THE "MUSIC" OF JEWISH LEARNING

AND THE "FAITHFUL MODERNIST"

By Jack Shechter

The "Faithful Modernist," that is, a person who is genuinelyreligioUf and at the same time steeped in modernity, affirms thetraditiopal purpose of study that searches for religious guidancefor life. At the same time, he affirms the modern methods of studythat values objectivity and unearths illuminating new data. Whenthese two affirmations are combined, they produce compellingreligious value for all Jews.

Traditional Jewish Study

A favorite book of mine, one that has remained fixed in my mind, is SamuelHeilman's People of the Book. Dr. Heilman is a professor of sociology at QueensCollege in New York and a modern orthodox Jew.

He describes a study he undertook of the various Chevra Shas- Talmudstudy circles-in the New York area. These consist of interested laypeople whogather weekly to study and carefully examine the classic rabbinic texts andcommentaries composed in Palestine and Babylonia some 1,500 years ago andearlier. The texts are entirely in Hebrew, but translated and discussed in English.Dr. Heilman wanted to discern the pattern and main characteristics of theselearning enclaves, and what motivated the participants to be so deeply involvedin what the contemporary Jew could justifiably consider arcane subjectmatter-compiled long ago and for another milieu. I

Heilman himself attended one of these study circles for a full year. A novicein this kind of study, he attended the circle faithfully, listened intently to theproceedings and, as he himself said, barely understood the material. He had littlebackground in Talmud and his Hebrew was not strong. Yet he was diligentand persistent. When asked why he attended in this way, despite the fact that hehardly understood what was going on, he responded, "I come here for the

. "music.

It should be noted that similar study circles have always existed in otherareas of classic Jewish literature such as in the texts of the Pentateuch, thePsalms, the Mishna, the Midrash. Professor Heilman's analysis could similarlybe applied to them.

What 1 am discussing here is what 1 think Professor Heilman meant by "themusic" of Jewish learning, which might yield some insight into the nature ofstudy in the traditional Jewish mindset. 1 then describe the modern mode of

1

study, how it differs from the traditional one-and what an affirmingcombination of the two modes produces: among other things, a FaithfulModernist.

The Role of Texts for Community

Let's first examine the difference between "reading" a Jewish text, asmoderns understand the word "reading," and "learning" Jewish texts, the latterterminology used by traditional Jews.

Reading is essentially a solitary activity. We sit alone as we read. We pauseoften, think to ourselves, mark up the book, take notes, go back and re-read apassage. It's usually quiet in our study or the library. We're enveloped inourselves and in the people and ideas in the volume being examined.

Traditional Jewish reading is not reading in the modern sense. It's quitedifferent. It's learning; it's studying in a social context. Witness the Yeshiva: forexample. Here Jewish learning takes place in a hall amid a cacophony of voices.This is the Beit Midrash (the study hall). Here students study either in pairs orthreesomes, reading out loud and talking animatedly back and forth. One whoenters is immediately engulfed by the chatter and conversation of the learners.

I remember this experience vividlyfrom my own school days at the orthodoxYeshiva Chaim Berlin I attended through high school, from my college years atYeshiva University, and from my son Reuven studying this way in the YeshivaUniversity Beit Midrash he attended for five years en route to receiving rabbinicordination.

The atmosphere is nothing like that of the silent home study or library carrelor the staid classroom we're accustomed to. Reading in the Yeshiva takes placeamid an incessant din. It's reading in talk; it's reading by discussion; indeed, it'snot reading at all-it's studying, it's learning, it's "lernen" as the Yiddish has it.

What, then, is happening here? The study experience is not a solitary activityduring which the person reflects on the text. Rather, it's a way of communalcommunication. The Jew studies in order to become part of the Jewish peopleand to connect to its value system. Study here is a ritual act of the community.This is what Professor Heilman meant when he talked about "the music" of theChevra Shas. It was a learning environment which provided what he called"sentimental education." This was a way for the Jew to connect to the Jewishcommunity of the past as his own, and to gain access to the values of his traditionas embedded in that community-and to live out those values by the very act ofstudy.

* The Hebrew word for sitting, that is where the student "sits" to learn. The Yeshiva is the Jewish parochial

school, in this context late high school, college or graduate school.

