Showing posts with label rabbi. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rabbi. Show all posts

Tuesday, December 8, 2015

Do You Know Jesus?



Condoleezza Rice was nominated for Secretary of State
by George W. Bush on November 14, 2004,
and assumed office on January 26, 2005

The Axial Period of world history was unique. The major religions in this time period of a few centuries saw enlightenment expand into the development of major religions. Islam, Zoroaster, Jainism, Hindu, Christianity and others came into the light of human awareness birthing new shifts in consciousness.
There is a lot missed thinking that Jesus is the only way. Considering that Jesus was a Rabbi means nothing if one does not understand what a Rabbi has to learn, how he is initiated and how deep their skill at research, analytical thought and not the least their disciplined grasp of major disciplines. Compared to the mediocre trysts into critical thought the average Christian makes beyond being saved how relevant is this type of religious focus if it is narrow?  Gregory E. Woods, Keeper of Stories 6.8.15 


Friday, October 30, 2015

A Mystery Teaching Us



God's Power Is Greater Than Your Problem
Rev. Dr. Sinclair Grey III 

God can make anything that appears impossible a reality. In other words, what may not make sense to you or seem logical in your sight isn't a problem for Almighty God. I need to say that again. With God, all things are possible because nothing is bigger than God and nothing is too difficult for our God to handle. All you have to do is be obedient to His will and trust Him without doubting. 

The Bible tells us when Abraham and Sarah had surpassed their biological years of having a child that God stepped in and reversed what seemed impossible. How so? Because God promised them a child. As you and I know, when God promises, He delivers. Through God's omnipotence, "The Lord dealt with Sarah as He had said, and the Lord did for Sarah as He had promised. Sarah conceived and bore Abraham a son in his old age, at the time of which God had spoken to him." Please don't miss this. Never doubt God. Never question His love for you. And never think your situation is too difficult for Him.


KNOW THIS:


The lesson of Sarah and Abraham extends into the realms of sexual potency. It is a deep undertaking into the restorative powers of sex, and the resurrection principles sexual energies. It isn't the easiest thing for me to put into English, but being 100 years old Abraham's life force has a significance in its symbolism. I am outside of the lexicon of canon law teaching into the mysticism of thought, action and purpose attempting to explain it. .

First of all we are thinking and thought needs to know it has a beginning. Beyond that where this teaching comes from the archetype within this story is the unthinkable life-death, abstract principle of all that is and all that is not. This the where the beat and the pulse of life-death-resurrection is projected into temporal continuity. This is a battle, a struggle not forever going on, but constantly in motion within the life of the body. It lived in Sarah and Abraham as it does in us all.

Sarah and Abraham came together as promised and their sex was born again into a light and a source of everlasting power not because Sarah was an extraordinary lover, but she and her husband were recipients of particular power(s). Abraham in covenant relationship with his death, and Sarah deeply embroiled in the mysterious aspect of blood and water exalted the principle of life-death beyond the simple understanding of 'in the beginning' tied themselves together and every aspect of Creation acted through their projection against itself and became cosmically deathless.

They destroyed illusion. - Gregory E. Woods, Keeper of Stories 11.18.13






Cosetta Chantal
May 10, 2013


Friday, July 11, 2014

Deeper Understandings


sacred space upon a hill by Rizza Dela Cruz





SATURDAY, MARCH 29, 2014

Partzufim - Divine Personas, Holy Family


Partzufim: (Aramaic, “Countenances,” “Personifications”). First outlined in the Zohar, this metaphysical concept is more fully devel­oped by Isaac Luria. According to the Lurianic cosmog­ony, after the catastrophe of the Breaking of the Vessels, the shattering of the primeval structure of light, the ein sof reconstitutes the fragments of the cosmic order into five “countenances” or “visages” that are able to mediate between supernal and material realities in a way the pri­mordial vessels were not. Think of the Partzufim as analo­gous to a “patch” for a faulty computer program.'


The biblical proof text that Chayyim Vital offers for the partzufim is Gen. 2:4, where he reads the compound word behibaram, “when they were created,” as a notarikon, breaking it up into be-Hay-baram, “Through ‘5’ He created them,” “them” being all of positive existence (Etz Chayyim, Gate III, 39). 


The Partzufim interact with humanity in the work of tikkun. These countenances also constitute and encompass the personal dimensions of God that are described in biblical and rabbinic writings, since they symbolize the male and female principles operating within the Godhead. In fact, the partzufim constitute a kind of “holy family,” a familial metaphor for the divine pleroma. In some writings, the various partzufim are assigned the names of biblical figures: Jacob and Israel; Rachel and Leah. Presumably, one can map the functions of the partzufim on the celestial level through studyingthe biographies and actions of those biblical characters. Other partzufim get titles, such as Yisrael Sava, “grandpa Israel,” for Abba.


