BOOK REVIEWS
One Man's Judaisms, by EMANUEL RACKMAN (New York:Phiosophical Librar, 1970).
Reviewed byMichael Wyschogrod
In one of the essays that make
up tbis collection, Emanuel Rack-man writes as follows:
Rightly or wrongly, one Jewish so-ciologist has named me as anideologist of "modem Orthodoxy."However, one can hardly regardmodem Ortodoxy as a move-ment: it is no more than a coterieof a score of rabbis in Americaand in Israel whose interpretationsof the Tradition have won the ap-proval of Ortodox intellectualswho are knowledgeable in bothJudaism and Western civiliation.None of the rabbis feels that heis articulatig any position thatcannot be supportd by referenceto authentic Jewish sources. Nonewants to organize a separate rab-binic body, and several have re-jected an attempt to publish an in-d~pendent periodical, because theyd!~ not want the remotest possi-bility that th form of separatismbe interpreted as a schism in Or-thodoxy. .1, no les~ than tpey, denyany clar to innovation. Ourchoice of method and values inthe Tradition, our emphases, and
our concerns, may be different.But the creation or articulation ofshades and hues hardly warrantsdignifying our effort with the terms
. "ideology" or "sect." We know thatthe overwhelming majority of Or-thodox rabbis difer with us and thatthe faculties of most Orthodox dayschools and rabbinical seminariesdisapprove of some of our viewsand so instruct their pupils. It isnot our mission to have them joinour ranks. Rather do we seek tohelp Jewish intellectuals who arebeing alienated from the Traditionto realize that they can share /lcommitment to the faith which isacceptable to them and at leastas authentic as the one they havereceived from their teachers butwhich they feel impelled to re-nounce. We reject the multiplica-ton of i:0gmas and their preciseformulation. . . . Ours is a com-mitment which invites questioningand creativity in thought and prac-tice, as applied not only to theLaw but also to theology.
Noteworthy about this passage isRackman's realization that "mod-ern Orthodoxy" is a minority view~it? which "the overwhelming ma-
Jonty of Orthodox rabbis difer"whie "the faculties of most Ortho-
101
TRAITION: A Journal of Orthodox Thought
dox day schools and rabbinical sem-
inaries disapprove of some of ourviews and so instruct their pupils."Not so long ago the philosophy of"synthesis," a term commonly as-sociated with the ideology of Ye-shiva University, was presented asthe wave of the future, the hopeof American Judaism. Suddenly wediscover that the majority of Or-
thodox rabbis and faculties of Or-thodox day schools reject modemOrthodoxy and that its exponentsare therefore of necessity an em-
battled band surrounded by hostileforces. One can only conclude thateither the "synthesis" preached at
Yeshiva University is not quite thesame product as the modern Ortho-doxy to which Dr. Rackran refersor that events did not quite develop
as anticipated. All this demonstratesthat the condition of American Or-thodoxy requires investigation.
Orthodox Judaism in Americafalls naturally into three divisions,
each of which has its own diverstiybut which nevertheless can be iden-tified in a broad sense. There is firstthe Yiddish speaking wing of Or-
thodoxy that rejects all secular edu-cation beyond the legally prescribedminimum. A large portion of thisgroup consists of Hassidic Jewsbut it would also include such non-Hassidic centers as the LakewoodYeshiva and similar institutions.Then there is the group that Iwould associate with yeshivot suchas Torah Vodaath and ChaIm Ber-lin. Most students in thi group at-tend college though usually in theevening and with some degree ofambivilence, since secular education,while not altogether forbidden inthese circles, is not exactly encour-
102
aged. Then there is finally the wingof Orthodoxy centered around Ye-
shiva University. Here secular edu-cation is less ambivalently em-braced and, as noted, talk about
"synthesis" is often heard. Thereare groups, such as that of Hirsch-
ian Orthodoxy which do not easilyfit into any of the groups. But out-side of such few exceptions, most
of American Orthodoxy does fallinto these three groups.
Dr. Rackman's book is, in thefial analysis, a thoughtful defense
of what might be called "rationalOrthodoxy." He proves beyondshadow of doubt that the geniusof Judaism has been its abilty toembrace diverse points of view andits reluctance to declare herctical
even views which did not gain wide
acceptance. He shows how thegreatest names in Jewish thoughtdisagreed about some very funda-mental matters (e.g., the corporeal-ity of God) with everybody con-
cerned retaining his good standing
in the rabbinic fellowship. And heshows how Jewish law has devel-oped in response to changes in theconditions of life to which the lawwas being applied. In short, Rack-man makes amply clear that thekind of dark Judaism, a mutation
of Judaism that asks no questions
and permits no deviation from aparty line, is not, in spite of whatit claims, the real original but rath-er a modern corruption of a viablefaith which did not shrink from lifeand its challenges when its healthwas in better shape.
