All that is new
It is legend that when handed a copy of a Chumash containing the Biur of Moses Mendelssohn, the great 19th century rabbi Moses Sofer known as the Chatam Sofer threw it to the floor. He warned his children in his will, not to study the writings of “Reb Moshe of Dessau”. Consider the famous statement of the Chatam Sofer, “Chadash assur min hatorah” - “new is prohibited by the torah”. The Chatam Sofer’s statement was not literal but rather a take on the Torah prohibition on consumption of the year’s new grain until the second day of Passover and the Omer offering.
What is not new is religious, social, political and ethical debate in the Jewish world. It is to a considerable extent a preoccupation. Zionism and the State of Israel is suffering an identity crisis and that is a focus of preoccupation both for Israel’s supporters and detractors. This isn’t new either and long predates the establishment of the modern Jewish state. The notion that Israel would just exist as a perfect reflective image of Jewish pride and practice that everyone agrees on or even will ultimately agree on is a naive concept.
Numerous enemies wanting to destroy the Jewish people is also not new so why would having our own modern nation state change that, rather would it in truth intensify the focus of this evil and often contagious obsession. Anyone who has seen the grotesque antisemitic and anti-Israel imagery peddled by the Iranian leadership for example which exceeds even their extremist rhetoric, will know very quickly how much more to the situation there is than just the current war. That destroying Judaism in whatever form or iteration is still a major infatuation.
Who we were
My 4th great-grandfather Rabbi Daniel Prossnitz (Steinschneider) was head of the Beth Din of the holy Orthodox kehila of Pressburg, modern day Bratislava. It was a position that he held for over 50 years. Rav Daniel was a uniquely powerful and influential Rabbi and he was more than just the city’s great halachic decisor. He was also a community leader, responsible for the appointment of the Chatam Sofer as the religious leader of the community and head of the famous Pressburg Yeshiva, commencing in 1806. Together they fought the encroachment of religious reform and Hungarian Neologism. Rav Daniel was also responsible for the appointment of Chatam Sofer’s son Avraham Shmuel Binyamin Sofer, who became known as the Ksav Sofer, as his father’s successor 30 years later.
Rav Daniel presided over proceedings and gave the first eulogy at the funeral of the Chatam Sofer, his dear friend and confidant, and it is also legend that at this funeral Rav Daniel pronounced certain edicts. One of these graveside edicts was that anyone who did not accept the Ksav Sofer to be the new religious leader of the community could not approach the grave and pay respects to the holy deceased father. He was insistent that the community religious standards that had been set would be maintained.
Rav Daniel had the birth surname Steinschneider and took on the name Prossnitz for the town near his birth where he grew up and first attended the yeshiva. Prostejov in Czech, Prusstitz in Yiddish and Prossnitz in German. So effectively he was “Daniel of Prossnitz”. Rabbi Daniel had six daughters and four sons. The descendants of his sons reverted to the surname of Steinschneider.
It is a genetic and ancestral curiosity that I am doubly descended from Rabbi Daniel. One of his grandsons married one of his granddaughters, hence they were first cousins and they were my great-great-grandparents. There is no halachic issue with first cousins being married and it was not totally uncommon in those times. This marriage took place in Vienna and the presiding Rabbi of the IKG (Israelitschen Kultusgemeinde) was Reuven Baruch, who was also head of the Sephardi community of Vienna.
Baruch was born Reuven ben Yehuda Baruch in 1811 in Timișoara, today Temesvar Serbia, then part of the large Austro-Hungarian Empire. In 1840 was elected the rabbi of the Sephardic community in Vienna who were Spanish-Ottoman Jews. Baruch studied Talmud in Livorno, Istanbul and also Izmir, one of the great centres of talmudic scholarship. Baruch encouraged the Judeo-Spanish language press in Ladino/Judezmo. Such was the diversity of Jewish life building in Central Europe at the time, especially Vienna.