 This aspect of Lurianic thought has a complex relationship with the sefirotic structure of classic kabbalah, not unlike the “wave/particle” phenom­enon in quantum physics. Thus whether the divine struc­ture manifests itself as the sefirot or as the partzufim de­pends on certain conditions, but they are essentially two aspects of the same divine force. The five countenances are:

Arikh Anpin: The “long/great countenance,” also called the Atik Yamim, “Ancient of Days.”
Abba: “Father,” the male aspect of the divine gamos is linked to the sefirot of Keter and/or Cho­chmah.
Ima: “Mother,” the celestial mother is tied to Binah.
Zer (or Zaur) Anpin/Ben: “The short/lesser countenance.” Product of the union of Abba and Ima, it is tied to the lower six sefirot: Chesed, gevurah, tiferet, netzach, Hod, and Yesod.
Kalah/Malcha/Bat: “Bride/Queen.” The feminine counterpart to Zer Anpin, she is linked to malchut.


The Partzufim, like their sefirotic counterparts, are also integral to the notion of the restoration of the Adam Kadmon, the cosmic human. In a kind of inverted “imi­tatio dei,” all human actions that advance the cause of cos­mic restoration are mimicked by the Partzufim.2 Thus humans help to activate them and ensure the healing flow of divine energies between higher and lower worlds. by    




1. Scholem, Kabbalah, 140–44.
2. Faierstein, Jewish Mystical Autobiographies, 28–29. Also see Green, Jewish Spirituality, vol. 2, 65–70.




Cooly, Milana inhaled her cigar curled in a cat's posture she purred someone responded with a corresponding shudder...


Sunday, July 6, 2014

the Messiah as Superman!



Why Superman is a Better Jewish Messiah than a Christian Messiah: A Mythic Movie Review of Man of Steel

Pearl Praise afloat...




I got to see Man of Steel just before vacation (I stood atop a Mayan pyramid - about as close to a ziggurat as I'm  gonna get, being a Jew, so that was awesome) and now I am ready to comment on it.

Much has been made about the christological spin given the Superman mythology in this movie, and I found much of it quite moving, if somewhat heavy-handed (I'm thinking of the "surrender yourself" come-to-Jesus moment with the priest, where a picture of Jesus is hovering right over his shoulder). It certainly shows how a really, really good myth can be the bearer of many vectors of meaning. The screenwriter(s) foregrounded some nice elements of the Superman mythos that resonate with the Christ story. Good christ-figures fill popular culture, from Klaatu to Gandalf, and only a first-class whinger would complain about bringing together two great western mythic tales ("Chocolate!" "Peanut Butter!" "Wait, they taste great together!").

I must observe, however, that the Man of Steel as the Prince of Peace is, IMHO, an awkward fit. The narrative proves Kal El = Christ to be something of a case of Procrustean bedding (Sorry to throw in a third mythic tradition here). And here's why I think this is so:

For while the plot contrives that Kent must surrender himself for the good of humanity, he neither has to suffer death at the hands of the people he has come to save, nor does he die, crucified or otherwise, by anybody, not even General Zod (Yea, Michael Shannon!), the Prince of Darkness. Indeed, he actively works to escape his fate, and does so successfully. The only two people who willing and successfully sacrifice their lives are his father (the Joseph stand-in) - who does so for the ethically questionable principle that it is better for others to die than for his son to prematurely reveal his true nature - and the Air Force colonel who does, in fact, destroy himself for the sake of saving humanity, but in a way that is more Torpedo Squadron 8 (look it up) than Jesus of Nazareth.

Look, there is no question that the master myth undergirding Superman is a kind of messianism: the particular religious brand of utopianism that centers of the special individual, gifted with unique powers, an individual who can and will transform our reality for the better and advance all that is divine, just, true, and right, improving the human condition. The messianic myth, writ small, is arguable at the very root of the superhero as a genre. Fair enough, but how, then is Superman more Jewish than Christian? While the messiah is the special invention of the Jews, messianism is also at the very heart of the Christian myth. Even so, it is useful to recognize Christian and Jewish forms of messianism as  categorically quite distinct. The uniquely Christian vision of the messiah is the supernal empowered “chosen one” who surrenders and sacrifices himself and dies for the good of humanity, his death bringing salvation in a way his life could not. The Jewish messiah, by contrast, is the empowered “chosen one” who strives and struggles, who to the very end lives for the good of humanity, ultimately to triumph over adversity and evil, but without losing himself. And so too, is Superman. While Christ-motifs will eventually appear in the long story arc of the Superman comic run (7 decades and counting), in their earliest form, and in their overarching mythologies, all comic book heroes conquer evil by defeating its minions, not by transcending it through their own death.  Leading, fighting for, and living for humanity is an archly Jewish myth; the master motif of Superman. This Jewish myth is actually the foundational premise of all the early superhero mythologies. 

There is a second way in which Jewish messianism is different. In Christian thought, there is and can be only one messiah. All other contenders are anti-christ. In Judaism, a messiah is a role and a high office, a role not bound to one person, one time in (or even the end of) history. In point of fact, every king and high priest of Israel was a messiah in their own time. Thus, the appearance of multiple superheroes in a single “universe” - the Justice League of America, for example - has a more Jewish than Christian resonance to it.