And yet, rational Orthodoxy, aseven Rackman admits, is on the de-fensive. It is not easy to see howthis can be documented short of
Book Reviews
a large scale invasion by question-
naire of the major institutions ofOrthodoxy, an approach which theempirical sociologist considers in-dispensable. But even in the ab-sence of such documentation onedoes get the impression that think-ing Orthodoxy is swamped in manyplaces by a less complicated prod-
uct which claims to have easy an-swers to questions and whose an-swers lack the complexity and per-
haps, to a degree, even ambiguity
which is almost always the resultof thought. Right-wing Orthodoxy
appeals to many for various rea-sons. It is uncompromising and de-mands much arid the imagiationsof many young people are movedby stringent, uncompromising de-mands. Furthermore, many thinkof Judaism in quantitative terms,reasoning that if Judaism is a goodthing, then the more of it there isthe better and the most the best.Intertwined with this is what mightbe called discount thinking: ouryoung people wil in any case sheda portion of their Judaism and itis therefore vital that there be somereserves so that even after the in-evitable discounting, enough re-main. All this produces a psychol-
ogy of safety: it is safer to send achild to a right-wing Yeshiva than
to a left-wing one; it is safer to
depend on this kashrut endorse-ment than that, etc. Seen in thislight, modern or left-wing Ortho-doxy is a risky and dubious propo-sition indeed.
I forget now whether it was Hux-ley's Brave New World or Orwell's1984 that depicts a society whose
mottos consist of such absurditiesas "Rebellon is Submission" and
"Innocence is Guilt." Whatevermay be the case in the politicalorder, in the sphere of faith thereis an inherent dialectic such that
safety is peril, certainty is ignor-
ance and defeat is victory. Thebroader ramifcations of this de-serve morc discussion than is pos-sible here, but it is not going too
far afield to point out that because
in faith Israel relates to its Godwho, while historically immanent,is also totally transcendent, there
is a constant unhinging of the hu-
man standpoint when the livingGod makes his demands. Anyfounding of Judaism which is ba-sically (in contrast to tangentially)
rooted in the wisdom of the world,in child psychology or in the prin-ciples of safety rather than in theobedience to a command which asoften as not involves embarking ona journey through a perilous desertin which there is no security, is awrong founding. Humanly speak-ing, it makes good sense, if we wishour children to retain a certain
quantity of Judaism, to endow themwith a larger quantity so thatenough remains even if some of itwears off. But because Judaism isnot only of this world, because it
is largely the gift of God to Israel,such calculations are dangerous be-cause they tend to assume success
in a worldly sense (i.e., the successin numbers of right-wing Ortho-doxy) and thereafter failure on theonly level that counts: pleasing
God.Here, of course, answers are
notoriously diffcult to come by.What is God's opinion about thisor that wing of Judaism, this or
that wing of Orthodoxy? Surely
103
TRITION: A Journal of Orthodox Thought
nobody knows for sure, and surelywe begin to be religiously seriousonly when tbs dawns upon us,when we discover that we are alunder God's judgment and that ofwbich we are the proudest andwbich we despise the most maynot correspond precisely to what
delights and angers God. There-fore, as fi an adherent of mod-em Orthodoxy as I consider my-self and as sharp a critic of darkOrthodoxy as I fancy myself, Imust ask also whether there issomething wrong in what modemOrthodoxy does and somethingright in the right? Without this
question, the record would be in-complete.
In the scientifc real, it is wide-
ly believed, there operates a checkon theory wbich precludes too rad-ical a loss of contact with reality.Th check consists of the "does itwork?" criterion? A theory aboutmetals which leads to a bridge thatcollapses is discredited; similarly,a medical theory which yields atherapy that produces no benefitcannot long be maintained. Is thereanything even pary approximatingsuch a reality check in the religious
domain?It seems to me that after all the
theories and debates are concluded,there remains one incontrovertiblephenomenal fact in the domain ofthe spirit: the saint, the Tsadik,
the man in whose presence argu-ment ceases and spirtual existenceis perceived. An analysis of thephenomenon can fil volumes, allthat need be said here is that Ju-daism canot possibly survve with-out the appearance of such Tsadi-
kim, men who are fully whole andfrom whom the people can drawsustenance. Tbs is not a question
of scholarship; in fact one of Ju-
daism's greatest weaknesses is theever recurring tendency to confuse
scholarsbip with saintliness, to be-stow authority that belongs to spiriton something or someone else.Tsadikim cannot be planned fornor can any "system" be designed
to produce a quota of them. Andyet, a system out of which they donot arise is defective, in dire need
of renewal.
Can a Tsadik arise from the soilof modern Orthodoxy? I find thisquestion very disturbing.
9l¡ Mystics, by HERBERT WEINER (New York: Holt, Rinehartand Winston, 1969).
