Jewish Life Summer 1977 by Jewish Action

j K

’:

$2 . 50

tmÊÈÊÊKm^ ~ î

^ g è S t v> . î

■ifefll8b*.^r f « •

UlBft i TAMMUZ 5737/SUMMER 1977

Comments /Our New President and Israel /Heroes of the Soviet Union /An Open Letter to the President of Israel /The Staten Island Ferry Why Gamble With Synagogue Standards /A halachic discussion of gambling and the synagogue. Books: The Teaching Machines of the Future /Some recent books of Jewi^b interest and concern. ;

Should Orthodox Jews Fight for Legislating Morals /A Symposium Henry Pereira Mendes: Architect of the Union of Orthodox Congregations of America /An objective look at American Orthodoxy a century ago. Letters to the Editor / On “Modern Orthodoxy“ / On T he Drive to the Sea /on Freud's “Pleasure Principle.“

A publication of the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America

Yaakov Jacobs Associate Editor: Yaakov Kornreich Editor Emeritus: Saul Bernstein Editorial Board David Cohen Samuel Cohen J. David Bleich Judith Bleich Lawrence A. Kobrin David Kranzler Shimon Wincelberg Chairman, Publications Committee: Lawrence A. Kobrin Published by UNION OF ORTHODOX JEWISH CONGREGATIONS OF AMERICA President HAROLD M. JACOBS Chairman of the Board: JOSEPH KARASICK Honorary Chairman of the Board: SAMUEL C. FEUERSTEIN Honorary Presidents: MOSES I. FEUERSTEIN MAX J. ETRA DR. SAMUEL NIRENSTEIN Senior Vice Presidents: DR. BERNARD LANDER DAVID POLITI SAMUEL L. BRENNGLASS REUBEN E. GROSS BERNARD W. LEVMORE Vice Presidents! NATHAN K. GROSS JULIUS BERMAN MARVIN HERSKOWITZ SHELDON RUDOFF FRED EHRMAN SOLOMON T. SCHARF Treasurer: GEORGE B. FALK Honorary Treasurer: MARVIN HOCHBAUM Secretary: MICHAEL C. WIMPFHEIMER Financial Secretary DAVID FUND National Associate Vice Presidents: NORMAN L. BRODY HERMAN HERSKOVIC AL H. THOMAS EMANUEL REICH EARL KORCHAK Vice Presidents for Regions: GILBERT CUMMINS Atlantic Seabord HY BERGEL Central Canada DONALD BUTLER Central East MAX RICHLER Eastern Canada DAVID LUCHINS Metropolitan New York JOSEPH MACY New England JOSEPH M. RUSSAK Northeast SANFORD DEUTCH Pacific Coast JOSEPH NELKIN Southeast MARCUS ROSENBERG Southeast RABBI PINCHAS STOLPER Executive Vice President

Mrs. Linore Ward and Family have established the Jess Ward Memorial Jewish Life Fund to assure the continued publication o f Jewish Life in its expanded format and to continue the dissemination of Torah ideology to English-speaking Jewry throughout the world. The Fund is a tribute to the sacred memory o f Jess Ward who in his lifetime gave of his talents and his means to his fellow Jews. We pray that these pages shall be a worthy memorial to his committed life.

TAMMUZ 5737/SUMMER 1977

Contents 2 Comments: Our New President and Israel/Heroes of the Soviet Union/ An Open Letter to Ephraim Katzir/The Staten Island Ferry "Due to technical reasons..." 11 Why Gamblé With Synagogue Standards/J. David Bleich 14 Books: The Teaching Machines of the Future/or: Some Recent Books of Jewish Interest/Yaakov Jacobs 21

A Symposium/Should Orthodox Jews Fight for Legislating Morals? A Rabbi Say No!/Stanley B. Wexler A Layman Says Yes!/Reuven E. Gross

31 A Cosmopolitan Way of Life/Jacob Marateck (retold by Anita and Shimon Wincelberg) 39

Henry Pereira Mendes: Architect of the Union of Orthodox Congregations of America (Part I)/Eugene Markowitz

49 "Who Is a Jew?"—in Detroit, Chicago, St. Louis—and all Points West Gershon Shusterman 54

Letters to the Editor/On "Modem Orthodoxy"/ On "The Drive to the Sea"/On Freud's Pleasure Principle." Note to subscribers and librarians

This issue follows the issue of Fall 1976. There was no Winter or Spring issue. All subscriptions will be extended. Future issues will be numbered to avoid confu sion. Because of the small staff producing Jewish Life, contributors are asked to make inquiry before submitting manuscripts, and to be patient in waiting for a response. ©Copyright 1977 by the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America. Material from JEWISH LIFE, including illustrations, may not be reproduced except by written permission from this magazine following written request. JEWISH LIFE is published quarterly. Subscription: 1 year — $10.00,2 years — $18.00,3 years — $25.00. Foreign: Add $.50 per year. Single copy $2.50, Editorial & Publication Office: 116 E. 27th St., New York, N.Y. 11016. Second Class Postage Paid New York, N.Y., and at additional mailing offices.

Our New President and Israel

As an editor I have always tried to be conscious of our Canadian and other non-American readers. But the w ords"Our new President" slipped by my censor. Yet in a sense, James Earl Carter or Jimmy Carter as he prefers to be called — will exercise power bver hundreds of millions of people outside the borders of the United States. So be it: We have a new President. As Americans and citizens of the world we look forward to a presidency which will offer succor to people who suffer all sorts of depri vation in our own borders and throughout the world. As Jews, we are anxious that the new presidency will be concerned with the well-being of Israel and our brothers and sisters living in its beseiged borders. The old bugaboo about "dual loyalty" no longer haunts most Jews, yet some Jews were troubled by the campaign of both presidential candidates directing themselves to Jewish voters on the single-issue of Israel. Israel's represen tatives have argued that Israel's military posture in the Middle East has been so beneficial to American diplomatic and defense needs as to make the Jewish state a valued ally whose security is inextricably bound up with the security of the United States. We believe this to be so and we welcome expressions of agreement on this thesis from President Carter. But, there is a deeper meaning to the unity of purpose of Israel and the United States, one which those of us who believe in the Divine right of the Jewish People to Eretz Yisrael must constantly recall. The world needs Israel and the Jewish People. The world needs the light of Torah? which grows stronger each passing day in Israel's yeshivos and religious com munities, even as that nation is governed by a secular government which is sensitive to religious belief only in proportion to its need to muster a workable political coalition. (These words were written long before the election in appear that the new government will indeed besensitive to reli coalition considerations.) Shortly after Mr. Carter took office, Shimon Peres, then Israel's Minis ter of Defence and now acting Prime Minister, said that Israel feels secure in having a president of the United States who believes in the Biblical prophesies concerning Israel's role in the "end of days." It is a source of joy for religious Americans that a man occupies the White House whose religious convictions go beyond the polite deference to religion which has been typical of recent presidents. But the assurance that Carter believes leaves us yet yearning that Shimon Peres will yet one day believe; that even before the end of days, a coalition will govern the State of Israel that deals with the eternal values and the destiny of Judaism beyond the need for the few votes it can thus muster in coalition with religious parties. A representative of the State of Israel recently asked me why Jewish Life has not had more to say on Israeli political matters. A good question — perhaps others have also wondered about it. The answer is somewhat personal. As a youngster growing up in the thirties and the forties I was caught up in the Zionist fervor, and on public occasions I sang Hatikvah sublimating the knowledge that it was written by a secular Jew and contained no reference to the Creator or His Law. On

the Fifth Day of Iyar in 1948,1 shared the joy and excitement of the entire Jewish People — with only some misgivings at the thought of a secular government ruling over Eretz Yisrael. As I grew older my misgivings grew, and I stopped singing Hatikvah, with no diminishing of my love for Eretz Yisrael. The last two decades have demonstrated to Zionist leaders that a Jewish State has not solved what used to be called "The Jewish Problem." We are still hated — and for the same reasons. What has changed is that hatred for the Jew has been crystalized and it is now directed at the State of Israel — as well as at the People of Israel. And I have changed too with this realization. When I stand with my fellow Jews at a public occasion as Hatikvah is being sung, I still don't sing — but I cry, and each attack against the State, whether with arms or with rhetoric (Hitler taught us how easily rhetoric can lead to killing) makes me sadder. But as a believing Jew I feel no need for Jewish Life to rehash for our readers the policy statements which come in the mail each day from a dozen different "Jewish leaders" and "Jewish organizations" even when I agree with them. We need some new thinking. As Orthodox Jews have become vocal on the American scene, speaking out for our rights and enunciating Torah positions, so must we apply our new eloquence—-and strength—to responding to our own ambivilence to the State of Israel. Some of my friends who have gone to live in Eretz Yisrael tell me that there they are now less troubled by ideological conflict. But the ambivi lence remains here and there, as witness the weird varieties of observance, or non-observance, of the Fifth of Iyar within Orthodox Jewish life. I trust that our readers will pardon this very personal excursion, while sharing with us their feelings on the heart of the matter.

Heroes of the Soviet Union The Soviet government bestows upon citizens they would honor most the designation, "Hero of the Soviet Union." If awards and honors had not been cheapened in Jewish life today, it is precisely this designation we should bestow upon every Jew who has grown up in the Soviet Union, under a regime hostile to all religion and more hostile still to Judaism, and has yet survived as a believing Jew. They — may their tribe increase — are the true heroes of the Soviet Union. Yet those Soviet Jews who have come to these shores have not been all that warmly made welcome. We have much to learn from our Israeli brothers, much more hard-pressed for funds than we are, who have accepted the burdens of their Soviet brothers without the murmuring words we hear in the American Jewish community. It has been charged that the Soviet immigrants are not like our immigrant fathers and grand fathers who found refuge in America: "They expect much more." Of course they are different. Immigrants in the nineteenth and early twen tieth centuries came here for the most part without marketable skills, and were forced to work in sweat-shops and live in slums. The world has changed; America has changed; New York City has changed. There are no sweat-shops for Soviet immigrants to work in, and who would want 3

them to live in slums. Many of them are highly-skilled and professionally trained. Should they be expected to work at menial tasks? HIAS and NYANA, who have served Jews coming to these shores in the past, have been slow to re-tool for the new kind of immigrant. As a result, dozens of grass-root groups have sprung up in those areas of Metropolitan New York where our Soviet brothers have settled. It is instructive that most of these groups are composed of Orthodox Jews and they have been espe cially sensitive to the religious needs of Soviet Jews who can so easily fall prey to assimilation and the blatant overtures of missionary groups. Yet more must be done to help these Soviet Jews, and American Jewry dare not plead poverty in rejecting its obligation. It is sad that Jews, who have ever been the victims of being labeled, should now respond to Soviet Jews who choose to come to America rather than Israel by pinning upon them the yellow-badge marked "Noshrim." (The label is obviously a logical result of having labeled Israeli immigrants in the United States "Yordim," but of that another time. Suf fice it to note that when Israel's security is threatened many of these "Yordim" find their way to the airport more quickly than their critics. Some that I know were at the Suez Canal two days after Yom Kippur in 1973.) It is a sign of moral decay that some were ready to place sanctions against these Jews — even to attempt to keep them in the Soviet Union. It is to our credit that this position was rejected by American Jewry. The question should never have been raised. What utter hypocrisy for those who shouted "Let My People Go!" based on simple morality and the right of people to freely move to whatever country will admit them, to propose that the slogan be amended: "Let My People Go— where we tell them they may go."

An Open Letter to Ephraim Katzir Mr. President: Having been President of Israel for a number of years now has surely affirmed for you what you previously knew: we Jews are a strange people, and a good people. One strange thing about us which I used to think was peculiar to the Galut is that we tend to ape the society in which we live, and we often adopt forms and mores already discarded by the gentiles. It strikes me that the sports craze in Israel today is of that nature. Your people in Israel seem to be outdoing their counterparts in Western society: the recent response to the basketball victory is a ready example. Your Prime Minister Yitzchak Rabin had to wait till the end of the game before announcing his resignation, and then few heard him because most of your people were already in the streets shouting themselves hoarse and honking their horns. But maybe your people need sports. Maybe they are tired of war games and have a need to relax with games that shed no blood. Let's leave that to the social scientists and the moralists. You are a physical scientist and I

am just a journalist — surely they understand the phenomenon better. But Mr. President, there is one thing I trust you will agree no one needs: and that is a monument to Chillul Shabbos; a structure made of stone and steel where Jews can gather on Shabbos in the Holy City of Jerusalem to desecrate the Shabbos together. A "monument to Chilul Shabbos?", you may ask. — How else can we characterize your friend Mayor Teddy Kolleck's plan to build a sports stadium in Sanhedria Murkevet to by-pass the restriction against the use of the existing stadium at the Hebrew University on Shabbos. I don't know who the people were who made that stipulation in con tributing the funds to build that stadium. I don't know their motives, but we must all salute them. They knew the sanctity of the Holy City and did not want to have any part in its desecration. They knew that the sanctity of Shabbos and the sanctity of Yerushalayim are one. They knew that Jewish Peoplehood could not be restored by trampling these sanctities. And now, in a time of serious moral crisis for your people in Israel, people are being asked to contribute millions of dollars to build a sports stadium in Yerusahalayim which will not only destroy the Shabbos rest of inhabit ants of the area, but will proclaim to the world that our struggle to recog nize Jerusalem as the spiritual heart of Israel and its capital is a sham. Mr. President: in your message to the Jewish People on the 29th An niversary of the founding of the State of Israel you offered a prayer "for the peace of Jerusalem, for peace in the Land and in the world." I put it to you, Mr. President, that there can be no "peace of Jerusalem," of the Land, or indeed of the world if this planned abomination becomes a reality. Teddy Kolleck's Sports Stadium will proclaim to the world Israel's re ligious and spiritual bankruptcy. It is more than an affront to Torah Jews in Israel. By undermining our claim to Yerushalayim — and indeed to the Land — based on the Divine Mandate, the proposed stadium is a threat to the "peace of Jerusalem" and the security of Israel.

The Staten Island Ferry In these days when symbol and reality are often confused, the "Staten Island Ferry" can sound like a new rock-group rather than what it really is: A huge boat which shuttles thousands of people each day between Staten Island and its smaller neighbor to the North: Manhattan Island. To many New Yorkers — and visitors to the City — the Ferry conjures up memories of Lag B'Omer picnics; sad trips to the Island's cemeteries; images of Yeshiva boy and girl dates. Today it is the last refuge for proper courting. But Staten Island has a new reality: within the confines of New York City's boroughs it is the last refuge for urban Jewry. When we moved to Staten Island close to two decades ago people raised their eyebrows and said: "Staten Island? — it's so far away." And then one day a group of men with hard hats came in little boats and laid bricks, poured mortar, put up steel beams, and twisted wire cables, and suddenly Staten Island

wasn't "far away." About fifteen years ago I went out on a limb and predicted that in five years there would be a Young Israel branch on Staten Island, and in ten years a shtibel. And so it came to pass. Heady with success I began to make more prophecies only to be reminded by some friends of the Tal mudic dictum that following the destruction of the Bais Ha'Mikdosh the gift of prophecy was given over to fools. The challenge made my homiletical juices flow: What did the Chachomim mean? I found the answer in the classic tale of "The Emperor's Clothes," where it took a child to see the simple truth. I had been urging several national Orthodox organizations to gain a foothold on Staten Island, to avoid the repitition of what had happened in Long Island which became — for awhile at least & a bastion of Conservative Judaism. But these groups had other priorities and re fused to read the writing on the wall. But the little people, rank-and-file Orthodox people set up a bridgehead in the Willowbrook area and the rest is history. Perhaps this is what the Chachamim meant: Our leaders who should be prophesying are blinded to reality and the simple people whose vision is unobstructed by international and cosmic issues know what has to be done. But it's hardly too late. Orthodox energies can still be brought to bear productively on Staten Island.

"Due to technical reasons. . . " We missed our Winter and Spring issues. We hope you missed them too. We refuse to take refuge in the time-worn ^ and often dishonest — catch-phrase that it was "due to technical reasons." Hardly technical: we ran out of money. Paradoxically at a time when our subscription rolls are growing, we were unable to produce the magazine. We appreciate the patience of some subscribers, and understand the lack of patience of others — even those who asked for refunds. We recently had a letter from a student on a university campus who wrote that his copy of Jewish Life had worn out from passing through so many hands and we sent him a replacement. We appear to be having an impact on the campuses, yet paradoxically, while missionaries from the "Moonies"tothe peripateticMission to the Jews have placed a price on the head of every young Jew perhaps running into hundreds of thousands of dollars, Jewish Life should be unable to publish for want of a small fraction of the bounty placed on a single Jewish soul! Some have suggested we lower our standards and thereby lower the cost of production. This we will not do. The average traditional Jew today reads The New York Times, Time or Newsweek, and some even read the Wall Street Journal, The New Republic, and the Saturday Review. We see no reason why a traditional publication should not at least strive for — if not always achieve — the standards we expect in our secular reading. But: we need your help. If you are one of those readers who has had a kind word to say about Jewish Life or if you are one who has com plimented us by disagreeing with us, we feel you owe us your help. If each of you solicits five or ten subscriptions, or gives a similar number of

gift subscriptions, we can avoid the pain of missing issues. It's as simple as that. Help us and we'll take care of the "technical" aspects of produc ing Jewish Life.

In This Issue In "WhyGamble With Synagogue drsRabbi David Bleich turns his tan S halachic skills to a pressing question with broad implications for the moral and ethical climate of the American Synagogue. What should be the position of Orthodox Jews in the face of continuous breakdown of morals in our society? Specifically, should we, as one part of the question, support legislation intended to stem the tide of immoral ity that is engulfing us? We put this question to Rabbi Wexler and he sent us his response. With his permission we asked to comment on Rabbi Wexler's paper. The result is the exchange which appears in this issue. We warmly invite our readers' participation in this vital debate. Anita and Shimon Wineelberg again treat us to a selection — "A Cosmopoli tan Way of Life”—from The Samurai of Vishogrod — The Notebooks of Jacob Marateck (Mrs. Wincelberg's late father.) One of the difficulties in understanding what is happening in American Orthodoxy is the absence of a clear picture of what things were like in the early stages of American communal life. Dr. Eugene Henry Pereira Mendes: Architect of the Union of the Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America, at least partially fills that need. It originally appeared in American Jewish Historical Quarterly, a scholarly journal, but deserves a wider audi ence. While Jewish Life is published by UOJC, the scholarly detachment of the author of this essay should dispel any notion that it appears here as a "puff" piece. Marshall Sklare, the distinguished scholar of American Judaism, has re cently written—of which more in our next issue—that Orthodoxy today sets the tone for American Jewish religious life. In that light, Dr. Mar kowitz essay is an excellent back-drop for Dr. Sklare's thesis. Who is a Jew? is most often thought of as a problem confined to the State of Israel. Rabbi Gershon Shusterman, who is himself in the front-lines of the battle against assimilation in America, outlines the problem of Who is a Jew? - in Detroit, Chicago, St. Louis—and All Points West, and he proposes some solutions. We are pleased to have in this issue an expanded letters department, although the volume of such response is still disappointingly small. There are some fierce responses to Rabbi Shlomo Riskin's, Where Modern Or thodoxy is At—and Where is it Going, which appeared in our issue of Spring 1976. Rabbi Riskin has read the letters and prefers to rest his case. The editor has been less gracious. Dr. Troffkin's observations on Freud's "ple asure principle,'' and our journalistic standards are a welcome critique. Dr. Berkovits' reply speaks for itself. One of our objectives in editing 7

Jewish Life is to make it a responsible forum for divergent opinion within American Orthodoxy. People sometimes tell me, "I like your magazine," and quickly add "but I don't always agree with what it says." I too don't always agree, and to paraphrase one of America's last living wits, who said he wouldn't join a club that would accept him as a member, I wouldn't want anybody reading Jewish Life who always agrees with us. Some of our readers were very critical of William Aron's article A Disap pearing Community: Jewish Life on New York's Lower East Side, insisting the Lower East Side is very much alive. Perhaps it's like the cup of water that is either half full or half empty. But not a single person took the time to put their disagreement in writing. So this is an invitation for an article — or even a letter — on "The Lower East Side: A Vibrant Jewish Commun ity."