There is, finally, a dark side to the Jewish Messianic/Superman myth that I take to be a curious kind of "proof" of Superman's essential Jewishness, and this is the Christian tradition of the anti-christ. It doesn't take much reading of Christian commentaries to realize that the anti-christ, as envisioned in the Revelations of John and then elaborated on by Christian tradition, is at its heart fundamentally a critique/polemic against the competing Jewish vision of the eschatological messiah. Cast as descendant of the tribe of Dan (and therefore a Jew), who triumphs and governs in this world, abet as a viceroy of Satan rather than God, the anti-christ is essentially a dig at the "carnality" of Jewish eschatological expectations.

Why am I reviewing this tangential matter? Because of a revealing conversation I had with a campus minister back in the 1970's, in which he declared Superman to be a cunning pop culture avatar of the anti-christ, a pulp-fiction blasphemy meant to mentally prepare mankind for the coming to the real satanic savior, the ubermensch bearing the the "mark of the beast." This preacher, immersed in Christian myth, intuitively detected this "Jewish" cast to Superman, and then deconstructed him through his the prism of his Christian len and, whola, he is revealed to be anti-christ. Or, Superman = Jewish Messiah = anti-christ. My experience of 40 years ago is hardly isolated; see this Washington Post article

So while I enjoyed Man of Steel, his ret-con (look it up) as a Christ figure is ultimately a triumph of marketing over innate narrative affinity. Superman is, and remains, more like Menachem ben David, "Comforter, son of David" rather than Christ,
"...eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one Being with the Father. Through him all things were made. For us and for our salvation he came down from heaven: by the power of the Holy Spirit he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary, and was made man. For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate; he suffered death and was buried. On the third day he rose again in accordance with the Scriptures; he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his kingdom will have no end." ~ Geoffrey Dennis (7.7.2013) 



Pearl Praise small before a giant tree.



To learn more, look up the Encyclopedia of Jewish Myth, Magic, and Mysticism available at Amazon:



Saturday, March 30, 2013

JESUS said, " "

"There is an important, but missing insight. It lives to evolve within these questions. "What did Jesus study? How was he initiated and who initiated him, and why? If Jesus is to be followed why study what others have said of him only? Why not study what he studied? How else can you follow him, and do the things he did, and greater, as he so fervently wished for any followers of his?" - Gregory E. Woods, Keeper of Stories 2.25.13




Tuesday, April 10, 2012

BETWEEN HIGHER PLACES OF BEING

Jaime Pressly sitting in a trailer !!!!
SPIRITUAL MATURITY



Rabbi Heshel said, “In every moment something sacred is at stake, and even in that moment being attacked something sacred is at stake. Can I chose, or be awake or aware enough to see that going on and to say I need an imaginative, creative, loving response that keeps my power rather than give it over to that person and just act the way they want me to act.”





whirling dervishes


Monday, February 8, 2010

The Jew as Money Lender

Sermon delivered March 11, 2005, by Rabbi Barry H. Block

Next month, my family will gather to mark the 100th anniversary of the birth of my grandfather, Irvin Shlenker, of blessed memory. My grandfather died when I was eight years old, so I did not have the opportunity to know him well. Even at that young age, though, I knew that Irvin Shlenker was a legendary figure in the Houston Jewish community. He seems to have been President of just about every Houston Jewish institution, and to have been the first Jewish person to lead several organizations in the wider community.


Professionally, my grandfather was bank president. However, I have been told that he was far too generous and soft-hearted for the tastes of the bank Board. It's not entirely clear to me whether he occasionally lent the bank's money, without appropriate approval, or whether he would lend his own money when the Board said “no.” At the very least, he often talked the Board into making loans against their better judgment.

In the years following my grandfather's death, when I was still a child, I was occasionally approached by older Jewish folks with thick accents. They would tell me that they could never have made it in America, had my grandfather not believed in them and given them their start. One man, a Holocaust survivor who went on to become a very successful furrier, continues to contact me and other family members, more than three decades after my grandfather's death, to tell us what a difference my grandfather made in his life. Irvin Shlenker lent him money when nobody else would do so.

Whether he was familiar with the teaching or not, my grandfather regularly performed what Rabbi Moses Maimonides declared to be the highest form of tzedakah, or righteous giving: He helped other people to help themselves. The truth be told, though, none of the recipients of my grandfather's loans has ever credited him with an act of charity. None has ever suggested that Irvin Shlenker, the banker, didn't charge interest on those loans. Yes, they say he would accept slower payments when times were tough. Yes, I've heard that he wasn't always right when he believed a person would succeed with the loan, so either he or the bank wouldn't always be repaid. But yes, too, he always charged interest.

Each year, on Yom Kippur afternoon, our own congregation's recognized authority in finance, our Past President Mickey Roth, reads the holiness code, from Leviticus 19. When he offers the verse commanding that laborers be paid on the same day of their work, Mickey opines that the Torah acknowledges the time value of money. Delayed wages aren't worth as much as salaries paid in a timely fashion. The fact that a dollar today is worth more than a dollar next year is the basis for charging interest on loans.

Other evidence from the Torah, though, suggests that God abhors the idea of charging interest, and that our ancestors might not have been so aware of money's time value.