Oh Vienna
Both modern and traditional Jews were drawn to Vienna in the 19th century as it became an open city for Jews. Vienna lies just 80km along the Danube from Pressburg/Bratislava. Whilst commerce flourished so did Jewish religious and cultural life. Some of the strongest roots of nascent Zionism were also planted in Vienna. I confess a certain attraction to the place nevertheless my family’s relatively brief presence there and ultimately their rapid departure under the threat of Nazi peril marks Vienna as both romantic in a sense and creepy at the same time. It is physically beautiful and impressive but it has a dark and ugly history for its Jewish community not just in the 20th century. The Jews had previously been expelled from Vienna at least twice, including suffering a violent pogrom in the 15th century. Still today I am uncertain that the reestablished and significant Jewish community there is entirely comfortable. But are we entirely comfortable anywhere.
My grandfather and already the generation before him had essentially left Hungary for Vienna but remained Hungarian citizens. It saved their lives when the Nazis walked into Vienna during the Anchluss in 1938 and they were able to leave Austria. 65,000 Austrian Jews were not as fortunate and were murdered.
My maternal grandparents were the last generation on that side of my family married in Europe. In 1928 they were married in the famous and impressive Stadttempel, the home of the Viennese Rite and the only one of around 60 synagogues and Jewish prayer houses in Vienna not destroyed by the Nazis during Kristalnacht. For my grandfathers side, having been a traditional “Hungarian” Rabbinic family this was to be the first and last modern Viennese wedding at the Stadttempel. Their Rabbi, Max Grunwald survived the Holocaust by escaping to mandatory Palestine and living out his old age in the new State of Israel.
The Viennese Rite as practiced throughout the main Ashkenaz synagogues of Vienna was unique in Europe. It eschewed the dramatic changes of German reform or even the less dramatic changes of the Hungarian Neolog. The essential layout of the synagogue was maintained with the Bimah facing the Aron Kodesh though often moved forward, men and women sat separately, choirs were men only and musical instruments were not permitted on Shabbat. The service made minor adaptions to the traditional nusach Ashkenaz including incorporating local piyyutim but the more substantial changes were to melodies and musical style, perhaps as one might expect in musical Vienna. The service was not substantively abbreviated and remained entirely in Hebrew. In particular contrast to German and other Reform, the Jews of Vienna continued to pray for the Jewish return to Zion, for the restoration of a Davidic dynasty there which would include the practice of sacrificial worship.
The development and adoption of the Viennese Rite was the result of the community religious and secular leadership seeking to balance the needs of traditionalists with those who sought a measure of modernisation and local community decorum. Like in many European Jewish cities, a rapidly changing world, changing professions and a generally changing environment for Jews meant shifts in traditions and institutions but Vienna was a unique setting, striking a balance between the old and the new forces. It maintained the position of the Holy Lands as a core religious and cultural value amongst Jews.
Today the Stadttempel remains as the centre of the revived Orthodox Jewish community of Vienna and also as a historical monument. My maternal great-grandparents from my grandmothers side, were already married in the Stadttempel in the 1890s, the wedding officiated by Rabbi Moritz (Moshe) Gudemann who had become the chief Rabbi of Vienna.
Around that time, Theodor Herzl had approached Rabbi Gudemann for his support prior to the first Zionist Congress in Basel but Gudemann ultimately opposed and criticised the modern national State based concept of Zionism and published a pamphlet in which he wrote, Zionism “transfers national chauvinism... to Judaism” and “a Judaism... with cannons and bayonets would swap the role of David for that of Goliath and be a pathetic travesty of itself”.
Steinschneider, Zionism and Antisemitism
Rav Daniel’s great nephew was the scholar Moritz (Moshe) Steinschneider who also came from Prostejov (Prossnitz) in Moravia. The center of Moritz Steinschneider's work as a historian was in the fields of medieval Hebrew and Arabic literature, and it is his monumental contribution to these fields that established his reputation as one of the most learned scholars of his age. He was recognised by many as the greatest Jewish scholar of the 19th century. His output included over fourteen hundred publications, ranging from short articles to books of over a thousand pages long. The breadth of Steinschneider’s knowledge was extraordinary. He is acknowledged for coining the term antisemitism. If only he could see what has become of that concept!