Reviewed byMelvi Granatstein
"Seek not things that are toohard for thee." With this quotation
Rabbi Herbert Weiner begins thechronicle of his own encounter
104
with a wide range of students ofJewish mysticism. His account,while journalistic in approach andpopular in tone, gives considerable
evidence both of hard scholarlywork and an incredibly persistentsearch in wbich he interviews and
Book Reviews
lives with a wide range of people.Not only does he have the predict-able interview with the LubavitcherRebbe, and discussions with Ger-shom Scholem and Marti Buber;he provides us with glimpses ofBratzlaver and Belzer Hassidi,extended encounters with RabbiZvi Yehuda Kook, the young iluiRabbi Adin Steinsaltz, Rabbi Da-vid Ha-Kohen, the "Nazi," amongmany others. We are presentedwith a veritable garden of tradi-tional Jewish types.
While we can be grateful to Rab-bi Weiner for presenting us withthis chronicle, it is perhaps appro-priate to reflect on the phenomen-on of such a book being writtenat all. At the end of hi accountRabbi Weiner muses briefly on thecoincidence of fiding both Rabbi
Kook's Kabbalistic tract Rosh Mil-Um and Psychadelic bxperience, abook co-authored by TimothyLeary on his desk. Unmistakeably,
the easy assumptions about the self-suffciency of the scientifc world-view have been shattered and a lostgeneration of youth is searcbing
for something more than the one-
dimensionality endemic to moderncivilization. That which modernman assumed had been buried ina medieval past begins to ressurectitself and a rabbi operating in thecontext of a movement which, inits classic phase, vehemently re-
jected anything that smacked ofmysticism now relates an eventwbich symbolizes the strange con-fluence of a contemporar culturalrevolution and an ancient, much
maligned, near-abandoned indigen-ous Jewish tradition. 9~ Mysticsis a monument to the persistenceof dimensions of experience thatthe entire weight of the modernscientific world-view could nevertotaly destroy.
Mysticism of whatever tye as-
sumes a multi-dimensional unverse.The Zohar says that the world ex-ists layer upon layer, dimension up-on dimension. The Ten Emanationsfrom the Infinite, the Four Worlds,the alternating movements of DivineHistalkut. and Hitpashtut al giveexpression to tbis multidimension-
ality. By contrast, the standard
modern textbooks on Judaism areone-dimensional and rather flat, andfall in easily with the modern my-thos of linear progress. For these
authors, God, if he exists at al,confrms human achievement wbichvanquishes all obstacles and createsGod's kingdom through the UnitedNations and the modern welfarestate. The problem of evil, the re-lationship between God and man,the mingled love and terror wbichinvested traditional religious ex-
perience have all but vanished fromthe scene. In discussing the ques-
tion of primal sin, one modernwriter even has the unmitigatedchutzpah to say, "The Genesismyths were in no way decisive forthe theology of Judaism."l By con-trast, Rabbi Weiner's lucid andpopular journal portrays traditionalJews in a Kabbalistic context asthey really exist; deeply concernedabout problems of relation to God,evil and sin, love and redemption,
1 Silver, Abba Hilel. Where Judaism Differed (New York: Macmll Co.),1961, p. 166.
105
TRAITION: A Journal of Orthodox Thought
thus in many ways modestly con-founding the conformist viewspropagated in Hadassah publica-tions and Oneg Shabbat sermons.It is the very multidimensionality
of Kabbalistic thought that in-trigues our writer. But Rabbi Wein-er himself recognizes an obstacle.He wishes to know if the "Iife-secrets can have meaning for thosewho do not share the full intensityof their (the Kabbalists) experi-ence." It is clear that for Rabbi
Weiner this is bound up with ques-tions of traditional religious belief.
Throughout the book this gnawingquestion is at work. The Tree ofLife beckons, but the path backis lost. What does that man do whocannot believe? Rabbi Weiner por-trays the problem most eloquently
in one particular event. He hasgone into a field with a Bratzlaver
Hassid to practice Hitbodedut -lonely meditation in the presence
of God. The aim of this exerciseis to address the Creator from thedepths on one's soul in solitude.He begins in dead earnest with apassage from the Psalms but then
the communication is broken. Thesophisticated musings of a Biblicalscholar and skeptic come to mind.The effort is renewed but the ultim-ate impression is that Rabbi Wein-er fails. He fails because that pathof communication so open to thetraditional Jew has been coveredover with the thorns and weeds ofthe modern experience.