In forthcoming issues: Crisis in Orthodoxy: The Ethical Paradox Crisis in Orthodoxy: Its Relevance for Jewish Thought Reb Naftali Amsterdam: A Biographical Sketch Henry Pereira Mendes: Architect of the Union of Orthodox Congregations of America (Part II) The Jewish Professional as Public Official-»—Any Relevance? Towards a United Orthodox Council Does Zionism Have a Future? The Orthodox Synagogue: Challenges of the Inner City and Suburbia Hashkofo/ A new feature presenting new transla tions from classical Jewish sources, with comment relating them to contemporary Jewish concerns Letters to the Editor/from...you! Comments on: Israel's New Government /“ Orthodox TriumphalisnT7.Ro//mg Stone: Orthodoxy as an “Al ternate Life Style"

J. David Bleich

Why Gamble With Synagogue Standards? Legalization of gambling under sponsorship of religious and charitable organizations in the State of New York has resulted in a mad and unbe coming scramble by a number of synagogues not only to organize Las Vegas nights and the like but to advertise these activities as widely as possible. It is ironic that precisely those institutions which are charged with moral leadership are now by legislative fiat granted a monopoly on an activity of very dubious morality. Gambling as a means of fund-raising is, at the very minimum, odious, no matter how worthy the beneficiary cause may be. Admittedly, other modes of fund-raising currently in vogue leave much to be desired. Ostentatious banquets, embarrassingly exaggerated tes timonials, gimmickry and pressure tactics have not done very much to enhance our communal image — even if they have succeeded in bringing in dollars. But, certainly, no one can seriously argue that such activities be abandoned in favor of gambling and games of chance. What benefit is there in merely substituting one evil for another? What advantage is gained in casting off one tasteless garb only to don another which is, if anything, less appealing? Must our institutional life always sink to the lowest common denominator? Our Sages put it aptly: "Ma'alin b'Kodesh V'ain Moridin;" rather than lowering standards we must ever strive for spiritual enhancement. I do not view playing games of chance as the greatest aveirah by any means. There are many other matters in which the Synagogue is remiss which are more serious and which it is far more painful to witness. It is the approach and the attitude underlying the sponsorship of gambling which are disturbing. Are our policies to be determined only on the basis of pragmatic consideration? Are we ready to proclaim that the end does justify the means? Shall we seek to regain the alienated by exemplifying the authentic values of Judaism or shall we imbibe yet another draught of alien culture? Is the fact that something is good enough for the State and even good enough for the neighborhood church a sign that it is good enough for Jews who are bidden to "make unto Me a sanctuary that I may dwell in their midst"? While my objection to gambling is not necessarily predicated upon considerations oiHalachah there is one point which should be made. The distinction often drawn between professional and social gambling is rooted in the Talmudic discussion (Sanhedrin 24b) dealing with the dis qualification of witnesses appearing before a Bais Din. Largely ignored is the position of those authorities (Rabbenu Nissim ad locum, Rambam, Hilchos G'zelah 6:10 and Teshuvos Rivash, no. 432) who aver that non professional gambling while not a cause for disqualification of a witness is nevertheless sinful. The transgression is defined as avak g'zelah (a trace of robbery), a category of theft classified as such by virtue of rabbinic decree. Gambling profits are regarded as dishonest gains because the transfer of

Ostentatious banquets, embarrasingly exaggerated testimonials, gimmickry and pressure tactics have not done very much tp enhance our communal image - even if they have succeeded in bringing in dollars.

Are our policies to be determined only on the basis of pragmatic consideration? Are we ready to proclaim that the end does justify the means? Shall we seek to regain the alienated by exemplifying the authentic values of Judaism or shall we imbibe yet another draught of alien culture?

Rabbi Bleich is a frequent con tributor to Jewish Life and is the author of the recently published Contemporary Halakhic Problems (KtavlYeshiva University Press, New York, 1977). A briefer version of this article appeared in Shema. 11

Gambling profits are regarded as dishonest gains because the transfer of funds from loser to winner is not at all wholehearted: the loser enters into the gambling compact only in anticipation of winning.

That - at times - some individuals succumbed to temptation in no way changes the posture of Judaism with regard to gambling. Judaism has always regarded games of chance not only as unproductive but as harbingers of depravity and has always sought to discourage gambling in all its guises.

Jewish education is a matter of pikuach nefesh (saving life) for the Jewish community. Hence, even if I cannot endorse their decision I can sympathize with those who feel compelled to resort to extreme measures in order to keep the doors of educational institutions open. What is really to be deplored is the lack of awareness on the part of our community of the crucial role of educaiton as a sine qua non of Jewish survival.

funds from loser to winner is not at all wholehearted: the loser enters into the gambling compact only in anticipation of winning. Indeed, it is for this reason that all authorities are in agreement that gambling debts are not legally collectable through a Bait Din. Those scho lars who do not consider gambling to be a form of theft do not in any way endorse non-professional gambling; they merely feel that no technical in fraction is involved. It cannot be established that occasional gambling was ever veiwed as an acceptable form of recreation. Parenthetically, there is a fundamental difference between games of chance and raffles or lotteries, particularly those which are sponsored on behalf of charitable causes. The former are played with every expectation of winning; the latter are really no more than contributions to a worthy cause accompanied by a some what unworthy hope of reaping an ealy reward for the performance of a good deed. Regardless of the halachic permissibility of occasional or social gambl ing, it is perfectly obvious that Judaism never looked with favor upon this practice. Not all which is not forbidden is laudatory. Jews always viewed gambling with a definite odium. There are recorded instances of Jewish communities which promulgated stringent ordinances prohibiting all forms of gambling. Obscure references here or there to communities or even religious functionaries who engaged in games of chance are of no more than passing historical interest. That— at times — some individuals succumbed to temptation in no way changes the posture of Judaism with regard to gambling. Judaism has always regarded games of chance not only as unproductive but as harbingers of depravity and has always sought to discourage gambling in all its guises. Furthermore, we should be neither naive nor dishonest with ourselves. A Las Vegas night — or bingo for that matter — as part of our institutional life, is decidedly not a form of harmless recreation. Recent articles in The New York Times only confirm what we have long known: these games are frequented to a large extent by compulsive players to whom such activity is hardly an innocent pastime. The games themselves are often held at locations far away from the synagogue or institution supported by their proceeds. They are often designed to attract members of underprivileged groups and to prey upon the weaknesses of those who can ill afford the losses they incur. Of course, it is no secret that many Day Schools and Yeshivos rely heavily on bingo to cover a significant portion of their deficits. Although I find this deplorable I cannot find it within myself to condemn outrightly the principals and educators who find it necessary to resort to these methods in order to keep their institutions solvent. Jewish education is a matter of pikuach nefesh (saving life) for the Jewish community. Hence, even if I cannot endorse their decision I can sympathize with those who feel compelled to resort to extreme measures in order to keep the doors of educational institutions open. What is really to be deplored is the lack of awareness on the part of our community of the crucial role of education as a sine qua non of Jewish survival. It is this lack of concern which has created the sorry situation in the first place. There is, however, a crucial difference between a synagogue and a school. I doubt that there is any synagogue which cannot survive without

gambling. In our affluent society is there really any congregation whose members cannot raise the necessary funds in a dignified and decorous manner? The congregation may not be able to erect a majestic edifice or to provide the many frilly which we have come to expect but these are not necessary concommitants of even the richest program of prayer and Torah study. Should Federations and Welfare Funds one day come to recognize that the paramount obligation of Jewish philanthropy is to Jewish education the same may then be said of Yeshivos and Day Schools as well. In any event educators must be called upon to exercise restraint. While all forms of gambling may be objectionable, there is clearly a difference between bingo and casino-like games of chance. In the case of the latter, the blatant nature of the gambling, the atmosphere in which such gambl ing is conducted and the "types" it attracts all combine to create a repug nance which cannot be overcome. The Jewish community simply cannot afford to allow any of its representative institutions to engage in such distasteful activity. The Synagogue does have a role in Jewish life. It exists to promote the realization and fulfillment of Jewish values in the lives of its congregants. While there may be disagreement with regard to precisely what does or does not constitute a "Jewish value," I question whether any thoughful person would classify gambling as such. No doubt some recreational activities may in themselves foster Jewish values, but only if the form of recreation is itself unobjectionable. Las Vegas nights, card parties, and the like simply do not pass muster when examined in the crucible of Jewish values. Rambam (Hikchos G'zelah 6:11) describes gambling as a frivolous activity which brings no benefit to the world and admonishes man to engage only in "matters of wisdom and the welfare of society." The realization of this ideal may be beyond attainment for ordinary mortals, but it is to such heights that the Synagogue must teach us to aspire. The Synagogue is a symbol of all the values and teachings Judaism seeks to impart to its adherents. A synagogue that engages in any activity not consistent with those values and teachings lays itself open to the charge of hypocrisy. A charge which even on pragmatic grounds we can ill afford. Let us not gamble our image away!

While there may he disagreement with regard to precisely what does or does not constitute a "Jewish value, " I question whether any thoughtful person would classify gambling as such.

The Synagogue is a symbol of all the values and teachings Judaism seeks to impart to its adherents. A synagogue that engages in any activity not consistent with those values and teachings lays itself open to the charge of hypocrisy.

Yaakov Jacobs

Books: The Teaching Machines of the Future/or: Some Recent Books of Jewish Interest

And - inevitably - some day some genius will develop a new method for imprinting words on sheets of paper and binding them between two boards, and man will once again have portable learning machines. Who knows? - they might even nostalgically call them "books."

Human progress unfolds in a circle more often than in a straight line. Take reading for example. Few people owned books until the develops ment of moveable type made feasible a book you could carry with you and read wherever you took it. In our day paperbacks seemed to be the ulti mate in the portable "learning machine." But people have long been talking about "software" and "hardware" and there may soon come a time when "curling up with a good book" may require the use of mic rofilm and heavy electronic equipment. Soon the reader may have to go to the book. And — inevitably — some day some genius will develop a new method for imprinting words on sheets of paper and binding them bei tween two boards, and man will once again have portable learning machines. Who knows? — they might even nostalgically call them "books." But meanwhile the publishing industry is still alive and well, though the big firms have either gone public, or been acquired by corpo rate conglomerates -— or both. One such conglomerate can own a large book publishing firm and a major league baseball team without any leak^ age between the disparate cultural phenomenon. (The producers of the film "King Kong" have published a book of the same name through their publishing affiliate — a gruesome prospect for the future.) One axiom of the publishing industry is that Jews are the largest group of book-buyers. As a result their buying habits are considered in the merchandising of books, and while Jews buy all sorts of books, there is often a sprinkling of so-called "Jewish titles" with varying degrees of real Jewish interest and degrees of accuracy in their Jewish scholarship rang ing from close approximations to truth, to utter distortion. We will in these pages periodically survey these books, not as literary creations — though at times we will do that too — but from the perspec^ tive of how they treat Judaism and Jewish values. We will also examine the growing production of Jewish religious works written and produced by Orthodox writers and publishers in response to an ever-growing audi ence for such works. The Coffee-Table Book

Rabbi Jacobs is Director to the Office of Special Projects in New York City's Human Resources Administration, and editor of Jewish Life. 14

Literary people have spoken disparagingly about the "coffee-table book" which is placed in one's living room — on the coffee-table — to impress visitors, but rarely read. Next Year in Jerusalem (A Studio Book/Viking Press, New York: 1976, 352 pp., $35) is heavy enough to be fitted with legs and used itself as a coffee-table. But the joke ends there: there are essays in the book that make rewarding reading. Part of the problem is the title: it is not another picture book about Israel. As Douglas Villiers, the book's^ British editor, explains in the Foreword, he asked "a group of authors,

critics, and commentators on Jewish life to write a series of articles on what interested them particularly about the Jew in this century.. .Each was given the basic theme: why, after prolonged periods of relative obscurity and quiesence, the impact of Jewish intellectualism and original ity should have surfaced so dramatically at this time rather than at any other." Mr. Villiers rejects what he calls "the more formal rabbinic defini tion, which states that a Jew is a child of a Jewish mother or a convert to Judaism." His definition includes those Jews who rejected the faith of their fathers and even those who were baptized by their parents to protect them from antisemitism. So be it: but it is the "more formal rabbinic definition" (in a sense rejected also by the State of Israel) which is the key to Jewish survival, and which alone can guarantee future Jewish creativ ity. The less formal definition makes for pages and pages of text and photographs devoted to such Jewish luminaries as Fanny Brice and Sandy Koufax, Sarah Bernhardt, Bobby Fischer and Sophie Tucker, and a host of other stars of stage, screen and radio — and of course television.

As Douglas Villiers, the book's British editor, explains in the Foreword, he asked "a group of authors, critics, and commentators on Jewish life to write a series of articles on what interested them particularly about the Jew in this century.. .Each was given the basic theme: Why, after prolonged periods of relative obscurity and quiesence, the impact of Jewish intellectualism and originality should have surfaced so dramatically at this time rather than at any other."

The "Meta-Rabbis" Of all the contributions to the volume, the most serious essay and the one which goes to the heart of the question which the editor poses, is "Some 'Meta-Rabbis' " by George Steiner. Steiner was bom in Paris to GermanJewish parents and brought to America as a youngster. In the wider world Steiner is acknowledged to be one of the most brilliant critics working today. His criticism and insights into language and life are deeply Jewish in nature, in spite of an apparent lack of a traditional Jewish background. In our smaller Jewish world he is known for his opposition to many of the treasured cliches of the Jewish establishment. Steiner, as the title of his essay suggests, concerns himself with what happened when Jews, who had thrown all of their intellectual capacity into the study of Torah, are suddenly unleashed into a secular world. "A millennium of ingathering, of intellectual and psychological com pression, was broken open, almost explosively, in a few decades. The space of habit, the customs of feeling and self-definition, which separated Marx and Heine from their grandparents were literally vast. Baptism was often no more than an external, in certain respects trivial, symptom of an abrupt emancipation and entry into the gentile world. Yet however dramatic the break — and in many individual lives it provoked bitter, nearly schizophrenic instabilities — the emancipated Jew carried with him powerful and characteristic burdens or privileges of inheritance. It is these, I suggest/ that determine, though often in an indirect, perhaps parodistic way, the direction and quality of the Jewish intellectual achievement after 1850." Confined in the Jewish ghetto, the Jew found his fulfillment, so Steiner argues, in the "transmission of Torah and Talmud.. .The written word and the ever-proliferating but vital context of commentary and critique that surrounded the canonic statement concentrated the essential ener gies of Jewish being." In this context Jews lived very human lives, but for them: "Thought was action; critique was creation. Exiled from the mate rial temple, the Jewish community gathered and survived in the inde structible house of words."

Confined in the Jewish ghetto, the Jew found his fulfillment, so Steiner argues, in the "transmission of Torah and Talmud. . . The written word and the ever-proliferating but vital context of commentary and critique that surrounded the canonic statement concentrated the essential energies of Jewish being." In this context Jews lived very human lives, but for them: "Thought was action; critique was creation. Exiled from the material temple, the Jewish community gathered and survived in the indestructible house of words." 15

What Steiner seems to be saying, in essence, is that those Jews who walked out of the ghetto leaving their Gemmorahs behind, could not leave behind their intellectual and critical techniques which they then brought to bear on secular learning, with devastating effects. Karl Marx, far removed from Yiddishkeit, became a benk-q'vetcher, sitting on the wooden benches of the reading room of the British Museum and scribbling glosses which turned the world up-side-down, even though he never took part in even a political demonstration, no less a revolution.

Steiner's words m anifest an understanding of Jewish thought categories that are often not available to Jewish thinkers writing even in a more Jewish context. Witness the following statement on the develop ment of Halacha. "Under the stress of altering historical conditions, Jewish law and prac tice had to be expanded, qualified, adapted via an incessant process of 'translation' and interpretative metamorphosis. The intelligence of the Diaspora evolved by virtue of a constant interplay, often sophistic and agonizingly overingenious, between the catonic propositions of eternal truths and the imperative requirement of local, circumstantial application. But the vision remained a totality. To the believing Jew no aspect of life — economic, social, psychological — could be immune from the reach and pertinence of the Law. At whatever price of mental agility, the novelties and challenges of a changing world had to be comprehended within the bounds of a unified, unalterably coherent vision. What is more: the new had in some way to be seen as foretold, as logically consequent on the rubrics of the past. Like the ghetto itself, Judaism, however physically confined, was a systematic unity, an organic whole giving a universal valuation to individual life and event, or it was nothing." Steiner's language indicates some scholarly detachment from the pro cess he is describing, but he states the case fairly and lucidly. What Steiner seems to be saying, in essence, is that those Jews who walked out of the ghetto leaving their Gemmorahs behind, could not leave behind their intellectual and critical techniques which they then brought to bear on secular learning, with devastating effects. Karl Marx, far removed from Yiddishkeit, became a benk-q'vetcher, sitting on the wooden benches of the reading room of the British Museum and scribbl ing glosses which turned the world up-side-down, even though he never took part in even a political demonstration, no less a revolution. Sigmund Freud, who teased his wife for bentching lecht every Friday night, found the tools for his psycho-analytical discoveries in the Jewish insight that "true meaning lies far below the surface of discourse and text, but it can be teased out, in part at least, by assiduous decipherment." "The same view," Steiner continues, "underlies the constant scrutiny, the reinterpretative commentary on and analytic paraphrase of the law in the rabbinic practice and in the daily personal existence of the observant Jew ." Steiner goes on to examine other great thinkers who have shaken the foundations of twentieth-century thinking in other areas, based on the inversion of their Jewishness. One would like to say that George Steiner's "Some 'Meta-Rabbis' " justifies buying the book, but its 35-dollar pricetag is not easy to blink at. One wonders too how many people — includ ing those who get it as a gift — will read Steiner or some of the other significant essays. But surely the publisher would be well advised to reprint Steiner's essay for a broader audience. Reading about the "MetaRabbis" it becomes apparent that Steiner himself is the "Meta-Rabbi" par excellence, with this difference: he seems to be willing to confront the words and texts that the others completely rejected. With his mind and his vast reading, what a rabbi he would have made!