Tonight we observe Shabbat Shekalim, the Sabbath on which we read that section you just heard from Exodus 30, about the poll tax our ancient ancestors paid at the Temple. Although this passage really doesn't have to do with giving or lending, here in San Antonio, Shabbat Shekalim has become the customary annual occasion to remember the good work of the Hebrew Free Loan Society.

The idea of interest-free loans, given by Jews to Jews, comes from a passage in Deuteronomy: “You shall not lend on interest to your countryman . . . You may charge interest to a foreigner, but not to your countryman, that the Lord, your God, may bless you . . .” In this context, the distinction between “countryman” and “foreigner” is correctly interpreted as meaning that interest may not be charged to fellow Jews, but only to gentiles.

My grandfather, then, would seem to have been less righteous than the furrier suggests, and certainly not scrupulous in his observance of Torah.

As we study our ancient Rabbis' understandings of the commandment not to charge interest to fellow Jews, though, we begin to realize that the kinds of loans they contemplated were very different from the loans on which most of us pay interest. In the ancient mind, loans were to be offered to those who were in desperate need, who did not have food to eat or a roof over their heads. A loan was indeed a form of tzedakah, of righteous charitable giving, for the lender, even if repaid, would sacrifice the time value of the money lent. In many cases, the lender might not actually have expected to be repaid. However, the borrower could accept this kind of tzedakah, head held high, with the intention, often fulfilled, of repaying the loan.

Only in modern times have people really come to understand that money has time value. Therefore, charging interest for loans was considered to be immoral, as though one were charging for tzedakah, until the last couple of hundred years. Today, of course, banking is a perfectly legitimate and honorable way to make a living. People take loans, on interest, because we want to buy things, like a house, which we can't afford to purchase in cash. Also, businesses take loans in order to get a start or to expand. Without access to capital, loaned on interest, people would not be able to achieve their fondest dreams or their most noble goals in life.

The same was true during the Middle Ages, long before anybody acknowledged the fact of the time value of money. Feudal lords, for example, needed money to plant their crops, at a season when they might not have much cash on hand. At the same period of time, Jews were generally not permitted to own or work the land, which was really the only way to support a family back then. With regret, Jews often turned to the practice of lending money to gentiles on interest. The Torah permitted the practice, but Jewish money lenders knew that their business was viewed as less than noble. Moreover, the practice of money lending often cast Jews in a bad light, in the eyes of their Christian neighbors. Too many times in our history, Jewish people were persecuted, even murdered or expelled from their homes, when the Christians to whom they lent money could not repay the loans. Even more often, when wealthy medieval lords faced an economic crunch, they continued to live high on the hog, while their serfs suffered. When the poor workers would begin to rebel, they would be told not to blame the wealthy Christian land owners, but rather that the fault rested with supposedly greedy Jewish money lenders. Inevitably, a pogrom would ensue, as understandably angry serfs, their rage displaced, would attack the Jewish village. Tragically, these violent outbreaks of anti-Semitism were not isolated and did not end in the pre-modern era. Hitler, too, utilized calumnies against Jewish bankers to stir up anti-Semitism among his people and to justify genocide.

The Jewish people need not be ashamed of our history as money lenders to gentiles in medieval Europe. The oppressors offered our ancestors very few legitimate methods of earning a living, and in fact needed Jewish money lenders. In some times, and in some places, Jews were highly valued and greatly respected by European nobles who knew they could not achieve their goals and feed their people without borrowing money on interest from Jews.

We may delight, too, in our tradition of loaning money without interest to those in need. Our local Hebrew Free Loan Society continues to do that good work today. Surely, as individuals, we may well want to extend that method of tzedakah to needy people of every race and nation. Loans, more than gifts, offer great dignity to the recipient, whether or not interest is charged.

Whenever we run across a person who may need assistance, be that person a Jew or not, let us remember the wisdom of Maimonides, even as I recall the example of my grandfather, of blessed memory. When we help another person to become self-sufficient, sustaining that person's dignity, we engage in the highest form of tzedakah, the greatest level of righteousness.

Amen.

Friday, December 25, 2009

JESUS - part 2



The elegant beauty of a mature woman brings to mind the gross contradictions of the Christ teachings filtered through the European people, culture, and institutions. The Rabbi's in Jesus' time were required to marry. Men who exude power, particularly extraordinary powers, arouse women the world over. Men who work in the dangerous professions, and wear uniforms arouse a lot of women because of the powers these men have at their command, and the relationship they have with power is stimulating. “The clitoris tingles with excitement”, I have been told many times, moistening with the possibility of the man inside of her warm Punany. The elixir of sexual powers bridges the distance between logic and mysticism at the speed, and release of copulation, the probing of a man inside a woman, the resultant union, and orgasms.



The vitality of lust, and sexual fulfillment could not have escaped the sensory perceptions of Jesus Christ. As fine as women are from his part of the world, and as alluring as women are in veils, and long loose flowing garments Jesus in command of so much power, and in possession of so much knowledge, wisdom and insight was a sexual magnet. The substance of his being, and his healing, and divination powers was composed of the primal elements of female ejaculation, sensuality, allure, magic, and foresight. Copulating with the masculine principals of taking, giving with an eye for the well-being of family, and the powerful ability of a man to consume and destroy illusions, and malefic forces threatening his equilibrium the powers of Jesus could only be balanced on the Earth plane in the arms of a wife, and supported by the women who gave of their energies to support his ministry.


