9/22/2010

High Holiday Tune Selection FAIL

All of the davening was nice. All of the ba’alei tefilla for the main tefilot (Shacharit and Mussaf on RH; everything, except maybe mincha, on YK) knew nusach and had nice voices. Nobody was too quick or too shleppy. Which is good. So why did I get the feeling that it wasn’t anything special this year?

I think it has to do with the tune selection of pretty much every shali’ach tzibbur – and I’ll include myself in this. I’m aware that tune selection is a tricky business. The tune must capture the mood of the particular piyut in question (i.e., no U-netaneh Tokef to the tune of “Puff the Magic Dragon,” to use an actual example from my childhood). The tune must be familiar to the crowd, or at least be familiar to enough of the crowd that you’re not singing solo and simple enough for others to pick it up quickly. And I think that the ba’alei tefilla all nailed these down pretty well, even if some got a little cutesy or gimmicky (like Ve-khol Ma’aminim TTTO “Anachnu Ma’aminim Benei Ma’aminim”).

The problem was this: too many of the tunes used were tunes from throughout the year. There were a bunch of Shabbat zemirot tunes (the Gerrer Kol Mekadesh, the Carlebach Kah Ribon, the standard Friday night and Shabbat afternoon tunes for Yedid Nefesh, and others). It was Carlebach heavy, but with Carlebach tunes that are completely ubiquitous – “Ata Takum,” “Niggun Neshama,” and the like. And I think that every slow song ever written by Abie Rottenberg made an appearance at some point during the High Holidays.

I’ll grant that many of these tunes actually were set to parts of the liturgy – Ko Amar  and Ha-bein Yakir Li being the obvious examples. I was also happy that “Adam Ha-Rishon’s Niggun” made several appearances (I used it for “Atiti Le-chonenakh”) over the course of the High Holidays.

These are all wonderful tunes, but by and large too few of them were Yamim Nora’im tunes. I understand that YK fell out on Shabbat this year – so commemorate that by using one standard Shabbat tune. Or use a Shabbat tune that is not sung every. single. week. There are at least three well-known tunes for Yedid Nefesh that are not standard (the one from Aish is my favorite – and I used it for Mimkomecha at Shacharit on RH). Use one of them (I see that my neighbor, the Nusach Freak, has the same gripe).

There’s a reason that these days are called the Days of Awe. The liturgy – and that includes the tunes – should inspire intense feelings of love, awe, and majesty. Using special tunes, that the congregation associates specifically with the Yamim Nora’im – like we all do with Chamol, for example – is the only way to do that.

One other gripe – don’t hybridize tunes for kaddish titkabel, something I heard a few times this holiday season. I enjoy the standard tune, what the NF calls the “victory kaddish.” I also happen to love the Modzhitzer titkabel, which I use. But don’t start with Modzhitz and switch to the victory tune for yehei shelama rabbah. You’re simply not doing justice to either.

I enjoy a mix of popular tunes (of the Carlebach and D’veykus variety), Chassidishe melodies (few and far between in our milieu, unfortunately), and “standard” Yamim Nora’im tunes from America, Israel, and even from particular yeshivot. And I’m not rigid about it like some people are. But when the tunes used are rather pedestrian, then the entire davening feels pedestrian, uninspiring, blah. In short, the davening wasn’t anything special because it wasn’t anything special.

9/19/2010

Negotiations

[I wrote most of this on Erev Yom Kippur, but ran out of time and was unable to post it beforehand]

The parsha of Ki Tavo coincides annually with the second Shabbat before Rosh Hashana. The most prominent feature of the parsha is the blessing and curses that God promises for upholding or failing to uphold the Torah. A superficial look will show quite obviously that the curses, the tokhecha, is much longer than the promised blessings. In fact, there is a general pattern that the warnings against breaching God’s covenant are generally much longer and more detailed than the promises of reward for obedience.
Negotiation is a tricky business. It involves getting two (or more) parties to consent to some kind of mutually beneficial association. In order for negotiations to succeed, the agreement must be in the best interest of each side. The more each party feels that it has no choice but to come to an understanding, the greater the chance that the negotiations will succeed. This is true of any and every negotiation.
As a result, the reward for upholding an agreement should be self-evident – if it were not worth my while to enter into the association, I would not have done so. Sure, there can be incentives along the way, but the real benefit of the agreement should be part and parcel of the agreement itself, not some external sanction or incentive. On the other hand, building sanctions into an agreement can keep each party honest. The greater the penalty for backing out of an agreement, the less likely a party is to have a change of heart and breach the contract. This accounts for the length of the tokhecha as well as the small print on any contract.
Currently, the NFL Players Association and the NFL owners are in the initial stages of negotiating a new collective bargaining agreement. Though there may be a lockout, everybody knows that the players and owners will eventually come to an agreement. After all, the players and owners desperately need each other. The owners can’t play, the players don’t have the resources to run a team, and the benefit that accrues to both when a team is fielded is way too great for either side to terminate the relationship for any extended period of time.
Contrast that with the current negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. The recent articles by Karl Vick and Roger Cohen about whether Israelis are truly invested in the peace process point to a reality that I think is accurate, even if the authors did not necessarily unpack it correctly: Israelis want peace, no doubt. But things are good enough in Israel right now that the incentives offered by peace do not justify the risks that peacemaking entails. Israelis are not desperate for peace, because, frankly, life is pretty darn good without it. And so the price they’re willing to pay for peace is not so high (I’m not judging whether this prevailing attitude is good or bad, or whether it has any bearing on the actual negotiation process, which much address a far more complex reality – those are much longer posts).
This is all by way of introduction to the intense negotiations that Jewish people all over the world will hold with their God over the next day. The primal, mythic core of Yom Kippur is the re-enactment of God’s selection of Israel and His entry into a covenant with them (the most potent symbols of this are the se’ir La-Shem and the second Luchot). Our basis for negotiations (see here) is that our collective relationship with God is akin to that of the players vis-à-vis ownership; we are powerless yet indispensable to His goals (Rav Ezra Bick has a wonderful discussion of this concept here), and He therefore must renew His covenant with us.