In his younger years he had been a devout and long standing student of Rabbi Nahum Trebitsch who became the chief rabbi of Moravia and headed the famous Yeshiva of Nikolsburg. Trebitsch’s tenure there bookended prior by Mordechai Banet and afterwards by Samson Raphael Hirsch.
In the 1830’s Moritz Steinschneider and a number of his fellow scholars also developed one of the very early concepts of modern Zionism, for Austrian and German Jews to resettle in the Holy Lands and to be followed by others and create a nation. This idea was kept suppressed as it could have been viewed unfavourably within the Austrian Empire as well as by rabbinic authorities. Steinschneider though ultimately developed an open opposition to the concept of Zionism as he came to believe that Jewish nationalism and a Jewish State was not a solution to the problem Jewish persecution. He grew cold on the idea of nationalism generally and remarked, “Nationalism is brutality; humanity is freedom and truth”. Like Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch he opposed some of the views and historical research of Dr Heinrich Graetz who saw Judaism as a national religion. It is unsurprising that Graetz became the Jewish historian of choice taught in Israeli and also Zionist oriented schools around the world.
Steinschneider has been proven substantially correct, as many forms of nationalism have been pretexts for hating Jews and extreme nationalism continues to be one of our greatest enemies. So then what of Jewish nationalism? While Zionism and the establishment of a Jewish national state has afforded many advances for Jews so far it has not proved to be any sort of antidote to the issues of Jew hatred. If it had been one of the objectives of Zionism it has not succeeded. Most forms of nationalism are riddled with questionable narratives and Israeli nationalism is at times no exception. Extreme forms of nationalism within Israel have also developed as a menacing force.
What have we become?
My great-grandfather was one of the founding shareholders in the Jewish Colonial Trust the forerunner of Bank Leumi and he was involved in early Zionism in Vienna. He and my grandfather were involved in various Zionist organisations. I have old letters written by my grandfather where he signs off, “mit Zionsgruss” the greeting of the early Zionist movement. After escaping Europe to Australia on the eve of WW2 they were among those who established the North Shore Synagogue in Sydney. My grandfather on the committee and my great grandfather an early President of the congregation. It was a congregation deemed Orthodox, operating in a rented hall, then a house and ultimately the foundation stone for its new permanent sanctuary laid by Rabbi Israel Brodie, the Chief Rabbi of the Commonwealth in the early 1950s. The congregation followed the traditional nusach Ashkenaz and customs but was certainly in the image of a modern Orthodox style while it served a community largely no longer strictly observant. Within two generations my mother’s family went from being a devout Orthodox Rabbinical family to being modern professional secularly educated, only barely observant and with largely progressive Zionist views. Significant religious and cultural change had taken place.
A nation set apart
Debates exist within the Jewish world about what constitutes Jewish Peoplehood including the debate about Jewish national self determination, but this should not be a debate determined by non-Jews, though the physical limits of Jewish national self determination must be met through negotiations with others. Sometimes pragmatic politics is also a hard fact on the ground. There is an irony in our general historically vexed acceptance of UN resolution 181 establishing both Israel and a Palestinian State within borders decided at that time. This contrasts with our general derision for many other UN resolutions relating to Israel. It also contrasts with the refusal of many in the Jewish nation to accept that Palestinian State.
Many Jews see themselves as part of a greater Jewish People and as constituting part of a Hebrew nation. This is often irrespective of religious sectarian affiliation. Historically Jew-Haters or antisemites have chosen to persecute Jews not simply on a religious basis, which they certainly and egregiously have, but also on the basis of Jews being a distinct people with distinct characteristics, which has included the accusation of Jews harbouring the seditious nature of an outsider. A distinct people, a seperate nation, ironically the Jew-haters have also worked to make Jews a politically and socially isolated group in deliberate offensive campaigns - if Jews weren’t already isolated for spiritual reasons, a point of significant internal debate, an enigmatic people. The Jew-haters today say many of the very same things as they have for millennia, and today they can also use Israel as a Trojan Horse for these hatreds.