The women married to the men who followed Jesus gave a lot of themselves to the their husbands to be a part of the three years of Jesus' final work on the Earth plane. The cords from wife to husband tied through sex, and covenant connected their men, the Disciples of Christ, to their children, and their marriages, and to the land, Mother Earth, that supported their families. The sexual powers of women were fundamental to the work of Christ. Without it his work would not have happened. Imbalance cannot create at the level of energy, and power Jesus required in his short time on the Earth plane of existence. Even in death the female principle and the physical presence of their wombs, and the lips of their vaginas beneath their garments were portals between the worlds he traveled for three days and three nights and Mother Earth after his Roman death.


Woman had to bring him into the Earth space in the Land of the Blacks, and women's energies expressed and released through their hearts, grief, wisdom, and from powers held between their thighs had to guide him through the underworld, and back to this plane of existence. The diagram of this is much like the Cherokee worldview. The Tsalagi people see the Upper, Middle, and Lower worlds. The relationship woman held in the scheme of existence is in their blood. The women held power with their blood during their sacred moon time (menstrual cycle), and the time of giving birth. Men held their relationship to sustaining life through the shedding of blood when hunting or in warfare.


In the crucifixion of Jesus these roles were played balancing each other in an extraordinary drama. Within the depth of this teaching the Mystery of the Messiah makes sense if one understands the life-death-resurrection dance of Life. Many creatures dance this dance on the Earth plane. The Vulture, whom I know through Death and Relationship, knows and teaches these things, but the intellectual conflict in seeing these things without fear lies in the teaching of the Church, and its insistence on denying the Female part of the process of the Christ Consciousness. And from this denial comes a Death to Jesus’ wish that we all live life more abundantly, and the stubborn belief that he conquered death maintains and supports a non-relationship with the Mysteries of Holiness.


-Gregory E. Woods, Keeper of Stories




























Wednesday, December 9, 2009

RABBI ABRAHAM JOSHUA HESCHEL story: (part two)





It was Heschel who addressed the White House Conference on Children and Youth. And it was Heschel who addressed the White House Conference on Aging, when, like Maimonides, he spoke of old age as a disposition to achieve moral virtue, as the age of opportunity for inner growth. At the American Medical Association, it was Heschel who reminded the physicians of the sacredness of their task. At Protestant and Catholic conferences throughout the country it was Heschel who, by speaking out for the meaning of true religion, represented the wholeness of Judaism. And, of course, it was Heschel who represented the diverse and scattered Jewish community in urging the Pope to rectify a 1900-year-old injustice which had caused untold misery and interreligious animus.


Heschel's fulfilled desire to be connected with such diverse constituencies is reflected in the fact that over thirty national organizations, Jewish and otherwise, sponsored the sheloshim in his honor. His roots in Judaism reached so deep that they penetrated that substratum of life which nourishes all mankind. Heschel's ability to relate to so many people on their various levels flowed from his conviction that man's grandeur surpasses his ideologies. His ability to deal with the thought and attitudes of so many religious communities issued from a certitude that God transcends His theologies.

When Heschel spoke, people sensed a vibrant, incarnated tradition. He never had to make forced connections with Judaism; he was the connection. To hear him in an address echoing the perspectives of Moses, Hillel, Saadyah, and the Ari was to witness a three thousand year tradition rolled up into one soul. He once declared that "the ultimate meaning of existence is to be a religious witness." By this he meant "compasion for God, reverence for man, celebration of holiness in time, sensitivity to the mystery of being a Jew, sensitivity to the presence of God in the Bible."

It was Heschel who issued a call for renewal at the 28th World Zionist Congress in Jerusalem. There he echoed the concerns of his address at the 1957 Jerusalem Ideological Conference when he had spoken of "the sin we have sinned in disparaging the spirit," and in not teaching that Judaism is "a joy of the spirit and the Paradise of the soul." "Judaism," he declared, "is not a matter of blood or race, but a spiritual dimension of existence, a dimension of holiness. We are messengers; let us not forget our message."

"Who is a Jew? he asked in 1972. "A person who knows how to recall and to keep alive what is holy in our people's past, and to cherish the promise and the vision of redemption in the days to come." He concluded by calling our attention to what could be "a golden hour in Jewish history. Young people are waiting, craving, searching for spiritual meaning. And our leadership is unable to respond, to guide, to illumine. With Zion as evidence and inspiration, as witness and example, a renewal of our people should come about."

No one knew better than he that authentic renewal will be based on a return to our sources. And it is in such a light that Professor Heschel's formidable accomplishments in Jewish scholarship must be viewed. In a review of these accomplishments, Professor Seymour Siegel rightly quoted Heschel's comment on Maimonides: "The achievements seem so incredible that one is almost inclined to believe that Maimonides is the name of a whole academy of scholars rather than the name of an individual."