2

I'm thinking of a furniture salesman I know. He works hard all day, comeshome, has dinner, and announces to his household, "I'm going to the BeitMidrash to learn." He's really not all that interested in the subject of theaccoutrements of the ancient Beit Hamikdash (temple), or the consequences tothe owner of an ox who gored his neighbor's cow, or about a soon-to-be marriedvirgin receiving 200 zuzim (Jewish coins used in Roman Palestine) or a non-virgin 100 zuzim as stipulated in the ketubah document.

When he studies Talmud this way, through discussion he is catapulted backinto the Talmudic world; time and place are erased and the student is back in theacademies of Sura and Pumpedita in Babylonia 1,500 years ago. Here the learnerjoins in the discussions, voices his opinions, is refuted or defended by Ravina andRavAshi and the other great teachers and masters of other ages. This is the waythe traditional student of today seeks to place himself vertically, as it were, withinthe Jewish tradition and continue it into the present.

This kind of learning connects the student to the rich emotional worldembedded in the classic texts. These are not just books on or off a shelf. Theylive in the context of hours of human give-and-take, of challenge andenlightenment in the framework of community. The texts here are interactive-in the way the reading is lively dialogue, in the way students speak in theirhevruta (study circle) in which they debate and ponder the texts aloud.

The Role of Texts for Religious Experience

In addition to their role for community, the classic texts of Judaism play yetanother role in the life of the Jew: They point to the central religious facet of theJewish enterprise. This is another basic reason why the traditional Jew studieshis texts with such passion. He wants to know what God expects of him, how andwhy he ought to live as a diligent, faithful Jew. And so, the texts appeareverywhere in his ritual life ...

a) In the prayerbook ... which abounds with material taken from the Bible,Talmud, medieval Jewish poetry, the Zohar, even from the theology ofMaimonides; for example, the Yigdal hymn which contains the 13 principles ofthe Jewish faith, and the Adon Olam purported to be authored by the medievalHebrew poet Solomon Ibn Gabirol, affirming the oneness of God.

b) In the Torah readings ... on the Shabbat and holy days, which have astheir constant companions sections of the Pentateuch and Prophets. The biblical"Song of Songs" is chanted on Passover, the book of Ruth on Shavuot,Ecclesiastes on Sukkot, Esther on Purim, Lamentations on Tisha B'av. A rabbinicliterary work, the Haggadah, is used on Passover, and on Chanukah medievalliturgical poems are read. The texts are always there-throughout the year andthroughout the life cycle-in the rituals of birth, Bar and Bat Mitzvah, marriageand death.

3

c) In the home rituals ... where, for example, the kiddush chanted overwine on Friday evening and Shabbat noon is essentially composed of quotationsfrom Genesis 2:1-3.

d) The role of the master teacher tells about the religious context oftraditional Jewish learning. It is no coincidence that the overseer of the BeitMidrash is called mashgiach ruchani-"spiritual supervisor." This teacher issomeone who guides the learner through the often difficult textual materials. Hehelps unravel thorny issues, prods the students to think for themselves, showsthem a derech in lernen-a methodology of study, and encourages interactionamong his charges. The master here has a special kind of authority. It's anauthority based on his personal piety, on his reputation for diligence, andespecially on Torah-wisdom; it is based on his mastery of the biblical andrabbinic literary corpus, or on a profound grasp of a particular facet of thiscorpus. Indeed, Jews venerate the learned teacher, which continues the longtradition of respecting the instruction, the insights, and the legal judgments ofthe sages of old.

To summarize: The traditional mode of Jewish study is for the purpose ofstrengthening community (both "vertically," i.e., community of the past, and"horizontally," i.e., community of the present), and to re-experience the religiouslife and value system of those who preceded in time those who study.

The Modern Mode of Study and Its Impact on the Traditional Mode

Up to this point, we've explored the traditional mode of Jewish study andlearning. A core of Jews these days, as they delve into Jewish texts, remain fixedin that tradition. However, most studious Jews today do not remain so fixed.Most are highly educated in the secular methods of study; they've been reared inan educational system where study is much more like "reading"-alone at homeor in a library, or in a university classroom that is usually a silent place where theinstructor holds forth. This modern educational modality differs significantlyfrom the traditional way. In what ways does it differ?

a) One different way is study for historical information ...

