Times Total Hatchet Job: Jonathan Rosen v. Peter Beinart

Jonathan Rosen's review in the Times, "A Missionary Impulse" of the book ‘The Crisis of Zionism,’ by Peter Beinart, is a total hatchet job.

Rosen is the editorial director of Nextbook, which seems at first to give him some credentials to review this book, but he is also the author, most recently, of “The Life of the Skies: Birding at the End of Nature” which cancels his credentials for this review. He is a published expert in birding, and a memoir writer, not a scholar nor even a pundit versed in Zionism, nor in American Judaism.

We are not a big fan of Beinart's views, often too liberal even for us. Oy but we do wince as his nemesis Rosen declares that Beinart is wrong because he is like a Mark Twain character, "Like the Widow Douglas trying to civilize Huck Finn before he lights out for the occupied territory, Beinart has a missionary impulse toward Israel. His faith resides in 'liberal ­ideals,' which he often makes synonymous with Judaism itself, or what Judaism ought to be."

The Rosen hatchet chips away until the final blow, where Rosen sums up modern Israel, and dismisses Beinart all in one sentence, "Sometimes it does this well and sometimes badly, but the struggle itself is the hallmark of a civilization far beyond Peter Beinart’s Manichaean ­simplicities."

Beinart may have written a bad book or a good book. It surely is a sophisticated work of argumentation. About that, other reviewers of all different stripes agree.

We will read the book and decide our own opinion of it. Meanwhile, Rosen has penned by far the worst "review" of the week in the Times, "Manichaean" or otherwise. In the Times Book Review we expect more substance and nuance, especially when a right winger outside of his area of expertise reviews a book by a trendy left winger who happens to be an expert in the subject matter of the book.

Ads:
Talmudic Books for Kindle on the Talmud, Bible, Kabbalah and Prayer
The Kindle Edition of the Classic Soncino Talmud in English

Read More

One Day Sunday 4/15 Free Kindle Talmudic Books

One Day Sunday 4/15 
Get two Free Kindle Talmudic Books

Define Judaism: Ten Seminars by Tzvee Zahavy
Eleazar: Rabbi, Priest, Patriarch by Tzvee Zahavy

and one more at sale price

 An Anthology from the Talmud Yerushalmi Berakhot by Tzvee Zahavy

Links to all...Talmudic Books for Kindle on the Talmud, Bible, Kabbalah and Prayer
 The Kindle Edition of the Classic Soncino Talmud in English

Read More

What is "Displaced Talmudic Energy?"

Jenna Weissman Joselit asks at HuffPost, "Do These Amazing Jews Have 'Displaced Talmudic Energy?'" If we bought the analysis referred to in the article about talented contemporary Jews, we would begin to refer to this syndrome as DTE. Alas we do not buy the theory.

The Talmud is a literature with distinctive contents and ways of thinking about the world. If it was a source of "energy" we would be among the first to market Talmud-Water or Talmud-Bracelets and try to get Madonna interested in the Talmud.

Wait a second, those are not bad ideas.

We do track a high sense of drama in the world of the Talmud and a conviction that we Jews are stars at the center of the stage. That is at most an idea, a concept or a meme, and not an energy bar.

The idea of DTE is part of what Joselit cites from the book by the forward to a book by Sidney Offit, "Nine Lives: Favorite Profiles of Famous People from the Annals of Moment Magazine." [Help us please - we cannot find any record of this book.]

Here are some of her observations about the phrase.

[Offit...] wonders how it is possible for so many contemporary artists, performers and cultural personalities from Tony Kushner and Jon Stewart to Bob Dylan and Brian Epstein to hail from a Jewish background. But where his predecessors looked to lineage, Offit does them one better. His canny explanation: "displaced Talmudic energy."

Is he actually suggesting that the "famous people" who figure here had at one point in their lives taken up the study of the Talmud and, having subsequently abandoned that pursuit for the stage, found that their engagement with the ancient text continued to influence their way of being? At first blush, readers might be forgiven for thinking that's what Mr. Offit means. After all, he does go so far as to call Jon Stewart a "modern Talmudist."

But I don't think that's really what he has in mind. Rather, by his lights, "Talmudic energy" -- displaced or intact -- has little to do with the actual study of the ancient text as much as it does with a particular sensibility, one sustained by the spirit of inquiry, an appetite for questioning and a penchant for detail.

