Article in local Jewish Newspaper

It’s never too late

The New York Times reported this week that only 7% of applicants were accepted into Harvard this year. In this overly competitive world, the slightest failure or hiccup is seen as derailing a dream. Yet, perfection, it seems, is no longer a guarantee of success. Among those denied were hundreds of students with 800 SATs, years of training, decades of extra curricular activities, an entire life distilled into the contents of an envelope.

At Passover, we should take a look at Moses and reconsider the pressure we put on our children to succeed. Moses, the ultimate Jewish leader, the greatest prophet we have ever had, started with very humble beginnings. The Egyptian society, our sages tell us, was very depraved. Moses was in the thick of it. Raised in the palace of Pharaoh, surrounded by harems, wealth, and idol worship, the chance that he would, one day, literally shine with spirituality was miniscule. Yet, it was Moses, who was our only prophet to have spoken with G-d.

Moses’ life gives us a lesson. It is never too late to make a “success” of ourselves. That potential for spirituality, that potential for connecting to G-d, lies in all of us - even those who appear distant. Moses’ leadership tells us that there is no such thing as “distant.” G-d is ready to connect to what Tikkunei Zohar refers to as the “spark of Moses” in each and every one of us.

So this Passover, concentrate on that G-dly spark that lies deep inside you and let it come out. The light we possess cannot be contained in an envelope or on a paycheck. Lighten up on the youth. In the words of William M. Shain, dean of admissions and financial aid at Bowdoin, “Where we went to college does not set us up for success or keep us away from it.”

Bronfman Grant Application

Charles Bronfman has challenged the Jewish community to come up with the next big idea to transform the way the Jewish community thinks about itself.

Before one can come up with this idea, one must tackle an even more important question.

Why be Jewish?

All people desire meaning and purpose in their life. If they don’t find it in Judaism, they will find it elsewhere.

For Judaism to survive into the next century we must come up with a compelling answer to this question of existence. Survival for survival’s sake, or survival to satisfy a prior generation’s feelings of nostalgia, is no longer sufficient to drive identification. So much of Jewish energy today is related to technique and organization. Very little thought is put into Theology. My concept is to develop a theology that will be both transformative and unifying; a system of thought that will bring the Jewish community together in the post denominational world.

Why be Jewish?

This question was put to a group of Jewish intellectuals, artists, and Zionists by Martin Buber in 1914. At the time, there was a burning question as to how one should express Jewish identity in the modern world. Today, that question is even stronger. Now, the question of Jewish existence is not one of expression, but rather, whether to exist at all.

If we listen to Buber’s answer at the time, it might just possibly give us some direction. “Jewishness should be a present reality. (Today) the religion is a memory, perhaps also a hope, but not a present reality. The Age of the Torah, the prophets, even early Chassidism has been followed by no genuine life of fervor that bears witness to G-d and makes out of truth a divine reality because it is lived in his name. There is a profession of faith, of monotheistic humanism, but no fulfillment.” (Buber 1914)

Today we have a lot of monotheistic humanism. Judaism is almost synonymous with humanism. But, where is the fervor?

The goal of modern Judaism has been to create a lifestyle that brings holiness into the modern world, a world of science and truth. To accomplish this task, all outmoded rabbinic legislation had to pass the test of reason, morality, and modernity to be acceptable. If, however, modernity is the ultimate judge of our behavior, one questions why a particularistic faith and identity is needed at all.

Is then the only answer to fall back to an insulated traditional world? Regardless of the fervor, most people today would not be willing to make that trade. Much of the Orthodox world, whether accurately or not, is perceived as being caught up in empty ritual, creating a never ending series of Chumras that escalate the demands of the religion. The outer manifestations may be strong, but, what kind of inner justification exists? The secular contributions of Art, Science, Literature, and Knowledge, these would be too great to give up for religious fervor.

So, where does that leave us? I suggest looking back to the great philosophers. Take Hermann Cohen for example. His message can be synthesized down to a few key points. “Religion is the infinite task of closing the gap between what “is” and what “ought”. (Cohen, 1919) Rather than starting with creation or revelation, two areas that present difficulty for the modern Western mind, Cohen starts with the idea of redemption. “The world is lousy and must be made better”(Cohen 1919). Awareness of an ideal and that one’s behavior falls short is much different than the anti-nominism of historical reform.

Yet, if religion is only about making the world a better place, morality should suffice. For Cohen, the special task of religion over ethics is to supply a sense of individuality. Ethics is abstract – universal. In a moral system, the “I” of man becomes the “I” of humanity. The “other” is seen as a concept. Religion takes the individual out of being a concept and makes them a person. This is the difference between the “I – it” and “I-thou”. The “I - thou” paradigm is set up between the relationship of man and G-d. Ethics recognizes the other as “he”, an end, not a means, but not yet an individual. Religion recognizes the other as “thou”. In Judaism the suffering of the other is the source of transformation of the “I – it” to “I – he” and “I-thou.” Thru religion passion becomes the source of compassion.

