Jews under threat -- and Jews seen as a threat: Rabbi Wein explains

In this, the fourth in his series of eight lectures on ‘The Jewish World 1880-1914’ Rabbi Wein continued his discussion of the plight of the Jews in Russia, taking up with the last of the Romanov Tsars—Nicholas II (right), who strictly enforced the harsh decrees imposed by his father Tsar Alexander III.

These three decrees were as follows:

1.       Jewish men of 18 had to serve in Russian Army for 25 years. Around 50,000 Jews were forced into the army; hardly any came back as observant Jews. Many tactics were employed to evade this conscription, such as changing surnames to make it look as though there was only one son in the family.

2.       All Jews had to live within the Pale of Settlement; this excluded them from living in the great cities of Moscow and St Petersburg. Once again, it proved possible to get round this restriction, at least for the wealthy.

3.       Heavy taxes were imposed, but these too could be evaded since Russia had a culture of corruption.

Nicholas was the head of the heavily antisemitic Russian Orthodox Church. He was also a cousin of Kaisar Wilhelm in Germany and King George V of England. All were grandchildren of England’s Queen Victoria and this was assumed to be a positive indicator of peace. Unfortunately it did not, since nationalism drove the family apart and led to the First World War.

The Jews in this period were divided. The maskilim (secularists) believed that society could order itself without religion and that history displayed a progressive improvement in human life and conduct. This movement began in Germany but spread throughout Europe. The maskilim regarded Judaism as being devoid of culture, with no real culture, literature or music of its own. Their philosophy is now reflected in the acronym DEI (“diversity, equality, inclusivity”) and in denial of the notion that the Jews are a special, unique people.

The Russian government, with which the maskilim cooperated, was sympathetic to this view, and to the solution of the Jewish problem by converting one-third, killing one-third and driving the remaining third out. Local rabbis were the “enemy”.

The orthodox community was not however beaten. Thanks to the Gaon of Vilna (left), the foundations of Jewish survival through Torah education were firmly established in the institution of the yeshiva. The establishment of the yeshiva enabled the best and most promising students to study in depth and also involved whole communities in their support.  Yeshivot also produced communists and free-thinkers, as well as what turned out to be leaders of the Zionist movement. One by-product of the establishment of yeshivot was the ongoing tension between the Rosh Yeshiva and the Rabbi of the town: not many people could fulfil both functions at the same time.

The yeshiva world was not immune from disagreement and dispute. Reb Chaim Brisker’s popular new way of analysing the text of the Talmud was at odds with the traditional methods used by the Netziv. This caused a split in learning methodologies that exists to this day—but in the nineteenth century they were both taught within the same institution. Added to this was the emergence of the Mussar Movement of Rabbi Yisrael Salanter, focused on establishing a world view based on ethical and behavioral values. Some yeshivot were in favour of mussar, others against it. And then came the political issue of Zionism: should the yeshivot be for it or against it? All these issues contributed to the fragmentation of the Torah world, not just in Lithuania but throughout the world.

A further idea promoted by the Gaon was that the Jews should stop waiting for the Messiah and should move to Israel. He encouraged those whom he influenced to leave and settle here. He himself got as far as Odessa, but never completed his Aliyah. The idea of moving however took root in Russia, where entire villages were emptied out as the Jewish poor fled to the United States to escape the cruelty of Tsar Nicholas. They knew they would struggle in their new land but reckoned that it was worth the struggle for the sake of their children.

There were however some Jews who did not want to leave Russia: they wanted to remain there and improve the country. They spoke Russian but were seen as a constant threat to Russian society because they tended to espouse far left and anarchist political causes. Nicholas was always worried about the threat that these Jews posed. Hounded by the police in Russia, some of them left for the United States, bringing their left wing sentiments with them.

Dear Maimonides, by Andrew Sanders (Book of the Month, Kislev 5785)

Dear Maimonides: a discourse on religion and science is described by its author as “a major attempt to understand the ‘meaning of it all’”, using the viewpoint of someone far removed in space and time from our world. This might seem something out of The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy—but it isn’t. It transports Yosef ben Yehudah ibn Shimon, the original addressee of Rambam’s Guide to the Perplexed, to 20^th century North America. By doing so, the author seeks to provide a new and empirical worldview that incorporates the teachings of both the ancient and the modern Jew.

Who is the man who dares to do this? Our author, Andrew Sanders, was born and raised in Hungary, where he lived through both the Holocaust and the subsequent Communist regime. Leaving Hungary at the age of 24, he was educated as a chemist, and worked in that capacity at the University of Toronto. Later, he learned computer applications, was an early practitioner of that field, became an executive of a major financial institution, eventually starting his own computer software company, which was highly successful. Thereafter he devoted his time and effort to researching and writing on Jewish subjects, from philosophy and theology to historical fiction. In 1989 he and his wife made aliyah.

This volume forms part of the Marvin N. Hirschhorn collection, housed in Beit Knesset Hanassi. You are welcome to borrow it.