Biblical, rabbinic, liturgical and other Jewish literature have been andcontinue to be used as an important source of data about past history. It hasbeen mined for knowledge about the language and literature, the life and religion,the culture and institutions of various early civilizations. To cite but a fewexamples:

• Biblical archaeology has revealed much light on ancient Canaanite andEgyptian religion and culture.

• Plumbing the treasures of rabbinic literature, the great talmudic scholarProfessor Saul Lieberman has uncovered much about the Hellenisticworldduring the first three centuries of the common era. Example: the pagan

4

emphasis on the value of hard work was seen by the rabbis to have been avalue Jews needed to emulate.

• Study of the Hebrew Bible has shed much light on nascent Christianity-what Jesus and the apostles, all Jews, imbibed from their Jewish roots.

• Jewish scholars, such as the eminent historian Salo Baron in hismonumental study of the Jewish experience, have documented the greatera of Islamic literary and cultural life during the Middle Ages. Thisflourishing period was shown to have impacted the Jewish Spanish"GoldenAge,"which produced a bevy of prominent Jewish poets, literaryand philosophical figures such as Judah Halevi, author of the famousKuzari.

Moreover, those who study the history of Judaism via its literature in theseways need not necessarily be, nor, in fact, were practicing Jews. Indeed, theymay not even be Jewish. Witness, for example, the seminal German BiblescholarJulius Wellhausen, who helped reveal the actual complexity of the Pentateuch;William FoxwellAlbright, the prominent archaeologist whose work has illuminedmany ancient biblical places and their characteristics based on his studies of theancient Near East; Paul Lapp, my teacher of biblical history at the PittsburghTheological Seminary, who followed in Albright's footsteps; John Bright, whoseHistory of Israel has anchored the period of the Patriarchs in concrete history;and George Foote Moore,whoseHistory of Judaism during the classical rabbinicperiod is itself a classic. These scholars have opened up new and revealing vistas,and have deeply affected the ways in which a modern religious Jew studies,prodding him and her to look anew at many of the basic suppositions oftraditional Jewish life and thought.

b) Another differing way is the focus on objective data ... The modernJewish scholar approaches the texts with an objective, critical eye, through a lensthat sees things as they are, not as he wants the materials to be. Indeed, in thisperspective, the Bible and rabbinical literature-all of Jewish literature for thatmatter-must be examined with critical care. For example, scholars over themany centuries have discerned multiple strata in the biblical materials-notheretofore observed. Lawrence Boadt in his Reading the Old Testament (p. 94)has succinctly summarized the essential character of the modern approach tostudy of the Pentateuch in this way:

Drawing on the history of how the various strata came to be, themodern Biblestudent now could discover four different authors andtheir literary styles, and he could picture clearly the different timesand places from which each source came. This analysis shows thedevelopment inwhich the early and mostly oral traditions of Israelwere gradually written down and preserved in four documents, andthen combined to make one Pentateuch. This is the famousdocumentary thesis known as JEDP (letters for each of the four

5

sources) and accepted by the vast majority of modern students ofscripture.

I would include among these modern students of scripture another mentor ofmine, the late Professor Nahum Sarna of Brandeis University, whose writings,commentaries and translations of scripture are standard works in the world ofJewish biblical scholarship, the bulk of which accept the documentary thesis as agiven.

In contrast to the perspective on the Pentateuch, the traditional students ofthe Bible (I can't help but depict them as "literalists") refuse to see these fivebooks as they are, but rather as they want them to be, that is, that they are intheir entirety the product of Moses at Mount Sinai, the work of this single authorduring one specific time in history.

The elements described here constitute the modern approach to scriptureand rabbinic literature: the unearthing of historical information, the new view ofthe complexity of biblical writings, the consequences of the external contexts inwhich Jews have lived, the emphasis on objectivity. These do, indeed, render themodern approach different from the traditional study of texts by the pious Jew ofthe past, and the pious today in many quarters. For, as we have seen, in additionto his study as a way to link to community, the traditional learner has anotherbasic motive in mind as he approaches the texts: how does the God of Israel, the"Ribona Shel Olam," the Master of the universe, want me to live? For him thesetexts communicate ultimate truth-truth about God, about the world, aboutwhat God wants of His people. Questions about historical reliability, aboutoutside cultural, political and economic influences, about technical accuracy, arebasically irrelevant to his overriding religious objectives. However, for theadherent of the modern approach to study, these objective factors remain quiterelevant and unavoidably compelling.