The Jewish Book Annual While the Jewish Book Annual (Jewish Book Council of the National Jewish Welfare Board, Volume 34, $7.00) is a periodical with a secular outlook, it has great value for any Jew who wants to keep in touch with the Jewish book. One would have to search through dozens of publisher's catalogues and listings to find a complete list of Jewish works in Hebrew, Yiddish, and English published during the past year; which is to say one would have had to do (probably imperfectly) what the JBA's bibliog raphers have done so well. The volume offers literary essays in three languages, few having any specific religious interest. The essay on "America's Pioneer Prayer Books" brings to mind that American Or thodoxy has yet to produce a Siddur for use by Jews who daven every day that is distinctly American and meets the needs of the times in which we live. A. Alan Steinbach's essay "O n the Art of Translation" is disappoint ingly unoriginal, though it is good that Jewish readers be reminded from time to time of the importance of good translation, of which more later. It is intriguing to notice that the 21-page listing of "American Hebrew Books," consists almost entirely of religious texts, some original, most reprints, and many of the reprints being classic Chassidic texts. Jewish Publishing in America, by Charles A. Madison (Sanhedrin Press/ New York, 294 pp./$11.95) pretends to be, as its subtitle would have it, a study of "The impact of Jewish writing on American culture." It isn't that for two reasons: first because the subject could not be treated in so slim a volume; and secondly — because it isn't. But it does work as a catalogue of Jewish publishing activity in the past, and Jewish publishing in the present. Isaac Bashevis Singer, when he takes questions after one of his lectures, tells his audience that if he cannot answer the question asked, he will answer a question that was not asked. Madison's book answers lots of questions, but not those suggested in its title. There are informative essays on "Early Publishing by and about Jews," on "The Jewish Publica tion Society," on "Other Organizational Publishers," and on "Commer cial Publishers," but very little about their impact on American culture — or on Jewish culture, for that matter. The chapters on Yiddish literature in America — especially the one on its "efflorescence," are adequate. But the author makes no attempt to deal with the enigma that while Yiddish is being taught in American universities, the only major source of Yiddishreading Jews is the traditional, and particularly the Chassidic yeshivos; that few Yiddish books are stocked in Jewish book stores; and that the only Yiddish book store in New York City (perhaps the only one North of Buenos Aires) is located on the fourth floor of a dingy converted town house on Manhattan's Upper East Side which houses a half dozen of the surviving Yiddish "Kultur" organizations. Lest the reader misun derstand, this writer has found a place in his heart — if not in his mind — for Yiddish writers and Yiddish literature. Religious Jews may one day realize that the major repository of that period of Jewish history when Yiddish was spoken by most Jews, is the works of the Yiddish writers who in varying measures turned their backs on the Jewish faith. Even the average young yeshiva bochur today — not to speak of the average American Jew — has little understanding of what life was like in the

It is intriguing to notice that the 21-page listing of "American Hebrew Books," consists almost entirely of religious texts, some original, most reprints, and many of the reprints being classic Chassidic texts.

The chapters on Yiddish literature in America - especially the one on its "efflorescence," are adequate. But the author makes no attempt to deal with the enigma that while Yiddish is being taught in American universities, the only major source of Yiddish-reading Jews is the traditional, and particularly the Chassidic yeshivos; that few Yiddish books are stocked in Jewish book stores; and that the only Yiddish book store in New York City (perhaps the only one North of Buenos Aires) is located on the fourth floor of a dingy converted town house on Manhattan's Upper East Side which houses a half dozen of the surviving Yiddish "Kultur" organizations.

The cocky Israeli attitude which negates Yiddish and East-European Jewry is beginning to mellow, and the Hebrew University (strange that its founders did not choose to call it "Jewish'') now boasts a Department of Yiddish, and is publishing "Yiddish Classics." The recent World Conference on Yiddish and Yiddish culture signaled the end of the war between Hebrew and Yiddish. But the traditional Jew who saw Yiddish always as "Mame-Loshon" and Hebrew as Loshon Ha'Kodesh, never felt the need to choose between his two parents.

While of course the original words were written by real live people, the "spin-offs" (an ugly expression we should confine to computerology) are, in effect, books composed by machines. And they have the flavor and the look of mechanical productions.

Shtetel. We may one day find ourselves scurrying to Yiddish literature to discover the richness of Shtetel life without which a vibrant period of Jewish history is a closed book. The cocky Israeli attitude which negates Yiddish and East-European Jewry is beginning to mellow, and the Heb rew University (strange that its founders did not choose to call it "Jewish") now boasts a Department of Yiddish, and is publishing "Yid dish Classics." The recent World Conference on Yiddish and Yiddish culture signaled the end of the war between Hebrew and Yiddish. But the traditional Jew who saw Yiddish always as "Mame-Loshon" and Hebrew as Loshon Ha'Kodesh, never felt the need to choose between the two. Madison's essay on "Contemporary Jewish Periodicals" is more like an annotated listing: again a valuable resource, but not a serious evaluation. This writer was disturbed to see Orthodoxy's The Jewish Observer and Jewish Life disposed of in two paragraphs, and Tradition in one paragraph. Jewish Publishing in America has a place on the bibliographer's shelf, but "the impact of Jewish writing on American culture" is a book that has yet to be written. The new Encyclopedia Judaica published by Keter in Israel a number of years ago has been adequately reviewed and discussed. Suffice it to say here that the cognoscenti still favor the German version which served as both model and inspiration for the new one. The German version I own, half-leather bound volumes A to L (L being the last volume published prior to the advent of Hitler) stands for me as a mute monument to German Jewish scholarship. The Keter edition was produced by miles of computer tape in the most modern technological fashion. But what do you do with miles of such tape after you have told it to make an encyc lopedia? If you are the resourceful people at Keter you tell it to make more books, and this they have done. Selecting various subjects deemed by Keter editors to have commercial possibilities, they simply let the compu ter loose and drained from it all that the massive volumes had to say on the given subject. While of course the original words were written by real live people, the "spin-offs" (an ugly expression we should confine to computerology) are, in effect, books composed by machines. And they have the flavor and the look of mechanical productions. Take for example The Jews of the United States, published by Quadrangle/The New York Times Book Company (which bought the Western Hemisphere rights from Keter) one of a series called "The New York Times Library of Jewish Knowledge." While it appears to be an original work on the subject, a note on the dust-jacket politely admits that it is "largely based on the material contained in the Encyclopedia Judaica . . . " and it reads not like a book, but like what it is: a compilation of encyclopedia entries. Biblical Archaeology is another in the series. Here the editors put it more delicately: "The resources of the recently published Encyclopedia Judaica have been at the disposal of the editors and writers." In the General Introduction to Jewish Philosophers (Bloch Publishing Company, New York bought this one from Keter) we are told: "The material in this book is based for the most part on entries that appeared in the Encyclopedia Judaica." The Bible and Civilization by Gabriel Sivan (Quadrangle/The New York Times Book Company, New York) is more of a hybrid: the author was

responsible for writing or editing much of the original entries on his subject in the daic.In his Foreword he writes: "I have drawn on the Ju wealth of information.. .in the new Encyclopedia Judaica. Some of which passed through my hands during the five years I served on the editorial board. . .however, liberal use has been made of other authoritative sources and I have also utilized research work of my own, including articles published in the encyclopedia or elsewhere.” Kabbalah,by the well-known scholar Gershom Scholem (Quadrangle/ The New York Times Book Company) is a "spin-off” of a different color. Scholem wrote virtually all the entries on Kabbalah for the encyclopedia, and according to the Publisher's Note they "have been revised and reedited by Professor Scholem for this volume." All of this is not to say that these computer-produced volumes are without value. They cover their respective areas well, and make valuable reference resources — almost like . .w ell. . .like an encyclopedia. But But there is something there is something frightening about computer-produced books. In a frightening about book as we have known it until now the reader is dealing with a person computer-produced books. In a book as we have known it until who addresses you through the page. The writer's objective is to do more now the reader is dealing with a than just transfer data from one mind to another —- he wants to confront person who addresses you you. One simply does not get that feeling from the computer-produced through the page. The writer's page. It is somewhat akin to leaving a message with your friend's answer- objective is to do more than just transfer data from one mind to ing machine. You know it's his voice speaking to you and he will ulti another - he wants to confront mately hear your voice, but the medium jars the message. you. One simply does not get that [INe ve run out of space, but not out of books. The pile to be considered has feeling from the computer-produced page. grown larger. A magnificentboxed volume, Hebrew Ethicals Wills (Jewish Publication Society) and a three-volume boxed translation of Mimekor Yisrael (Indiana University Press) stare me in the face, a written by Orthodox rabbis and scholars, and some reprints and translations of which I hope to write in the next issue.)

Attention Librarians! We will send a free sample copy of Jewish Life to any university, public, or Jew ish communal library if you agree to display it on ! your periodical shelf. Send us a note on your letterhead and we'U send you your free sample copy with information on special library rates. Write to Jew ish Life/Library Service/116 East 27th Street/New York, N ew York/11016 19

Stanley B. Wexler

Should Orthodox Jews Fight For Legislating Morals? A Rabbi Says No! The last vestiges of state legislation which vainly attempt to regulate personal moral behavior are being rapidly swept away. Substantial parts of the moralistic legal structure have already been eradicated while other sections have been amended. The remaining laws have been consigned to limbo and are rarely, if ever, enforced. The areas of personal behavior that have been directly affected by these changes include abortion, adultery, contraception, homosexuality, divorce, obscenity and, to a lesser degree, prostitution. Catholic authorities view these trends with mounting concern. To gether with many other Americans, they see in them omens of the ulti mate moral deterioration of the society. They have resisted the liberaliza tion of the moral laws with fierce determination, but their failures have been as consistent as their zeal. They have even imposed their convictions on the 1976 presidential campaign, much to the disconcertment of the candidates. Christian fundamentalists have always sought to enlist Jewish support for their moralistic battles. Their hope was to create the impression that resistance to change was widespread and not limited to a single denomi nation. In all of the moral areas, but especially on the question of abor tion, the temptation for devout Jews to join in opposition to reform has been very strong. Some Jewish organizations and Rabbinic groups have indeed taken public positions in favor of retaining existing laws and against the proposed changes. Such actions are certainly a reflection of the deeply held moral convic tions of Jews on these issues. Despite these profound feelings, however, I believe that it is unwise for Jewish groups to advocate actively for state endorsement and codification of Jewish moral values in the body of con temporary law. I feel even more strongly that Jews should not lead the efforts to remove the moral strictures presently in force. The wisest and safest course for Jewish groups to follow would be to remain discreetly on the sidelines while such issues are being fought out.

Christian fundamentalists have always sought to enlist Jewish support for their moralistic battles. Their hope was to create the impression that resistance to change was widespread and not limited to a single denomination. In all of the moral areas, but especially on the question of abortion, the temptation for devout Jews to join in opposition to reform has been very strong.

Who Would Benefit from Moral Laws? As far as Torah-true Jews are concerned, the benefits of state moral laws are minimal. Pious Jews do not acquire their moral imperatives from state law. Their sense of propriety is derived from the teachings of the Torah and the Shulchan Aruch. Long before they become familiar with laws of the land, they are steeped in the unique sanctity which emerges from the concept that man was created in the image of G-d. The decadence of the

Stanley Wexler is Rabbi of Young Israel of Westchester and Adjunct Professor of Sociology Westchester Community College and Touro College

As far as this writer understands the Halacha, the obligation to impose moral laws upon non-Jews exists only in a Jewish state or in areas under Jewish sovereignty or political control. Not for a moment would the author hesitate in demanding such policies for the State of Isral and the areas within the Biblical boundries which were liberated by Israel from Arab control in 1967.

environment more often serves to strengthen rather than weaken the determination of religious Jews to conform to their own standards of holiness. When we eliminate traditional Jews, we are left with non-observant Jews or non-Jews as the possible beneficiaries of state moral legislation. I feel that it would be wrong — albeit for diverse reasons — for Orthodox groups to push the state to regulate the personal moral behavior of either of these two categories. Since this position involves complex halachic ramifications, some explanation is in order. Considering the situation of the non-Jew first, we are aware that the Halacha requires a certain degree of moral conformity by the non-Jew. It is in fact possible that in the matter of abortion the Halacha sets a harsher standard for the non-Jew than it does for the Jew. Beyond any doubt, thé prohibition on arayos (immorality) is included by the Talmud in the list of the seven commandments binding upon Noachites. There is a vital differ ence, however, between merely preaching desired moral behavior to those outside of the faith or making it imperative upon Jews to seek to impose such moral restraints upon others. As far as this writer understands the Halacha, the obligation to impose moral laws upon non-Jews exists only in a Jewish state or in areas under Jewish sovereignty or political control. Not for a moment would the au thor hesitate in demanding such policies for the State of Israel and the areas within the Biblical boundries which were liberated by Israel from Arab control in 1967. In these areas, the commandment of imposition is applicable and it is within the practical ability and power of the State to achieve this end. The Issue of Abortion We may easily apply the general arguments stated above to the specific issue of abortion. I feel that it would be a mistake for Jewish groups to openly endorse the Catholic drive to secure a constitutional amendment barring abortion, as it was wrong to pressure the presidential candidates on this issue. I offer the following reasons for this position. • Jews would be placing themselves on the wrong side of American public opinion, legislative judgement and judicial interpretation of con stitutional liberties. Abortion reform was passed in New York and other states and subsequently approved by a 7-2 margin on the Supreme Court. • In the mind of the average Jew, an impression would be left that Jews and Catholics share the same views on abortion. This is hot true. Catholic opposition is far more basic and allows for fewer exceptions in extenuating circumstances. • Jews would appear apathetic to the fate of more than 100 Jewish women who annually would lose their lives in botched illegal abor tions. These victims were not in large number promiscuous teen-agers. Most of the victims of illegal abortions were married housewives. • There may be a danger to Jews in the precedent of a constitutional amendment restricting personal freedom. The same procedure could later be followed in restricting behavior which is permissible to Jews as

well as that which is forbidden to them. What would Jews do if the state banned divorce (as was the case in North Carolina at one time)? What if the state raised the legal age for marriage as is the case in Communist China? Could not states establish stronger Blue-laws or Christmas holiday observance? While I do not worry about separation of church and state in the support of parochial schools, I see in moral legislation a more dangerous breach. Imposition of the will of specific church de nominations on the American people could easily endanger the religi ous freedom of American Jewry. We conclude that we will not be serving the interests of anyone by ad vocating state moral legislation. Traditional Jews who are worried about the moral behavior of other Jews, or even of their own children, should resort instead to the time-honored methods of instilling moral discipline. The best ways are still those which call for parents to set a wholesome example for children by their own behavior and by providing their chil dren with intensive Jewish training. Other important methods include encouraging children to associate With good company and participating in groups such as the National Conference of Synagogue Youth. We are not free to remove the burden of propagation of morality from our own shoulders.

We conclude that we will not be serving the interests of anyone by advocating state moral legislation. Traditional Jews who are worried about the moral behavior of other Jews, or even of their own children, should resort instead to the time-honored methods of instilling moral discipline. The best ways are still those which call for parents to set a wholesome example for children by their own behavior and by providing their children with intensive Jewish training.

Fuel for Antisemites? A different situation prevails in the Diaspora. Here the Jew is powerless to impose moral law upon the non-Jew. The best a Diaspora Jew can do is to use means available to him in the democratic process to advocate enact ment of such laws. I do not believe that the Halacha requires the Jew to use such means. Where there is no halachic imperative to take a course of action — and the action could easily endanger the safety and Security of the Jewish community — it seems best to avoid the action. We must be aware that moral issues are very hotly contested in America. To get involved in a fight between lions is foolhardy. If we advocate reform, we are caricatured as atheistic heretics. If we advocate morality we are called oppressive tyrants. Why should we provide more fuel for the antisemitic fires? One cannot give any credence to the argument that it is politically safer for Jews to live in a morally strict society than in a looser one. History has shown that antisemitic persecution is the common denominator of nonJewish societies regardless of their moral standards. We have suffered as intensely from the Arabs, who retain a high personal morality, as we did from the Greeks who lived at the opposite extreme. Religious fanaticism, which may be the source of the personal morality, may in fact add religi ous persecution to political antisemitism.

We must be aware that moral issues are very hotly contested in America. To get involved in a fight between lions is foolhardy. If we advocate reform, we are caricatured as atheistic heretics. If we advocate morality we are called oppressive tyrants.

Morality of Non-Religious Jews Having considered the issue of imposing moral laws upon non-Jews, we now turn to the question of non-observant Jews. Here there is no ques tion of the obligation of religious Jews to seek to strengthen the morality of non-religious Jews. It is a sad state of affairs, however, when we take 23

the position that it is vital for a non-observant Jew to live in a morally strict environment as opposed to a loose one. Such an argument is a grievous admission that the Torah world has no influence on the non observant Jew and must seek the help of the state in achieving the moral discipline that is lacking. If state law could really succeed in this task, it may well be worth admitting the shame of our helplessness. State law, though, is at best a broken reed upon which we xannot lean, and an understanding of the legislative process will confirm this judgement. The Legislative Process Legislation is more a follower of public opinion than a creator of it. States that have relaxed moral laws have done so in response to public pressure and existing public behavior. A very definite majority of Americans sup port abortion reform. The presidential commission on obscenity deter mined that a majority of Americans are in favor of removing all restric tions on pornography except for minors. In the light of these feelings, morality laws are ultimately doomed. Even if we could get them passed by political skill and manipulation, they would be short-lived. Such a turn of events could be disastrous for the non-observant Jew. While the laws are on the books, we would become complacent in our efforts to reach them and we would be totally unprepared when, inevita bly, the laws are repealed. Our Jewish brethren whose morality is the product only of restrictive state law would be free of moral restraints when the state laws are removed. Furthermore, even when the moral laws are in effect they are not al ways widely observed. Peer influence has greater impact on moral be havior than does the law. A non-observant Jew who has a majority of associations with people lacking in strict morality, is likely to opt for immorality regardless of existing legislation. In addition to the laws being ineffective, the imposition of such laws may intensify the alienation of non-observant Jews to Torah and religious Jewry. Such Jews do not resent our preaching^Torah morality. What they would bitterly resent is any effort on our part to sic a policeman on them. They would feel strongly about attempts to make them observe out of yirah (fear) what they do not care to observe from ahava (conviction).

Reuben E. Gross

Should Orthodox Jews Fight For Legislating Morals? A Layman Says Yes!

(With Rabbi Wexler's permission we asked Reuben Gross to react to Rabbi Wexler's position. His dissent follows.)

Rabbi Wexler, in calling upon American Jewry to retreat from its respon sibilities as Jews, Americans and human beings could not have chosen a more unfortunate example than the abortion issue. He agrees that the obligation to impose the seven mitzvos upon Noachides exists in areas under Jewish political control and states that he would not hesitate for a moment to demand such policies from the State of Israel in respect to the Biblical boundaries under its control. In the Diaspora, however, he says the Jew is powerless. The fact is that as a rabbi in the County of Westchester he can exercise more political clout than a dozen of his colleagues can exercise in Israel. On the abortion issue, in particular, the moral guidance of the rabbinate was sought, but the Orthodox rabbinate remained silent. The crucial battle that opened the gates to the abortionists was fought in New York State. The attack was stemmed until a Jewish legislator switched his vote. He acknowledged that his vote for abortion was contrary to the wishes of constituents. He declared, however, in a highly emotional speech that as a matter of con science he could not go back and face his family at the Seder if he voted against permitting abortion. This was the nail that lost the shoe, that lost the horse, that lost the rider that lost the battle against abortion. How sad that this man should have mistakenly equated the freedom of Pesach with the freedom to destroy a potential life! Another legislator, a practising Orthodox Jew from a predominantly Jewish district was unaware of halachic demands on this issue — all because that part of the rabbinate that knew the halacha failed to speak up.

The crucial battle that opened the gates to the abortionists was fought in New York State. The attack was stemmed until a Jewish legislator switched his vote. He acknow ledged that his vote for abortion was contrary to the wishes of con stituents. He declared, however, in highly emotional speech that as a matter of conscience he could not go back and face his family at the Seder if he voted against permitting abortion.

The Facts of Political Life Aside from New York and the abortion issue in particular, to speak of Jews as "powerless" is to deny the plain facts of political life in the United States. Probably no other ethnic or religious group has as much influence per vote as Jews. Whether this is so because of strategic concentration in large cities, their articulateness, or their greater readiness to vote, need not hold us. The fact is that Jews have been able to muster enormous strength in Washington in behalf of Israel and Soviet Jewry largely be cause these issues, though political in nature, were presented as moral issues. To retreat into a ghetto-like psychological shell over a pure moral issue, to cry out, "Don't get involved," when the imperatives of Torah, America, and Humanity converge sharply and point toward resistance against abortion and the consequent moral breakdown of society which it forebodes is unthinkable.

