7 May 2010

My Religious Journey

Here is an essay that I had to write when applying to yeshiva.  Given the context, you can take some parts of it with a pinch of salt, and other parts are more restrained than they otherwise would be.  However, it is a reasonable account of my take on Judaism and how I got there.

-----

Understanding my background and the development of my Jewish views will help you to understand my inspirations and my reasons for applying to the Shappells Summer program. I come from a traditional, involved but largely non-observant Jewish family. Nevertheless, the fact that I was raised in a small, provincial community was a blessing that meant I was far more involved than my peers from larger communities. In a community like ours, everybody got involved with the synagogue and Cheder, sent their children to Jewish youth movements, and learnt basic skills such as leining and the ability to lead a service.

My road to observance was, and is, a slow and gradual one that has been going on throughout my life. For example, I first remember saying no to a pork sausage when on holiday at 11 years old. Continual development saw me refuse to eat both rump steak and ice cream in the same meal at 14 (!), first voluntarily wear tefillin on a Hanoar Hatzioni camp at about 15 and start to be Shomer Shabbat on the very day I started university. There have been numerous milestones since, but there is no rush to observance. Judaism isn’t a race to the finish line but one where one must “gird up strength like a lion... for the service of his Creator” every day.

The reasons for increased observance at such a young age were largely either non-cognitive or due to general intellectual virtue, rather than grand notions about the ‘truth’ of Judaism. For example, I was moved by the rabbi who taught me from barmitzvah who insisted I was ‘religious’ when I was adamant I wasn’t, and taught Judaism in such a sincere and candid way. Equally, I was upset at a hypocrisy that said I couldn’t go to a friend’s party because it was Shabbat but where we instead stayed in and watched television. An example of intellectual virtue was when thinking about the so-called ‘small things’ such as how we dress. Should I base my actions on the fad of the moment or the results of thousands of years of discussion?

My first experience of Jewish hashkafa- when I was old enough to appreciate it- was through various outreach organisations on campus. One thinker who stood out was Rav Dessler whose writings were both clear and resonant. His position on issues such as ‘free will’ influenced my thinking. Most impressive, however, was the effect that his work had on the people who read it. This internalisation of thought and translation into practice is perhaps the most impressive feature of Chareidi Judaism in general and mussar in particular.

Despite this, the first work that inspired me and gave me a Jewish world-view that I could call my own was Rambam’s Guide for the Perplexed. “Philosophy...” in the words of Wittgenstein “...is a battle against the bewitchment of our intelligence by means of language”. Through his analysis of homonymous, hybrid and metaphorical words, Rambam shows how misunderstanding our language results in “false notions and perverse methods”. Through untangling the knots of our thought, and understanding its limits, we assume the correct position before G-d. His work showed me the value and uniqueness of Judaism, firstly because the errors of thinking Judaism warn us against and the philosophical pretentions he identifies are much in evidence today. Secondly, the battle against this type of thinking is encoded in our entire way of life. This, for Rambam, is the essence of us having a ‘divine law’ as opposed to the ‘conventional law’ of other nations. All our actions are directed at destroying the idolatry of false thought from the world.

Since then, I have accepted some of the criticisms of Rambam’s philosophy by people such as Rav Hirsch, Shadal and Rav Soloveitchik; particularly with regard to areas such as ta’amei mitzvoth and biblical exegesis. Judaism has a constructive, as well as destructive, element. Rav Hirsch contends that Judaism’s world-view should “develop creatively from within [its received tradition]” and as “a science from itself” rather than be focused on external philosophy. For Rav Soloveitchik this specifically means a “philosophy of halacha”. Thus, two books of his that have inspired me are The Halakhic Mind which details how such a philosophy may be achieved and The Emergence of Ethical Man which is the best example I know of its application. Personally, I follow Rav Hirsch who has wider conception of the sources from which ‘the way’ or mission of Judaism is to be derived. Equally, he has a more practical focus indicating, through his conception of Torah Im Derech Eretz, the way Judaism, l’chatchila, should be enacted in the world.