To summarize: The modern mode of study is far more objective than thetraditional mode generally and specifically with regard to scripture. It seeks tosee the Jewish experience and its literature in the context of the larger societies inwhich these have functioned, revealing in the process a good deal about life,culture, religion and institutions of the non-Jewish world.

Can the Twain Meet?

Here, then, we have two apparently conflicting objectives in the study ofJudaic texts-that of the traditional and modern, what I have called "learning"and "reading." The question now is: can the two modes of exploration be seen asin unity with each other so that they, in fact, can strengthen rather than weakeneach other? Indeed, can they be seen as in harmony rather than conflict, or mustthey remain in permanent tension?

A fascinating story about Yosef Yerushalmi, the late professor of Jewishhistory at Columbia University (a classmate of mine in the Rabbinical School at

6

the Jewish Theological Seminary) appeared in the New York Jewish Week inAugust 2011. The story reveals the unresolved tension between Yerushalmi'smodern mode of historical studies, which focuses on the objective facts of theJewish experience versus the traditional view of Jewish history as influenced bythe hand of Providence. After his passing, a heretofore unpublished and unknownnovel which Yerushalmi wrote was published in The New Yorker magazine. Itconcerned a character simply called Ravitch who is a scholar of Jewish historywith a restless spirit who yearns for peace of mind. The article goes on to tellabout Yerushalmi's famous book, Zakhor, which was about the tension betweenJewish memory and Jewish history-and more broadly between the ancient,spiritual and religious life versus the modern, secular and academic one.

"Many Jews today are in search of a past," Yerushalmi wrote, but they do notwant the past that is offered by the historian."

Yerushalmi who taught at Harvard and Columbia, was never quite sure hewanted the history he had to offer either. He was religiously observant in hisyouth and later ordained at the Jewish Theological Seminary, but thenabandoned the life of the pulpit for one of the professor's podium. The dilemmahe faced was similar to Ravitch's: Should he embrace the emotional pull of faith,or should he dismiss it and risk finding only comfort in the facts?

"I think his life conflict was unresolved," Ophra, Yerushalmi's wife, said ofthe Ravitch character. And how about her husband, Yosef? Was the conflictunresolved too? "Perhaps," she ventured: "Like everyone, we all carryunresolved conflictswithin us."

And then there is Professor James Kugel, the long-time professor of Hebrewliterature at Harvard University, and later at Bar Ilan University and a practicingOrthodox Jew. A highly creative and prominent scholar of biblical literature,Kugel in his How to Read the Bible describes both the traditional and modernmodes of scriptural study, notes their fundamental differences, indicates thatneither can be considered invalid and ignored, yet makes no effort to integratethe two in a way they might amplify and reinforce each other. To the contrary, heasserts in the closing pages of his book: "My own view is that modern biblicalscholarship and traditional Judaism are, and must always be completelyirreconcilable."

A Faithful Modernist cannot and need not accept the unresolved tensionbetween the traditional and modern modes of study as exemplified by ProfessorYerushalmi, nor can he accept the two modes as irreconcilable, as indicated byProfessor Kugel. He agrees with Benjamin Sommer, a Hebrew Bibleprofessor atthe Jewish Theological Seminary who in the Jewish Quarterly Review equatesJames Kugel's view on the irreconcilability of traditional Judaism and biblicalscholarship to sticking one's head in the sand: "A Jew whose intellect believesthat biblical criticism makes valid claims, but whose religious self pretendsotherwise...is rendering God service that is fragmented and defective."

7

Both Professors Yerushalmi and Kugel represent those immersed in modernhistorical and biblical scholarly endeavor, yet are also persons of religiouscommitment rooted in the tradition. They see conflict between the two realms,but leave it unresolved. By way of contrast, here I search for an affirmingrelationship between the two realms. I believe that the two can not only be seenas in harmony with each other, but can and do strengthen one another. Thishopefullywill lead us to a unified modality embodied in what I have been callingthe Faithful Modernist.