I don't doubt that the innovative and influential personalities profiled in this book possess these qualities - and in spades. But why call them examples of "displaced Talmudic energy"? Why, in fact, go all the way back to the Talmud? Might not contemporary readers be better served and more effectively enlightened by explanations that highlight economic forces, say, or the historic role of the Jews as latter-day brokers of both goods and ideas? And what about the galvanizing, generative effects of marginality on creativity?

Although essentialism has fallen from grace and out of favor in most contemporary circles, it continues to hang on within Jewish ones, pace Mr. Offit's "displaced Talmudic energy." I'm not sure why, but I suspect it's one way to keep celebrated Jews close at hand and within the fold.

Read More

Tzvee's Talmudic blog in New York Magazine

Tzvee's Talmudic blog was mentioned in New York Magazine Comments this week

Talmudic Books for Kindle on the Talmud, Bible, Kabbalah and Prayer
The Kindle Edition of the Classic Soncino Talmud in English

Read More

On “Reflections on the Influence of the Rov on the American Jewish Religious Community” by Dr. Tovah Lichtenstein

Notes by Tzvee Zahavy on "Reflections on the Influence of the Rov on the American Jewish Religious Community" by Dr. Tovah Lichtenstein

Dr. Tovah Lichtenstein, the daughter of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik (the Rov) wrote an essay, "Reflections on the Influence of the Rov on the American Jewish Religious Community." (TRADITION 44:4, 2011, Rabbinical Council of America, pp. 7-22.) In it she is up front in her self-assessment and thus characterizes her observations as opinion. She says at the outset, "I hope that my understanding of the Rov's influence on the community in which he lived will ring true to those who knew him and who wish to appraise his contributions to the American Jewish religious community."

She further limits her scope to appraising her father's,

a.       impact upon the religious community

b.       its commitment to Halakha

c.       its public stance in relation to the general society

d.      its self-image

This limited range is disappointing. We would prefer from the daughter of a noteworthy figure some new inside knowledge, perhaps about her father's self-appraisal of his successes or failures. A daughter's mere opinions about abstract issues concerning her father can be highly personal and more than likely they are biased.

Dr. Lichtenstein's agenda is also a bit vague in its four bullet point goals because we don't have rigorous definitions for them. We don't know what metrics if any measure a person's "impact on" a community. We don't know the parameters of the "community", who is in and who is out. We don't know how to measure the sweep of a community's "commitment to Halakha". We don't know what a community's "public stance" entails. We don't know what "general society" means and we don't know how to determine a community's "self image". Ambiguities abound in the statement of the mission for this essay, making it hard to impossible to assess the success of the exercise.

Be that as it may, we do appreciate the intellectual vigor of the opening paragraphs including the notion that the writer explored hypotheticals in thinking about her father's career.

Sometimes, I entertain myself by playing "What if" games. What would have happened had my father been elected as the Chief Rabbi of Tel Aviv in 1935? As is widely known, he was a candidate for that post, but was not chosen. Had he been selected, and had he appeared on the Israeli stage immediately after Rav Kook's passing, what, I often wonder, would the Religious Zionist community be like today? And, I continue the game – what would the non-haredi Orthodox community in America be like today, if the Rov had left the United States in 1935?

In answering her last "what if" scenario, Lichtenstein concludes that, "Without him, the overwhelming majority of this community might have disappeared, absorbed into the Conservative movement."

Contrary to Lichtenstein's assertion, we believe that this did in fact happen. Although no one disappeared a large number of Jewish families affiliated with Conservative Judaism as it grew substantially from 1935 to 1985, deriving most of its membership from the ranks of the liberal Orthodox community.

Employing a battleground rhetoric, Lichtenstein next explains, "The Orthodox community in the 1940s and 1950s was under threat from the religious left, which demanded reforms." In the academic history of the religion, the more usual narrative of the emergence of Conservative Judaism was not one of threat and response. Sociologists recount the postwar population shift to the suburbs and the adaptation of synagogue and ritual to the new forms of social organization and to the practical needs of the times.

The next claim that Lichtenstein makes with certitude assures us that, "The current existence of a thriving and dynamic community of Torah scholars, of ba'alei battim involved in the general culture and deeply committed to Talmud Torah and shmirat mitsvot, may be attributed, in no small measure, to the influence of the Rov."