This is the dilemma of the search.If one believes and practices the
Halakhah, " 'Blessed is he and it iswell for him.' Others wil have moretrouble." Without Halakbah, whatremains is "litte more than a col-
106
lection of data. . ." Rabbi Weinerseeks to "walk the narrow ridge"between Tradition and anarchy,living responsibilty in God's pres-ence but without the weight ofTradition to guide him. The guidehe chooses is clearly Martin Buber.But Buber himself is described byWeiner as an "anti-mystic." RabbiWeiner notes the powerful contrastbetween Buber's anti-halakhic, anti-mystical interpretation of Hassidutand the shock of a real life en-counter with flesh and blood Has-sidim of the Belzer variety and thisis coupled with a presentation of
Gershom Scholem's critique of Bu-ber's Neo-Hasidism. Rabbi Weinermodestly refuses to choose betweenthe scholars but there can be littledoubt that the living encounter sup-ports Scholem's critique more thanBuber's presentation. Yet in the
end, Weiner, in Buber's footsteps,cannot totally accept the traditionalcontext in either its exoteric oresoteric manifestations. But hereinlies the problem.
The motive is pure but the pathis more than just diffcult. It defeatsthe purpose of the search. Surely
Rabbi Weiner wanted more thanmerely the assurance of the value
of a Buberian "Life of Dialogue."
The vineyard of Jewish teachingcan remain as abandoned and un-tended with the life of Dialogue
as without it. Perhaps the error isto begin with the question of be-
lief in the fist place. Not belief
but life-style would seem to be thekey. Perhaps tbis is what the Lu-bavitcher Rebbe meant when hetold Rabbi Weiner that the "logic-al" implication of belief in Godis the performance of the mitzvot.
Book Reviews
One would have to conclude thatRabbi Weiner is also aware of thi.Why else would he seek to im-merse himself in the Mikveh of theAr, to celebrate a Seudat Shabbat
at the home of Rabbi Ashlag orRabbi Kook, or to worship withthe Bratzlaver Hassidim? Yet some-how the lie-style itself is not total-ly compellng for Rabbi Weinerseeks belief fist. Tbs is the dilem-ma of a rather remarkable book.
If 9~ Mystics is truly sympto-
matic of a trend that is to be withus for a while, then the wheel has
really turned. The deep seated re-ligious yearning that impelled Rab-bi Weiner's search wil come to
symbolize the quest of a generationand perhaps the treasures of ourtradition wil be preserved andhanded on in renewed strength.The sophisticated banality of con-formist interpretations of Judaismwil be set aside. for a profound
analysis that wil take the deepest
claims of the human soul seriously.Rabbi Weiner raises the gnawingquestion of belief. Perhaps that toowil be answered for the future gen-erations. So changeable are theaffairs of men that if Judaism hasnot been totally emasculated by itsaccredited interpreters we mightfind our way back to the Torah andthe Tree of Life.
Jewish Philosophy in Modern Times, by NATHAN ROTENSTREICH(New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1968).
Reviewed by
Eliezer Berkovits
Teachers of Jewish philosophyare sadly aware of the dearth ofsource material in the area of mod-ern Jewish philosophy that theymight recommend to their students.A great deal of Jewish phiosophy
in the nineteenth and the present
century was written in German andmost of it has remained untrans-
lated. Practically the only excep-
tion is Martin Buber, whose worksare available in translation and
about whom there exists a richexplanatory literature. This prob-ably is the reason why Professor
Rotenstreich did not include the
pbilosophy of Martin Buber in hisJewish Philosophy in Modern
Times. All the more grateful arewe to him for introducing the con-temporary student to modern Jew-ish philosophy as it indeed does
exist apart from Buber and evenRosenzweig. The thoughts of thelatter are of course not quite asunknown as those of most of mod-ern Jewish thinkers. Yet, in spiteof the relative popularity of Ro-
senzweig, the name, it is ratherdoubtful how well known and un-derstood is Rosenzweig, the think-er.
Roteiistreich discusses the vari-ous trends in modern Jewish philos-ophy under the headings: The Ruleof Ethics - Moses Mendelssohn;The Religion of Morality - S. D.
Luzzatto; The Inner Imperative andHoliness - M. Lazarus; From theEthical Idea to the True Being -
107
TRADITION: A Journal of Orthodox Thought
Hermann Cohen; The Religion ofthe Spirit - S. Formstecher, S.Hirsch and N. Krochmal; TheRoad Back - S. L. Steineim andFranz Rosenzweig; Harony andReturn - Rav Kook; BetweenMan and Nature - A. D. Gordon.The volume is the best introductionto Jewish phiosophy in moderntimes available to the student.
From a historic point of view,the resurrection of such thersas Lazarus, Formstecher, Hirsch isvaluable, though their contrbutionto a working philosophy of Ju-daism today is minmal. The samemay be said of Krochmal and evenMendelssohn. Reading Roten-streich's presentation one realizeswith renewed amazement how littleunderstanding these men had forthe specific quality of the religious
category.One should be especially grate-
ful to the author for rediscovering
for us of Steinheim and such asecularist interpreter of Judaism asthe idcologist of the Haluz move-ment in its most formative years,
A. D. Gordon. Steinheim, in par-ticular, deserves careful attention
and study. Rotenstreich compares
him to Yehuda HalevI. It may,perhaps, be more correct to callhim the Hasciai Crescas of modernJewish philosophy. True, like Ye-
huda Halevi, he sees Judaism notas an intellectual but a uniquely
religious phenomenon. However, inaddition to that, very much likeHasdai Creseas in hi days, hesubjects his predecessors, the ra-
tionalistic identifers of religion withphilosophy, to devastating and ef-fective criticism.