What Does the Modern Study Approach Contribute to Harmony Withthe Traditional Approach?

First,faith and basic traditional affirmations are often enhanced by moderncritical thinking. When, for example, a contemporary bible researcher detectsmultiple strata in the texts of the Pentateuch that reveal the hands of differentwriters and different eras in biblical life, we cannot conclude that thePentateuchal texts are the product of a single hand and their provenance in butone period of time and clime. However, for the Faithful Modernist, what theseresearches do show is that the Divine speaks to humanity in all eras of Jewishlife and to the many faithful in their own period and place who are attuned toGod's will. Nahum Sarna, the late professor of biblical studies at BrandeisUniversity who always personified for me what I have been calling the FaithfulModernist, articulated this perspective this way:

A misapprehension, shared alike by the followers of "pietism" and"scientism," was that the recognition of the non-unitary origin ofthe Pentateuch must be destructive of faith and inimical to religion.But is it not to circumscribe the power of God in a mostextraordinary manner to assume that the Divine can only workeffectively through the medium of a single document, but notthrough four? Surely God can as well unfold His revelation insuccessivestages as in a singlemoment in time:

Indeed, genuine faith and basic traditional affirmations about the Divine role inhuman life are thereby enhanced rather than diminished.

This is what is meant by the notion that the God of Israel is the God ofhistory. The Faithful Modernist sees God as having manifested His presence andrevealed His will not only in early biblical (Pentateuchal) times, but in theprophetic era as well-in His communication with the great prophets, Isaiah,Jeremiah and Ezekiel,Amos, Hosea and Micah.Yet more: His presence and willwere manifest when, earlier, God guided His people during the Exodus fromEgypt-and into the Promised Land, when He went into exile with Israel inBabylonia,when He led His people back to the land in the Persian era, when Hegirded the strength of the Maccabeesduring the revolt against the Syrian Greeks,when He was with His people during the traumatic period of Roman oppression...

.. See Understanding Genesis: The World a/the Bible in the Light a/History, p. xxiv.

8

and on and on through the vicissitudes of the Jewish experience down throughthe centuries-including our own when His spiritual presence is seen to be in themidst of the people teaching, sustaining and inspiring them as they delve into theoral law (Talmud and Midrash and Responsa) in lively,continuing conversation.

Indeed, the tenacity of the Jew in the face of constant hostility, his survival,and the triumph of his spirit have their source in the faith that God guides andredeems. The texts of the Jewish people explored by the modern scholar tell usthat Moses' experience with the God of Israel at Mount Sinai was but a crucialbeginning.

In this and similar ways, modern critical thinkers will not be put off orcavalierly dismissed in the name of tradition. Faith is not allowed to bejettisoned by blindness to the findings of the critical mind, which is one of God'smarvelous endowments on His human children. Abraham Ibn Ezra (1089-1167)was a prominent Spanish Jewish Bible commentator during the Middle Ages.His work occupies every standard edition of the Hebrew Bible. A guidingprinciple he employs in interpreting scripture was that the human intellect is amalach Hashem, "an angel sent by God" and he further emphasizes that "he whobelieves in something that contradicts the sechel [that is, common sense, reason,logic] abuses the finest gift God has given him" (see Proverbs 20:17-21). Ibn Ezraechoed his famous Muslim predecessor, theologian and jurist, Abu Hamid al-Ghazali (1058-1111), who emphasized that 10 barah Hashem b'riali yotairnihbedet min hasechel, "God has created nothing more distinguished thanreason" (translated from the Arabic into Hebrew by Rabbi Avraham bar Hasdai[ca. 1230 CE], an enthusiastic scholarly partisan of MosesMaimonides who was achampion of rational thought in the pursuit of religious studies). So, too, ThomasAquinas (1224-1274), the preeminent spokesman of the Catholic tradition, whosaw reason in harmony with faith. Indeed, reason, Aquinas emphasized, was adivine gift highly to be cherished, for it buttresses religious faith rather thanundermines it. (Aquinas' notion of a Prime Mover/Causeless Causedemonstrated his reasoned thinking about the existence of God.)