Professor Siegel went on to say that in most of his scholarly work, Heschel touches upon the relationship between mind and mystery-- between that which can be expressed and that which is greater than our power to describe. This is usually called the relationship betweeen faith and reason. But in Heschel's thought it is much more than this. It is no less than the recognition that sensitive scholars and thinkers have always realized that they existed in a reality surrounded by the ineffable, and that all of life, whether it be theologizing, philosophizing, or performing sacred deeds, is an attempt--never completely successful-- to express this overwhelming experience.

I am unaware of any other scholar in recent history who has contributed a new scholarly understanding to each of the four pivotal periods of pre-modern Jewish existence. For the Biblical period, The Prophets articulates the divine pathos of the Most Moved Mover's involvement in the affairs of man. This is done through a systematic presentation of the assumptions of Biblical thought. For the Rabbinic period, Torah Min HaShamayim BeAsplaqariah Shel HaDorot depicts the complexity of rabbinic reflection on the religious situation. Heschel discovered two internally consistent schools of thought which he organized under the rubrics of the school of Rabbi Ishmael and the school of Rabbi Akiba, both of which, he claimed, became formative for subsequent Jewish intellectual history. Two volumes of this study on revelation and the human response were published in his lifetime. The third awaits publication. This triolgy which traces the internal dialectic of Jewish theology throughout its history serves as his magnum opus. Without such an understanding of the woof and warp of Judaism his writings on contemporary theology are almost inconceivable.

The highpoints of Heschel's investigations in medieval thought deal with the expectation of prophecy and the claim for individual inspiration. Some of his most distinctive work was generated by asking not so much what the philosopher said as asking what were his questions. Heschel held that the answer of a philospher serves as a window to his soul. This approach is beautifully illustrated by his existential biography of Maimonides. Although Isaiah, Rabbi Akiba, the Baal Shem, and Rabbi Mendel of Kotsk were his constant companions, it was Maimonides, I think, who was his model. And like his mentor, he put off many scholarly dreams to dedicate himself to the sickness of mankind. History may yet say: "From Abraham to Abraham..."

Heschel's work reached its climax in his study of mysticism and Hassidism. Although he left the center of Hassidic life to go to Berlin, Hassidism never really left him. For some strange reason, which only his disciples sense, he put off making his major contribution to the understanding of Hassidism. Previously, he had written on specific Hassidic masters, and had described their world in The Earth is the Lord's. And yet, it was not until the last week of his life that he finished a full-length portrait of Rabbi Mendel of Kotsk whom he compared with the Baal Shem Tov. It was with this book that he repaid his debt to the world of Hassidism and was laid to rest. Heschel's books were adorned with impressive scholarly bibliographies. But they read like seforim--holy books. Indeed, his books illustrate his own insight: "Judaism teaches that God can be found in books." Despite Heschel's rhapsody of the sublime, the wondrous, the awesome, and the mysterious, he still felt that--

God is more immediately found in the Bible as well as in acts of kindness and worship than in the mountains and forests. It is more meaningful for us to believe in the immanence of God in deeds than in the immanence of God in nature. Indeed, the concern of Judaism is primarily not how to find the presence of God in the world of things but how to let Him enter the ways in which we deal with things; how to be with Him in time, not only in space. This is why the mitsvah is a supreme source of religious insight and experience. The way to God is a way of God, and the mitsvah is a way of God,..a mitsvah is where God and man meet.

Many of us, before we encountered Heschel, thought that Tradition served to limit our horizons. But his teachings were so expansive, his insights from traditional sources so breathtaking, that we were tempted to run back to the safe bosom of secularism. Such an escape, however, was impossible, for he never permitted us to flee from intellectual challenges. Above all, by teaching us that there is a God in this world, he helped us overcome our common embarrassment with serious theological discussion.

Heschel's contribution to contemporary thought is well-reflected in the titles of his theological works: Man Is Not Alone, God In Search of Man, and Who Is Man? Underlying much of his theological perspective is what Edward Kaplan has astutely called "the displacement of subjectivity." The Bible, Heschel helped us to see, frequently presents matters from a divine perspective. It thus reflects more divine anthropology than human theology. It is not so much that God is a symbol of human thought as that man is a symbol (tselem) of divine thought. Similarly, God is not so much a need of man as man is a need of God, for religion is as much a result of God's search for man as man's search for God.

In this manner, the Book of Job and Abraham's argument with God over Sodom are understood not so much as man's attempt at theodicy as God's attempt at anthropodicy. It is not God's commitment to justice which is at stake as much as Job's integrity and Abraham's commitment to justice. Indeed, the Bible can be seen as a tragedy wherein God fails to find a righteous man.

Similarly, Heschel viewed prayer not as an encounter with God, but as an event of being encountered by God. In prayer, he taught, our asking of God gives way before the awareness of being asked by God. Heschel taught that religion begins with a question and that theology begins with a problem. He even went so far as to assert that a person without a problem may not be a person. His teaching was not directed at resolving our problems as much as provoking our questions. Even then, his most common response in class was, "Is that the real question?"