As such, my philosophy is based on these ‘modern’ elements of Orthodoxy, although they are rooted in the tradition of the Kuzari. However, I’m also cognisant that the need to develop a philosophy at all is a symptom of galut. We still have the Fast of Tevet to mourn the loss of the First Temple where we could see the Urim v’Tumim and so, the tangible presence of G-d in the world. I think Chassidic interpretations of Tanach, such as those of the Izbicer Rebbe, can give a ‘taste’ or ‘feel’ of that world. We learn how through being ‘authentic’, we can realign G-d, ourselves and the world. In other words, they show us the redemptive qualities of our choices and actions.

Other inspirations include Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks and Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz. They have done so much to clearly and intelligently articulate the vision of Judaism to a wider audience, as well as having done so much within our faith. It makes me so proud to be a Jew, for example, when Rabbi Sacks preaches to the House of Lords or European Union. He helps to fulfil the Torah verse that the “nations, which will hear all these statutes, and say, ‘Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people.’”

As you can see from this, most of my Jewish learning has centred around hashkafa, or learning other Jewish subjects from English-language books. The next part of my Jewish development is to progress my textual skills so that I can learn the Sifrei Kodesh in the original. I have tried to learn some Mishneh Torah with friends and could, with difficulty, learn it independently. Equally, I have spent a year learning gemara on WebYeshiva, giving myself an introduction in ‘how to learn’ and the style of argumentation employed. I try to learn from the Aramaic with a chevruta but need many aids to get anywhere. My lack of ability in these areas is a major motivation in deciding to attend yeshiva. It will provide the focused environment and the expert teachers I need and will hopefully serve as a springboard for future learning. The summer program at Shapell’s provides ‘intense skills-oriented Torah learning’ and its general focus on developing textual and analytical skills mean that it is the perfect yeshiva to further my goals.

Equally, you will have seen from my development that I have drawn inspiration from different strands of Judaism: Chareidi Judaism for its transformative effect and Avodat Hashem, Modern Orthodoxy for drawing its philosophy directly from the sources, Chassidut for giving an insight into the redemptive quality of the mitzvoth and Torah Im Derech Eretz for providing the communal organisation that is best suited to furthering the Jewish mission. As such, I feel I espouse Shapell’s derech that all the Torah’s ways are pleasant. The yeshiva will provide many role models that I can learn from and be inspired by. Whilst, textual learning is the main aim, you will provide a nurturing environment in which to do it.

15 Apr 2010

Live Election Debates

Without sounding premature- and with the risk of looking stupid after tonight- I have two objections to ‘presidential style debates’ between party leaders.  They are both linked but separate.

The first one is just coming from the perspective of being a pedantic purist.  Unlike in America, we are not voting for head of state or even a head of government.  We are voting for a local candidate to represent the interests of their constituency.  Of course, they will usually (but not always) subscribe to a broad programme of action that will link them with other candidates as a ‘party’.  The party with the largest amount of candidates will have the strongest mandate to rule, and will be prudent for the Queen to ask the leader of that party to form a government.

Here, party rule and the recognition of a prime minister are outgrowths of the process and not its object.  This is why (so i believe) a candidate may change party mid-term.  It is also why there didn’t need to be an election when Tony Blair stood down as leader of the Labour party.  People complained that Gordon Brown hadn’t been given a mandate by the British people.  HE didn’t need one- he had the support of the largest amount of candidates that we had supported. 

From this perspective, there is a risk in these debates that we vote on which person we want to decide the laws of the country.  However, most decisions will not be made by that person (alone) but by 646 people we vote for.  And there is, at least in theory, a distinction between the people we vote for and the party they belong to.

The second reason is linked but from a more practical perspective.  The idea of the debates, I suppose, is to open up a wider audience to the ideas and policies of the different parties.  However, the head-to-head format is such that it will focus us on the personalities and not the policies:

  1. It will create an adversarial atmosphere and they will not be able to reflect on past-mistakes or the trade-offs inherent in their policies without the other candidates just using it as a weapon to rubbish them with. 
  2. To score points, they will immediately have to debate which policies are better, without having the time to say what the policies actually are (beyond a punch-line).
  3. It encourages scrutiny of body-language, confidence and presentation- everything apart from substance.
  4. They won’t (can’t) dignify one another’s points by debating specific points, but just as a springboard to make a speech about their own policies in that area.
  5. They will need to find that 'key quote or slogan’ which will appear on the news.