And so, to turn again to the issue of the critical method of biblical studies,note the following example, amongst many others, of the consequence of suchstudy.

When the book of Leviticus ordains in great detail the content andmethodology of the sacrificial system to be employed in the Temple, it is clearlydepicting the mode of worship of the Israelites after having settled in thepromised land. Indeed, the Temple built by King Solomon (ca 920 BCE) tookplace well over 300 years after the period of Moses (ca. 1300 BCE). Yet, the Biblein Leviticus asserts that the various specific details about the sacrificial systemwere ordained by Moses himself, which was, as noted, centuries before theTemple was in existence and the Israelite settlement in the land. Such a claim isin religious fundamentalist circles justified by a faith assertion, to wit: Mosescould depict specific rules and regulations via prophecy, in this case meaning thecapacity to predict events and regulations centuries into the future.

9

A Faithful Modernist, wedded as he is to rational thinking, avoids such aclaim as a matter of principle, which clearly is at odds with common sense, withreason, with logic. Rather, he embraces the views of Ibn Ezra, al-Ghazali andThomas Aquinas, who do not allow statements of scripture to contradict God'sfinest gift to man-his critical mind. What the Faithful Modernist does do in thisrepresentative instance is something strongly affirmative religiously. WhatMoses did was to hear the Transcendent bid him to establish a basic principle offaith, "Youshall love the Lord your God with all your heart and soul and might(Deuteronomy 6:S)-ul'ovdo, and "worship the Lord with all your heart andsoul" (Deuteronomy. 11:13). This basic principle-the obligation to worship, tothank and praise and beseech, to express dependence on a Power-not-human, onthe One and only God of the universe-was to be implemented by the later statedleaders-priests of Israel. They were to employ the category of the sacrificialsystem, which was the prevailing mode of worship in their own time and clime.And further, this principle-the obligation to worship "the Lord your God"exclusively-was to be implemented by the religious leaders of subsequentgenerations when the sacrificial system no longer obtained, again in accordancewith the altered ways of worship in those later times. And so forth into moderntimes.

Such has been the pattern throughout Jewish religious history. Indeed, thesocial and economic, political and religious conditions change in the course oflife's flow, but not the core principles established by Moses in the period ofMount Sinai. For it was there and at that monumental setting that the obligatoryprinciple of worship of the One God of Israel was established, along with theother fundamental principles of the faith. What subsequent generations havedone was to adapt the principles Moses planted for humanity and do so in theirown spirit in order to make the teachings relevant to the spiritual needs of thosegenerations. Indeed, these subsequent adaptations were always seen as implicitin Moses teaching at the Sinai period.

Jonathan Sacks in the Koren Rosh Hashana Machzor, Page xii, hasarticulated the notion established in this story in striking modern terms:

In the earliest stages of an embryo, when a fetus is still no more than asmall bundle of cells, already it contains the genome, the long string ofDNA,from which the child and eventually the adult will emerge. Thegenetic structure that will shape the person it becomes is there fromthe beginning. So it is with Judaism. "Bible, Mishna, Talmud andAggada,even what a senior disciple is destined to teach in the presenceof his master, was already stated to Moses at Sinai (see TalmudYerushalmi, Pe'ah 2:4).

The Faithful Modernist does not need a literalist reading of scripture toestablish for him abiding religious obligation.

A practical result of this approach emerges: highly educated contemporaryJews who are "religious" by inclination yet have been profoundly influenced by

10

modern/secular ways of learning, and are irrevocably committed to these ways,are persuaded to connect to the traditional fold.Why? Because, again, traditionalreligious affirmation and modern critical research have been found to be of onemind: God's pervasive presence in the world and in the ongoing life of Hispeople-and acceptance of His principle requirements on the part of that people.The two realms are positively connected rather than being viewed at odds witheach other.

A second contribution of modern critical thinkers to harmony with thetraditional approach to learning: the historical data they have unearthedprovides new understanding of the phenomenon of adaptation and change thathave contributed to Jewish sturdiness and survival through the ages. Certaincurrently accepted-and rejected-beliefs and practices have, in fact, beenmolded and remolded as a result of the impact of new findings and perspectivesdeveloped in different periods of time and in various locales in the world. Thushistorical studies reveal the adaptive nature of Judaism, its patterns of thoughtand action understood as responses to changing environmental conditions.Absent such ability to change and adapt to new times and climes, the Jewishenterprise would have become fossilized.