Some critics avoided grappling with the philosophical challenges posed by Heschel by conveniently categorizing him as a "mere" poet or mystic. Realizing that we apprehend more than we comprehend, Heschel refused to reduce the perceptions of the mind to the rationally transparent. He knew only too well how much of religious affirmation is sheer metonymy; that religious language demands the "accommodation of words to higher meanings." Thus he did not hesitate to deploy a poetic turn to point to "the unutterable surplus of what we feel." He, of course, also rejected any flight to irrationality, rather he urged us to see the mystery in the interstitial crevices of everyday being. To adequately grasp Heschel's thought, we must follow his advice to "unthink many thoughts."

Abraham Joshua Heschel left this world on the Sabbath, that day of peace which he taught so many of us to appreciate and celebrate as a foretaste of eternity.

He once said: "There are three ways in which a man expresses his deep sorrow: the man on the lowest level cries; the man on the next level is silent; the man on the highest level knows how to turn his sorrow into a song." In that spirit, may the following dayyenu suffice:

· Had he illuminated the prophetic experience and the intellectual relevance of the Bible, but had not depicted how the struggles of the Rabbis illuminate our own religious situation, it would have been enough.

· Had he depicted the intellectual struggles of the Rabbis and not shown how medieval Jewish philosophy is the window to the soul of the Jewish intellect, it would have been enough.

· Had he shown how medieval Jewish philosophy is the window to the soul of the Jewish intellect, but not demonstrated how the mystical-Hassidic experience is the interior way of living Jewishly in the world, it would have been enough.

· Had he demonstrated how the mystical-Hassidic experience is the interior way of living Jewishly in the world, but not illuminated the categories of contemporary Jewish existence, it would have been enough.

And now that he has illuminated such categories from Auschwitz to Israel, from suffering to the Sabbath, from prayer to ethics, from Warsaw to Berlin, from New York to Selma, from Washington to Rome, from Hanoi to Moscow, and from Jerusalem below to Jerusalem above, how much more is doubled and redoubled our indebtedness to Abraham Joshua Heschel, who bore witness to the meaning of being Jewish in the twentieth century.

* * * * *

Reuven Kimelman is Associate Professor of Near Eastern and Judaic Studies at Brandeis University in Waltham, Massachusetts. This article is reprinted with the permission of the editors from the Melton Journal, No. 15, the Winter 1983 issue called "Leadership: Portraits of Challenge, Vision and Responsibility."

Copyright of Religion and Intellectual Life is the property of Association for Religion & Intellectual Life and its content may not be copied without the copyright holder's express written permission except for the print or download capabilities of the retrieval software used for access. This content is intended solely for the use of the individual user.


Source: The Association for Religion and Intellectual Life, archives.

http://www.crosscurrents.org/heschel.htm


Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel story (part one)


By Reuven Kimelman

Our teacher, Abraham Joshua Heschel (1907-1972), served as Professor of Jewish Ethics and Mysticism at the Jewish Theological Seminary of America from 1945 to 1972. No title could be more fitting. He was Professor of Ethics and Mysticism not only by lecturing on the principles of ethics and mysticism but also by professing ethics and highlighting the mystery of being.

There is as much need for compelling models of righteousness as there is for precision in determining what is right. While religious ideas may engage the mind, it is the religious person who makes the religious option compelling. We too often presume that the purpose of saints is to provide triumphal adornment for the tradition, when in fact, comments one observer, their task is to wrest that ever-receding tradition into immediate availability through the medium of their own lives. Heschel made his impact by the wholeness of his person, by his passion for social justice, by his scholarship in the Jewish tradition, and by his religious thinking on the human situation.

He alone possessed the richness of language to express what his person meant to his friends and students, his colleagues and his people, his nation and the world. Only his own eloquence could do justice to that most superlative of men. We must use his words now, words he once used in a eulogy: "The beauty he created in his writings, the dignity and force he lent to the life and literature of Judaism, the sensibility to the Jewish spirit which he inspired in his students, the abundance of his learning, the radiant vitality of his understanding for human beings, for works of art, for subtleties of words, and above all the integrity of his character, his unassuming and magnificent piety, his power to revere and to love." This was Abraham Joshua Heschel.

There are many people from whom we can learn methods, skills, and techniques. There are a few from whom we can learn the meaning and the secret of nobility. Heschel would quote a Hassidic master: "The Jew's greatest sin is to forget that he is the son of a King."

He walked on a higher plane than most of us. In my mind, his name has always evoked an image of exaltation. He was able to sense glory where others could see only darkness. He was blessed with a gift which few men possess: the marvel of presence. He did not have to speak to communicate his faith, his convictions, his nobility. His very presence communicated a vision. His outwardness conveyed something of his indwelling greatness. His very being radiated a sacred meaning.

Some people are like commas in the text of Jewish life; Heschel was an exclamation point. He was honest with his God, and honest with his fellow men. He burned with sincerity. In the last week of his life he mentioned having just completed his work on the Kotzker Rebbe entitled, A Passion for Sincerity. I asked him why he did not translate emes as truth or integrity. "The word is sincerity," he replied. Ironically, the publisher titled it A Passion for Truth.

It was easy to revere him, for he was endowed with the power to revere. It was easy for many human beings to love him, for he had the power to love many human beings. He had also the capacity for hatred, and despised sham and injustice.