Both criticisms are this:  what is important is what the candidates we vote for want to do and not who it is that does them.  We don’t need to vote for someone to head up the country or embody the country.  We have that already.  The Queen.  As her (and because we vote for them: our) loyal servants, the M.Ps are the people to carry out her (and because we vote on it: our) program.  There should be no importance to a PM other than in that regard.  Their personality is, therefore, irrelevant and so the debate is misleading if it suggest otherwise.  

13 Apr 2010

Make Sure You’re Registered!!

Yes, general election time and no doubt, there will be an awfully poor turnout as is the norm.  Make sure that you don’t contribute to this trend. 

The first step is to make sure you are actually on the electoral roll.  This is probably that should have been done as far back as last year.  However, in my case I was too lazy to register in Leeds and mistakenly thought I was already registered back in Reading.  Realising that I wasn’t registered last week, I thought it would be too late but there was enough time… just!  My local constituency had the deadline of the 20th April.  It may be different town to town but time is definitely running out.  For more information or to download a form see here:  www.aboutmyvote.co.uk. 

People not voting is a sign of the decadence of our culture.  We enjoy our freedom but don’t really believe in it enough to take an active part.  Not caring about democracy is the attitude that leads so many in our country to support tyrants (left and right) abroad.  Who are we to say that our society or form of governance is better than theirs?  Well, tell that to the Iraqis who risk bomb and bullet to be able to vote.  Whilst I hold no truck with imposing democracy on other people, the least we can do is to uphold our own.  Voting is not a right, it is a duty!

19 Mar 2010

Things that slightly annoy me: 2

Continued from: here 

People who “say it how it is” slightly annoy me.  There is no indication that what they say actually is, is “how it is”; or if it is: there is no indication that is how it should be.  Does Alan Sugar really put the best people through The Apprentice or are they sometimes rash, ill-considered opinions?  Does Simon Cowell really know what makes a successful singer or does he simply know how to get a Christmas number one?

In real life, it is surprising how ‘telling it like it is’ correlates with the person who has the loudest mouth, is the most sarcastic, or who judges others far more than themselves.  Also, the person’s opinion always seems to be describable by a mix of the following adjectives: certain, unambiguous, radical, exciting, controversial, ill-nuanced, unmitigated.  We live in a funny world where the opinion adjudged to be the closest to reality never happens to be one that is ‘matter-of-fact’ or recognises complexity.

It is precisely seen as a virtue, and not a vice, of an opinion that it is unmitigated and unambiguous.  Gone are the social conventions that prevent you telling the truth.  No longer are minor issues allowed to obfuscate major ones.   False or pernicious ideas are no longer protected because other people believe them.  However, the above virtues only hold if the opinions are true or at least, well-considered.  Too often we should agree with Peter Ustinov, “Her virtue was that she said what she thought, her vice that what she thought didn't amount to much.”

Valuing people who ‘say how it is’ is generally a licence for people to say whatever crass, prejudiced and foolish things ‘come to mind’.  Now, opinions stated with utter conviction are more likely to come across as true.  Equally, an opinion that comes to their mind will also come to other people's’ minds and so believed.   However, this is no guarantee that the opinion is any good.  Often what comes to my mind in response to a situation is “F**k, Sh**, B*^&!”ks, W^%k”- yet there is a good reason why those of us without Tourette’s Syndrome inhibit those responses.  A little silence, contemplation and good old-fashioned British Civillity go a long way.  They allow us to take on-board additional information, see things from a different perspective and come to an appropriate response.

As the Talmud says: “If silence be good for the wise, how much better for fools”

25 Feb 2010

It Just Don’t Sound Frum: 1

There are many things that those Yeshivish types do and believe based on how “frum” it sounds/looks/feels.  This is so even if there are alternative, more convincing, viewpoints within the Jewish tradition or even if it put them directly at odds with the established halacha.  Some beliefs even have been magic-ed up from thin air or 16th Century Christianity.

