Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Thursday, November 26, 2009
Making Exceptions
Monday, November 23, 2009
Fanatics in Israel
Imagine an extra-terrestrial – or someone from Oslo or maybe Kansas City – who googles ‘ultra-orthodox’ and happens upon Avirama Golan’s ‘Who are Israel’s ultra-orthodox Jews?’ What would he find? Golan starts by expressing dismay – ‘woe unto us,’ she laments – at the differences of the skullcap-wearers who continue to ‘divide and subdivide.’ True, Golan admits, one can’t generalize – but in this taxonomy, the ultra-orthodox largely consist of lunatic preachers, arsonists, vandals, fanatic messianists and missionaries, murderers, and impoverished psychotics; the few lawyers and the staff at the Glatt Kosher restaurant in Petach Tikvah come as afterthoughts, negligible exceptions.
Golan may be convincing – to the outsider – as she dons the mask of rationality, speaking for the ‘distress’ of the ‘moderate’ Israeli majority. In the name of analyzing the secular-religious divide, she blames the now-defunct Shinui for dubbing the ultra-orthodox ‘parasites’; yet herself implies a comparison between the ‘ultra-orthodox’ and dividing, multiplying and mutating cells. Admitting that ‘it’s impossible to define the word “Haredi,”’ she goes on to provide the dizzying list of ultra-orthodox proclivities, and concludes by condemning the government for having ‘abandoned its citizens to extremist.’ That this kind of supposedly enlightened form of anti-semitism has many parallels and precedents – among Jews, as well as non-Jews (the Nazis were experts at taxonomies of Jewish ‘perversities’) – does not make it any less venomous and misleading. No, Norway, it is not like this! But typical as it may be, Golan’s portrait of the world she calls ultra-orthodox, may show her, with much in common with the extremists she condemns.
In Israel, extremist right and left exist in dangerous co-dependency: both sustain a divisive vision of the world which allows for the perpetuation of their parallel one-sided hatreds. Like the camera-man who visits Kiykar Shabbat in Jerusalem on the Independence Day and the thuggish delinquents who happily accommodate with vulgar displays of disrespect, Israel has turned into a predictable play of hatred – and it’s the rest of us who lose out. Most Israelis don’t identify with the fanatical displays of religious zealotry, nor with Golan’s thinly veiled anti-semitism and close-mindedness. Yet while the rest of us strive for a culture which accommodates our sense of complexity – and the richness and diversity of our shared tradition – it’s the divisive rhetoric of fanatics on left and right which prevails. But there is a growing sense among Israelis that the sociological categories and languages of enmity that sustain fanatics of every color have run their course, and that we need new ways of talking, thinking, and acting – reflecting the diversity of life and culture outside of newspaper headlines and billboards in Mea Shearim.
John Donne, the seventeenth-century poet and sometimes Hebraist, writes, ‘no man is an island.’ Donne does not merely assert that individuals are connected, but that his own individuality is dependent upon others: ‘any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind.’ With Donne in mind, perhaps it is time to assert more strongly what many of us already know, but what left and right-wing extremists continue to deny – that we don’t fit into their categories; and are connected, depending upon each other for our various identities. To deny that connectedness, to disenfranchise through sociological dissection and divisiveness diminishes. As Donne writes: ‘And therefore never send to know for whom the bells tolls; it tolls for thee.’
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Rosh HaShana Redux: Speech in Exile, Kol Shofar
What is man? For Aristotle, man is the rational animal. In the Jewish tradition, man is the speaking soul. Yet on Rosh Hoshana we forgo speech or dibbur for kol shofar, the voice of the shofar. Why do the days of awe commence with kol? Why is Rosh Hashana, yom t’ruah - the day of the sounding of the shofar?
The musaf prayers of Rosh Hashanah are the longest of the year - with three sections, on Kingship, Remembrance and Shofar. The blessing that ends the last section reads: 'For You hear the voice of the shofar and You give ear to the t'ruah (the shofar blast), and none is comparable to You.' Why does the blessing emphasize that G-d hears the sound of the shofar? Rambam writes that the shofar arouses man to repentance - 'to awaken us from the slumber of habit and draw us close to our Creator.' So why should the blessing stress that G-d hears the kol shofar; shouldn't it emphasize rather that the people of Israel hear the shofar? The conclusion of the blessing is also strange: for 'no one is comparable to You.' We don’t find other blessings mentioning G-d’s uniqueness. Why here?