A personal experience might serve as an illustration of this phenomenon.While serving as a Rabbi in Pittsburgh, I once visited my alma mater, the JewishTheological Seminary in New York, and was invited to a gathering of seminaryfaculty and their wives at the home of Rabbi David Weiss-Halivni-a leadingscholar of rabbinics and another seminary classmate of mine. They wanted tohear about my various initiatives at my synagogue they had heard about, and Iwas eager to hear their take on some of the religious issues of the day.

The fivefacultywivespresent were the following:

• APh.D. in library science • Aprominent landscape artist

• An editor of children's books • A Ph.D. in psychology

• APh.D. in biology

I asked the group what they thought about women serving in the rabbinate,being counted to a minyan alongwith the men, receivingan aliya at services.

All five women were adamantly opposed, citing the traditional ban on thesematters. When I pointed out that they, along with many women doctors andlawyers and college professors are active in the "outside" world, meet and workwith professional men and women all the time, they each responded: thereligious public domain is different. When I asked why it was different, theirresponse was that the religious realm has a different set of criteria on thesematters as established by the traditional Halakha, which is authoritative on thematter.

11

These truly accomplished professional women have not integrated theirgeneral and religious public domains-a puzzling dichotomy between the secularand religious ways of thinking and acting. This is a phenomenon, I believe, thatcould use some research and analysis.

Of course, these women, along with their traditional male counterparts, havenot had the last word on these matters insofar as the Faithful Modernist isconcerned. The latter points to the fundamental principle long since establishedin scripture: "AndGod created man in His image, in the image of God He createdhim; male andfemale He created them" (Genesis 1:27). As such, both have equalstatus in God's eyes as well as in human eyes. Hence the twentieth and twenty-first centuries, in contrast to preceding centuries, have come to the realizationthat the place of women in general and in the religious realm in particular haschanged. The Faithful Modernist thus applies the biblical principle of humanequality to women along with men in the public domain heretoforeimpermissible. Indeed, he viewssuch as clearly implicit in that sacred dictum.

Third, modern studies in comparative religion have revealed strikingsimilarities in sacred phenomena to that of the traditional notion. Examples ofthis are sacred places considered to be of supreme importance due to experienceswith the deity, mountains considered to be the abode of the deity, the view thatone's own country is at the center of the earth, and law codes such as theBabylonian Code of Hammurabi (ca. 1880 BCE) which preceded in time thebiblical codes and which have striking parallels to them.

In my book The Land of Israel: Its Theological Dimensions (p. 180 ff), Idetail an aspect of this phenomenon. In a report titled "Their Gods ResidedThere," published in the Los Angeles Times, we're told that more than 20 Incasites on mountaintops in the Peruvian Andes were discovered during a four-yearperiod by Johan Reinhard, an American anthropologist and mountain climber.The Incas who labored up these mountains, some higher than 20,000 feet, wereworshipping the gods that they believed dwelled in and on those mountains.

At least 50 such mountaintops with Inca ruins, remains and artifactsindicative of active worship of the gods were found on peaks from southern Peruto central Chile. Reinhard documented this mountain deity worship on thefamous Machu Picchu. Other archaeologists report Kenyans who still practicetribal religion and revere Mount Kenyaas the home of their god.

To be sure, the content and implications of what occurred on thesemountains, of one's country's centrality, of the non-Israelite codes aresignificantly different than the parallel biblical phenomena. Indeed, the extra-biblical notions have been refashioned in accordance with Israelite principles.However, the phenomena in which the contents are embedded are oftenstrikingly similar.

For the Modernist this perspective opens up new vistas that softenethnocentricity and invites a more inclusive approach. It offers place for others

12

to share in the enterprise of religious development by suggesting that multipleideational and ritual possibilities abound in the realm of religion. It inducestraditional religionists to be open to the possibility that others-both within andwithout the Jewish fold-are also in possession of some "truth." When thisperspective enters into the religious mindset of the traditionalists, the door ofmutuality is jarred open so that "readers" and "learners" can see a way to valuetheir different modes of study and a path found to appreciate the validity of otherperceptions of the religious condition.