Moral action requires the possibility of redemption. A person must take responsibility for their own failings. “The self is not a given entity, but an ideal towards which we must always strive.” Sin is a means to redemption. Liberation from sin becomes the goal and only through the attainment of that goal can a new “I” be begotten. The possibility of self transformation makes the individual an “I”.

These ideas are so much more powerful than techniques. They have the power to be transformative. Why be Jewish? Because it is the best means available by which to make the world a better place. It is the means of making what “is” an “ought”. The person must realize that they are not a given entity but an ideal. Think of living one’s life on the way to an ideal? This idea is something that can capture the imagination of the next generation.

Martin Buber takes the idea of the “I – thou” relationship even further. For Cohen, the purpose of religion is to bridge the gap between what “is” and what “ought”, looking at other people as “Thous” is a way to achieve this goal. People are not objects. They are not concepts. Rather, people are unique entities that must be related to in a deep authentic way. Yet, for Buber, these authentic relationships are not means to an end, rather they are an end in themselves. Authentic relationships are in fact the substance of reality.

For what is reality? We are told that man experiences the world. He goes over the surface of things and comes back with impressions. He brings back some knowledge of the world’s condition. But, as Buber explains this “experience” is only made up of “it and it and it” (Buber, 1923). Idealism tells us that reality is something we make in our mind based on our experiences. For Buber, these experiences are actually the foundation of “I-It” alienation. The true fabric of reality lies not in one-sided impressions. No, true reality lies in relationships.

“When one relates to another authentically, he is no longer a he/she limited by other he/shes, a dot in the world grid of space and time, nor a condition to be experienced, a loose bundle of named qualities. Rather this “he” becomes a “you” and fills the firmament and everything with light. There is no experience of “you”, just relation.” (Buber 1923)

Just think how powerful these ideas can be in revitalizing Judaism. Authentic relationships, according to Buber, have the ability to transform the individual. That is essentially what the Jewish community needs, more transformative experiences. These experiences do not require a lot of energy or resources. They can be created simply by loving another with the depths of one’s being.

The beauty of theology is that it doesn’t just transform the individual, it has the ability to transform organizations as well.

Studies show that the Jewish community is pulling away from organized religion. The word “organized” is essential here. Spirituality, G-d, community; these ideas still maintain power. It is the organized Jewish world that is alienating. Rather than following Buber’s directive of pursuing authentic relationships, the Jewish community deals with its constituents as “its”. The institutions have taken on a life of their own, moving by way of inertia. Bureaucracy, rules, and dehumanization is often the experience that accompanies Jewish involvement.

The problem that faces the Jewish community is essentially a disconnect between the reality of its members and the structure of its organizations. Jews today are autonomous. They are looking for meaning on their own terms. A woman called me this week looking for a Hebrew school for her son. She was not interested in the standard communal solution. Her family spends every Friday night together, celebrating Shabbat. She did not want to push away that celebration to attend services. The Temple, for its, part had a requirement that students in their Hebrew school attend a given amount of services. The Synagogue, Temple, Federation, have become professional entities looking out for their own best interests. The interests and motivations of their constituents are secondary at best.

This mother said to me, “I am not looking for a denomination. I am not looking for someone to tell my son, “This is how it is”. I am looking for my son to take responsibility for his own religious journey.” What she is looking for is an authentic relationship.

Institutions, as Buber explains, can be “Golems”. Like clay robots, they no longer know the human being. They bring together people, but, only as objects. Too often, a true sense of community is lacking. “Modern developments have expunged almost every trace of a life in which human beings confront each other and have meaningful relationships”(Buber 1923).

We are lonely and alienated. If Judaism and the Jewish community could confront that problem it would make a practical difference in people’s lives. We can, and must as a community, strive for authenticity.

True authenticity will drive and shape the institutions. As Buber explains, “People come together in true community when all of them stand in a living reciprocal relationship to a single living center.” (Buber 1923) The ever present thou, G-d, provides that center.

Judaism was once a revolutionary faith. Look at the ideas that we have given to Western Culture. Monotheism, the ineffable G-d, a sense of purpose in creation, equality of man, importance of contemplation and leisure in one’s life, care of the environment, responsibility towards one’s neighbor. When other men worshipped objects and conducted human sacrifices, Jews came and permanently changed the world. We must recapture that role as spiritual revolutionaries to the world. We need to change the world.

Let’s reinvigorate Judaism so that it is transformative. The experience with Judaism should transform the individual, organizations, and ultimately society. For too long we have emphasized those elements of Judaism that make us like everyone else. However, our theology, our culture, our families are different. Let’s value that difference.