Some of the problems with wbich
108
a student of modern Jewish phi-losophy has to struggle remain un-resolved even in the painstaking
analysis of Rotenstreich. For in-stance, has Herman Cohen realysucceeded in moving from the ethi-cal idea to true Being? Did he con-vincingly transform bis logic into
ontology? Rotenstreich is, of course,right in saying that with his idea
of man's reconcilation with Godand God's forgiveness Cohen hascome closest to a personal God.So was Rosenzweig right when hetoo declared that for Cohen Godwas more than an idea. So it wasfor Cohen the individual Jew, theson who in his old age returned tohis father's house. But was it soalso for Cohen the pbilosopher,even in his old age? On what canhe base his idea of forgiveness,
if revelation for bim is not anevent in time, but man's creation
in reason? It appears that, philo-sophically speaking, Cohen neverreached True Being. To the veryend the gist of his pbilosophy re-
mains expressed in his own formu-lation, when he wrote in his Phi-losophy oj Reason from the Sour-ces of Judaism: "But can one love
anything else but an ideal" Poor
Cohen!Similarly, one might say, not-
withstanding the excellent chapter
on Rosenzeig, Professor Roten-streich hardly convinces us thatRosenzweig's claim that his methodis that of "absolute empiricism" is
a valid one. In his criticism ofidealism, Rosenzweig was right indoing it on the basis of "absolute
empiricism." But one remain un-conviced that .his triad of Crea-tion - Revelation - Redemption
Book Reviews
or his idea of faith are the results
of that method. However, in read-ing Rotenstreich's presentation whatdoes come though with great clar-ity is something that a student ofthe Star in particular has beenhesitant to acknowledge, i.e., thatthis ilustrous and truy great Baal
Teshuvah of modern times funda-mentally misunderstood Judaism.Nowhere is this more obvious thanwhen he places Christianity in timeand Judaism outside of time andhistory. The truth is, of course,
that whereas the Christian Kig-dom of God is not of this world,Judaism asks for the establishment
of this world as God's Kingdom.Whereas according to Christianityhistory itself is the Fal and aUaccommodation with it is a com.promise with the original teaching,according to Jewish teaching his-tory is the dimension of Jewish re-alization and responsibilty. It isfor this reason that Rosenzeigcould have no understanding forthe surival power of Judaism and
hit upon the fantastic idea of Jew-
ish eternality enclosed in the secretof the blood of the Jewish people.
His explanation of the missionary
drive in Chrstianity and its ab.sence in Judaism must also berelegated into the realm of fantasyIt is based on the same lack ofunderstanding the nature of Ju-daism. Needles to say that in a
"Judaism" that is beyond tie andunconcerned with man and his con-dition in history there can be noplace for Zionism or a Jewish State,It is not that Rosenzeig was ananti-Zionist; he did not understandthe historic quality in Judaism, i.e.,its very essence. One is inclined to
say that his "Judaism" was moreChristian than Jewish, just as his"Christianity" is invested with someJewish features which to erase wasthe very purpose of Christianityfrom the beginning. There is littledoubt that existentially Rosenzweigwas a saintly Jew; his philosophy,however, hardly belongs in a chap-ter entitled, "The Road Back."Steinheim, Yes! Rosenzweig, No!Did he not say himself that theStar was not a Jewish book?
Mainly under the impact of ex-istentialism the writings of RavKook have become included inmodern Jewish philosophy. Un-doubtedly, one of the more diffculttasks of presentation was encount-ered by the author in presenting
the thOught world of Rav Kook.As is well-known, Rav Kook didnot write systematically. His state-ments are more like poetic outpour-ings of a great soul, which he wouldjot down on all kinds of slips ofpaper at hand. They were collectedand edited by his dedicated disciple,the Nazir of Jerusalem. The task
that stil awaits to be done is to
crystalize the principles of RavKook's thoughts from his numerousexclamations and present them insystematic form. This, however,goes far beyond the scope of anintroductory work like the one be-fore us. Rotenstreich's chapter on
Kook wi send many to the studyof the master. Often because ofthe vagueness of expression andformulation, it is not easy to fathomthe meaning of Rav Kook. Untilthe systematic work on Kook wilbe written, his words wil remainwide open to possibilties of inter-pretation. On a number of major
109
TRADITION: A Journal of Orthodox Thought
points we are unable to go along
with Rotenstreich's interpretation.We believe that he exaggerates theprinciple of unity in Rav Kook'sthought. The distinction betweenmatter and mind, good and evil,right and wrong, secular and sacredis not only subjective. Subjective is
man's seeing of these diferences asabsolute. The difference in kind ex-ists only in an inadequate humanunderstanding. However, the difer-ence in degree is a real, objectiveone. There are diferent levels ofrality, sharing in the divine sub-
stance in diffcring degree. They areall dependent on each other, theyall influence each other, but theyare not one. The spiritual builds onthe matcrial; the sacred, on the
secular. Neither can one speak ofa union of science and Divineknowledge. The Chokhmat Hako-desh is diferent in method as wellas function from the Chokhmat Ha-chol. They are related to each oth-er, secular knowledge in need ofcompletion by sacred knowledgeand sacred knowledge in necd of
the solid factual information pro-
vided by the other. Since Roten-
streich understands Rav Kook asmaintaining the homogenous unity
of all reality, he is consistent in
saying that the improvement of theworld depends on the manner inwhich the world is comprehendedand not on actual change. This toois more than questionable. ActuallyRav Kook even formulates a theoryof qualitative evolution. He cer.