Rebuen E. Gross has been commenting on American Jewish affairs for as many decades as he has been intimately engaged in Orthodox Jewish life.

Man's Unalienable Rights The great document whose birthday we celebrate has as its underlying theme the Torah doctrine that Man is endowed by the Creator with unalienable rights '-life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

It is widely assumed that this is a proclamation of the now accepted liberal doctrine that every man and woman has a right to his life and person that can be taken from him only by due process of law in brief, that people own their bodies. In truth, it means the very opposite.

In this Bicentennial Year Jewish pulpits rang out in pride over the fact that the inscription on the Liberty Bell, "Proclaim Liberty Throughout the Land" was taken from Leviticus. More perceptive rabbis may have also noted that the great document whose birthday we celebrate has as its underlying theme the Torah doctrine that Man is endowed by the Creator with unalienable rights — life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Virtu ally none, however, researched the matter to discover exactly what Jeffer son meant when he said that life is unalienable. It is widely assumed that this is a proclamation of the now accepted liberal doctrine that every man and woman has a right to his life and person that can be taken from him only by due process of law — in brief, that people own their bodies. In truth, it means the very opposite. John Locke, from whom both the ideas and the phraseology of the Declaration was taken, explains the unaliena bility of life, thus: "No Man can, by agreement, pass over to another that which he hath not in himself, a Power over his own Life." " . . .M an.. .has not liberty to destroy himself.. .for Men being all the workmanship of one Omnipotent and infinitely wise M aker.". . . " Secular Humanism: A Fourth Religion

The terrible truth is that there is no rational basis for regarding human life as sacred. In the set of values comprehended under "rational," "sacred" does not exist. The sanc tity of life is a religious and mysti cal derived from a belief in a Creator.

If America has forsaken its basic religious roots, as Jews, we cannot escape responsibility for that change. In June, 1976, Leo Pfeffer, at a public session of the NJCRAC boasted that America now has a fourth religion, more powerful than the three recognized Biblical religions. He acknowledged that Secular Humanism is the fourth religion and like all other religions it seeks to make its principles the categorical imperatives of the society wherein it abides. Dr. Pfeffer should know. He, his American Jewish Congress, and the allied secular, liberal Jewish organizations have done more than their fair share in converting America to Neo-Paganism. The ghastly paradox is that the Hebraic roots of this country, planted by New England gentiles, were tom up by secularist Jews, while religious Jews sat by under Rabbi Wexler's banner, "Don't Get Involved." Abortion is neither the first step nor the last step of this trend. It started with freedom of speech v - a high sounding principle which translated into the real world meant "pornography"— the pollution of our moral ecology with lewdness and nudity in a competitive crescendo to the point of saturation. In our media-permeated society no one totally escapes this moral pollution. Satiety leads to perversion; over-stimulation to rapes, adultery, pre-marital and extra-marital liaisons — and a deafening cry for abortion on demand. But the matter cannot end there. The terrible truth is that there is no rational basis for regarding human life as sacred. In the set of values comprehended under "rational," "sacred" does not exist. The sanctity of life is a religious and mystical value derived from a belief in a Creator. The prohibition of abortion by Noachides is derived from Rabbi Yishma'el's unique translation of shofech dam ha'adam ba'adam as spilling

the blood of man in m a n . . . " instead of the commonly accepted transla tion "spilling the blood of man by man. . . " However it is translated, can the scruples and restraints against one kind of spilling of blood be main tained when the other is lost? The Twin Sanctities: Life and Family It is to the everlasting credit of the Catholic church that it has stood firm and faithful in the battle against lewdness and immorality. Regrettably, it seems to have forgotten the reasons for the moral laws. Orthodox Jews, too, have so identified Taharas Hamishpachah with the Mikveh as to have forgotten that that term embraces a wider set of values. All the laws governing morality, from regulating the length of a sleeve up to the Seventh Commandment, are concerned with one basic aim: To guard the integrity of the family; for families are the bricks of which civilized societies are built. The current tide of permissiveness rolls on inexorably, sweeping away in its wake the twin sanctities of life and family. Rabbi Wexler, however, would have Orthodox Jews, the sole surviving heirs of the concept of Mamleches Kohanim, bury its head in the sand and ignore the tide while there are yet allies to help roll it back. His basic reason, repeated in different ways, is that Jews may antagonize the majority of Americans whom he claims favor abortion. Again, he errs in reading the facts. The battle for abortion was basically won in the courts. The popular branches of government, the legislatures, have been conservative on this issue. The Congress lately removed abortions from the list of Medicaid subsidized services but the courts stepped in to stay this re moval. If as Rabbi Wexler claims, the majority of Americans are pro abortion then the movement for an amendment is an exercise in futility. In a world dedicated to pleasure wherein lives and potential lives are snuffed out for reasons of convenience, no one is safe. Jews being most vulnerable are the first to suffer in times of stress. It is true that Jews did suffer under Christian and Muslim dominated societies. However, the marvel is not that Jews were persecuted but that they survived. Under Islam and the Church Jews were a declassed but protected minority. Though that protection was far from fool-proof against the xenophobia of the mobs, these religions gave an appreciable measure of stability to life in societies that otherwise would have been totally lawless. In Genesis XX, 10, 11 where Avimelech asks Avraham what he saw that caused him to refer to Sarah as his sister, Avraham answered, "for I saw there is no fear of G-d in this place and they will kill me on account of my wife." Com menting thereon — a Medrash says that where there is no fear of Heaven, people are presumptively capable of any crime, including murder. The De-sanctification of Life Although there can be no question that religious differences supplied a handle to antisemitism, yet the pogroms of previous centuries were tame affairs compared to the death camps of the Secular 20th Century or, to what a future de-sanctified society may impose. Whether my reading of history is less accurate than Rabbi Wexler's

In a world dedicated to pleasure wherein lives and potential lives are snuffed out for reasons and convenience, no one is safe, Jews being most vulnerable are the first to suffer in times of stress.

Although there can be no question that religious differences supplied a handle to antisemitism, yet the pogroms of previous centuries were tame affairs compared to the death camps of the Secular 20th Century or, to what a future de-sanctified society may impose.

need not detain the reader. The verdict of Halacha is clear. Acceptance of abortion as a norm by Western society seriously circumscribes our free dom of association therein. Islam, and by reliable authority, Christianity, stand outside the classification of idolatry. A society, however, that not only tolerates but affirmatively rejects and finances violations of Noachide laws, stands on the lowest rungs of idolatry. Such a society is the peer of Sodom and the Generation of the Flood. Our freedom of association in any idolatrous society is limited. Moreover, it would seem to be the ver^ diet of Torah that observance of Noachide laws is minimal for a society's survival. Shall we be less "involved" in America's survival than Avraham Avinu was in behalf of Sodom? In brief, Orthodox Jews, sensitive to the demands of Torah as interwo ven into the American fabric and as Humanists in the religious sense, cannot fail to oppose vigorously the de-sanctification of life that inheres in abortion and the entire complex of movements that have turned the lifecreating process from kodesh to chol. Failure to "get involved" bodes grave danger to the society in which we live generally and to sheer physical survival of the Jew in particular.

In brief, Orthodox Jews, sensitive to the demands of Torah as inter woven into the American fabric and as Humanists in the religious sense, cannot fail to oppose vigor ously the de-sanctification of life that inheres in abortion and the en tire complex of movements that have turned the life-creating pro cess from kodesh to chol.

We believe Jew ish Life should be more widely read. If you agree, you can send a gift subscription to your local library, Jewish Center, or Hillel Foundation, or any other institution or facility where it will be read by large numbers of people. Or you can send us your check for ten dollars and we will select a library that has no funds to buy a subscription. No need for a coupon: just write the name of the recepient on your check, or mark it "Library Fu n d ," and send it to: Jewish Life/Library Fund/116 East 27th Street/New York, New York/10016 28

THE UOJCA POCKET CALENDAR DIARY FOR 5738/1977-1978 Handsomely Bound in Maroon Leatherette ORDER NOW —------------ for yourself _ — —-—your friends -------------_your congregation

Combines a wealth of Jewish information for every day usefulness. Contains the Jewish and secular calendars, a full daily diary section, explanations of the holidays, candle-lighting times, weekly Torah and Hoftorah readings. Yahrzeit date record, Tefillath Haderech, schedules for Sefirath Ha-omer, information on the program and structure of the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America, and a wealth of information on the UOJC and Jewish living throughout. only $3.00 per copy (individual orders under 25 copies cannot be imprinted). Inscribed congregations bulk order: $1.50 each, plus $4.00 per order (minimum order: 25 copies). ALL ORDERS MUST BE PREPAID Order from Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America 116 East 27th Street/New York, N.Y. 10016 29

Retold by Shimon and Anita Wincelberg from the Notebooks of Jacob Marateck

A Cosmopolitan Way of Life To me, the memorable thing about being thirteen was not my bar mitzvah, a celebration disposed of on a Monday morning with no more fanfare than putting on a fresh, still-creaking pair of tefillin, and tasting my first glass of brandy. It was the fact that my father finally agreed there was no future for me in our town, and allowed me to depart for Warsaw and lead my own life. Tuesday was when Tuviah the teamster carried goods and passengers to Warsaw. I'd already received my police permit to travel and could hardly wait to escape our village and its backward ways, and begin to share my brother Mordechai's liberated and cosmopolitan way of life. My brief experience in Vishogrod as a matzo-baker had already con My brief experience in Vishogrod vinced me that I could work the same hours and at the same speed as a as a matzo-baker had already grown man, and Mordechai, in his letters, had assured me he could get convinced me that I could work the same hours and at the same me a job like his, as a baker's assistant, which seemed to be a very adult speed as a grown man, and and responsible profession. Mordechai, in his letters, had It was a bitterly cold spring day and my mother, who had insisted on assured me he could get me a job travelling with me, pounded her feet and shivered beside me on Tuviah's like his, as a baker's assistant, which seemed to be a very adult crude open wagon. Harnessed to this vehicle were two moribund horses and responsible profession. who clearly had been better trained in how to fast than how to run. Friends and relatives had come to see us off and piously wished us that we might arrive in Warsaw without the loss of any fingers or toes to frostbite, as sometimes happened to people who rode with Tuviah, a man I persuaded my mother to go back who attracted small disasters the way bare feet attract splinters. home, and Tuviah obligingly Unlike my mother, I felt no discomfort whatever. Tall and proud as a stopped his horses, although you general, I sat beside her on a crate of eggs, one foot resting on a live calf would have needed a microscope and the other dangling jauntily over the side. Imagine, I thought, here I to distinguish between their walking and their standing still. am travelling to Warsaw, a place where people eat white bread in the Before climbing down, my middle of the week, and you drink hot tea with lemon and sugar even mother handed me my baggage, all of it tied up in one red when you're healthy. But just as we started to leave town, it occurred to me, if I was truly kerchief, a chunk of bread with an onion and, although I was on my going to make a career for myself in the great world, now was as good a way to a "liberated" new life, my time as any to begin standing on my own feet. I persuaded my mother to siddur and tefillin. go back home, and Tuviah obligingly stopped his horses, although you would have needed a microscope to distinguish between their walking and their standing still. Before climbing down, my mother handed me my baggage, all of it tied up in one red kerchief, a chunk of bread with an "A Cosmopolitan Way of Life" onion and, although I was on my way to a "liberated" new life, my siddur is another chapter from The Samurai of Vishogrod/The and tefillin. Notebooks of Jacob Marateck, Then she said goodbye to me with as many tears as it would have taken translated and adapted from the to dispatch one's son to fight the Turk. I, for my part, wasn't laughing Yiddish of the late Mr. Marateck either. But I comforted myself with the thought that, big as Warsaw was, I by his daughter and son-in-law. "A Trade for an Aristocrat," wouldn't let it gulp me down. from The Notebooks appeared As an afterthought, my mother gave me Mordechai's address. She in our issue of Spring 1976.

I was awakened by a scream of outrage. All around me was darkness as deep as the ninth plague. What happened? While riding through the Rysovar forest, that historic den of highwaymen and horse-thieves which the Polish police avoided like the evil eye, something very simple had occurred. With the passengers huddled for warmth into a tight, slumbering knot, and Tuviah up front, surrounded by a curtain of snow, sleeping as sweetly as any paying passenger, someone had quietly walked alongside and unharnessed the better of the two horses. His accomplices had helped push the wagon so that it never slowed until the stolen horse was far away.

On the icy road, sometimes the horse fell, sometimes Tuviah did, and sometimes both of them together. Since no one had taken any notice of me, 1 stayed on the wagon and tried to go back to sleep. But I missed the warmth and comfort of being squeezed between Leibel and Guta Yerel, both of whom were huffing and pushing behind me.

didn't know where he worked, but after all I could wait for him in his room. In the next few hours, the wagon passed through various other villages and began to fill up with passengers. One of them was Laizer, a leather dealer who, being a chossid, did not permit himself to sit next to a strange woman. And so, before I knew it, a healthy pair of hands had lifted me and put me down as a buffer between himself and Guta Yerel, the mid wife. At first I was insulted at being handled like a child. But, since Guta weight at least 250 pounds, I soon saw the benefit of being sandwiched between two such warm, well-padded bodies. To add to my comfort, a drunken Pole sat directly behind me, and soon dozed off and started to wheeze like a sick horse. The alcoholic fumes he exhaled began to warm the back of my neck, and when they reached my nose I became pleasantly drowsy, and slumped against the fat midwife as though she were a pile of soft feather bedding. I was awakened by a scream of outrage. All around me was darkness as deep as the ninth plague. What happened? While riding through the Rysovar forest, that historic den of highwaymen and horse-thieves which the Polish police avoided like the evil eye, something very simple had occured. With the passengers huddled for warmth into a tight, slumber ing knot, and Tuviah up front, surrounded by a curtain of snow, sleeping as sweetly as any paying passenger, someone had quietly walked alongside and unharnessed the better of the two horses. His accomplices had helped push the wagon so that it never slowed until the stolen horse was far away. Tuviah first noticed something was wrong, when the wagon began to stutter to a crawl. Half in his sleep, he shouted the Polish equivalent of "Giddap," and automatically brought his whip down on the healthier horse. When he realized he was beating the air, he woke up altogether, saw what they had done to him, and for a moment alternated between cursing the thieves and beating the innocent horse they had left him. His passengers too now came to life, encouraging Tuviah with cries of, "What are you waiting for?" and "Let's catch them!" But no one made a move except the unfortunate Tuviah himself, who jumped down and began to circle the wagon, and even looked under neath, as though his good horse might merely have gotten mislaid. In the end, of course, everyone had to get off and help push, while Tuviah walked in front, bitterly leading the horse even the thieves didn't want. On the icy road, sometimes the horse fell, sometimes Tuviah did, and sometimes both of them together. Since no one had taken any notice of me, I stayed on the wagon and tried to go back to sleep. But I missed the warmth and comfort of being squeezed between Leibel and Guta Yerel, both of whom were huffing and pushing behind me. At daybreak, the exhausted passengers cheered up a little. A town was visible in the distance. With a renewed burst of strength, horse and wagon were dragged and pushed until we reached the inn. Here, no one seemed the least bit surprised at our calamity, and the

good news of our arrival spread like the rumors preceding a holy man. A number of Polish peasants soon arrived with horses for sale. To their credit be it said that not one of them tried to sell us back our own horse. In the taproom of the inn, meanwhile, the men among the passengers, not counting the Pole, lost no time taking out tallis and tefillin, and even the women brought out their veiberishe siddurim and, possibly to help us keep warm, we said our prayers with such fervor, a cloud of steam soon hovered over our heads. Afterwards, we all, myself included, moved up to the counter and, after a few glasses of vodka, felt a good deal more cheerful about continu ing Our journey. First, of course, we all had to have a bite. Only I realized that, after splurging on two. glasses of shnapps, I could no longer afford a piece of bread and herring. I still had money in my pocket but, even though a glass of hot tea with sugar was only a kopek, my total capital was limited to the equivalent of maybe sixty cents, which had to last me till I got a job. Back in the wagon, where I made sure of getting my old seat between Guta Yerel and the leather-dealer, a new comedy now developed. The horse Tuviah had hired to pull us into Warsaw was strong and wellrested, while the old one, which he had inherited from his father, liked ever so often to stand in one spot and admire the scenery. As a result, when Tuviah cracked his whip, the new horse eagerly lurched forward. But, held back by its partner, it ended up with its front legs doing a futile little dance in the air, while the old horse remained nailed to the spot, dreaming its horsy dreams. Tuviah unleashed a string of deadly oaths along with his whip. But his tired old horse merely turned around with a look of reproach, as though wondering whether Tuviah could possible mean him. Bystanders soon gathered and started favoring us with the usual sort of good advice. One peasant said we should have the horse change places with the passengers. Another suggested we hang a bundle of straw under his nose and set fire to it, and the other recommendations were all on a similar high level. The end result was Tuviah had to hire another fresh horse. He declared bitterly that, after the years he'd spent training his horse to go without food, the innkeeper had spoiled it by feeding it too much. We had been due to arrive in Warsaw at noon. We got there shortly before midnight. Almost at once I saw some of the wonders I'd heard about: Cobbled streets free of mud, horseless trams running on tracks, buildings so tall you wondered what kept them from tumbling over like a house of cards, and funniest of all, men wearing short coats and stiff collars. The fortune of sixty kopeks I clutched in my pocket spared me the need to look for a hotel. However, since it was still a long time to sunrise, I though I might as well look for a place to sleep. My nose led me to a stable filled with hay. I crawled in, covered myself, and didn't wake up again until, what seemed like minutes later, a large hand, reaching in for a load of hay, pulled one of my feet out with it. Since it was now broad daylight, I began walking the streets, asking people how to get to my brother's address. After several hours of being

First, of course, we all had to have a bite. Only I realized that, after splurging on two glasses of shnapps, I could no longer afford a piece of bread and herring. I still had money in my pocket but, even though a glass of hot tea with sugar was only a kopek, my total capital was limited to the equivalent of maybe sixty cents, which had to last me till I got a job.

We had been due to arrive in Warsaw at noon. We got there shortly before midnight. Almost at once I saw some of the wonders I'd heart about: Cobbled streets free of mud, horseless trams running on tracks, buildings so tall you wondered what kept them from tumbling over like a house of cards, and funniest of all, men wearing short coats and stiff collars.

Since it was now broad daylight, I began walking the streets, asking people how to get to my brother's address. After several hours of being spun like a dreidel in all four directions, I found the street and number. My brother's lodgings turned out to be on the fifth floor of a four-story house. I climbed up to the attic and knocked. A shrivelled old woman in a robe which seemed to have been stitched together out of dishrags, opened the door, peered at me blindly, went back to find her glasses, then demanded to know what the devil I wanted.

So I spent the day prowling the wondrous side streets of Warsaw, marvelling over a hundred things I had never seen before. Finally I stopped in front of a little cafe which I'd been told by a shopkeeper served as an "office" for several small employment agents.

I was happy to see unemployed boys of thirteen were so much in demand, after all. But now, both men put out their hands and stared at me. I stared back, bewildered. Finally, one of them hissed, "Advance on commission. One ruble."