Family, foes and painful choices: Toledot 5785

The troubling question on this week’s parsha that has persisted throughout the ages of biblical commentary is: Whatever is Yitzchak thinking when he plans to give the blessings and heritage of Avraham to Eisav? Basically, explanations fall into two categories. One view is that Yitzchak, fooled by Eisav, is quite unaware of his true nature and wanton behavior. Rashi, quoting Midrash, interprets that Eisav “hunted“ his father with his pious speech and cunning conversation. Yitzchak is taken in and believes that Eisav, a man of the world and a physically powerful figure, is better suited to carry on Avraham’s vision than is Yaakov, the more studious and apparently less sophisticated of the pair. 

The other opinion, more popular among the later commentators to the Torah, is that Yitzchak is aware of the shortcomings of behavior and attitude of his elder son. His desire to give the blessings to Eisav is due to his wish to redeem and save him, to enable Eisav to turn his life around and become a worthy heir to the traditions of his father and grandfather. Yitzchak thinks that even if he gives the blessings to Eisav, Yaakov will not really suffer any disadvantage in his life’s work, while Eisav will find his way back to holiness through the blessings that he will have received. 

These two divergent attitudes towards the wayward child in Jewish families are enacted daily in Jewish family life. Later Yitzchaks either wilfully allow themselves to be deluded regarding the behavior and lifestyle of children or, aware of the problem, they attempt to solve it through a combination of generosity and a plethora of blessings. 

Rivkah, the mother of both Eisav and Yaakov, is not fooled by Eisav’s apparently soothing words; nor does she believe that granting him blessings will somehow accomplish any major shift in his chosen lifestyle. To a great measure she adopts a policy of triage, saving Yaakov and blessing him while thus abandoning Eisav to his own preferred wanton ways. 

The Torah does not record for us the “what if” scenario of Eisav receiving the blessings. Would he have been different in behavior and attitude, belief and mission? However, from the words of the later prophets of Israel, especially those of Ovadyah, it appears to be clear that God concurred with Rivkah’s policy, holding Eisav to be redeemable only in the very long run of history and human events. 

The moral of this episode is that one must be clear-eyed and realistic about the painful waywardness and misbehavior of Yaakov’s enemies, be they from within or without our immediate family and milieu. There are many painful choices that need to be made within one’s lifetime and especially in family relations, and few pat answers to varying and difficult situations. Perhaps that is why the Torah does not delve too deeply into the motives of Yitzchak and Rivkah, being content merely to reflect the different emotional relationships each had with their two very different sons. The Torah emphasizes the role that human emotions play in our lives and does not consign all matters to rational thought and decision-making.   

Shabbat shalom, Rabbi Berel Wein       

The power of "ignorance, illiteracy and superstition": Rabbi Wein

Last night, in the third of his eight lectures on "The Jewish World 1880-1914", Rabbi Wein introduced us to the condition of the Jews in the days of the Russian Empire. This lecture was quite unlike its two predecessors. While Jews were moving into Western Europe and the Austro-Hungarian Empire, quite the opposite was happening in Russia where it was the Empire that was moving into areas that already contained Jews.

Much of this lecture was taken up by Rabbi Wein’s vivid depiction of social, political and religious conditions in Russia which, remarkably, had remained more or less unchanged since the 15^th century. Russia was a primitive, feudal country that was controlled by a powerful aristocracy. The country was also dominated by the Russian Orthodox Church—a body that cultivated deeply superstitious and sometimes pagan practices, and which could not tolerate, within the borders of Russia, the presence of those who worshipped any other religion. This was because, for the Russian Orthodox Church, Russia was effectively The Holy Land.

For those who were not members of the aristocracy, life was hard. With an illiteracy rate of 95% there was no educated middle class to counter the power of the Church. Nor was there any trade of the sort that brought prosperity to the lands further to the West. The vast majority of the population consisted of serfs—effectively slaves—who worked the land in exchange for the food they ate. The serfs had no rights and could not leave the land to which they were born. Poverty was endemic but, because all were poor, being poor carried neither shame nor stigma.

Russian society was in effect frozen. The aristocracy wanted no change since they lived comfortably off the labour of the serfs. The Church likewise had no interest in change since it was only by keeping the masses ignorant, illiterate and superstitious that they could retain their influence and, as Rabbi Wein quipped, “The wonderful thing about a superstition is that you can never prove it wrong”.

It was not until the Napoleonic wars that there was any thought that change might occur. While the invading French army overreached itself and had to retreat, Russians who encountered the French were shocked into realising what a backward and primitive people they were, when compared with their better educated and more sophisticated invaders.

From this point onwards, the stability of serf-bound Russia began to weaken. Moves were made to emancipate the serfs, which alienated the nobility and while leaving the serfs with nothing they could do with their freedom. Meanwhile anarchists began to spread their doctrine that man was basically good and that it was only government that was bad: destroy government and self-rule by the inherently good would follow.

It was against this backdrop that the Tsars (Alexander I, right, and his successors) had to consider what to do with the Jews who lived to the west of their empire. The government, increasingly paranoid, imposed censorship on all Hebrew publications and simultaneously operated contradictory policies: it was sought to assimilate the Jews into Russian society via military conscription—thus forcing them to learn the Russian language and become part of Russian culture—while also depriving them of basic legal rights.