tainly recognizes history as a formof dcvelopment during which the
divine sparks arc elevated from
lower form to a higher one, asresult of which the union of the
110
different part of reality wil be ac-complished through a process ofsanctifcation through man living,acting, functioning, and not justcomprehending. Even the positivefunction of evil with Rav Kook canbe understood only within a processof sanctification that takes place inhistory. (See, f.e., Rav Kook's ideathat God, who is the Tov Hamuch-lat, Absolute Goodness, is in needof the Tov Hayachasi, the relativegoodness, which emerges fromman's struggle with evil in history.)It is for this reason that we are un-able to accept Rotenstreich's inter-pretation that fhe world's longing
to return to its source is one to besatisfied in knowledge, which, how-ever, has no basis in objective ex-
istence where the world is in factone with its source. It would seemto us that, on the contrary, the
longing is the cause of all move-
ment in reality. It is the dynamic
principle in reality. It is responsiblefor all movement and developmentin nature as well as in history. It isthe process of sanctification, whichwil ultimately overcome the veryreal difference in the degree of holi-ness in the universe and unite inthe Divine source what is one inits root and origin and becomes dif-ferentiated in the act of Creation.
Creation is very real with RavKook. At best one may speak ofpanentheism in his thought, but notof pantheism. Finally, we wouldnot define Kook's concept of the
Kodesh Hakodashim as "the com-bination of the holy and the pro-
fane" or the unity of the two. (In
any case, one should not render
Kook's Hebrew term, Chol as pro-fane, but as secular.) In the pre-
Book Reviews
creation phase, the Holy of Holies
is not a combination or unity of
two elements, but is absolute one-ness of True Being. Creation repre-
sents, in the Kabbalistic manner a,
degredation of holiness by differen-tiation in degrees. After the returnto the source, the original oneness
is restored. This however, is againnot the result of any combination
but the end of tbe process of long-
ing which in the act of universal
sanctification overcomes Creation,as it were, and thus recovers the
original oneness of all reality.Notwithstanding some disagree-
ments with the author's point ofview, one puts this volume downwith a senge of appreciation for hiscomprehensive scholarship and witha sense of gratitude for a workbadly needed and long overdue.
Sefer Yosef ha-Mekane, edited by JUDAH ROSENTHAL (Jerusa-
lem: Mekize Nirdamim, 1970).
Reviewed by
Prank Talmadge
The Hebrew polemical literatureof the middle ages contains farmore than a repository of ad hocdefenses against the onslaught of
would-be proselytizers. In it, oneoften encounters the attempt of theJew to come to a self-definition notonly in regard to his conception ofthe nature of religion but in hissocial ideals as well. Thus the socialhistorian as well as the historian
of ideas could well profit from thestudy of these sources. Until rela-tively recently, however, they havebeen largely neglected by the his-torian and indeed by the philologistas well. That this is the case hasbeen dúe possibly less to a lack ofinterest than to a concern felt bypast generations that the material
found in these texts went beyondthe standards of propriety set for
an atmosphere of Jewish-Christianbrotherhood. The fact that A. Pos-nanski, who edited Profiat Duran's
Reproach of the Gentiles and theencyclopedic Schiloh, refrainedfrom publishing several other textswhich he had prepared, seems toreflect this situation.
In a work such as the Sefer Yo-
sef ha-Mekane, a thirteenth centuryFrench polemical compilation by R.Joseph ben Nathan Offcial, the gen-teel refinements of modern dialogueare clearly lacking. The book con-sists of a series of arguments basedon passages from the Bible and theNew Testament, many of which aredialogues reported to have taken
place between Jews and Christiandivines. The stance of the Jew ismiltant, forthright, and unequivo-
caL. Frequently, when the Christianwishes to prove the foreshadowing
of Jesus or Christianity in the OldTestament, the Jew, using an old
disputational technique, seemingly
agrees with his opponent only toturn the tables on him.
