Most Helpful Customer Reviews
33 of 35 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Compelling Ideas for Judaism and the Jewish State, April 4, 2000
Perhaps the best introduction to Yeshayahu Leibowitz in English is Eliezer Goldman's prefatory essay to the volume he edited, Yeshayahu Leibowitz, Judaism, Human Values, and the Jewish State (Cambridge, MA: Harvard, 1992). This volume contains 27 translated essays, most of which come from Leibowitz's Hebrew collection, Yahadut, Am HaYehudi u-Medinat Yisrael (Jerusalem: Schocken, 1975). Goldman's recent collection of his own essays, Mehkarim ve-Iyyunim (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1996) contains a number of pieces on Leibowitz as well. Yeshayahu Leibowitz (1903-93) was the often paradoxical, so-called "conscience of Israel"--a philosopher, controversial social critic, and sharp-tongued Socratic gadfly. He was born in 1903 in Lithuania, and was educated in Germany prior to settling in Jerusalem in 1934, where he taught chemistry, physiology, and the philosophy of science at the Hebrew University. He was an author and editor of the Encyclopedia HaIvrit, and taught, lectured, and wrote on a wide range of issues throughout his long life. Beyond his political thought, Leibowitz is perhaps best known (and critiqued) for his radical conceptions of Judaism. In brief, his position focused on the centrality--indeed, exclusivity--of mitsvot as the constitutive factor in Judaism. Observing the commandments (i.e. fulfilling the divine will) is an end in itself, and not a means to achieve personal, spiritual, or communal benefit. The significance of a religious act, argues Leibowitz, is in its performance qua worshipping God. To seek any meaning beyond that is, in his opinion, idolatry. Critics took Leibowitz's position as atheistic--and indeed, he effectively removes God from the human experience of religion: God as the transcendent being is unimportant to Leibowitz, only the service of God holds any meaning. The relationship between man and God can only exist in the arena of the normative practice of halakhah (Jewish law). Leibowitz feared (and in this many feel he was prescient) that the continued entanglement of religion and state would ultimately lead to a corruption of religion. He felt that the inability or unwillingness of rabbinic authorities in the early years of the State to forge innovative halakhic approaches to unprecedented situations (engendered by the return of Jewish sovereignty in the modern era) would turn religious Jews into parasites. Leibowitz further articulated views on the State, such as positing that the ascription of inherent sanctity to the land is a form of idolatry, and that viewing the state as a value in and of itself (rather than a vehicle for social or national good) is a precursor to fascism. He believed that Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza after the 1967 war would ultimately corrupt the state in the way in which all colonial regimes become corrupted. All of these elements bear the common thread of his repugnance at the use of religion to justify what he saw as political corruption or oppression. He remains an original (albeit controversial) voice on every issue within the Israeli social discourse. This helped generate the visceral connection the Israeli public has to Leibowitz and the issues on which he wrote. This volume introduces the reader to these compelling issues, and to a thinker who articulated positions which anyone interested in understanding Jewish life in the Jewish State in the modern era must contend with.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
13 of 14 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Superb exposition, December 11, 2001
Eliezer Goldman, the editor, has done an excellent job in presenting the ideas and views of Leibowitz to the English speaking public. This collection of articles gives a broad overview of the Jewish faith, the relationship of religion to the people and the state of Israel, the political problems of the Israeli state and finally the relationship of Judaism to Christianity. It is a thoroughly honest exposition of the problems inherent in the various topics and it is a pity that the book has not become more widely known and reviewed. It should be of interest to a Jewish as well as Gentile readership and had his warnings after the 1967 war, in relation to the occupation of the conquered territories, been heeded Israel would not be in the difficult straits the country finds itself in today. His discussion of the Judeo-Christian heritage and refusal to accept the term is also valuable. He does not mind explaining "the repugnance Judaism has for Christianity" as seen from a genuine orthodox Jewish perspective, rather than from any of the other parts of the spectrum which comprises today's Judaism. While some may not agree with all of his views, they are honest, well reasoned and therefore important to be listened to.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
4 of 5 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
interesting, February 25, 2006
As another review points out, Leibowitz believes that the purpose of Judaism and mitzvot is "the religious perfection of man", and that mitzvot (commandments) should be observed for their own sake rather than for external ends. According to Lebowitz, it follows that religion is completely separate from morality; if serving God is the most important end in life, it takes priority over man's perceptions of morality. Rather than seeing the almost-sacrifice of Isaac as an aberration, Leibowitz sees it as a classic example of how Judaism should function - obedience to the divine command for its own sake. Leibowitz has a point: certainly, God does not exist to serve man. But I wonder if Leibowitz somewhat oversimplifies Judaism; halacha (Jewish law) is based in part on broader perceptions of morality (though on the other hand, that morality comes in part from halachic tradition).
Leibowitz follows his logic to a variety of conclusions, including:
*rejection of messianism, because hope in a worldly Messiah "undermine[s] the motivation to serve God in the world as it is" and thus leads to defections from Jewish practice when the Messiah fails to come and the "cheerless day-to-day practice of Torah and Mitzvoth" (p. 71) fails to inspire.
*Rejection of the idea that Jews are naturally holy. Holiness, according to Leibowitz, comes from following Mitzvoth, and thus a belief in holiness by birth is merely "racist chauvinism."
*Rejection of Christianity because "in Christianity it is not man who serves God but rather God serves man." (p. 98).
*Rejection of Kabbalah because Kabbalah interprets mitzvot as "a method for mending disruptions in the world of divinity" (p. 111) and thus falsely elevates man to a divine level.
*Rejection not of Zionism, but of the idea that Zionism has religious significance. The state of Israel is not bound by halacha, and is thus a secular state like any other. Because the state is not a Jewish entity, it can (and should) give up territory where appropriate to satisfy the Zionist goal of Jewish self-government, a goal frustrated by Israel's occupation of Arab-inhabited land.
*Rejection of the idea that religion is necessary for a decent social order. Leibowitz points out that if "To know God and cleave to Him is the ultimate value" such that "all human considerations must be set aside" (p. 160), then the social benefits of religion (or lack thereof) are of no importance.
On the other hand, Leibowitz seems to flinch from his halachic rigor in discussing equal treatment of women. Rather than endorsing traditional theories that women should stay out of government, Leibowitz asserts that religious Jews "cannot perpetuate the halakhic decisions of our fathers dating from a social reality which differed radically from our own." Leibowitz draws a distinction between laws that reflect "a given sociocultural milieu and its prejudices" and "unconditional prescriptions [such as] the laws of incest, family purity and so on." (p. 131). But if (as Leibowitz asserts) halacha transcends ethics, why should this distinction exist? Why not just assume that seemingly unethical halachot are part of divine service?
I'm not sure I agree with, or even understand, everything Leibowitz writes. But he is certainly provocative and interesting.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|