In order for us to assess the validity of this statement we need to know how the author arrived at it. The writer tells us that the Rov exercised his influence on the community through several prominent themes and characteristics of his teaching and personality which she labels:

1.       confidence in the truth of Torah

2.       supremacy of the Halakha

3.       pride in the tradition

4.       participation in general culture

5.       translating the Jewish experience into philosophical categories

a.       sacrifice

b.       the creative aspect of Torah study

c.       the religious experience

We do agree that these notions, moods and motivations are found in the work of the Rov and could serve as inspirations to members of a community. Still it is not clear to us how any part of the Rov's religious teaching and opinions reached the public and how it is known to the essay author that it was these five themes, to the exclusion of all other factors, which had a preservative affect on the "current existence" of the community. Lacking any expert opinion connecting the dots, we are left at best with a few well-intentioned and respected personal opinions.

At the conclusion the author asks, "What is the long-term influence of my father, the Rov…?" For the Israeli community she cites actual data, "Four of the Rov's books have been translated into Hebrew, including Family Redeemed, which has sold more copies in Israel than in the United States. His writings are quoted in high school textbooks, and courses are given in institutions of higher learning that deal with aspects of the Rov's thought."

Regarding the Rov's "lasting influence" in the United States, Lichtenstein observes a few imprecise new trends in Orthodox circles, such as these two:

·         A "shying away from general culture and a commitment to Zionism"

·         "…those who are turning to the left, having lost their confidence in the truth of the Torah"

Lichtenstein sees a serious challenge of the current day as follows expressed by those who say that, "The Torah in the 21st century needs to accommodate itself … to the New Age, with its demand for sexual freedom and egalitarianism." And indeed these may be looming tests to a traditional culture's sexual mores and gender assumptions. Yet we do not see how Lichtenstein connects these to the work of her father in the past generation.

We feel personally vindicated to read the concluding section of this essay which characterizes the Rov as a persistent and partially successful performer of Judaism. In writing our recent book, God's Favorite Prayers (Teaneck, 2011), we struggled long and hard to find the dominant archetype for the Rov in our scheme of the ideal theological types that we find in the prayer book. We ended up setting him in the "performer" archetype, that form of expression and personality that carries the Torah-traditions forward in dramatic ways in the synagogue.

Lichtenstein laments that her father was not able to transmit sufficiently his performative qualities to his students. As the Rov wrote, "I did not see great success in my work on the experiential plane." ("Al Ahavat ha-Torah u-Geulat Nefesh ha-Dor," 420) Lichtenstein assesses, "While many speak in his name, few disciples are able to integrate and implement his way. Perhaps his message is too complex and demanding."

Yes, the Rov left a complicated legacy. We think that overall it would benefit him greatly if he was appreciated mainly for what he was best: a truly masterful interpreter of Torah and great dazzling performer and breathtaking artist of Jewish theology.

Read More

WSJ: Golf Practice, Daily Talmud Study, and "the illusion of competence"

We liked this WSJ article for two reasons. First, we agree that spending lots of time at the driving range does not translate directly into better golf shots on the course.

Second, we agree that practice sessions can lull one into the "illusion of competence" in golf and in many other activities in life.

We like the concept and now we are thinking about how it may help us characterize relgious activities (such as the daily Talmud study called Daf Yomi). Here is the article about golf drills.

Not at Home on the Range:

Why Much of the Work Golfers Do to Improve Their Games Isn't Helping Them Get Better

By JOHN PAUL NEWPORT

You're on the range, pounding balls, and suddenly golf seems easy. All the parts of your swing sync and you start striping one career-best drive after another. "By golly, I've got it," you say to yourself. You can't wait to get to the course.

Science has a name for this exalted state, but unfortunately it's not "flow" or "in the zone." It's "the illusion of competence," and the odds are it's doing your golf game more harm than good.

You may think you've got it, but you haven't. More than most people realize, the range has little to do with actual golf. "After most sessions on the range or even lessons, golfers haven't really learned anything, if by learning you mean making a skill usable, durable and automatic in other contexts," said Fran Pirozzolo, a Ph.D. in neuropsychology who has worked on performance training with PGA Tour pros, elite athletes from football and baseball, Navy SEALs and NASA astronauts. By "other contexts" he means playing in the pressure of competition, but also driving off the first tee in front of friends and hitting off a downhill lie.

We golfers, it turns out, are bad at assessing the state of our skills. We are even worse at understanding how our brains work when we try to make changes, and most instructors aren't much help, either. "Our golf culture is set up to pass along knowledge in half-hour or one-hour lessons. In that time, a teacher can fix a shank or get somebody to slice the ball less, and everyone leaves the lesson happy. But there's not much of a system in place to transfer that knowledge onto the course," Pirozzolo said.