"The children of Israel walked onthe dry land" (Exod. 14:29). Apriest asked R. Joseph: "What
111
TRITION: A Journal of Orthodox Thought
sign is there in the fact that thewaters were split and the Israel-ites passed through it?" I said tohim: "What say you?" He said tome: "It is a sign of the baptismalwaters." I said to him: "So haveyou spoken. Those who passedthough on dry land and did notsoil themselves with the waterwere saved, but those who did notwalk on the dry land and weresoiled by the water perished." Hesaid to me: "If so, why were theydivided? He should have led themon the surface of the water." I saidto hi: "It is a sign that we shallbe among you and not be soiledby the water" (p. 47),
A further example may prove ofinterest. One classic reference toJesus according to the Christiantradition is the verse Gen. 49: 10,
"The scepter shall not depart fromJudah nor the ruler's staff from be-tween his feet unti 'Shiloh' comes
and his be the homage of peoples."The Vulgate translates "Shiloh"
(shylh) as "He who is to be sent"(qui mittendus est, apparently read-ing shlyh) viz. Jesus, thereby in-dicating that with the advent ofJesus the dominion passed from theJews to the Church, the New IsraeL.
An apostate said to Rabbenu Tam:"How can you say that Shiloh isnot Jesus? The verse itself alludesto ths. The initial letters of thewords Yavo SHiloh Ve-Io (Shilohcomes and) spell YeSHU (Jesus)."He replied: "So have you spoken!Look furthcr! The initial and finalletters of YikhaT cAmiM (hom-age of peoples) spell YaTcEM ~'wil lead them astray.' This isJesus who wil lead them astray."
We are indeed grateful to Prof.Judah Rosenthal, who has alreadycontributed so much to our libraryof edited polemical literature andto the Mekize Nirdamim Societyfor this particularly handsome edi-tion of SeIer Yosef ha-Mekaae.
Har Habayit: Nezer Tifarteinu, by SHAUL SHAFFER (Jerusalem:
Y ofeh Nor, 1968).
Reviewed by Moshe Klein
A moment of great import inJewish history occurred in 1967when Jerusalem was liberated, thusproviding free access to the kotelmaaravi. The yearning of genera-
tions had been realized with start-lig suddenness. Since then Jews
have flocked from all over theworld to the ancient city of Jerusa-lem to pray at the kotel; at timesreaching a peak of 300,000 persons
in one day. This new experience
confronts each of us with a dearh
112
of knowledge concerning the Templemount and the western wall, hal-lowed by Jews over the past twothousand years.
Fortunately, a most timely bookhas appeared written by a Jerusa-
lem scholar, covering the halakhic,aggadic, historical, archeological,
architectural and legal aspects ofthe har habayit and the kotel ma-
aravi. Shaul Shaffer had previouslypublished a series of books on re-lated subjects, among them; Hamik-dash-Vekeilav, Bayit Rishon, Bayit
Sheini, Begdei Kehuna, Hashi,
Book Reviews
Sh'Bamikdash, and Chukei Hakor-
banot. Some of these texts havebeen beneficial to teachers in theyeshivot. His most recent book isthe most timely, since it providesa wealth of material for all whomake their pilgrimage to the kotelmaaravi.
Har Habayit is written in a lucidHebrew style presenting little dif-ficulty for most readers. The variedtopics presented aTe annotated withabundant footnotes referring tooriginal sources, while the subject
matter is further clarified by dia-grams and photos. The author didnot intend to treat each topic in
depth, preferring to give an over-
view of a wide range of subjectsrelated to this area. The reader isable to delve deeper into any singletopic by studying the sources cited
by the author. Likewise, it is pos-sible to skip any topic which is not
of particular interest to the readerand stil benefit from other por-tions of the book.
It is evident that Rav Shaffer at-tempts to stay clear of controver-
sial issues. Thus in discussing thehalakhah of kedushat har habayit,he prefers not to deal with the
question, which arose following itsliberation; whether any part of thehar habayit in its present area lackskedusha. To do so would have ne-cessitated an in-depth treatment ofone single issue which is clearlynot in the design of this book.
Any person who is drawn to thekotel maaravi and desires to knowmore of its history and traditionswil fid Shaul Shaffer's book anindispensible source. It contains a
wealth of material and provides a
concise treatment of the full rangeof issues related to the har habayitand kotel maaravi.