Meanwhile, inside the cafe sat boys with mothers, boys with fathers, candidates for high school, all being urged to eat up, without a moment's embarrassment at the openmouthed way I sat on a bench outside and watched them. Finally, one mother feeding a runny-nosed boy was sensitive enough to come out and beg me to stop staring, I was spoiling her son's appetite.

spun like a dreidel in all four directions, I found the street and number. My brother's lodgings turned out to be on the fifth floor of a four-story house. I climbed up to the attic and knocked. A shrivelled old woman in a robe which seemed to have been stitched together out of dishrags, opened the door, peered at me blindly, went back to find her glasses, then demanded to know what the devil I wanted, I told her I'm the brother of Mordechai the baker. The name seemed to mean absolutely nothing to her. With sinking heart, I insisted this was the address I'd been given. After some further evasion, she finally allowed that some baker boys were living there, and if my brother was one of them, he came home to sleep only on Friday nights. It seemed to me very strange that my brother should need to sleep only one night a week. Meanwhile I also had a glimpse of what she meant by "h om e." It was a narrow room with a diagonal wall and no ceiling what ever. Under this wall were crammed a row of narrow beds, each of them covered with straw-filled sacks and pillows. I stood and thought what to do. The old woman either didn't know or wouldn't tell where my brother was working, and here it was only Wed nesday, What to do with myself till Friday? Since I'd indulged myself in a breakfast of coffee and a roll, I had only about 57 kopeks left to my name, and nowhere to sleep. Yet my feelings in that wretched place were such that I couldn't get myself to ask the old woman if I could use Mordechai's bed until he turned up. So I spent the day prowling the wondrous side streets of Warsaw, marvelling over a hundred things I had never seen before. Finally I stop ped in front of a little cafe which I'd been told by a shopkeeper served as an "office" for several small employment agents. As soon as I approached the place, two ragged little men in bowler hats with canes in their hands came running out and fell upon me like hungry cats cornering a fat mouse. Each man pulled out his little notebook and took my name. I admitted that I had no address, and therefore wasn't yet registered with the police, but they seemed willing to overlook that. I was happy to see unemployed boys of thirteen were so much in demand, after all. But now, both men put out their hands and stared at me. I stared back, bewildered. Finally, one of them hissed, "Advance on commission. One ruble," I told them I didn't have a ruble, but as soon as they found me a jo b . . . Both fiercely crossed out my name in their books and told me to go to the devil back where I came from. This brought to mind that, even if I'd wanted to go home, I didn't have the return fare. Night was falling once again, and I had been told if the police caught me without a legal place of residence, I would wish I had never seen Warsaw. Meanwhile, inside the cafe sat boys with mothers, boys with fathers, candidates for high school, all being urged to eat up, without a moment's embarrassment at the openmouthed way I sat on a bench outside and watched them. Finally, one mother feeding a runny-nosed boy was sensi tive enough to come out and beg me to stop staring, I was spoiling her son's appetite.

I moved my seat and tried to look elsewhere. Business began to thin out. It was dark now, but I was more troubled by the growling of my stomach than by thoughts of the police. I started up a hopeful conversa tion with a waiter who looked faintly familiar. He turned out to be a landsman from Vishogrod. He asked me don't I have relatives in Warsaw. Don't I have relatives! I have a brother, a baker. What more did I need? He dismissed my brother with a wave of his hand. A baker, he said, is no longer a human being. But he's still my brother! A boy who works as a baker, he patiently explains, is already half dead. His very life no longer belongs to him. What is the good of a brother like that? His words left a chill around my heart. I now understood why my brother slept in his room only on Friday nights. The rest of the week he didn't have time enough to go home. The waiter saw how depressed his words had left me. He took me into the kitchen and found me something to eat; By the time I'd finished eating it was midnight once again. The restaur ant closed, the waiters were swallowed by the darkness, and I still had no place to sleep. My landsman had also warned me that any homeless boy found in the streets at night is first given a warm welcome in the cellars of the police station, and then deported back where he came from, which at the moment seemed to me more terrible even than what they might do to me in jail. Cautiously, I made my way back to my brother's lodgings, felt my way up five flights in total darkness, and banged on the door. No one answered. After a while, I stopped banging and fell asleep in front of the door. Before long, though, I was awakened by the janitor who'd heard me sneaking up the stairs. He was holding a lit candle so close to my face, I could feel it singe my eyebrows. Brother or no brother, he warned me if he ever again caught me sleep ing on the stairs, he'd turn me in to the police. I went back down into the freezing street. Every bone ached. I couldn't stop yawning. I tried to tell myself not to lose courage. Then I quickly searched my pockets to make sure the janitor hadn't robbed me. Thank Heaven, my wealth was intact. Unseen, I plodded the dark streets to keep my toes from freezing, and after some hours the sun grudgingly rose. I now began in earnest to look for a job of any kind, simply to tide me over till Friday afternoon. But before the day was over, I realized there were literally hundreds of boys like myself, all freshly arrived from the provinces, unregistered by the police, also looking for any kind of job. While standing with a group of these boys, wondering whether I wouldn't do better alone, a middle-aged couple arrived, looked us over like cattle-dealers on market-day and decided on me. "Want a job?" "What kind?" I said stupidly. "You want or you don't want?"

He asked me don't I have relatives in Warsaw. Don't I have relatives! I have a brother, a baker. What more did l need? He dismissed my brother with a wave of his hand. A baker, he said, is no longer a human being.

By the time I'd finished eating it was midnight once again. The restaurant closed, the waiters were swallowed by the darkness, and I still had no place to sleep. My landsman had also warned me that any homeless boy found in the streets fit night is first given a warm welcome in the cellars of the police station, and then deported back where he came from, which at the moment seemed to me more terrible even than what they might do to me in jail.

I now began in earnest to look for a job of any kind, simply to tide me over till Friday afternoon. But before the day was over, I realized there were literally hundreds of boys like myself, all freshly arrived from the provinces, .unregistered by the police, also looking for any kind of job.

Although I didn't care for his tone, 1 fell onto the straw mattress as though from a great height, and think I was asleep before I'd even closed my eyes. But I'd barely had time to turn over, when I found the boss' wife tugging impatiently at my shoulder. Half-asleep, with darkness still covering the windows as thickly as it covered my eyes, I was back washing bottles.

By now it was as cold as it was dark, and where was I going to spend the night? I said, "I'll take it." They had me follow them home, where they put a plate of bread and herring with tea in front of me. I ate silently, still afraid to ask what they expected of me. Then I waited to be shown my room. The master nodded for me to follow him down a flight of groaning wooden steps. The cellar contained a barrel of dirty water and what looked like a thousand empty, mud-caked beer bottles. I looked at him. "G et to work," he said, not unkindly. I was to wash each one, inside and out, before going to sleep. What choice had I? The boss watched as I set to work, and complimented me on my energy and neatness. Then he proceeded to tap a barrel and fill the bottles I had washed. In this manner, it got to be one o'clock, two o'clock, three o'clock, and I was still washing bottles. My fingers were stiff with cold, and since my boss was working as though it were broad daylight, I felt embarrassed to ask him when his workers were expected to sleep. I'd already given up looking at the time, when the boss' wife suddenly shouted down, "Let him go to sleep already, or he'll run off like the others." The boss nodded like a man who has learned to be tolerant of human weakness. He pulled out a sack filled with straw and smoothed it down against the floor. "You can sleep now, if you like," he said like a man who understood a child can not yet be expected to work like a man. Although I didn't care for his tone, I fell onto the straw mattress as though from a great height, and think I was asleep before I'd even closed my eyes. But I'd barely had time to turn over, when I found the boss' wife tugging impatiently at my shoulder. Half-asleep, with darkness still cov ering the windows as thickly as it covered my eyes, I was back washing bottles. During the day I was sent with a sack from tavern to tavern to collect more empty bottles, and my bosses kept me so busy with that, I never even had the chance to ask about food. By evening, I was staggering like a drunk, and quite willing to forget about supper if they would just let me sleep for a while. But the boss again gave me some bread and herring and, as kindly as ever, explained that on Thursday nights, all the bottles had to be filled for Saturday night deliveries. Therefore, just that once, it was customary to work all night. But to make up for this, he would let me sleep all Friday night and all day Saturday. He made it sound as though only a monster of ingratitude would fail to see how reasonable was what he asked. But I had simply gone too long without sleep. And since, in he last two days I had earned the equivalent of exactly seventeen kopeks and tomorrow I was sure to see my brother, I decided I could afford to be independent. The boss, when I told him he could keep his job, was almost speechless with indignation. Never in this world had he encountered such impertinence. A boy who expected to eat without working! He had no doubt that, with luck, I would end before a firing squad. (In which, as I mentioned already, he wasn't too far from wrong. But that's another story.) He also preferred not to pay me my wages.

Once more, my problem was how to get through the night without being arrested. On Nalevka Street, I met another homeless boy, and he took me to his "quarters," an abandoned bakery, where I had my first good night's sleep since I left home. In the morning I awoke full of happy anticipation. At last it was Friday. Today I would see my brother, and he'd see to it that I had a job and a place to lay my head. It was agony to wait till evening. Toward sunset, I stationed myself in front of the house where my brother had his bed. I didn't know whether he would come directly home, or go to the synagogue first. But I wanted to take no chances of missing him. It was getting dark already when I noticed two ragged human skeletons drag themselves along the pavement. They moved on scrawny, tottering legs and seemed, ever so often, barely to keep one another from pitching face down into the mud, paralyzed with sleep. It took me some time to recognize one of these ghosts as my brother. I ran to throw my arms around him. He gave me a blank look and went right on past me. I cried, "Mordechai, it's me, your brother Jacob." But he and his com panion kept on, as though afraid to lose their momentum. They staggered up the stairs like a pair of drunks on an icy road. I followed close behind them, ready to catch Mordechai when he fell. But he somehow made it up to the attic floor and lurched into his dormitory. Before he could lie down, I grabbed his arm and tried once again to remind him who I was. He peered at me with eyes no longer able to focus. Finally, by way of a sholom-aleichem, he extended a limp, flour-and-dough-covered hand, then told his landlady, "Give him to eat," and fell on his bed as though he'd been shot. To tell the truth, I was beginning to feel a little unwelcome. Here it was Shabbos, the one day in the week on which it was forbidden to fast and, while tonight I might have inherited Mordechai's portion, I surely couldn't also expect to eat for him tomorrow. At the same time, if I had any notion of being allowed to use one of the beds, it was only minutes before each one of them was filled with a bakery-boy, all in roughly the same condition as my brother. And their snores, which weren't long in coming, began to sound like a railroad station where several trains were getting up steam. It was a terrifying sight. The landlady tugged at my arm and pointed to a little bench where she had put down some food for me. But either the snores, or the food itself, had killed my appetite. The moment her back was turned, I started to lie down on the floor next to my brother's bed, and a thick cloud of sleep smothered me almost at once. Yet my final waking thoughts were of utter contentment. I felt at peace. I had, after all, known from the first that as soon as I found my brother, he would take care of me.

In the morning I awoke full of happy anticipation. At last it was Friday. Today I would see my brother, and he'd see to it that I had a job and a place to lay my head. It was agony to wait till evening.

I cried, "Mordechai, it's me, your brother Jacob." But he and his companion kept on, as though afraid to lose their momentum. They staggered up the stairs like a pair of drunks on an icy road. I followed close behind them, ready to catch Mordechai when he fell. But he somehow made it up to the attic floor and lurched into his dormitory. Before he could lie down, I grabbed his arm and tried once again to remind him who I was.

Eugene Markowitz

Dr. Markowitz is Adjunct Professor of American Histroy at Seton Hall University in Newark, New Jersey. This paper appeared in Volume LV, Number 3 (March, 1966) of the American Jewish Historical Quarterly. It appears here by arrangement with the American Jewish Historical Society. In keeping The mass of the East European Jewish immigrants coming to the United with the objectivity and scholarship of this paper, we have States at the turn of the century brought with them the traditional Or retained all foot-notes and the thodox Jewish mode of worship and observance. Here they found a soci spelling and editorial style of the ety which was not hospitable to their ways. Not that religious freedom Quarterly.

Henry Pereira Mendes: Architect of the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America

was abridged or in any way curtailed in this free land, but the social milieu acted strongly against transplanting the shtetl, their mode of living in their East European home towns and villages, to these shores. Obser vance of the Sabbath became extremely difficult. Observance of the diet ary laws outside of New York City's East Side was burdensome and the religious education of their children was on the lowest level. The deplorable condition of Judaism, specifically traditional Orthodox Judaism, is vividly portrayed in a contemporary description of the time, written in Hebrew by Morris Weinberger, entitled Jews and Judaism in New York. There are one hundred and thirty Orthodox congregations in New York City. Some claim their number to be two hundred and forty. They are both correct because the congregations are not well or dered and defined. Those who claim the larger figure probably in clude small shtiblech and minyanim as well as klausen. If one were to search for these in obscure courtyards and attics, their number might well exceed three hundred.1 According to this observer, these congregations did not deviate in their physical arrangements from the Law, and some of them had a Beth Hamidrash attached to their house of worship where religious books were kept, and an occasional elderly worshipper would study in those books.

The author is indebted to Mr. A. Piza Mendes, son of Dr. Henry Preira Mendes, who graciously made available to him the extensive collection of his father's private letters, newspaper clippings, pamphlets and articles, as well as other material relating to the period under consideration. This collection hereinafter is designated as the PM Collection.

1Morris Weinberger, Ha-Yehudim veha-Ydhadutbe-New York [Jews and Judaism in New York] (New York, 1887). The author was himself a devout Orthodox Jew and wrote

with great passion rather than with detached historical objectivity. However, his general description and analysis are confirmed by other contempory writers. [See "Letter from Cincinnati The Observer of Israel in America," Ha-Meliz (1889), no 180, p. f i The author vividly portrays an Orthodoxy beset by inner conflicts between an ignorant laity and a weak rabbinate. Orthodoxy, he reports, is besmirched by its external enemies such as the Socialists and other anti-religious elements. "The enemies of our faith," he writes, "rejoice and are happy that they can ridicule and belittle us."

After the daily service five or six men would remain to study the Talmud or the Pentateuch. Weinberger adds: These sessions, however, last no more than half an hour, and this, too, without depth or comprehension and in a rush because these men are poor and must toil to earn their livelihood.2 The real leaders of those congregations were gabbayim (lay religious functionaries), the presidents and the sextons, who truly controlled all affairs touching upon congregational life. As for the ordained Orthodox rabbis, there were no more than a few of them. They received neither the respect due them, nor the minimal emolument necessary to maintain themselves in dignity. The same author described how hundreds of preachers — darshanim — literally had to peddle their sermons and even those congregations who supported a preacher did so meagerly. These preachers are forced to supplement their incomes from a thousand other sources to merely keep their families alive.3 The only religious functionary held in esteem was the cantor, if he was blessed with a superior voice. As for theshohet (ritual slaughterer), he was completely under the rule of the crude owner of the chicken market, and his functioning according to the Law was undermined by the owner. At times the shohet is forced to slaughter two hundred chickens in one breath and woe unto him who is God fearing4 AND TOOK TIME OUT TO SHARPEN THE INSTRUMENTS OF HIS CALLING. A large number of these were ill-prepared to function as shochtim and were religiously not attuned to this profession. The state of Jewish education was most deplorable. The indifference of the Orthodox elements to their children's religious studies was graphi cally described by Weinberger. The level of instruction in the heder did not go beyond elementary reading. Because of the over-abundance of small private schools and their untrained instructors, the competition for stu dents was keen. Many advertised that they are willing to teach any Jewish child, whoever he may be, rich or poor, stupid or smart, for ten cents a week, or forty cents a month. The parents feel that the price may go lower and withhold their children from instruction in the belief that the price may go down to a penny an hour.5 2M. Weinberger, op. cit., p. 3. 3Ibid., pp. 3-4. 4Ibid., p. 2. sIbid., p. 18. While conditions in general in the field of Jewish education are truthfully portrayed by Weinberger, accuracy of detail 40

is at times lacking. Among the most authoritative descriptions of the state of Jewish education at the time, the author has found the following: Alexander M. Dushkin, Jewish Education in New York City (New York, 1918), Bureau of Jewish Education; Nathan H. Winter, "The Role of Samson Benderly in Jewish Education in the United States" [unpublished doctoral thesis

On the entire East Side of New York there was only one Talmud Torah — at 83 East Broadway — wchih the author found of any merit. This was the Machzikei Talmud Torah. Some four hundred students studied there for four years under the best teachers available. They received free clothing and careful supervision for they came from the poorest of families. Yet even these children did not reach to the level of studying the Mishnah. Weinberger complained that many of the Orthodox leaders will think little of donating twenty dollars or more to support the cantor and the choir, and give not a cent to support the study of Torah.6 There were some congregational Hebrew schools uptown, notably that of Congregation Adath Israel on 57th Street. He mentioned, too, the Heb rew Free School, probably at 624 Fifth Street, where fifteen hundred students received an elementary education free. This school was sup ported "by the donations of wealthy Reform Jews and some German and Dutch Jew s."7 The most encouraging development in Orthodoxy was the establishment of the Yeshivat Etz Chaim — the mother of American Yeshivot.8 Orthodoxy in New York was in a chaotic condition, poor in resources and devoid of real leadership. Each congregation was an entity unto itself, and little or no co-operation was evident among them. Whereas the vari ous liberal and Reform elements had eloquent spokesmen with mastery of the English language and various journals to expound their point of view, the Orthodox Jewish community had no articulate spokesman and cer tainly no leaders to give effective battle against its detractors. To be sure there were some native Orthodox Jews, notably the membership of Con gregation Shearith Israel, but the contact between them and the mass of East European Jews on the East Side was minimal. The latter, in fact, did Drachman, "Jewish Education, Needs and for the New York University School of Methods," Menorah, vol. VIII, no. 1 (Jan., Education, 1963]. See his chapter on 1890), pp. 15-18; and Lloyd P. Gartner, "The "Jewish Education in the United States at Jews of New York's East Side, 1890-1893," the Turn of the Century." See also Henry American Jewish Historical Quarterly Moskowitz, "A Study of the East Side [=AJHQ], vol. LID, no. 3 (March, 1964), pp. Heder," University Settlement Association 272-284. Studies (New York, 1898), pp. 22-26; Jeremiah Berman, "Jewish Education in New York City, 1860-1900," Yivo Annual of 6M. Weinberger, op. cit., p. 22. Jewish Social Scinece, vol. IX (New York, 7Ibid., p. 23. For a detailed description of the 1954), pp. 245-275; Fifty Years Work of the networks of schools operated by the Hebrew Education Society of Philadelphia, Hebrew Free School Association, see 1848-1898, published by the Hebrew Education Society, 1899; Julius Greenstone, Jeremiah J. Berman, "Jewish Education in New York City, 1860-1900," op. cit. "Jewish Education in the United States," American Jewish Year Book, vol. XVI (1914-1915), p. 94; Israel Friedlander, "The 8For the history of Yeshivat Etz Chaim and its evolution to the present day Yeshiva Problem of Jewish Education in America and the Bureau of Education of the Jewish University, see Gilbert Klaperman, Community of New York City," Report of the "Yeshiva University: Seventy-five Years in Commissioner of Education for the Year Ending Retrospect," AJHQ, vol. LIV, no. 1 (Sept., 1964), pp. 5-50, and no. 2 (Dec., 1964), pp. July 30, 1913 (Washington, D.C.: 198-201. Department of Interior, Bureau of Education), ch. XVI, pp. 365-393; Bernard

not really look upon them as real Orthodox Jews. Weinberger complained that they praised the Orthodox way of life, and strongly defended the traditional approach to Judaism, but simultaneously they showed a high degree of friendship and similarity to the Reformers and seemed to speak their language.9 It was upon this discouraging scene that the Minister of Congregation Shearith Israel, Dr. Henry Pereira Mendes, entered.10 He recognized the weaknesses inherent in the situation and endeavored with some success to strengthen the structure of Orthodoxy in the United States of America. Somehow, in spite of the fact that his Orthodoxy was of the British variety and suspect to the East European Jews, he was successful in having himself identified with them and being considered by them as an Orthodox Jewish leader. At the same time, he gained recognition in the non-traditional camp and among non-Jews as an au thentic Orthodox Jewish spokesman. He was one of the few modern Orthodox rabbis at the time, by no means the only one, who could defend Orthodoxy against its detractors and give it a voice in the world outside the East Side ghetto.11 In using the term "modern Orthodox" we have in mind a new trend that came into Orthodox thinking toward the end of the nineteenth century. It was an Orthodoxy that was uncompromising in its strict adher ence to the Torah, both the written Bible and the Oral Law. It did not deviate from any of the traditions and laws. It differed from the Or thodoxy of most East European rabbis primarily in the mode of approach to secular education, to non-Orthodox groups, to external aesthetics, and to the degree of involvement in non-religious communal activities. In each one of these areas, Dr. Mendes, and others sharing his views — such as Dr. Bernard Drachman and Dr. Philip Klein — had definite views and philosophies in which they differed from what one might call the traditional East European Orthodox rabbi. Dr. Mendes possessed secular edu9M. Weinberger, op. cit., p. 34. 10Dr. Henry Preira Mendes, son of the Reverend Abraham P. Mendes, was bom in Birmingham, England, April 13, 1852. He received his Jewish education from his father who was the founder of Northwick College — a boarding school in London, where religious studies and secular education were combined, much on the style of the modem Day School. There is no evidence that he possessed Semichah — the traditional Orthodox Jewish ordination. He received his M.A. degree at the University College, London, and his Doctor of Medicine, at the University of the City of New York. He served as minister of the newly formed Sephardic Congregation of Manchester, England, 1874-1877, and was invited by Congregation Shearith Israel to succeed the Reverend Jacques Judah Lyons, serving the congregation up to 1923, as hazzan and minister. During his long career as minister of this historic congregation, he engaged in many 42

communal activities and many a present prominent Jewish organization owes its origin in part to him. Among those he helped found were: the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1886; the New York Board of Ministers, 1881; the Montefiore Home for Chronic Invalids, 1884; the Jewish Branch of the Guild for Crippled Children, 1896; the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America, 1897; the American Federation of Zionists, and the Young Women's Hebrew Association, 1902. He served all these groups and many others in an official capacity. Dr. Mendes was a prolific writer of literary criticsim, novels, children's boks and textbooks, as well as a stream of articles in the contemporary periodicals on various phases of Judaism and Jewish life. n See Eugene Markovitz, "Henry Pereira Mendes: Builder of Traditional Judaism in America" [unpublished doctoral thesis, Bernard Revel Graduate School of Yeshiva University, 1961 J.