We don’t believe in Original Sin. We believe in the value of every human being and their ultimate redemption. We don’t believe in Grace. We as humans, hold the key to our redemption. We, not some outside force, must change the world.

I end with my favorite quote from Martin Buber; “The renewal of Judaism means to put aside our dualism between our absolute and relative life in order that the fight for fulfillment might grasp the whole people, that the idea of reality may penetrate everyday, that the SPIRIT may enter into life!!!”

“Only then when Judaism extends itself like a hand and seizes every Jew by the hair of his head and bears him in a storm between heaven and earth towards Jerusalem will the Jewish people be ripe to build itself a new destiny.” (Buber 1914)

My Bronfman Grant Proposal

Earlier this year Charles Bronfman sponsored a competition at Brandeis for the "Next Big Jewish Idea"; something that would turn the community on its head and transform the world. Over 250 proposals were submitted. In the end the finalists that were chosen all had agents, publicists, and prior book deals. The person actually chosen turns out to be a Harvard Grad student finishing his PhD.
It is surprising that Brandeis had to go to such an extent to get a Harvard PhD to teach at their school. In many ways I feel cheated. I put a lot of energy and thought into my proposal. I still think that there is something here for a book.
Yet, the thing I find so disheartening is that the proposal that actually won is a continuation of what I see as veneer Judaism. Radicalism with some spackle from authentic memory? It seems like the criticism leveled at modern Jewish text study. One selects the point that one wants to make and then draws the circle around it.

G-d is in the House

This past week Shmuley Boteach debated Christopher Hitchens over the existence of G-d. By all accounts he seems to have lost. It is unfortunate, because from my perspective the existence of G-d is a given and proof of his existence rather simple. The problem with most discussions about the existence of G-d is that they begin with creation, travel through evolution, and end in some type of emotional argument that morality is not driven by the divine.

There are a variety of proofs; ontological, teleological, and historical that lay a foundation for the existence of G-d. As the Boteach- Hitchens debate set forth, the burden of proof is on the side of religion. To disprove an atheist all one has to do is prove some idea of the divine. As Neil Gilman lays out in his moderation, there are a variety of concepts of G-d; Maimonidean, Kaplanian, Spinozan, etc. One could add to this Aristotelean and Platonic as well. For the atheist to lose the argument only one of these arguments has to be proven correct. Instead, atheist shifts the debate to religion and the personal practices of the religious. Shmuley found himself trying to defend all of religious practice and thought and doing a rather poor job of it.

The existence of G-d can be proven with one quick argument, “Can people change?” If G-d does not exist, then humans are merely complicated monkeys. Their DNA, their instincts, even their feelings of solidarity and self sacrifice are hard wired. Spinoza lays out the argument very clearly when he describes his conception of G-d. G-d for Spinoza is the first cause, the beginning, the unfolding equation that is everything. According to Spinoza, man has freedom of choice only because he is not intelligent enough to realize the causal connections in the world. In the same way, that I can not choose to be in Cancun, without first buying a ticket and getting on the plane, so too, a person can not make choices that conflict with their essential wiring and environment. A certain DNA, a certain brain chemistry, a certain environment will produce a certain outcome.

But, for Jews the existence of G-d supposes the possibility of change. People can improve, they can make amends, they have the ability to rise above their wiring and choose right or wrong. This debate can be seen clearly in “House MD” Season 4 episode 12. In this episode, a Chassidic couple is treated by the diagnostic team. We see a conflict between the philosophy of the observant Jews, where a former record producer is now Chassidic, and that of House, who denies the existence of G-d and feels that people can never change. House checks the woman for drugs and STDs. He is sure that there is a skeleton in the closet that will explain her medical problems. In the end it is merely a loose kidney. House has an epiphany. He realizes that people can change and this affects House’s relationship with his friends.

This is great, an observant Jewish story line. As an observant Rabbi, I could not agree with every detail of the storyline. Yet, this is really not the excitement. The excitement lies in the correlation to the Torah portion. This week's Parsha was Trumah. It talks about the Mishkan, the dwelling place in the desert and the sacrifices that take place there. The whole foundation of the Mishkan is predicated on the idea of self sacrifice. You shall take for me a terumah..... a donation. G-d lays out a promise that if the Jews come together and build a home for him, he will dwell amongst them. Our sages point out that the word should have been "it", I will dwell in it. Instead, it was amongst "them" - If we give of our selves, G-d will be amongst us. What was the House episode discussing? Self sacrifice as well.

So, in the week when the Torah talks about G-d's House, kindness, self Sacrifice and change. House is talking about G-d, self sacrifice and change. Hitchen's and Boteach argue about the existence of G-d. All they have to do is watch House.