The Exempla of the Rabbis by Moslls GASTER (1968); TheFoundation of Jewish Ethics by SIMON BERNFELD (1968); TheCensorship of Hebrew Books by WILLIAM POPPER (1969);The Synoptic Gospels by CLAUDE G. MONTE FIORE (1967);Great Men and Movements in Israel by RUDLF KITTEL(1968); Studies in Pharasaisim and the Gospels by 1. ABRAHAMS(1967); Contributions to the Scientific Study of Jewish Liturgyby JAKOB J. PETUCHOWSKI (1970); The Samaritans by JAMES
A. MONTGOMERY (1968); The Jewish Foundations of Islam byC. C. TORREY (1967); The Jewish Sources of the Sermon onthe Mount by GERALD FRIEDLANDER (1969); The Psalms byMOSES BUTTENWESER (1969); Sex Laws and Customs in Ju-daism by Louis M. EpSTEIN (1948); Hizzuk Emunah byABRAAM BEN TROKI (New York: Ktav Publishing Co.).
Reviewed by Ktav Publishing Company for itsAbraham R. Besdin very ambitious program of reprint-
scholarly volumes of the past whichPlaudits should be extended to are presently out-of -print. In the
113
TRAITION: A Journal of Orthodox Thought
ideological polemic with the forcesof secularism and Jewish nihilsm,
there is desperate need for pene-
trative studies which project theinsightfulness and omnirelevance ofour tradition. Much of the aliena-tion rampant in our ranks is due
to the conviction that the thrust of
our group elan has been spent andthat an encrusted parochialism has
rendered it anachronistic in this ageof cosmic embrace. Ktav's fastgrowing series of studies are, there-fore, a welcome addition to ourintellectual armory.
Inevitably, some of these worksneed be updated by knowledge ac-cumulated sincc their initial publi-cation. Scholarly disciplines tend tooverlap and are reciprocally enrich-ing. Over a period of several dec-
ades, new sources of informationcome to light and variant vantagepoints of judgment come to. thefore. A process of intellectual cross-pollnation ensues, forcing a greaterbreadth of perspective. Ktav has,
therefore, very wisely invited mod-ern scholars in the particular fieldsinvolved, to append brief introduc-tions to these works and, thereby,
to contemporarize their usefulness.The volume Faith Strengthened,
(Chizuk Emunah) by the 16thcentury Karaite, Isaac of Troki, isconsiderably enhanced by the intro-duction of Trude Weiss-Rosemarin
who, herself, is the author of a veryuseful study, Judaism and Chris-tianity, Their Differences. This
study is. a veritable demolition ofChrstian pretensions of being asuccessor faith to Judaism. It is a
tellng refutation of all alleged
christological references ascribed toour Tanach and an exposure of in-
114
herent contradictions within the
Gospels themselves. The book wasa major obstacle in the way ofmissionaries whose evangelical zealwas blunted by the persuasive re-buttal arguments of Isaac of Troki.Atheists, including Voltaire, used itin their anticlerical polemics againstChristianity. It is not a portrayal ofJudaism; it is, rather, a learned andhighly competent apologetic andpolemic work, as useful today, ifneeded, as in the past.
Sex Laws and Customs in Ju-daism by Louis M. Epstein is anauthoritative review of Jewish atti-tudes to all aspects of sexuality,
from ancient to modern times. Thehealthmindcdness of Judaism with
its rejection of a schismatic dualiybetween body and soul emergesforthrightly in this study. A mostiluminating introduction by a Dr.Ari Kiev contrasts the Jewish codeand ideology with the prevalent con-dition of modem man who growsup in a permissive family and soci-
etal setting, with no internal pat-terns of restraints or mastery of thewil over one's instincts. He writes:
Factors working against the devel-opment of maturity, independence,self-relevance and emotionalhealth are also encountered lateron, where one is exposed to theouter-directed pressures of con-temporary society plus the sensual,provocative stimuli of mass media,which sing the praise of a utopian,sensual, irresponsible playboy ex-istence and with electronic author-ity set new standards of behaviorfor the population . . . Indeed,this is the curious paradox, tbatwhere the individual grows up andlives in a society without a set ofintêrnalized restraints and respon-sibilties, wbich on the surface ap-pears to be an ideal state of free-
Book Reviews
dom, he is in fact less free thanwhere he has a built-in set ofstandards which help him to definehimself, and so free hin to actmore decisively in the present. The
modern individual accommodateshimself to various situations ratherthan being able to accommodatesituations to himself.
REVIEWERS IN THIS ISSUE
RABBI ABRAHAM R. BESDIN is the Associate Director of the RabbinicalCouncil of America.
PROFESSOR ELIEZER BERKOVITS is Chairman of the Department of
Phiosophy at the Hebrew Theological College in Skokie, Ilinois.
RABI MELVIN GRAATSTEIN, a frequent contributor, is now director ofthe Hiel Foundation at the University of Manitoba.
DR. MOSHE KLEIN, formerly with the Albert Einstein College of Medi-cine, is now senior lecturer in psychology at Bar llan University.
PROFESSOR FRA TALMADGE is a member of the Department of JewishStudies at the University of Toronto.
PROFESSOR MICHAL WYSCHOGROD, a member of our Editorial Board,
is chairman of the Department of Philosophy at the Bernard Baruch
College of the City University of New York.
115