1 I 1 § 1 I m I ■ I M I

< < i i i * J ] s I 1 i

l 1 1 I 1 1

1 i c J i ]

1 I I I

i I ] ]

8 8

]

■

. (

■

cation and used it to defend Orthodoxy and to fight its detractors. He co-operated and worked with non-orthodox and secular Jewish groups, for the greater good of Judaism. He firmly believed that beauty and out ward form and decorum were essential if Orthodoxy was to maintain itself, and retain the loyalties of its youth. Finally, Dr. Mendes held the view that everything relating to the moral welfare of the community, Jewish and general, must be the province of the rabbi. He did not confine his labors and activities to the synagogue alone. Thus, one may observe some areas of Jewish life in which he endeavored to utilize his talents on behalf of Orthodox Judaism. One of the prime areas in which he utilized his talents was his attempt to unify the Orthodox Jewish forces in America into a national Orthodox congregational organization. The woeful situation of Orthodoxy in America, as described above, its lack of cohesion and absence of any authority led him to conclude that unity was the primary need of Orthodox Jewry. He, therefore, embraced and expounded various schemes for unity. At first he was one of those who advocated a Jewish synod — some unifying religious authority that would be recognized by all Jewish elements.12 He had hoped that even Reform groups would be willingly bound by its decisions. Said he: Every day a synod is deferred is a sin upon the shoulders of those who should hold it. All true men would respect the deliberate opin ion of such a qualified and honorable body.13 This notion was favored by others, too. In an editorial. The Jewish Mes senger asked for the establishment of a synod. It quoted at great length a speech by Dr. Sabato Morais, who also urged a conference for that puris pose.14 Dr. Mendes envisaged such a group to embrace all American Jewish congregations. The purpose would be "for the adjudication of ritualistic questions."15 Two years prior to this, the Board of Delegates of American Israelites advocated the idea of a synod when it issued a state ment saying that The expediency and propriety of convening a synod is for the pur pose of infusing into the conditions of modern Judaism the authorative exposition of Jewish ecclesiastical law.16 This was a most naive and impractical idea. It should have been obvi ous that to expect Reform Judaism to submit to any kind of "ecclesiastical 12In 1855, the Conference of American Rabbis [Reform] recommended at Cleveland the convening of a synod to give Reform some legal aspect by connecting it with the Talmud and other Jewish legal sources. In Orthodox Jewish ranks, the Reverend Isaac Leeser of Congregation Mikveh Israel and Congregation Beth El Emet of Philadelphia proposed a synod. See Maxwell Whiteman and Edwin Wolf 2nd, The History of the Jews of Philadelphia from Colonial Times to the Age of Jackson (Philadelphia, Pa., 1957), pp. 372-377.

13Sermon on the "Attractiveness of the Synagogue, " newspaper clipping, exact date not given [PM Collection]. 14Jewish Messenger, Aug. 20, 1888. 15Ibid. 16Statement made May, 1878, quoted in the Jewish Messenger, Sept. 3, 1886.

law" would negate the essence of Reform Judaism. Classical Reform and its American variety believed "that Jewish law must withstand the test of time and prove its worth in elevating the spiritual life of the Jew ."17 It was only when Dr. Mendes turned his attention to the more realistic goal of some kind of unity in Orthodox Jewish circles that a limited success was achieved. This came about through his founding and organizaing of the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America in 1898. Before this, many efforts had been made to unite the Orthodox congre gations of the East Side for common action on matters relating to obser vance. Judah David Eisenstein, a leader in those movements, chronicles those attempts in his Ozar Zikhronotai, and gives a detailed description of the most ambitious of those plans, the organization of a Chief Rabbi nate.18 Before describing his endeavor, it should be pointed out that as early 1879 the Board of Delegates of Orthodox Hebrew Congregations, a newly formed group comprising twenty-six Orthodox congregations in New York, had decided to bring over from Koenigsburg, Rabbi Meir Leib Malbim to head the religious interests of the movement.19 Congregation Shearith Israel appointed some of its trustees to represent it in its endeavor to engage a Chief Rabbi.20 These assured the group of the financial support of Shearith Israel. However, every soon thereafter Rabbi Malbim died, and with him the entire plan died. It should be noted that Congregation Sheartih Israel favored the plan for unity. In a letter to the Board of Delegates of Orthodox Hebrew Congregations, they stated that any scheme to unite Orthodox Jewry upon a firmer basis would meet with their approval.21 They demanded, however, that the Chief Rabbi should be a man "of experience in the peculiar aspect of Judaism in this country." This was an important prerequisite to their support.22 The next most noteworthy attempt in this direction was the election of Rabbi Jacob Joseph as Chief Rabbi in 1887. This was the result of the union of a number of Orthodox congregations, among them Beth Hamidrash Hagadol and the Kehal Adash Jeshurun, to create a Beth Din and to regulate matters pertaining to divorce and kashrut. It organized a form of a kehillah under the name of the Association of the American Hebrew Con gregations, and was to finance its project from dues paid by the congrega tion and fees paid by the butchers for supervision. After lengthy corres pondence with the most outstanding rabbis in Europe, they elected Rabbi Jacob Joseph to the post.23 He arrived in August, 1888, and received a warm welcome from the Jews of the city, with thousands of people fol lowing him wherever he appeared to speak. However, no sooner did he 17Quoted by the Jewish Advance, Jan. 2,1886 (PM Collection).

20Minutes of Trustees, Congregation Shearith Israel, Aug. 18, 1879.

18Judah D. Eisenstein, Ozar Zikhronotai [Hebrew] (New York, 1929), pp. 258-262.

21Ibid. 22Ibid.

19David and Tamar de Sola Pool, An Old Faith in the New World: Portrait of Shearith Israel, 1654-1954 (New York, 1955), p. 385. 44

23Judah D. Eisenstein, op. cit.f ppp. 258-262.

begin to enforce some new regulations in the area of kashrut when he found himself challenged from many directions. The failure of this at tempt at unifying Orthodox Jewry under a Chief Rabbi may be ascribed to these factors: firstly, the "Modern Orthodox" element did not like him because he could not speak English in a polished manner.24 He also seemed to lack the strength of leadership to hold the groups together and give them direction. In addition to this, the already existing rabbis op posed him and refused to recognize him as their superior. They opposed his new regulation on shehitah, and as a result, the butchers were encour aged to disregard him.25 Dr. Mendes, however, was friendly to the project and we find him and Dr. Drachman addressing representatives of the organization at a mass meeting.26 He had, however, doubts of the possible effect upon the American scene of Rabbi Jacob Jospeh who did not conform at all to the image of the rabbi he thought was needed upon the American scene. He was fearful that the emergence of the Chief Rabbi would spell the doom of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America he had helped found.27 In the presence of the members of the Association of the Americlan Hebrew Congregations, he wondered whether a Chief Rabbi would be able to effectively oppose the encroachment of Reform upon the American scene. He is quoted as cautioning them not to give way to false hopes. Those who come after you will be Ameri cans — full-blooded Americans like your brethren farther uptown.28 Unlike Dr. Sabato Morais, his co-worker at the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, Dr. Mendes showed great respect for the Chief Rabbi and was helpful to him. He expressed publicly his approval of the idea and thought it might help unify Orthodox Jewry. Dr. Mendes joined Judge Philip J. Joachimsen, a well-known lay leader, in inviting the new Chief Rabbi to accompany them on an inspection tour of the Hebrew Orphan Asylum. Heretofore, the Russian Jew had been looked down upon and at best tolerated; now the rabbi was accorded respect and a fine status by the spiritual leaders of New York's best and most aristocratic congregation.29 This new status was deemed of great importance in estab lishing the authority of the Chief Rabbi. When Rabbi Jacob Joseph established his system of the inspection of shehitah to be financed by some form of modest tax on meat and poultry, it was Dr. Mendes who was one of his staunchest supporters. When the butchers and wholesalers showed defiance, Dr. Mendes and Dr. Drachman were asked by the Chief Rabbi to help bring those men in line. By lending their names to the project, they gave it importance and pre24M *., p. 268.

26Ibid., p. 145.

2sIbid. See Abraham J. Karp., "New York Chooses A Chief Rabbi," Publication of the American Jewish Historical Society [=PAJHS], voi. XLIV (March, 1955), p. 174. Karp chronicles in detail the steps that led to the tragic neglect of the Chief Rabbi and to his untimely death in 1902.

27Ibid. 2SIbid.f pp. 153-154. 29Ibid.f p. 160.

stige.30 It was with sadness, however, that Dr. Mendes analyzed at the very outset the almost impossible task facing the Chief Rabbi, who was ill prepared to face the challenge of the American scene. The American Israel ite quotes him as describing this challenge to an audience of members of the Association. He posed the question: Has he the power and ability and education enough to enter the lists for Orthodoxy? Will he dare oppose the uptown ministers, some of whom maintain that God did not dictate the Torah word by word to Moses? Indeed, can he enter into a polemic with them in order thereby to lead the errant sheep back to the fold of our faith? Do you believe in the possibility that by virtue of the authority he posseses in the old country, he will be able to exert a salutary influence on the youth of America?31 Unfortunately, his prophecy was fulfilled. However, one of the desirable results of this venture was to encourage Dr. Mendes and a few others to organize a decade later the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America, and to guard properly against the pitfalls which destroyed the office of the Chief Rabbinate and the Association. Immediately preceding the actual organization of the Union, Dr. Mendes was involved in an effort to organize a united orthodox rabbi nate. In 1896, we find him to be one of the organizers of a group called the Orthodox Rabbinical Council of New York City. In a circular, the prog rams set forth by the group included the following: 1. Conversionist danger 2. Religious education 3. Social conditions 4. Free lectures and sermons 5. Congregations unable to maintain preachers of their own, and how to help them 6. Ritual matters, such as milah and divorce.32 The fact that this circular was also written in the Yiddish language and contained among its signers rabbis from the East European school of Orthodoxy, indicates that this was to be a genuinely united Orthodox body. Some of the signers included were Rabbis Mendes, Bloch, Drachman, Marcus, Gur Yanowsky, Wechsler, Meisner, Tzinzler and Friedman.32 a This, too, proved to be an abortive attempt, and the specific reasons for its failure can only be conjectured. (The concluding Part II will appear in our next issue.)

31American Israelite, March 30, 1888, quoted 32AThe writer was unable to complete the full by Abraham J. Karp, PAJHS, vol. SLIV, no. names of some signatories. 3 (March, 1955), p. 184. 32Circular in Yiddish and English, 1896 [PM Collection] 46

TRADITION ©

GLATT

There’s no “Fiddler on our Roof", but within Lebowitz’ there is a symphony of superb service, gracious hos pitality, excellent cuisine and distinctive entertainment that has appealed to discriminating Orthodox Jewry for 64 years.

Reserve Now for

SUMMER FUN Open through Rosh Hashana-Sukkos Holidays. Comfortable traditional Shul-large colorful Sukkah

LEBOWITZ PINE VIEW HOTEL Fallsburg, N.Y. 12733

Phone (212) 279-3854 ( 914 ) 434-6100

FELA SHAPELL COLLEGE OF JEWISH STUDIES FOR WOMEN

JERUSALEM, ISRAEL

(FORMERLY HARTMAN'S)

Is now accepting applications for admission from college and graduate students for the 1977-78 academic year Curriculum includes Mishna, Tephila, Bible. Philosophy, Law and Languages. Students with a limited Torah education are invited to join our one- or two-year programs. Our College is recognized by the Israel Ministry of Education for receiving a Teacher’s Diploma and our courses are accredited by American universities. Dormitory and dining facilities are available.

Learn How To Learn

For further information or for an appointment to meet our Representative from Israel, Contact: Shapell College of Jewish Studies 1239 East 8th Street Brooklyn, N.Y. 11230 (212) 338-3400

Gershon Shusterm an

"Who Is a Jew?" — in Detroit, Chicago, St. Louis — and All Points West The time i&the near future. The place, the office of an American rabbi. A young couple wants to be married. The rabbi knows the young man and his family; he is concerned about the background of the young woman. The door of the study opens. In walk the youngsters and the rabbi breathes a sigh of relief. Contrary to the dictates of contemporary fashion, the young woman is modestly dressed. She smiles demurely by way of greeting and does not extend her hand to the rabbi. She explains that she is a graduate of a prestigious Jewish day school and a fine seminary. The young people speak with die rabbi at length. The kalleh-to-be is well versed in Torah learning. She even speaks a creditable Hebrew. She is looking forward to establishing a Jewish home. The rabbi is clearly impre ssed and the wedding is arranged. A heart-warming story? Not for those concerned with Halacha and the perpetuation of Yiddishkeit. The young woman in our tale, the izniusdik "Daughter of Israel," is not really Jewish. An intermarriage has just been arranged, and any children bom of this union will not be Jewish. Prepos terous? No. Unlikely? Again, no. The circumstances for this sad tale are being prepared at this very moment in many American communities.

The time is the near future. The place, the office of an American rabbi. A young couple wants to be married. The rabbi knows the young man and his family; he is concerned about the background of the young woman. The door of the study opens. In walk the youngsters and the rabbi breathes a sigh of relief. Contrary to the dictates of contemporary fashion, the young woman is modestly dressed. She smiles demurely by way of greeting and does not extend her hand to the rabbi. She explains that she is a graduate of a prestigious Jewish day school and a fine seminary. The young people speak with the rabbi at length. The kalleh-to-be is well versed in Torah learning. She even speaks a creditable Hebrew. She is looking forward to establishing a Jewish home. The rabbi is clearly impressed and the wedding is arranged.

The State of our Day Schools To gain some insight into the situation, let us return to the present and look at the state of the Hebrew Day School movement. Day schools, until recently concentrated in the frum communities of the larger cities, are springing up in suburbs and small towns as well, often drawing upon the non-observant population of the area to make up their student bodies. Not uncommonly, there are within such neighborhoods a fair number of gentiles married to Jews and other people who identify with Judaism and consider themselves Jewish, when in reality they are not so according to Halacha. Much has been published in Jewish journals and the secular press on the issue of "Who is a Jew?" However, that very important, universal Jewish question most often means: "Who is a Jew in Israel" or "Who is a Jew under Israel's Return," not "Who is a Jew here in America?" It is not necessary here to review the Halachic guidelines for "Mi Yehudi?" We can all concur in and feel comfortable with the simple definition of a Jew as one who was bom to a Jewish mother, or who has been converted to Judaism K'halacha. Why open the delicate and often painful question: "Who is a Jew and can therefore attend a Jewish day school?" at all? Why not continue the trend of some of today's schools and open the doors of the Jewish day school to all applicants? Except in rare instances, people do not com$ to place their children in a

Why open the delicate and often painful question: "Who is a Jew and can therefore attend a Jewish day school?" at all? Why not continue the trend of some of today's schools and open the doors of the Jewish day school to all applicants?

Rabbi Shusterman is Director of the Hebrew Academy, a Lubavitcher Yeshiva in Long Beach, California. He has asked us to record his indebtedness to Mrs. Beverly Goldstein for her assistance in preparing this article.

Many Jews who are themselves emancipated from their Judaism often bristle at portraits of themselves in contemporary literature. Philip Roth, for example, has been smeared with the "self-hate" brush. Yet in his Letting Go, Roth comes closer to the heart of what ails American Judaism than some of his high-minded critics, when he has a young lady speak wistfully about her "conversion" from Catholicism to Judaism which she feels should have consisted of more than being dunked in the YMCA pool in her faded blue Jantzen bathing suit.

What if we do go along with the tide of the Jewish community? What if we accept the children of such "converts" as day school students? What would happen next?

Jewish school unless they feel an identification with Judaism. What of people who have undergone a non-halachic "conversion" to Judaism at the time of marriage to a Jew, or those who have embraced the JewishAmerican way of life without conversion? y* They identify "Jewishly." They may be welcome members of non-traditional synagogues. They present their children for admission to day schools. These people can sit on the boards of every Jewish organization in town without anyone ever reminding them that good people they may be, they are not Jews! Many Jews who are themselves emancipated from their Judaism often bristle at portraits of themselves in contemporary literature. Philip Roth, for example, has been smeared with the "self-hate" brush. Yet in his Letting Go, Roth comes closer to the heart of what ails American Judaism than some of his high-minded critics, when he has a young lady speak wistfully about her "conversion" from Catholicism to Judaism which she feels should have consisted of more than being dunked in the YMCA pool in her faded blue Jantzen bathing suit. A recent survey polling a group of one hundred thirty seven Conservative and Reform clergy asked the question: "What criteria do you consider sufficient to make the children of mixed marriages (where the mother is non-Jewish and non-converted) Jewish in all respects?" The answers included: "A declaration that the child is Jewish and will be raised as such;" "giving the child a Hebrew name;" "promising to give the child a Jewish education;" "certification by a rabbinic board;" "ritual immersion and/or circumcision;" as well as proper Halachic practice. What if we do go along with the tide of the Jewish community? What if we accept the children of such "converts" as day school students? What would happen next? By accepting these children into Jewish day schools we give them entree into the traditional Jewish community, and we give them approval to call themselves Jews and to marry into Jewish families. In short: We would actively participate in the blurring of lines that have been carefully maintained and guarded for over three milennia. A Religious Issue

For one not bom a Jew, becoming a Jew has this in common with becoming a physician, a member of the bar, a brain surgeon, a Kiwani or an Elk: More is required than wanting to be one, or declaring oneself to be one, or acting like one. The Torah has established for all times what one must do to become a Jew. Every human being has the right to exercise his free-will and reject these criteria - no one has the right to change them.