The Jewish people, who were cast out of the Holy Land and who have since that time identified as those people and who have also been constantly identified as those people apparently don’t really get to exist on their own terms. Jews it seems exist on the negative conception of their persecutors and haters and are a peculiarly non-people for a group of people so distinctly singled out. Nonetheless a Jewish peoplehood, even a Jewish nation can still strongly and distinctly exist in the absence of a contemporary nation state.
It’s not just possible but a long proven fact that Jews are good and patriotic citizens in the nations of the diaspora. As a nation set apart it is difficult though to conform to versions of an extreme form of nationalism which often makes Jews a target. Conversely if we attempt to overly define, dictate and codify our own nationalism in our own nation state of Israel we risk tearing ourselves apart as the danger of an extreme nationalism is universal.
The shock of the new
I believe in the importance of Israel, the justice it serves to the Jewish people and as a nation built and maintained on the modern principles of the Declaration of Independence. I am also comfortable and accepting that Zionism by its very nature represents a type of reform movement within the Jewish world. Not the Reform synagogue of nineteenth century Germany or modern Reform movement most prevalent in America. A reform of greater magnitude. Casting aside traditional religious and communal thought that has existed for century upon century in relation to the return to the Holy Lands. Recasting that return in the form of a modern social-political movement or in the form of a modern religious-political movement represents possibly the greatest reform in the modern history of the Jewish people. It is monumental. We should accept that such reform does not sit comfortably with all.
A large proportion of Torah observant Jews historically and still today reject a political national Jewish State. They see Zionism potentially overtaking, overriding or subverting traditional Judaism. Conversely myself and many others, see the Jewish State as a culturally relevant, historically just and powerful, pragmatic Jewish concept. That includes a modern Israel that adopts rational and democratic political standards, that respects the rights, diversity and differences within the Jewish people, as well as the non-Jewish citizens of Israel as well as its neighbours which has to include the Palestinians. But respect has to be mutual if it is to mean anything. A dream? Not if you will it!
What would the Chatam Sofer or Daniel Prossnitz make of the modern Jewish State. It is understood that the Chatam Sofer supported the idea of Jewish settlement in the Holy Lands, the Yishuv. It is unlikely that he would have supported the establishment of a Jewish nation state especially in the administrative image of a modern European nation. It is also unlikely that the Gaonim would have supported Messianic Zionism, the reestablishment of a Sanhedrin or the building of a Third Temple.
Religious opposition to Zionist concepts continued to rage on throughout the late 19th and early 20th century, the reform it represented was too great and incongruous for many. It has to be remembered that this opposition was not from members of extremist sects or radicals or so-called self hating Jews but from the most deeply respected and admired authorities on Torah and Jewish community leaders. Rabbi Elchonon Wasserman, a prominent student of the Chofetz Chaim and a Rosh Yeshiva himself said:
The nationalist concept of the Jewish people as an ethnic or nationalistic entity has no place among us, and it's nothing but a foreign implant into Judaism; it is nothing but idolatry. And its younger sister, "religious nationalism (l'umis datis)", is idol worship that combines Hashem's name and heresy together (avodah zarah b'shituf).
Religious Zionism is an example of substantive reform even if it it’s adherents daven a traditional nusach and generally follow Halacha. The Halacha is followed to varying degrees and with large measures of leniency and modern pragmatism by many. It accepts the clothing, language, commerce and style of the modern non-Jewish world and even to a great extent many customs. When do ongoing and broadly accepted pragmatic leniencies become in reality, entrenched reforms.
Rav Kook a revered historical leader of this group coined his own saying: “Hachadash yiskadesh, vehakadosh yischadesh; “the new will become sacred, and the sacred will be renewed.” Whether Kook’s perception and pragmatic acceptance of the new takes Israel ultimately on the path to redemption or instead along a current trajectory towards a Messianic dystopia is certainly a major part of Israel’s current identity crisis. Perhaps Kook’s needle has just become stuck in the groove or is still playing out, and not very tunefully. It is proving difficult to have things both ways.