Elite athletes know themselves better. "That's why Tour pros talk about needing months or even a year to integrate a swing change. Eighteen-handicappers almost never understand that," he said.

Drawing heavily on the latest research in neuroscience, Pirozzolo is working with Steven Levitt, a professor of economics at the University of Chicago and the co-author of "Freakonomics," on a golf research project to determine which transfer techniques work and which don't.

One technique that clearly doesn't work is "massing"—that irresistible urge most golfers have to hit interminable balls at the range until, maybe, they get it right for a short spell. "Massing can be useful for introducing new skills because you have to create a basis. But fairly quickly, if you want to progress and retain what you've learned, you need more advanced techniques," Pirozzolo said.

A lot of these can be uncomfortable, since they involve frequent failure. The good news is they can take less time than the random ball-whacking many golfers are already doing. Some can be adapted into games against other players, especially short-game drills.

"Interleaving" is one example. That's neuroscience-speak for constantly alternating clubs, drills and targets. In one experiment that Levitt and Pirozzolo conducted, the goal was to increase proficiency on 110-yard wedge shots. One group of participants hit 90 shots to targets exactly that far away. A second group hit 30 shots to 70-yard targets, 30 shots to 110-yard targets and 30 shots to 120-yard targets. In the end, the second group substantially outperformed the first group in hitting to 110-yard targets, even though they had hit only a third as many shots to that distance.

Generally speaking, the best practice techniques are those that lay down multiple, vivid memory patterns in the brain. Sometimes that entails introducing "desirable difficulties" such as simulated pressure, hitting in strong winds and from bad lies. Practicing in short sessions across many days is more effective than "cramming" the same work into a single session, opening more avenues for recall.

Not all golfers are willing to put themselves through such grief, of course, even though they'd ultimately enjoy the game more if they did. (A recent study by the golf research firm Pellucid determined that for each stroke lower a midhandicap golfer scores, he or she will play, on average, 10% more rounds because of increased enthusiasm.)

A major reason for players' reluctance to make the effort is their frustration with previous lessons, when what they learned on the practice tee (or thought they learned) didn't stick. "Golfers are being sold a lie when they're told they'll get better with 30 minutes of swing analysis," said Rick Jensen, a sports psychologist who argued in his book "Easier Said Than Done" that simple lessons aren't enough. "Golfers need coaches like in other sports, someone to give them drills, monitor their progress, send them out to scrimmage and give them feedback," he said.

The intensive coaching model that works for Tour pros is too expensive for most amateurs, but Jensen said that if players are better educated about what it really takes to improve, they and their teachers can better decide how to use the time and money that is available. There are signs that this philosophy is gaining steam. Top-50 instructor Michael Hebron now teaches almost entirely in light of the latest brain-science research. "You never hit the same shot twice on a golf course, so why should you on the range?" he said. Golftec, a national chain of teaching centers, sells most of its lessons in multimonth or yearlong packages that include gym-membership-type access to video-enhanced practice facilities.

Even for local teaching pros, there's a better way, said John Kennedy, the director of golf at Westchester Country Club in Rye, N.Y. The starting point is establishing realistic long-term goals that are within the student's budget and physical limitations. "A 45-year-old 20 handicapper in OK shape, with a lesson every other week or so, should probably be able to get down to a 12 handicap in one season. But he'd have to really commit to his teacher and follow through on drills and proper practice and the short game," Kennedy said. "It's doable and enjoyable. But people have to be told the truth. And they have to really want to get better in their heart."

Read More

The Haggadah as an American Best Seller

So we do not really care about what is inside of the New American Haggadah by Jonathan Safran Foer and Nathan Englander and two other popular writers. 

The watershed event of this Passover season was the appearance of a Haggadah in the top 100 best sellers at Amazon.com - today at # 39 and 34 days in the top 100. What the hey?

We had guests at the Seder who had the NAH but it turns out that they had no contributions to make to our table based on the contents. 

Who cares if the NAH is quirky or a masterpiece? As a result of the NAH's popularity we do expect many other popular writers and celebrities to publish Haggadahs next year. That is a good thing for Jewish books, and so that is a perfectly good result, from our perspective.

Talmudic Books for Kindle on the Talmud, Bible, Kabbalah and Prayer

 The Kindle Edition of the Classic Soncino Talmud in English

Read More