"Who is a Jew?" is not a racist issue; it is not an elitist issue. "Who is a Jew?" is a religious issue. For one not bom a Jew, becoming a Jew has this in common with becoming a physician, a member of the bar, a brain surgeon, a Kiwani or an Elk: More is required than wanting to be one, or declaring oneself to be one, or acting like one. The Torah has established for all times what one must do to become a Jew. Every human being has the right to exercise his free-will and reject these criteria — no one has the right to change them.

I 1 I

j { }

I I I I I B I 8 s 8 1 8 1 8 8 8 8

j j c j z ^ r j ( t ^ r \ \ c

8 8

c j

]

8 \ 8 t ■ t

r B p

1 n 8 p 8 s

8 Ji 8 c 8 c

a v

"Jewishness.. .Is Not an Honorary Doctorate"

When discussing the issue of "Who is a Jew?" in Israel, Justice Moshe Silberg of the Israeli Supreme Court was asked: What of a person bom of a Jewish mother who joins El Fatah, as compared to a person bom of a Gentile mother who actively participates in the life of the State of Israel and is ready to give her life for it. Justice Silberg replied: "The El Fatah

8 8 8

d Ji \

Jew is simply a contemptible, wicked Jew, whereas the children (of the Gentile mother) are wonderful and noble Gentiles. But Jewishness.. .is not an honorary doctorate that is awarded for specific achievements or accomplishments." Whereas children of admittedly non-Jewish mothers could be dis suaded from attending a Jewish school with relative ease, children of a woman who has decided to call herself Jewish because she is married to a Jew; or women who have undergone what they were innocently led to believe is a proper conversion, pose a more complicated dilemma. Will a self-proclaimed Jew or a graduate of a "conversion seminar" accept the halachic definition? Will she allow her children to be converted to Judaism according to Halacha; and can the children be actually converted? While it is the child — not the mother — who will be attending the school, it is the mother who determines whether or not a proper climate exists in the home for bringing up a Jewish child. Wisdom, tact and a keen perception of halacha are necessary for making such decisions. At a school interview the administrator must proceed with great caution and tact to explain "Mi Yehudi?" and to elicit the reaction of prospective parents. He must re member that even non-halachic converts are frequently more devout than born Jews; that converts try harder to identify with Judaism, and it is hardly the fault of the improperly converted woman that the concept of conversion K'Halacha is alien to her. (Later we will discuss another category of children whose background can conceivably make them ineligible for day school acceptance: the nonJewish child who has been adopted by Jewish parents.)

Will a self-proclaimed Jew or a graduate of a "conversion seminar" accept the halachic definition? Will she allow her children to be converted to Judaism according to Halacha; and can the children be actually converted?

Two Distinct Objectives What is the raison d'etre of Jewish day schools? In frum communities it is to educate youngsters in Torah studies. In more assimilated communities, the first objective is to instill a feeling of Jewish identification and aware ness and then to impart knowledge. The Midrash tells us "if there be no kids (young goats), there will be no wethers (mature goats)." Out of the Jewish day schools of today will come the leaders of the Jewish com munities of tomorrow. We owe it to these communities and to all Jews, past, present, and future, to make sure that the "kids" who are the day school students of today are actually Jewish. There would appear to be a simple solution to the problem: Ask each Jewish day school applicant's parents if he or she is a bom Jew or a convert and whether the child was bom into the family or adopted. Ac cept those who are Jews by Halachic standards and reject everyone else. — This simplistic solution can not work. By rejecting all questionable applicants, we would alienate and cut off a large part of the community we wish to reach, the assimilated Jews who have intermarriages in their families and within their immediate circle of acquaintances. Also, we may discover at some future date that a particular child who is attending a Jewish day school passed through the screening but is not in fact Jewish. What mechanism would exist to change that status? What solution would work? First, we must educate adults in the school and in our communities regarding the traditional concept of Jewishness.

There would appear to be a simple solution to the problem: Ask each Jewish day school applicant's parents if he or she is a bom Jew or a convert and whether the child was bom into the family or adopted. Accept those who are Jews by Halachic standards and reject everyone else.

closely involved in the situation to have the objectivity necessary to judge who is or is not an acceptable candidate for proper

We must clearly define conversion "K'Halacha" and emphasize that such conversion does not make one racially or religiously superior. We need to stress that a sincere convert who has undergone a proper conversion is totally accepted by observant Jews, even while some non-observant people may accept as fellow Jews only those who can remember grandma's gefilte fish. Jews do not seek "racial purity" or "ethnic purity." A candidate for conversion may be of any coloring, any national origin, speak any native language and have any idiosyncrasies, and yet qualify to become a Jew. Next: Day schools must write and adopt guidelines reiterating the definition of a Jew as one bom to a Jewish mother or one who has converted to Judaism K'Halacha. The rules should make it clear that only Jews are eligible to attend the Jewish day school. Then finally we need provide a mechanism for proper conversion. The administration of each school should carefully select a rabbi in its local area who deals with conversion K'Halacha; whose reputation is impeccaMe; and whose procedures are acceptable to a reputable national Orthodox organization. Day school rabbis should realize that they are too closely involved in the situation to have the objectivity necessary to judge who is or is not an acceptable candidate for proper conversion. Also, a day school rabbi is usually not a community rav and should remove himself from decisions of this nature on principle. Therefore all potential converts should be sent to the Orthodox rabbi selected for this purpose. His decision should be binding. After these steps — an educational program on issue; a clear definition

I 1

rabbi is usually not a community rav and should remove himself from decisions of this nature on principle. Therefore all potential

of who 18 a Jew' and selection of a rabbi who can rule on and perform conversions — the school should set some time limit for prospective conversion. When interviewing the parents of a prospective student, the school

H v jH s I tl

Orthodox rabbi selected for this purpose. His decision should be binding.

administrator can explam the identity conditions among the other requirements for enrollment. A person who has been converted by means other than those set forth in the school rules, or whose child is not Jewish, can be referred to the rabbi who deals with conversion and upon his recommendation the child may be granted a conditional acceptance for the period until such time as the child has become Jewish, not to exceed the period set by the school. It should be made clear at the time of the interview that if at any point the rabbi, the child, or the parent, can not or will not continue with the conversion procedure, the child must be with drawn from the school.

The administration of each school should carefully select a rabbi in its local area who deals with reputation is cablepim;and whose procedures are acceptable to a reputable national Orthodox organization. Day school rabbis

The Adopted Child It is pertinent here to mention the adopted child. If, at the initial meeting with the parents, the rabbi elicits the response that the child is adopted, the rabbi should first establish whether the child came from a Jewish agency and then whether the child came from a Jewish mother. If the source was a Jewish agency, the agency should be willing to provide documentation of the child's mother's religion. If the document shows evidence that the child's mother was Jewish, an Orthodox rabbi can rule on the validity of the evidence, and then have drawn up a document 52

I 8 B I I I I I I 8 S fi

c c { i t 1 c c a 1 { c

B I I I I I

i c t s F v

8 r

1 1 8 t

r 1

■ «

8 a 8

8 0

confirming that fact. This document would become part of the child's official history and kept with his or her birth certificate and adoption papers. The parents should be made aware that this documentation also will be necessary to facilitate the child's bar mitzvah and wedding, and that such data is more easily obtained soon after adoption than years later. The parents of an adopted child who is known to have been bom to a non-Jewish mother must be informed of the necessity of the child's conversion to Judaism. Because adoptive parents are often defensive about their children's backgrounds, tact and diplomacy are needed to broach the subject with them. However difficult, the discussion must take place and a commitment to see the rabbi dealing with conversion must be obtained before the child should be enrolled in the day school. It should be made dear from the beginning in these and other cases that if at any point the parents do not or will not pursue the possibility of conversion, the role of the school as educator of Jewish children justifies their rejection of the child. (School boards routinely face similarly difficult situations as deciding what to do with a child whose parents can afford to pay for tuition but refuse to pay, or what to do with a problem child whose grandfather contributes to the endowment of the school.) The matter of keeping Jewish day schools Jewish is of such great importance that the administration of the school should insist on the cooperation of the board of directors to assist in the process. We have an obligation and a responsibility to inform prospective pa rents and to do everything we can to facilitate sincere conversion where it is indicated. The key issue here is responsibility. The primary responsibil ity of the day school, the education of committed Jews, is already joined with the responsibility of molding future Jewish generations and the re sponsibility to return non-observant Jews to the path of their fathers. To these responsibilities we must now add that of safeguarding the religious integrity of our people, insuring that the Jews our grandchildren marry are indeed Jewish to the end that those of us who merit greeting the Moshiach shall be pure — not racially and not ethnically — but pure in our commitment to the Almighty and to His Torah.

It should be made clear from the beginning in these and other cases that if at any point the parents do not or will not pursue the possibility of conversion, the role of the school as educator of Jewish children justifies their rejection of the child.

The matter of keeping Jewish day schools Jewish is of such great importance that the administration of the school should insist on the cooperation of the board of directors to assist in the process.

On: "Modern Orthodoxy" To the Editor: One can only admire Rabbi Riskin's seemingly ubiquitous involvement in Torah Judaism. In his article "Where Modern Orthodoxy Is At — And Where It Is Going" Jewish Life, Spring 1976), he posited a thesis with several obvious yet keen observations, whose ramifications and applica tion are never focused into clear view. By implication, Riskin suggests jj§ lii that modern Orthodoxy, though not bankrupt, is decidedly inferior to its "rightist" (Riskin's term) counterpart. His arguments deserve some attention. He feels "the absence of a striv ing after emunah and kedushah, which is widespread within the modern Orthodox community is symptomatic of spiritual Failure." He points to the absence of effort to achieve an awareness of the Shechina in tefilla. He deplores the discussion of the closing prices on the Stock Exchange dmv ing tefilla. I must ask him are these lamentable observations present to a significantly lesser degree in the shtiebel and hashkama minyan? Does the prayer experience of the "rightist" groups in Queens and Brooklyn reflect In the shul vibrations of the "right an aspiration for deveikus? In the shul vibrations of the "rightist" commun ist" community does one feel the ity does one feel the Kedushas Beis Ha'Keneses or the striving for emunah Kedushas Beis Ha'Keneses or the and kedushah, whose absence, according to Rabbi Riskin is widespread striving for emunah and kedushah, whose absence, according to Rabbi within modem Orthodoxy? Rabbi Riskin's observations in this realm are true but represent only Riskin is widespread within mod half-truths. Why does he confine his focus in these observations to mod ern Orthodoxy? ern Orthodoxy, from whose emotional and educational roots he was nur tured, when in truth, they are unfortunately accurate for most move ments of Torah Judaism? Rabbi Riskin raises the very important question of goals for children. He undoubtedly realized that "rightist" parents, who take pride in their son, the talmid chochom, encourage him to enter business. Alternatively, the young man is encouraged to leam in Kollel for many years as he enjoys the support of his wife or her parents. How many parents of the "rightist" orientation encourage their son, the talmid chochom, to serve Keneses Yisrael in chinuch or rabbanus? Does the mitzvah of Talmud Torah not embrace both li'lmod u'le'lamed (to study and to teach)? Once again, why does Riskin confine the dimensions of his observations, which might apply to most Orthodox groups, to modern Orthodoxy? Rabbi Riskin further feels that modern Orthodoxy has produced few talmidei chachomim. He finds it difficult to understand that "with all of our yeshivas, American Orthodoxy (modern from context) has produced so few genuine talmidei chachomim." The Sages apparently feel that the de velopment of talmidei chachomim follows a law of nature whereby for every hundred students taught, ten will emerge satisfactorily (tovim); the ten are further taught for the sake of two who will emerge; and the two are further instructed as one cannot determine who will ultimately be fit. (This follows the position of the Academy of Hillel, which favors a qual ified "open-admission" policy in Jewish education,) Thus the Sages con-

s: o n e n b cl o h a

h n ir ic e:

tl v 0 r<

P tl D h tl C w cl

is tl 1 ir d si ei

T c< is ir si

in id th aits its V-

rn to ie us >a he iCt mah ad dy dir^ein. eir m he >n, he nd his ;rn ew >ur so ie-ry are are fit. alm-

sider it satisfactory if talmedei chachomim are produced at an efficiency rate of one percent (1%). I feel Yeshiva University can take pride in its yield of talmedei chachomim over the past twenty years. Its yield in this area may even exceed the 1% expectation of the Sages. Statistics would prove rather illuminating not only in evaluating the modern Orthodox yeshivos but also for evaluating the "lightest" yeshivos, whose yield of talmedei chachomim, Riskin assumes, is satisfactory. Although every individual is unique, in the domain o i mitzvos ma'asiyos one can expect an appropriately.. .(similar) performance of all people. Halacha provides a minimum normative behavior, of which all people are capable. Rabbi Riskin is in sound territory when he notes that every ma'aseh ha-mitzvoh "must be supported by mitzvos she'b'lev," by an inner compo nent. However, the capacity for this inner component will differ from individual to individual. No two individuals will put tefilUn on with the identical internal experience. It is even rare for one individual to experi ence the same kiyum she'b'lev on successive days. Halacha has provided an objective minimum for the fulfillment of pre cepts. In most cases, the minimum requirement is met when the precept is performed (according to the halachic prescription) with an awareness that it constitutes a Divine imperative. The depth of religious fervor will vary from individual to individual and from occasion to occasion. Yet the objective criteria for observance must be acknowledged as a minimum in religious experience and fulfillment. Rabbi Riskin either obscures this notion or negates it. In discussing Torah attitudes, he concludes " I f American Orthodoxy produces. . .Sabbath-observing intellectuals who cannot say 'my soul thirsts for the Living G-d', we shall have failed." It was the psalmist, King David, who said "m y soul thirsts for the Living G -d." Do all Jews really have the spiritual capacity and dimension of David? Does anything less than this dramatic davidic response mean, as Riskin says, we (i.e. modern Orthodox) have failed? I cannot agree to such an extremist position, by whose standards even many (or most) in the "rightist" group would be classified as failure. Human nature, if left unchecked, is much like a liquid which assumes the shape of its container. In a society where -— Riskin correctly observes — it is often very "difficult to maintain a synthesis of Torah values with contemporary values," modern Orthodox families may seek out "right ist" yeshivos for their children. Such yeshivos serve as a dam, preventing the inundation of their children's minds and hearts by foreign waters. Thus the growth of "rightist" yeshivos and communities may merely indicate the utility of such dams in strengthening Torah values, not as a desirable objective in itself. Many modern Orthodox parents may look to such dams as aids to help their children reach the end product, the mod ern Orthodox Jew, who may ultimately represent an ideal. This means that the challenge to modern Orthodox yeshivos is greater. These yeshivos have already selected a central path which allows for considerably less deviation. The margin for deviation within the "right ist" groups before entering a danger zone is considerably greater than in modern Orthodoxy. In this sense, the "rightist" groups offer greater in sulation . . . .

Rabbi Riskin is in sound territory when he notes that every ma'aseh ha-mitzvoh "must be supported by mitzvos she'b'lev/' by an inner component. However, the capacity for this inner component will differ from individual to individual. No two individuals will put tefillin on with the identical internal experi ence. It is even rare for one indi vidual to experience the same kiyum she'b'lev on successive days.

Human nature, if left unchecked, is much like a liquid which assumes the shape of its container. In a soci ety where Riskin correctly ob serves- it is often very "difficult to maintain a synthesis of Torah val ues with contemporary values," modern Orthodox families may seek outr "rightist" yeshivos for their children. Such yeshivos serve as a dam, preventing the inunda tion of their children's minds and hearts by foreign waters.

I must confess that I deeply appreciate the concerns expressed by Rabbi Riskin. It is merely his treatment of these concerns which I found illconceived. I do hope that the leaders of all groups of Torah-Jewry would recognize these concerns and commit themselves to finding solutions. Rabbi Menahem Meier Paramus, New Jersey To the Editor:

As an "inverted marrano" whose goal is synthesis I must demur to the basic thesis implied in the Rab bi's argument. To be an inverted marrano is not a sin. To believe in the ultimate triumph of the synth esis of all truth is not a cardinal crime.

I had long ago despaired of Jewish Life representing all of "Orthodoxy." As the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations began to drift more and more to the "right" so did the "house organ." It certainly has never been open to disparate theological or halachic views. Unfortunately, or more correctly by reason of our own laziness, the Orthodox rabbis (at least by our own definition) who serve Orthodox congregations (objectively de fined as containing an acceptable mechitza) who will neither be intimi dated by the "right," browbeaten by the shtiebel or frightened by the excesses of a permissive society have never created a vehicle in which mainstream Orthodoxy could express itself. Rabbi Riskin's sermon is billed as "an even-handed overview of native Orthodox Judaism." As an Orthodox rabbi, I feel compelled to indicate to those who are members of Orthodox synagogues unaware of the nuances of the various views, that the article is, as most material in Jewish Life, neither even-handed nor representative of mainstream American Or thodoxy, but rather a typical "right-wing" expression. Two factors causing the current Orthodox shift to the "right" are consi dered by Rabbi Riskin: The concept of synthesis and the incidence of the "inverted marrano." Inverted marranoes are in Rabbi Riskin's words: "Jews who act out the rituals, but have the inner responses of the sec ularist. Sabbath observing intellectuals who cannot say 'my soul thirsts for the living G-d.' " As an "inverted marrano" whose goal is synthesis I must demur to the basic thesis implied in the Rabbi's argument. To be an inverted marrano is not a sin. To believe in the ultimate triumph of the synthesis of all truth is not a cardinal crime. Secularism is set up as a "straw-man" and in proper order despairingly destroyed. The intimation is that secularism per se is the cause of promis cuity. It is tantamount to suggesting that Nazism is the child of Western Civilization (poor Plato and Da Vinci) and not the perversity of man. Imagine a prophet of Israel suggesting that sin in Jerusalem is a result of Torah. As an "inverted marrano" my soul yet thirsts for the living G-d. Is such a paradox possible? For a post-holocaust Jew it is not only possible, but more than likely the only honest option open to the world of Torah and ultimately G-d Himself. It is not as Rabbi Riskin suggests that I cannot say "My soul thirsts. . . , " but it may perhaps even be a sacrilege to so ver balize our heritage today. Rabbi Riskin in defining Judaism as a "monotheistic religion" indicates that it "stands or falls on its ability to imbue its adherents with a deep

bbi illjld

■ier sey

y ." ind sen ore by demithe Lich dve 2 to Lees ,ife, Orisithe rds: >ecfor

the o is h is

‘gty nis:ern Lan. t of

uch but and say aer

ates eep

abiding faith in a higher being, which endows every human activity with higher meaning. . . . " Judaism is however more than a "monotheistic re ligion," it is an ethical monotheistic "life system" grounded on legalmoral (halachic) norms. The purpose of this system is not only to allow men to relate to the super-natural but to order deliberate living in the here and now guaranteeing maximum freedom to all. Mystical union with the Divine is very attractive but unrelated to the basic question: the turning of Orthodoxy to the "right." "Render unto Caesar" and "Be a Jew in your tents" are not of necessity the corollary slogans of synthesis anymore then "Let all that you do b e . . . " is the corollary maxim of a monothesis. Much human corruption is dictated by the later as much good is legislated by the former. I do not deny that the basic acts of my Judaistic "marronoism" stem from basic theological and moral concepts. They are invisible and to be apprehended only through a lifetime of religious observances to which they gave birth. I am less concerned by the knitted kippah at "Kosher World" than by the quasi-chassid who in his clinging to G-d in mystical union no longer needs the kippah at all. American Orthodoxy was built by the appeal of the rabbinate to people to build one observance upon another without asking their constituents to be "G-d-intoxicated swingers." If as a result we have not created the European typegodol it may well be that that proto-type of Jewish learning is not an absolute and may well be anachronistic. I seem to doubt that the Rambam would have passed muster in Mir or Slobodka! To enjoy the bounties of G-d's world in the cultural idiom of the day, e.g. "Grossinger," is not a biblical prohibition. Not to enjoy with dignity that which the Almighty, good fortune, and hard work have presented American Jewry is the greater crime — "Because thou didst not serve the Lord thy G-d with joyfulness and with gladness of heart, by reason of the abundance of all things." Intellectually and culturally not all of secular western culture is to be seen as the "handmaiden" of the Kitzur Shulchan Aruch. There is truth amongst the goyim even though it is not Torah. When we speak of synth esis we have always m^ant that we view G-d's declaration.. ."and it was good" to include all of Creation with our task to raise all elements of this Creation to a level of sanctity. "How shall man obtain a conception of the majesty of the Divine? Through the expansion of his scientific faculties; through the liberation of his imagination and the enjoyments of bold flights of thought; through the disciplined study of the world and of life; through the cultivation of a rich, multifarious sensitivity to every phase of being. All these desiderata require obviously the study of all those branches of wisdom, all the philosophies of life, all the ways of diverse civiliza tion, and the doctrine of ethics and religion in every nation and tongue" - Abraham Isaac Kook In conclusion I recommend for those who still dream of synthesis to read Rabbi Norman Lamm's "Monism for Modems" and "Two Versions of Synthesis" in his Faith and Doubt (New York: Ktav, 1971). "Tension is an indispensable concomitant of synthesis. . . " anxiety and doubt and perplexity are necessary side reactions of the art of synthesis." Lamm.