The shock of the new takes the Jewish people into a different realm. The Jewish people have created a nation and a society largely in the image of the enlightenment and the level of reform and societal change is unprecedented in our history. Elected parliamentary leaders, secular based legal system, universities teaching all manner of enlightened humanities, sciences and conducting research, a modern bureaucracy, police force and of course a heavily resourced and large military based on a secular model of hierarchy and command. One of the most enlightened reforms being high levels of gender equality in most spheres of society. Structures, references and culture alien to most of the past two thousand years of Jewish life.
We want it all and we want it now
We want Moshiach now. We want him speedily and in our times. We want Judea and Samaria now. We want to rebuild the Third Temple now. We want and we want.
The nationalist messianics and some of the proto-Zionist Hasidic sects seek redemption as soon as possible, they demand it. Get me out of this shitty world and this shitty scary thing called life. Take us to spiritual paradise. They aren’t Zionists at all in the conventional sense that most of us understand.
Sad to say that there is also a whole swathe of Israeli people and supporters attempting to recreate a culture that is unlikely to have ever existed in Judea and Samaria. It’s a Judeo-Disney. Yes, Jews lived there and even ruled there for a time but not in the manner that they are now attempting to cobble together mythologically two thousand years later. It’s interesting to look at history and its fun to play dress-ups but probably not with guns or thinking the West Bank is the Wild West. Burning the olive trees of Palestinian farmers is not a biblical burning bush. When people try to recreate an ancient culture in the contemporary world, impose a distorted ahistorical nationalism, claiming fanciful spiritual visions, prostrating themselves on the Temple Mount, really they are just making a mockery of both the historic culture and the Jewish people.
What of the many, if not the majority of the Jewish world including probably most Israeli Jews who do not want any of those things. Certainly not now, certainly not in some great hurry and certainly not at the expense of the rights and dignity of others. What if most of the Jewish world are actually not interested in Messianic constructions of Judaism, a messianic Israel or a messianic life in general. Or not interested in a Haredi Israel or a Haredi life. Not interested in schools teaching a nation State imposed version of Judaism or religious nationalism whether taught at schools in Israel or aligned schools in the diaspora.
If you believe that you have a soul
When a government starts imposing the laws that characterise what it is to be a Jew they are taking on the role of a religious authority, this is a dramatic reform. A secular governmental religious authority where Judaism and Jewish identity is at the whim of the government of the day is utterly preposterous.
What could be more ridiculous to the eternal religion than an ephemeral elected government dictating religious practice, giving religious guidance or making religiously oriented laws. One thing perhaps could be. A self ordained Haredi dominated Rabbinate sanctioned by the government and setting the religious character and even law of the State when many of its opaquely appointed members don’t accept the legitimacy of that State to begin with.
Being Jewish might ultimately be all that I am. Does some person today whether in the Knesset in Israel or anywhere else think that they have the right to own or dictate what that means? A Jewish soul given by God belongs to its owner and ultimately returns to God, he gave us that soul and freewill. Not any government. Israel is a holy place, but the government is not holy, a State is not holy, it is a pragmatic institution. Are the President or Prime Minister of the State holy men, would you pray to a National flag? Siddurim containing a prayer for the State of Israel is a significant late 20th century reform. We can perhaps pray for a State or at least for the people, we certainly cannot pray to a State.
An enigma, a contradiction, an awkward conflation - Legitimate concerns
It is important that we pay some heed to the concerns expressed even by our non-Zionist antecedents, historical communal and religious leaders and scholars about the dangers that can come with statehood and nationalism. We can still do so whilst also being Zionist and supporting Israel. But we can consider their valid concerns or is our hubris so great that we just sweep it aside. We are Zionists and know everything better, and if you weren’t hearing us we can explain it to you again and again! This disposition is as true of the traditional Zionist left as it is the Right.
Politically and religiously the entire concept of Zionism and the modern State of Israel represents a type of Jewish reform which most Jews have been willing to accept and support. If we are to imbue it with any religious construction it becomes even more evidently a new type of religious pathway and even greater reform. If we put State before religion then surely it moves beyond just a reform. If the State is above God it becomes a substitute deity, no matter how that is twisted, then we are at a critical juncture in the history of Judaism.