Abraham Joshua Heschel lived out his name. As Abraham, he possessed that distinctive combination of compassion and justice. "He kept the way of the Lord by doing what is just and right." He risked his life, his reputation, the affection of his friends and colleagues to fight for the disenfranchised of this world. At the same time, he could pray for and even forgive those who offended him. Some called him Father Abraham.

As Joshua he fought the battles of the Lord. He attacked anti-Semitism with every fiber of his being. He opposed nihilism with a sense of values that was almost embarrassing. He undermined atheism with the words of the Living God that seared the heart of the listener. He assaulted racism with such a sense of the dignity of man that blocks of human hate were burned upon the altar of shame and contrition. Above all, he stormed the fortress of self-righteous power--the war-makers, impressing upon all that man is not a number, but the image of God.

As Heschel, finally, he was the descendant of the Apter Rav, Avraham Yehoshua Heschel, known as the Ohev Yisrael, Lover of Israel. Such a lover of the holy, the human and the divine, has yet to be seen. Abraham Joshua Heschel had that special pedagogical capacity to make each student feel as most beloved. He once remarked: "We are commanded to love our neighbor: this must mean that we can."

Heschel's meaning for our time is bound up in the impact he made on the passions of the day. Heschel's concern and action have been pivotal in two issues: race and peace. On the first, many will remember the picture of his striding alongside Martin Luther King, Jr., in the protest march at Selma, Alabama. Mrs. Coretta Scott King, in recalling that event, called Heschel "one of the great men of our time." Rabbi Heschel described the march in these words: "For many of us the march from Selma to Montgomery was both protest and prayer. Legs are not lips, and walking is not kneeling. And yet our legs uttered songs. Even without words, our march was worship. I felt my legs were praying."

Less well known was Heschel's prominent role at the National Conference of Religion and Race in Chicago, 1963, a convocation which sparked the participation of clergymen in the great march on Washington later that year. Heschel delivered a major address: "One hundred years ago," he reminded the delegates, "the emancipation was proclaimed. It is time for the white man to strive for self-emancipation, to set himself free of bigotry." The greatest sin, he declared, is that of indifference: "Equality is a good thing ... what is lacking is a sense of the monstrosity of inequality."

It was Heschel, too, who helped organize and serve as co-chairman of Clergy and Laity Concerned about Vietnam, a group which spearheaded the religious opposition to the war. It was typical of Heschel to emphasize concern about Vietnam. While others saw the issue as being one of America's misguided involvement in world affairs, Heschel cried out for the people of Vietnam and for the soul of America.

Heschel's protest went to the deepest level of the issue. To withdraw from Vietnam would no doubt mean losing face, and he understood the dilemmas of the policy-makers. But to remain in Vietnam would mean something worse: losing our souls.

Once Herschel invited to his seminar on ethics, at the Jewish Theological Seminary, an anti-Vietnam war hero who proceeded to try to convince him to go to jail to save his soul by arguing that no one of integrity can willfully benefit from a corrupt society. Heschel asked if that would bring the end to the war one day closer? His would-be savior answered, "Regardless!" Heschel then refused, saying that we cannot indulge in the saving of our souls at the possible expense of the lives of others.

He regarded the continuation and escalation of the war as yet another instance of that moral callousness, that insensitivity to the sufferings of others which, combined with an overweening confidence in the righteousness of a position, underlay the problems of America. And so he called--long before this became a theme of political campaigns--for national repentance, for a return to conscience and an enlargement of the moral imagination, for a dedication to peace rather than victory. In particular he appealed to those of religious faith. "To speak about God," he proclaimed, "and remain silent on Vietnam, is blasphemous." One of his last public acts was a visit to a prison to witness the release of, and to welcome back, that war protestor.

What pained Heschel most of all was the relative silence of the Jews. When one remembers the masses of Jews participating in the civil rights struggle as though they were going forth from Egypt again, one is struck by their relative reticence on the war. Not that Jews did not speak out; they did, as always, well out of proportion to their number. What grieved Heschel was that for twenty years we had been condemning the good, but silent Germans. And now within only one generation there were Jews who were satisfied being good, silent Americans. In a democracy, a silent majority is a scared majority. Still, as far as I know, Heschel, unlike younger spokesmen, refused to use the language of the Holocaust even to discuss Vietnam, for he understood the horrible singularity of Auschwitz. But his rallying cry of "Some are guilty, but all are responsible," simmered with the question of "Where art Thou?"

Early in the 1960's, when Heschel was forging concern for Vietnam, he was simultaneously lighting the spark for one of the greatest protest movements of Jewish history--Soviet Jewry. Back in 1963 it was Heschel who first declared that Soviet Jewry was the number one priority of American Jews. On September 4, 1963, he sounded the call: "East European Jewry vanished. Russian Jewry is the last remnant of a people destroyed in extermination camps, the last remnant of spiritual glory that is no more. We ask for no privilege; all we demand is an end to the massive and systematic liquidation of the religious and cultural heritage of an entire community, and equality with all the other cultural and religious minorities. Let the twentieth century not enter the annals of Jewish history as the century of physical and spiritual destruction! If I forget thee, 0 Russian Jewry..." (to be continued...)