I T Z F A M I L Y

OCEAN AT 41st ST., MIAMI BEACH THE FIRST KOSHER DRIVE-INS IN AMERICA. Brooklyn: Surf Ave. at W. 15th St Coney Island Bronx-Westchester: 96 Mam St. (Post Road) New Rochelle Just North of the Mall. FREE PARKING

OCTOBER 1973

SAVE MORE THAN 50% on 2 English imported

JEWISH TRAYS retail value $25.00

YO UR PRICE $ 1 l ? 5

Both have a silver anodized aluminum frame blue bottom with silver imprint and ornaments.

Large tray for candles or Challes 15 ins. x 9 ins.

Small tray for Habdalah 10 ¡ns. x 7 ¡ns. HURRY with your order, stock is limited. Send your check for $11.95 per set, postage included in U.S.A.

to E R IK B. NUSSBAUM 381 P A R K A V E N U E SOUTH, NEW YO R K , N.Y.10016

OCTOBER 1973

-for the w hole fam ily too! To begin with, Alba is the best-tasting non-fat dry milk there is—real country fresh ta’am with all the nutrition of whole milk, but without the fat or water. That’s treat No. 1. And here’s No. 2: Chocolate Flavor Alba (only 81 calories per 8 bz. serving). Here's No. 3: Alba 66 Hot Cocoa Mix (only 66 calories per cup). And No. 4: Alba 77 Fit 'n Frosty for delicious shakes (choco late or strawberry and only 77 calories per glass). All 4 treats are instant easy mixers, all calorie controlled and positively delicious.

catoneswglass

CERTIF ED©

nrsn naia rw ?

Oieinz ♦

♦