Kol comes in a place where speech is not possible. In Egypt, speech, our sages tell us, was 'in exile.' This does not mean that there was no conversation in Egypt. To the contrary, there was too much conversation - about vice presidential candidates, the Bail Out, and pennant races. Of course, these are important, but in Egypt these were the only topics! Because of their collective debasement, their enslavement to a culture of work and idolatry, the people of Israel foresook their spiritual roots, and it showed in their speech. Language has the highest powers - to unify spirit and body, to bring together heaven and earth; through speech, the spiritual can find expression. When speech is in exile from its Source, however, it ceases to achieve its elevated goal. When there is no longer the possibility of meaningful speech the only recourse is to cry out. Though immersed in the decadence of Egypt, the people of Israel were still able to cry out to G-d with their voices. Even when speech is corrupted, there is still that internal voice, the authentic kol of the neshama. A person may not know how to pray, he may not know how to learn Torah, but he can still cry out! Kol is the inner voice of longing for the divine.
But kol also expresses G-d's longing for us. In the Rosh Hoshana musaf, revelation and the sound of the shofar are linked - the means through which G-d draws close to us. The shofar sounds at the revelation of Mount Sinai, and is also associated with the day of the creation of man, as well as the End of Days, when the final great shofar blast signals the full and ultimate revelation to all of humanity. In the Talmud, the shofar, though merely an object, is associated with the 'inner sanctum of man.' The ram's horn connects to the our inner depths because it is the means by which we attend to G-d's revelatory voice and draw close to Him. The shofar arouses us from our own slumber and habit, from our exile from ourselves. Rosh Hashana is not only a day commemorating G-d’s revelation in history, it is a day of self-revelation, the revelation of our inner selves for which G-d yearns.
At the end of the prayer services on both days of the holiday, there are several requests. One is: 'Hayom Tidreshenu L'tova': 'Today seek us out for good.' We ask G-d not only to seek good for us, but we ask him to seek for the good in us. Seek out the good in us which other people don’t know; seek out the good in us about which we don’t fully know! G-d, as the blessing of Remembrance reads, finds Ephraim to be his ben hayakar, his most precious son, his yeled sha'shu'im, his most delightful child. But Ephraim was also the most wayward son, the one who worshipped idols; yet G-d finds him to be the most precious! G-d yearns for Ephraim, as the prayer reads, with 'His inner self' - literally His innards. G-d’s own internal desire, as it were, is for us to reveal our internal voices. We implore G-d during the year, but especially during the days of repentance, to hear us: sh'ma koleinu! Hear our voices! Hear our authentic voices! Attend to the voice which gets lost in our daily routines—lost to others, lost even to ourselves. On Rosh Hashana, we take the first step to reclaiming our speech, by first finding our inner voice.
This is the uniqueness of G-d - emphasized in the prayer: 'there is none like You.' He is the one who hears our attempts to connect to him through sounding the shofar. There is no need for some mediator or sacrificial agent in order for our repentance to be accepted: G-d is the one who hears us and accepts our prayers. The shofar blasts call out: remember our authentic selves, even if we have forgotten! sh'ma koleinu: hear our voices; help us - during these days - to remember who we are!
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Fear of G-d: Religion's Antidote
The wife of a friend is in the shmattah business. She makes the shmattas; he collects the money, deposits it in the bank. One day recently, he took the profits - 800 Shekels - which unbeknownst to him, fell out of his pocket as he scootered from one end of town to the other. I met him the following day – his remorse had already turned to relief: ‘Baruch Hashem’ - his wife had secured a new order the very next day – for exactly 800 shekels!
Baruch Hashem - Thank G-d!
Our sages say that there are three Books – the first is the Torah, the second, the Book of the cosmos or the natural world, and the third, the Book a person writes for himself. G-d has his two books – His means of revelation. But every person has to write their own book - their means of self-revelation. So I tell my story – and in so doing show gratitude for the kindnesses bestowed upon me. 'Baruch Hashem!' But the proclamation – ‘and the very next day she received an order for exactly 800
‘Adulthood,' writes the psychoanalyst Adam Phillips, ‘is when it begins to occur to you that you may not be leading a charmed life.’ Being an adult, breaking the spell of charms, may require the painful realization that we must free ourselves of the stories of the future in order to live in the present.
G-d admonishes
Freud found fear - fearful memories of past pain - to be at the root of the religious impulse. People, as Phillips explains Freud, are not bad, they are simply frightened. Fear is the response to absence, trauma, lack of love and security. It’s the first fear first felt in childhood – when parental love and security, feelings of wholeness are sundered and lost. Trauma, in this Freudian story, is at the beginning, in one form or another, of every personal history. Religion provides - in the simple Freudian reading – a benevolent future of consolation, a charm to forget ‘pain for a while.’
Fear is response to what is missing - the resonance of the trauma of love lost, security lost, the feeling of being foresaken. In Phillips' reading of Freud, one says to the patient - 'tell me what you fear and I will tell you what has happened to you.' In this depressing vision, the past experience of wounds and loss makes one imagine a future limited by that experience of those past failures. This offers the consolation that the future will be just like the past. Even though the vision is grim, the consolation is that I get to relinquish responsibility: I give into my idolatrous vision of an impossible future in which my passive inaction is blameless. In jumping to conclusions about the future, I close it off. Since the past will inevitably look like the past – ‘things never work out for me!’ – my passivity is justified.