These infractions can be saved until later posts as no doubt there could be counterarguments.  Instead, here is an example where there is absolutely nothing wrong with what Chareidim do, but is a clear case where you just can’t imagine them doing the opposite.  That is, they celebrate their Hebrew Birthdays and encourage Ba’al Teshuvot to do likewise.  A person’s ‘secular’ birthday- or ‘solar’ to be more neutral- is religiously meaningless.

Now, there is a view expressed by some of our sages that the opposite is the case.  For example, Ibn Ezra says:

[T]he beginning of each individual's year is from the moment he was born, and when the sun returns to the same point at which it was earlier, the person completes one full year

And as Saadya Gaon says:

A person's life is numbered according to solar years, as is the life of any growing thing, for example, trees and the like

This may be a minority view- I don’t know- and so is not something I advocate one way or another.  Rav Yaakov Emdem says G-d “holds” by both birthdays.  However, it “just don’t sound frum” to have a birthday according to a secular/non-Jewish/goyishe calendar.  It just seems to be a dilution of Yiddishkeit and assimilation into the surrounding culture.  As such, it is something to be avoided wherever possible.

Even were one to be convinced by Ibn Ezra, it just wouldn’t help you look frummer than other people to celebrate one’s solar birthday.  Here it doesn’t matter, but there are examples where what is frum collides with what Judaism teaches…..

24 Feb 2010

Things that slightly annoy me 1

This ‘slight annoyance’ is something that has happened many times to me, including the other day.  Imagine the scene: There is a Big Issue seller who is asking passer-by after passer-by to buy the magazine off them and they just get ignored.  As such, you resolve to buy one off them, get your money ready and approach them.  After handing your money across, they reveal a single magazine in a ripped plastic bag and ask, “Do you want the magazine?… It’s just that it is my last one…”

Do I want a magazine?  I have no idea whether I want a magazine but I paid for one.  Firstly, for them to keep it is explicitly against the Big Issue rules which are written inside.  As such, I’m perfectly within my rights to take it.  Secondly, it is entirely against the spirit of the enterprise.  They are meant to be “working, not begging”- selling you an item you want and earning the proceeds, and not guilt tripping you into giving them money.  Whilst most people do get it just for charity and not to read, a transaction should at least take place.

Of course, however, you can’t in reality take the magazine.  Doing it after they have taken your money puts you in an awkward position.  I would like to say that I “don’t have the heart” to take it, and that I don’t want to be responsible for them to be without food for the day.  In reality, however, I think they are being a tad dishonest but am concerned with appearing to be a stingy Jew.  This really is something that to a large extent, really very “slightly annoys” me.

15 Feb 2010

Leeds Jewish Welfare Board

Either you all are, or will be, sick to death about me going on about my marathon. Nevertheless, there is a shockingly long way to go towards reaching my fundraising target of £2000. As such, I thought I’d give a little information below about the charity I am supporting. If you wish to sponsor me, please go to http://uk.virginmoneygiving.com/NeilClarke

Leeds Jewish Welfare Board are responsible for financing some of the most important work in the Jewish community of North Leeds. They ensure that every community member is looked after, regardless of their situation in life. Many of their services are also open to the wider non-Jewish community.

Here are some of their services:

  • Older People's Services- activities and transport for those who are no longer able to cope with their normal activities of daily living or feel that they may need some support
  • Manny Cussins Family Project- a range of activities and support to children, families and adults.
  • The Rainbow Project- supports those with learning and physical disabilities through a wide range of residential, community support and day services.
  • Moorcare-provide an accessible, personal and confidential home care service for adults living in their own homes. This covers the whole of the North East Leeds area irrespective of age, gender, race, colour, religion, disability and sexuality.
  • Leeds Jewish Blind Society- offers social care support and advice for people who are struggling with visual problems together with access to helpful equipment. Now incorporates services for the hearing impaired

The Leeds Jewish Welfare Board are also responsible for running the Marjorie and Arnold Ziff Community Centre and setting up the Holocaust Survivors Friendship Association

Visit http://www.ljwb.co.uk for more information.