For the religious nationalist the nation State becomes a vessel for God’s will and almost becomes a proxy for God but this is a tendentious and contrived concept at best, while for the secular nationalist the nation State almost becomes a substitute for a God who they don’t recognise. If the State is put above the people then it becomes a dangerous form of nationalism.
We need to ask for example; Do those who believe in messianism actually believe in a homeland for the Jewish people or something quite different. Do extreme ultra-nationalist events like the Jerusalem Flag march skirt very close to idolatry?
Extremist Messianic religious nationalism which has a greater influence than ever before on political, social and, military decisions in Israel, to the country’s detriment is an awkward conflation. For various reasons it does not sit comfortably with many Jews. It is more than just a break from Jewish religious traditions and teachings relating to Zion and the Jewish return. It is also a severe break from accepted cultural and political paths of the modern Zionist state envisioned by its founders. What is Israel’s legal, ethical or moral code even as a modern nation state when the current government has made it clear that Israel’s already fragile social contract is to be thrown out the window.
The modern Jewish State whether in the image of the traditional Israeli Left or Right is both primarily democratic and largely liberal in conception, though neither the traditional Israeli Left or Right ever fully embraced liberal democracy. This chicken is coming home to roost right now. Still the modern state is built upon fundamentally enlightened ideas. Israel is filled with non observant Jews who live the life of modern Jews but who ironically often reject Reform Judaism and at the same time show actual contempt for Orthodoxy whilst despising the Haredim. So what Judaism are they practicing. If they deny and even condemn the views of the greatest Jewish thinkers and religious scholars from throughout history then they are practicing another type of reform.
No fog, but a messianic quagmire of war
Israel has been and fundamentally continues to be in a genuine war with a major adversary in Iran. Israel will win this war in some form though there are questions about what the aims are and what will constitute a win. Some will imbue this win and Israeli political leadership with spiritual prowess and another piece of evidence towards restoration and redemption. Of course this is complete nonsense, it’s just a war with various complex strategic aims and the leaders are just people, that’s all. The total train-wreck that has characterised the Gaza situation proves that there is no spiritual or miraculous guidance happening. The Messianics are twisting and convoluting every event, good or bad as another sign of imminent arrival of the Messiah. For some religious minded elements the only way they can rationalise the reforms are by imbuing them with messianic properties. I understand the conundrum but it doesn’t make for a coherent or acceptable national narrative, the total opposite. A state that exists only to sit in isolation and to await the messiah.
Without the support of the diaspora, particularly the American diaspora, Israel’s situation becomes tenuous. This is why the most extreme elements such as the messianic Right, who are impossible partners for anyone, and a black eye for Israeli credibility present a monumental problem and danger for Israel.
Time never stands still
For the Jewish people both Zionism and the future path of the State of Israel may pose as many questions as it answers at the moment. We have accepted and adopted the reforms to the Jewish world set by Zionism and the modern State of Israel in various ways. In accepting these changes to traditions are we consuming new grain, perhaps taken before its time. Chadash assur min hatorah” or “Hachadash yiskadesh, vehakadosh yischadesh”. We grapple with these apparent contradictions. In so doing we sometimes struggle to digest this new grain and the spiritual value of it can be problematic for our souls to absorb.
Perhaps another approach. Einstein once commented that; “the only reason for time is so that everything doesn’t happen at once.” Again, consider the Chatam Sofer’s statement “chadash assur min hatorah” - “all that is new is prohibited by torah”. Does it mean that everything must remain the same forever, or that we cannot innovate or that the world does not change. If we consider “chadash” in the same sense that it is used in “ain kol chadash tachat hashemesh” - “there is nothing new under the sun”, it relates to all historic experience, but also to that which has not yet been experienced in our terrestrial world. There are still discoveries for people to make, history to uncover, so what we might think of as new has already been existent even if it hasn’t yet presented itself to our eyes or been understood within our basis of conception or knowledge. Therefore God must have already anticipated it and addressed it within the Torah. Do we need to understand it fully and are we even capable of doing so. It is neither a renewal or the new. It is within something simple yet profoundly sacred called chai, it is just life.