This is one form of idolatry. There is another where the analyst says, 'tell me what you pretend not to fear, and I will tell you what has happened to you.' This is the idolatry that sometimes stands in for - pretends to even look like - Jewish observance. In our fantasies of an always benevolent future – the recovered 800 shekels as theological statement – there are similar fears, also closing off the possibilities that the future may hold. This is the charmed life – of salvation if not always achieved, at least anticipated. My fears, in this version, put me under a self-induced spell – things will always work out. Though adulthood, as Phillips tells us, means breaking the spell. Of course, it’s easier to live a charmed life. Though the charm sometimes wears off in the shock of a reality denied, sudddenly asserting itself. Such recognition - coming too late - leads not to adulthood, but crisis. So one can go directly from childhood to midlife crisis - without passing through adulthood. Or alternatively, in a conspiracy of denial, one attempts to maintain the spell and the illusion; after all, everyone else does. Though the faith that inspires jealousy is almost certainly theatrical, inauthentic.
The 800
Hiding in the endless stories that affirm a simplistic - not simple - faith is the fear of a future that might just be like the past. We all know that past – not only of our personal histories, but our recent history as a nation – a collective trauma never before known to the world. Yet after this trauma, there is the desire for the self-induced spell: a charm to push off our ‘pain and anguish.’ So we insulate ourselves from the present in our ideological retellings - our charmed stories - about the future. Adorno wrote, ‘no poetry after
Judaism is at its deepest roots a skepticism: Abraham, I sometimes answer to precocious and skeptical students, was the first chozer b’shaila – the commonly used term to describe once observant Jews who have returned to a life of questioning. But if there were more chozerei b’shaila among observant Jews, there would be less chozerei b’shaila. In some sense, it’s the atheist that has more in common with the servant of G-d than the idolater. He has refined the impulse of iconoclasm, and cleared out the idols and charms. His problem, however, is that he fails to see his own atheism as the remaining – the last – idol in the sanctuary.
‘Tamim tiyeh im Hashem Elokekha’; and you should be perfect with Hashem your G-d. Break the idols! The Torah tells us, as Rashi explains, not to look into the future, but to anticipate only G-d. While the nations of the world are 'time-observers' – seeking propitious moments and segulas, wearing amulets and red-strings, and consulting religious-looking astrologists and charmers, the Torah enjoins: 'Give them up; live in the present.' Onkelos writes that the injunction of tamim tiyeh is to be pure in fear of G-d.
Freud is right: Religions are born out of fear, they are ideologies – providing clear and predictable maps of an already foretold future. In this sense, the yiras Shmayim required by G-d is an antidote to religion, or that religious impulse - and its charms - created by fear. But Judaism is neither an ideology nor a religion. For being perfect in the fear of G-d means acknowledging not knowing, and facing a future without guarantees. There are no charms – for the Jewish adult – to do away with such fears.
A child experiences what Phillips calls the 'to and fro of emptiness and plenitude' – of love present, and then love strangely and inexplicably absent. Such loss brings about our attempted compensations, all of those charmed and charming stories, to secure the future, as T.S. Eliot wrote, 'to redeem the time.' In such fear, we make a future out of something we cannot possibly afford to believe in. For even, as we try to charm ourselves with such stories, we know - deep down - that it's just a spell.
In the psalm recited twice daily from the beginning of the month of Elul to Shmini Atzeret – we read: ‘when my mother and father forsake me, then G-d will take me up.’ For many years, I read this verse incredulously: 'do parents really forsake their children? what could be further from the mind of a parent? But parents - even the best of us - are always forsaking our children. In Rashi’s reading of the text, that forsaking begins at the time of conception – the time, as Rashi writes, of the parent’s 'pleasure' – after which 'they turn their faces,' and G-d is left to sustain the growing fetus on His own. So parents turn to different pleasures and obligations, it's only natural, as the child gets older – they sometimes turn their faces. The baby is crying; but the kettle is boiling. And the child - even with the best of parents who nurture their infant to childhood, and their child into adulthood - feels forsaken, left alone, and... fearful. There is no 'charm' - notwithstanding the protest of Milton's Satan's - to 'respite or deceive, or slack the pain.'
Tamim - be pure. Live in the present; give up the charmed stories about the future that other nations of the world entertain. In the Maharal’s reading, the verse is a conditional statement, but it’s a condition that is fulfilled automatically. Be perfect in your fear of G-d: and when that fear of G-d replaces the fears that generate idolatrous stories that close off the future, then G-d will be your portion. Such a portion, however, is for adults only.