Intellectually and culturally not all of secular western culture is to be seen as the "handmaiden" of the Kitzur Shulchan Aruch. There is truth amongst the goyim even though it is not Torah.

The term Inverted Marrono may be incorrect — "gambler for deliberate living" may be more correct. The incidence of the shtiebel and hashkama minyan have ultimately little to do with all the above. If it were so it could be dealt with intelligently and dispassionately. The gravitation to these"off beat" prayer rooms by "right" wing Orthodoxy is more in the nature of a new "Korach" move ment and their covert rebellion against authority than the desire to cleave to G-d. "Kovach's defiance of Moses, however, was for the first time a planned conspi racy, initiated by a small group of elite individuals, who were prompted by a lust for power. A new ideology based on the presumption of greater democracy, and on more logical Halacha was formulated. No petty quarrel, desert fears or sudden ungratified needs prompted this rebellion. This was no spontaneous outburst of the masses. From the very outset it was a conspiracy for power." - Ha'Rav J.B. Soloveitchik (Shiurey Ha'Rav, P. 45) In the same article...Rabbi Soloveitchik writes: "Actually it is the external mitzvah, not the inner experience which is primary.. .The only solid reality is the mitzvah whose integrity and dimensions the Halacha can control. The intangible and vascillating inner emotion must follow, reflect, and be disciplined by the outer mitzvah." Inverted Marronoes seeking synthesis, using the mitzvah, objective and active, disciplined and calculated is the approach of Torah. "First (in the mitzvah of Tzitzit) it states "an d you shall look upon them", a deed performance, and then, only then, will the recollection of the mitzvot; the experience, come." (Soloveitchik — Shiurey Ha'Rav p. 45) Rabbi Elihu J. Steinhom Stamford, Connecticut The Editor Comments: Jewish Life is not a "house organ," Let's leave it at that. But Rabbi Steinhom and his colleagues now do have a "vehicle" in which they can express their views.

To the Editor:

Many of his criticisms of modem Orthodoxy are penetrating and correct. However, is the situation any better to the right? One need only turn some pages earlier in the same issue of Jewish Life and quote from Rabbi Bernard Weinberger's very perceptive comments on the Torah community which seems so idyllic in Rabbi Riskin's comments.

Rabbi Riskin portrays modern Orthodoxy as observant but superficially so, and therefore facing a serious challenge from the right. One can only wonder on what Rabbi Riskin bases his statistics on this swing to the right. Many of his criticisms of modem Orthodoxy are penetrating and correct. However, is the situation any better to the right? One need only turn some pages earlier in the same issue of Jewish Life and we quote from Rabbi Bernard Weinberger's very perceptive comments on the Torah community which seems so idyllic in Rabbi Riskin's comments. "All of this would be absolutely exhilarating if it weren't for the sad fact (and it grieves me to have to say it) that all of this vigorous piety is all too often superficial, and not supported by personal behavior behind closed doors. There is a distinct discrepancy and inconsistency between the

le y y y e

■ I ■ I 8

■ 8

n n of |

fs is

re n d Le

n it

I 8 8

B 8 B

8 8 8 8

bi n

8 8

ly [y ie d

8 8 B 8 8

te Lh

ct >o id ie

8 8 8 8

image we project on the outside and the real world in which we function privately. It is not simply the usual discrepancy between the ideal that we give lip service to and the real that we experience. That would be quite normal, since this is the way people express their hopes and aspirations, What we have here is a blatant self-deception that really entails adulteration of the ideal. If "learning in a kollel" is not supported by other aspects of piety that they purport to imply, then they can become a caricature and denigration of Chassidic life. And.. .nowhere is the failure to be genuine more devastating than in marriage. Here self-deception becomes deception of another human being who may or may not be able or willing to be a party to the facade." Rabbi Riskin is certainly correct in criticizing the decorum in many a modem Orthodox synagogue. However, is the shteibel the answer? The The New York Stock Ex New York Stock Exchange.. .(and) the Diamond market.. .are as much change. . .(and) the Diamond mar extracurricular subjects of discussion in the shteiblach as in the modern ket...are as much extracurricular subjects of discussion in the shteib Orthodox synagogue, perhaps even more so because the Orthodox pro lach as in the modem Orthodox fessional has limited contacts with that element of the business world. It is synagogue, perhaps even more so usually a flight from communal responsibility that paves the road from because the Orthodox professional has limited contacts with that ele the synagogue to the shteibel rather than problems of decorum. ment of the business world. And again while Rabbi Riskin has produced an excellent standard for ¿11 Jews to utilize in measuring their commitment in his query on how one sPends his spare time, one can not accept the assertion implied in his question, "And is it any wonder that with all our Yeshivos, American Orthodoxy has produced so few genuine Talmidei Chachomim?" Neither he nor I have counted them, but both of us meet many of them daily at Yeshiva University. There is today in the United States and Israel a gener- There is today in the United States ad°n °f American-born men and women (and this too is a goal of modern and Israel a generation of Orthodoxy), who are doctors, lawyers, pulpit rabbis, scientists, other American-born men and women (and this too is a goal of modem professionals and businessmen who are genuine scholars and meet Rabbi Orthodoxy), who are doctors, Riskin's fine criterion of devoting every free moment to study and learn lawyers, pulpit rabbis, scientists, professionals and ing. Furthermore, this learning is not only academic but is applied to other businessmen who are genuine scho every aspect of life, from family to society, from medical practice to inlars and meet Rabbi Riskin's fine dustrial technology. Not all, not even most modern Orthodox Jews reach criterion of devoting every free these levels, but then, if Rabbi Weinberger is correct, and I believe he is, moment to study and learning. neither does the world of the right. Modem Orthodoxy's goals are more demanding and therefore possibly more difficult to attain but certainly most compensating as a way of life replete with faith and sanctity. Rabbi Riskin is correct in asserting that modem Orthodoxy's acceptance of secuâr l i n i n g is responsible for the strength of Orthodox Judaism today, While roshei yeshiva still denounce college education, their students, some I # hirtively and others overtly, enroll in institutions of higher learning seekin8 credits f°r their religious studies in the yeshiva. The challenge of the State of Israel, of the Holocaust, and of the cause of ôytet Jewry today have become the major areas of confrontation between Modem Orthodoxy recognizes all m°dern Orthodoxy and those to its right. Modern Orthodoxy recognizes the faults of secular Judaism in the all the faults of secular Judaism in the United States and in Israel. It, United States and in Israel. It, however, believes that the State of Israelis a divine manifestation and the however, believes that the State of Israel is a divine manifestation and answer 1° the challenge it presents is to join the dynamic surge of Jewish the answer to the challenge it pre history. The response to the challenge will not be found by remaining sents is to join the dynamic surge of Jewish history. ak)0ând apart from the process. . . 59

Modem Orthodoxy has produced a generation of young people who today are part and parcel of Israel. Others in America identify with Israel and attempt to give it a Torah image. Uncounted numbers have given of themselves on dangerous missions for Israel and the Jews of Russia with out fanfare or publicity. This fiery commitment is one of genuine kedusha and emunah and with the flames of this commitment G-d is rebuilding Jerusalem and the future of our people. Rabbi Louis Bernstein Bayside, New York (The Honorable Percy E. Sutton, President o f the Borough of Manhattan has consented to our sharing with you his letter to Rabbi Jack Simcha Cohen commenting on "Changing Neighborhoods: The Drive to the Sea," which appeared in our issue of Winter 1976.)

Those who understand this process...share great concern for its im pact upon the very viability o f the City o f New York in the years ahead. As a result, along with an understanding as to the nature of this problem, there has emerged as well a recognition that we need to concern ou rselves w ith the economic and racial stability o f our local communities.

On: "The Drive to the Sea" Permit me to extend to you my compliments with regard to your article, "Changing Neighborhoods: The Drive To The Sea." I have read it and found the article to be most perceptive. Indeed, it is my opinion that your article is indicative of an understand ing that has emerged in recent years among our political, civic and religi ous leaders, in communities throughout the City of New York, that the very future of our great city lay in the stability of its many neighborhoods. Moreover, as you know, the story of the growth of the City of New York during those periods of its most expansive development may be seen partly in the history of its many neighborhoods; communities to which there came persons of various racial and ethnic backgrounds and who came to the City of New York from foreign countries and other parts of the United States. During the last fifty years striking demographic changes have occurred in the City which resulted in the integration of many of these groups within the City's various communities. As your article suggests, however, this trend has continued so as to result in the resegregation of many of our neighborhoods. Those who understand this process.. .share great concern for its im pact upon the very viability of the City of New York in the years ahead. As a result, along with an understanding as to the nature of this problem, there has emerged as well a recognition that we need to concern ourselves with the economic and racial stability of our local communities. . . Additionally, I want to join you in the hope that increasingly New Yorkers, including our Jewish residents, will realize that by their determi nation and refusal to flee from the City they shall ultimately contribute to the well-being of their families, the stability of their communities, and the viability of the City of New York. Percy E. Sutton New York City

On: Freud's "Pleasure Principle" To the Editor: In the comments section of the fall 1976 issue of Jewish Life, you expres sed your pleasure with the New York Times for showing, in their article 60

on the growing use of the Mikvah, that they "can indeed write about Jewish tradition without distortion of classic concepts and without the smaltzy style that often turns serious matters into farce." Can we not expect that contributors to your journal exercise the same degree of care in their articles. I am referring to the paper by Eliezer Berkovits entitled, "A Jewish Sexual Ethics." In this contribution, Rabbi Berkotits stated that man, according to Freud's metapsychology, " is fully comprehended by the pleasure principal." Although the author has every right to disagree with Freud, he owes his readers an accurate rendition of what Freud said, and it is simply not correct to say that Freud believed that man is "fully comprehended by the pleasure principle." Freud saw the transition from the pleasure principle to the reality prin ciple as one of the most important and momentous steps in the develop ment of the ego. While Freud never changed his view about the impor tance of the pleasure principle in mental functioning, he did state that an individual has reached maturity when he can renounce the pleasure prin ciple, adjust himself to reality and turn to the external world for the object of his desires. These brief comments about Freud's conception of the pleasure princi ple are not intended to do justice to the integrity of the man and the richness of his work. It should come as no surprise then, that there are many who would strongly feel that Berkovits' distorting simplifications of Freud's views are no less distasteful to them than uncritical reporting on Jewish affairs is to you. Walter H. Troffkin, M.D. Elkins Park, Pa. Dr. Berkovits replies: I have read Dr. Troffkin's objection to my statement that according to Freud man is "fully comprehended by the pleasure principle". Now it is true that Freud occasionally does say that "the pleasure principle has been replaced by the reality principle", but let us see what exactly is the function of the reality principle. Writing about the ego-instincts, which at first seek nothing but gratification no less than the sexual instinct, Freud explains: "...under the influence of necessity, their mistress, they soon learn to replace the pleasure-principle by a modification of it. The task of overriding pain becomes for them almost equal in importance to that of gaining pleasure; the ego learns that it must inevitably go without immediate satisfaction, postpone gratification, learn to endure a de gree of pain, and altogether renounce certain sources of pleasure. Thus trained the ego becomes "reasonable," is no longer controlled by the pleasure principle but follows the reality principle, which at the bottom also seeks — although a delayed and diminished pleasure one which is assured by its realization of face, its relation to reality." (A General Introduction to Psycho-Analysis, Sigmund Freud, Permabooks, p. 365) The idea is even more clearly stated in Freud's Beyond the Pleasure Princi-

pie (Bantam Book ed. p. 26), where he writes: "This latter principle [the reality principle] does not abandon the intention of ultimately obtaining pleasure, but it nevertheless de mands and carries into effect the postponement of satisfaction, the abandonment of a number of possibilities of gaining satisfaction and the temporary toleration of any pleasure as a step in the long indirect road to pleasure". [emphasis mine] In other words, the pleasure principle is apt to act stupidly by disre garding facts, reality. The reality principle is its modification; it trains the pleasure principle how to get around obstructing facts of reality and thus gain the greatest amount of possible gratification. The reality principle is the "strategist" of the pleasure principle and subservient to it. There is nothing here on Dr. Troffkin's eloquent assertion that Freud "did state that an individual has reached maturity when he can renounce the plea sure principle, adjust himself to reality and turn to the external world for the objects of his desires." There is no renouncing here of the goal of the pleasure principle of achieving the highest degree of gratification; there is only renouncing stupidity in going about achieving that goal. It does say something that when, toward the end of his creative career, Freud wrote his little volume Beyond the Pleasure Principle, he was not writing about the reality principle, but about his—in his own opinion— rather uncertain discovery of the death instinct. No matter what the sig nificance of the reality principle may be on the psychologist's couch, ethically speaking man still remains "fully comprehended by the pleasure principle". That was our only concern. Eliezer Berkovits Jerusalem

On the "Monument for Judah Turo" To the Editor: May I point out what appears to be a typographical or proofreaders error in Tishrei's issue on P. 35, of Rabbi Dr. N. M. Adlers Responsum. It appears that "not" should be omitted and that he must have written "It is lawful for Israelities to subscribe...provided it is cast...by a non Israel ite..." (Rabbi) Nisson Shulman Los Angeles, California (Rabbi Shulman is of course correct and we appreciate his careful reading.) To the Editor: Your Fall 1976 article on the plan to build a monument in memory of Judah Turo was most interesting. Background on this plan is found in

Three Years In America (1859-1862 by I. J. Benjamin, Volume 1, pp. 320 to 333.) Benjamin II, as he styled himself, was a German Jew who was in New Orleans at the time plans were made to erect the monument. He writes that it was his vigorous protest in a public letter which forced the monument committee to ask leading European Rabbis their opinions. He adds also that while David Einhorn and Isaac Meir Wise, architects of American reform Judaism, agreed that the monument was contrary to halacha, "not a single Orthodox Rabbi in America took my side, which was also theirs" (pg. 324). The beginning of the Civil War put an end to the committee's plans. Sincerely, (Rabbi) Raphael Groner Binghampton, New York

“You will read it with a wonderment mixed with the anguish that only the reading of cer tain old, simple but upsetting legends can in spire...you laugh, you smile as you follow his adventures in the Army of the Tsar...Jacob Marateck is irresistible.” —Elie W iesel, The New Leader “A treasure-house of stories & experience...wry, ironic humor.” — R o b e rt K irsch , L.A. Times ' “Searing graphic...a little masterpiece.” —S am u el S ilv er, The Jewish Post “ Filled with humor, religiosity, strength and pride.”

—T h e L ib rary Jo u rn a l “ Remarkable...tells more about life in Eastern Europe than any history text.”

— D o n n a S ta n d e n , P h ila d e lp h ia B u lle t in

THE SAMURAI OF VISHOGROD THE NOTEBOOKS OF JACOB MARATECK

Retold by Shimon and Anita Wincelberg The Picaresque Adventures of a High-Spirited Young Orthodox Jewish “Samurai” , from Warsaw’s lower depths to the farcical and bloody corruption of the Russian Army in Manchuria.

$ 7 .9 5 at your b ook store

or postpaid from Jewish Publication Society 1528 Walnut St. Philadelphia, Pa. 19102

Name______ Street_______ City ____ _ State , j _________________________________________ Zip-----------------------□

Please send m e __________— copies of THE SAMURAI OF VISHOGROD at $7.95 each postpaid. □ Please send catalogue and information on money saving membership plan.

DAVID SHAPELL COLLEGE OF JEWISH STUDIES FOR MEN

JERUSALEM, ISRAEL

(FORMERLY HARTMAN’S)

Is now accepting applications for admission from college and graduate students for the 1977-78 academic year. Curriculum includes Mishna, Gemara, Bible, Philosophy, Law and Languages. Students with a limited Torah education are invited to join our one - or two - year program s. Our College is recognized by the Israeli Ministry of Education for receiving a T ea ch e r’s Diploma and our courses are accredited by American universities.

Boruch needs room in someone's heart. His parents can't care for him

Dormitory and dining facilities are available.

and he needs an Orthodox foster home for a while.

Learn How To Learn

Is there room in your heart? for Boruch?

Call: (21 2) 8 51-6300 For further information or for an Representative from Israel, Contact: Office of the Registrar Shapell College of Jew ish Studies 2 Sderot Ha’meiri Jerusalem , Israel

appointment to

meet

our

David Shapell College of Jewish Studies 1239 E ast 8th S treet Brooklyn, N.Y. 11230 (212) 338-3400

Add^airf toyoyrtravel. AsktorBorenstems Glatt Kosher meals. More hard-to-please travellers prefer our distinctive cuisine than any other brand. Because we’ve got “tarn.” That’s why we’ve been El Al’s exclusive American caterer since its inception. Nowwe offer our unique and varied menus to any traveller on any airline. Delicious, satisfying Glatt Kosher meals are yours for the asking. Just specify Borenstein’s whenever you book vour flight. y Gourmet or dietary (for instance, low sodium) meals are available on request. Since 1945

4907-16th Ave. Brooklyn,11204 • (212) 851-6300 "The only professional child care agency under Orthodox Jewish Auspices in the U. S. A ."

E n jo y ...

•

179-29 150th Road, Jamaica, N.Y. 11434 (212) 656-3600

in Kosher Poultry

PREFERRED WORLD-WIDE