Fourth, recent psychological studies have shown that a world withoutfaith,a godless world, would be one of incessant conflict and chaos; it would be barrenand lifeless, lacking in color and texture, an empty wasteland that would notsustain its inhabitants and in which they would feel lost. These studies haveimagined life without God as entailing fear, sadness, interpersonal isolation andless meaning and hope. This finding on the part of modern scholars has made apositive contribution to religion as such. Though this shows that people oftenbelieve out of psychic need rather than out of genuine religious conviction, it doescontribute, in its way, to strengthening the religious cause.

Fifth, the modern study of biblical, rabbinic and subsequent Jewishliterature presents another distinct result: its vast array of study aids,translations, commentaries, dictionaries, encyclopedias, critical editions of texts,histories, comparative religion studies et al., constitute a veritable treasure trovefor all who wish to gain entry into the magnificent Jewish world of communityand spirituality.

Finally, and especially significant, it is here where the Modernist andTraditionalist meet in harmony on the basics of the religious enterprise. Whenthe Faithful Modernist internalizes and acts in the spirit of those two words, thatis, he is truly "faithful" and authentically "modern," and the two elements areintegrated in his outlook on the religious enterprise of our time ...when thisoccurs, he does not cavalierly negate the inner religious quest so evident in thetraditional texts of the faith. To the contrary, he uses the critical, historical andother elements of modern study to elucidate the richness and personal relevanceof the classic Jewish texts. He brings to bear the techniques and fruits ofcontemporary scholarship to illumine the depth and spiritual significance of thisliterature for the contemporary seeker.

The eminent Jewish historian Yosef Yerushalmi has unearthed a fascinatingdocument that illustrates what a modern critical scholar can and does contributeto the traditional religious perspective on the character of the Jewish enterprisethrough the corridors of history. Yerushalmi himself does not say so, but his nowstoried document demonstrates, I believe, that historical data illuminestraditional religiosity. Here is his finding depicted on pages 90-91 in his bookZakhor:

In the dark year of 1942, a book was published in fascist Rome by a GermanJesuit scholar, Peter Browe, titled The Mission to the Jews in the Middle Ages

13

and the Popes. The last chapter deals with the manifest failure of the Christianmission to achieve its total goal. Some Jews had been converted everywhere, inSpain many, but medieval Jewry as a whole had not succumbed. This chapter,which Browe called "The Reasons For the Meager Success of the Mission to theJews," is divided into three parts. The first is "The Reasons From the ChristianSide"-namely, what was there in the Christian approach that precluded a greatersuccess? The second is "The Reasons From the Jewish Side"-to wit, what wasthere about the Jews that enabled them to resist?

At this point, Browe's hitherto consistent empiricism leaves him stranded.Having exhausted all the "reasons" he could find, Browe felt that thephenomenon was not fully comprehensible. And so, the last part of his chapter isentitled "The Reasons From God's Side." Perhaps, in the end, God Himself didnot want Judaism to be obliterated. In conclusion Browe wrote: "This entirehistory of the Jewish people, its life and wandering throughout the centuries, thepreservation of its race and peoplehood amid innumerable struggles andpersecutions, cannot be explained out of purely political and sociologicalconsiderations ...Only out of faith can we in some wayunderstand the solution ...."

Conclusion

And so, we now come full circle. For the Faithful Modernist, an affirmingcombination between the two modes of study-"reading" and "learning"-is hismodus operandi. He affirms the traditional purpose of study which seeksreligious guidance and affirmations. At the same time, he affirms the modernmethod and purpose of study which unearths striking and pertinent new data,and values objectivity. Both are indispensable and, combined, they can and doproduce an amplified and enriched "music of Jewish learning" of compelling andenduring value for all Jews who delve into the textual stuff of Judaism.

Jack Shechter is formerly Associate Professor of Biblical Studies and Dean ofContinuing Education at the University of Judaism (now the American JewishUniversity). He earned the Ph.D. in Bible at the University of Pittsburgh and isauthor of The Land of Israel: Its Theological Dimensions and Journey of aRabbi: Vision and Strategies For the Revitalization of Jewish Life, bothpublished by the University Press ofAmerica.

14

•

,

,