What happened after that? Stay tuned to Rabbi Wein’s next lecture to find out!

The struggle for succession: Chayei Sarah 5785

Death is not only tragic for those intimately affected: it also poses problems of succession and reorganization of the family, company or institution. In this week’s parsha Avraham and Sarah, the founders of the Jewish nation, pass from the scene. They are succeeded by Yitzchak and Rivka. Indeed, the majority of the parsha is occupied by the story of how Yitzchak marries Rivka and they establish their new home together. 

In personality, temperament and action,n Yitzchak and Rivka differ markedly from Avraham and Sarah. Whereas Avraham and Sarah devoted themselves to reaching as many outsiders as they could, being actively engaged in spreading the idea of monotheism in the society that encompassed them, Yitzchak and Rivka seem to take a more conservative approach, seeking only to consolidate what they had accomplished and to build a nation built on family rather than on strangers whom they might attract to their cause. 

As we will see in next week’s parsha, the struggle of Yitzchak and Rivka is an internal family struggle, as the world conflict that engaged Avraham and Sarah now take place within the family itself. The outcome of this struggle will turn on how to raise Eisav and Yaakov, and how to guarantee the continuity of Avraham and Sarah’s beliefs through their biological offspring. Eventually it is only through Yaakov that this is achieved and they are able to live through the blessing that the Lord promised them.

It becomes abundantly clear that the main struggle of the Jewish people will be to consolidate itself and thus influence the general world by osmosis, so to speak. The time of Avraham and Sarah has passed. New times require fresh responses to the challenges of being a blessing to all humankind. There are those in the Jewish world who are committed to “fixing the world” at the expense of Jewish traditional life and Torah law. Yet the simple truth is that for the Jewish people to be effective in influencing the world at large for good, there must be a strong, committed Jewish people. King Solomon in Shir Hashirim teaches us the cost of failure to do so: “I have watched over the vineyards of others, but I have neglected guarding my own vineyard.” 

The attempted destruction and delegitimization of the Jewish people or the State of Israel, God forbid, in order to further fuzzy, do-good, universal humanistic ideas is a self-destructive viewpoint of the purpose of Judaism. Without Jews there is no Judaism and without Judaism there is no true moral conscience left in the world. It seems evident to me that the primary imperative of Jews today is to strengthen and support Jewish family life, Jewish Torah education and the state of Israel. 

We are among the generations of Yitzchak and Rivka and therefore have to husband our resources and build ourselves first. We have as yet not made good the population losses of the Holocaust seventy years ago! If there will be a strong and numerous Jewish people, the age of Avraham and Sarah will then re-emerge. The tasks of consolidation of Jewish life as represented by the lives of Yitzchak and Rivka should be the hallmark of our generation as well. 

Shabat shalom, Rabbi Berel Wein    

Jerusalem Street Art: a visual spectacular

Jerusalem is not just a beautiful city; it is also an inspiration for artists the world over. Not all the art is conventional art-gallery material, though. Every wall is a potential canvas for the street artists whose work leaps out at us as we wander through the city.

We don't find much street art in Rechavia, but go down the road to Nachlaot, for example, and you enter a maze of allleys emblazoned with striking and colourful images -- some angry, some humorous, some merely decorative and some quite enigmatic. 

Here, in this seven-minute video clip, our member Heshy Engelsberg takes us on a tour of some of Jerusalem's most striking street images. Thanks, Heshy, for sharing with us.

"Can you have a society without beliefs?": Rabbi Wein

Delivering the second of his eight lectures on "The Jewish World 1880-1914", Rabbi Wein sent out a powerful message to his audience on the importance of understanding our past in order to make our present more meaningful and our future more viable.

Starting with a survey of the vast polyglot Austro-Hungarian Empire and the manner in which it unravelled, Rabbi Wein went on to describe how the Jews living within the Empire themselves fought vigorously against one another, with traditional Jews fighting chasidim and with maskilim and Neologs -- the advocates of extreme reform -- fighting them both. This was a tragedy because, ultimately, the only cause that united the disparate nations and communities within the Empire was their antisemitism and their belief that it was the Jews who were responsible for all their misfortunes. The efforts and varying fortunes of many celebrated rabbis of the era were also reviewed.

In the course of his lecture, Rabbi Wein reminded the audience of both the power of the press -- which was even greater in the late nineteenth century in the absence of other mass media -- and its propensity to influence rather than inform its readership. He also posed some deep philosophical questions: 

• How do you define 'tolerance' in a secular society?
• Is it even possible to have a society that has no beliefs whatsoever?

Rabbi Wein painted a vivid picture of turn-of-the-century Vienna, the capital of the Empire. Vienna then was a rival to Paris in terms of culture and the arts, a fantastic backdrop against which Jewish attempts to gain acceptance, whether through assimilation or (in the case of Gustav Mahler) conversion, ultimately failed.