9/07/2010

Steak n' Slichos

Last night/ this morning, I went with my father and my nephew to Jerusalem for our annual Erev Rosh Hashana 'Steak n' Slichos.' We have a late dinner of entrecote at Vaqueiro. We then head down to the Kotel for selichot at the astronomical midnight. I'll admit that the idea of steak and selichot is an expression of contemporary suburban religious sensibilities - conspicuous consumption followed by a devotional pilgrimage. But I like it.

The Kotel was jam packed, and there was a real diversity there. I happen to love the cacophony of different traditions that you get there. Some find it distracting, and if you're looking for a focused davening, I suggest the Hurva, a few steps away. I like the jumble of Jews trying to outshout each other. Since we got there about a half hour before astronomical midnight, I joined a kumzitz organized by Yeshivat Eretz Hatzvi. It was nice to see lots of people stop and join in. It was just. really. nice.

Before descending to (or after ascending from) the Kotel plaza, you can see - it's really quite amazing - the Jewish throngs saying selichot at the Kotel and the Ramadan break-fast celebrations taking place in Silwan, just a few hundred meters away. Looking out over the"Holy Basin" and watching Jews and Muslims observing their religions separately and peacefully, it's easy to forget how many wars have been fought over this very piece of real estate.

Living in Israel, it's impossible to avoid the holiday season. The whole rhythm of life builds up to Rosh Hashana - colleagues and friends send out cards, synagogues have their annual membership drives, schools send home songs and honey dishes, radio stations count down the year's best songs, and journalists review the highlights and lowlights of the past year. In this environment, it is inevitable that we take stock of our lives. My birthday - always a time to review life - falls out on the second day of RH this year, exacerbating my brooding and introspective mood.

I won't share everything I've been taking stock of, but I will share my resolution (kabbalah) for this RH - I will not talk sports in shul anymore. If it seems a bit prosaic, it's because it's manageable. I've begun to feel that the topics of conversation in shul - and not just the bein gavra le-gavra talking - is too shallow. Shul fills an important social role in my life and in the lives of many others, as it should. Talking in shul - not necessarily during davening - is inevitable and even encouraged. I've found that sports have become a sort of "default" - a way to make conversation without really trying to get to know the other person, of "talking without speaking." So if I cut out sports in shul, I expect good things to happen (I'm not in shul now, though, and the O's are beating the Yanks for the second night in a row [UPDATE - Buck-O's win again] - 4 in a row vs. the Yankees and Tampa Bay if they hold on).

Together with you, readers, I look forward to a happy, healthy, and productive 5771. Le-shana tova tikateivu ve-teichateimu.

8/19/2010

Quick Takes II

I hope to get back to regular posting once I return to Israel next week. In the mean time, here are some more quick takes:


NGO Transparency:
The more transparency the better. Just make sure that whatever the standards are, that it applies equally and evenly.

Eden Abergil:
Obviously, we treat prisoners today better than we treated them in biblical times. Yet, a review of the first part of this week's parsha shows that concern with a captive's dignity is not new or foreign to our tradition.
This article - shrill and self-righteous and wrongheaded and normally not something I'd link to - contains this mistranslation gem: "Suddenly they saw that the Palestinians actually do live in a cage, literately, in order to protect themselves from settler abuse." They do not literally live in cages. I'm not sure how one might live in a cage literately, though a case can be made for Solzhenitsyn. The irony is in the illiteracy of confusing "literally" with "literately."

IZS on Anti-Zionism at Israeli Universities:
My emerging worldview on Israeli politics is that all things must be applied evenly and equally. The people who complain that the government funds non-Zionist Haredi schools should not then complain when others try to apply the same standards to universities. 
Regarding the issue at hand, I take a libertarian view. People can teach, write, publish, research, protest, etc. whatever the heck they want. The government has every right to decide where it wants to spend its shekels, and obviously the interests of its citizens should take priority in that funding: they should be spending more on Tay-Sachs research than on sickle cell anemia research. But if some donor wants to endow a chair in Basque Studies, by all means.
With this in mind, I am simply amazed that a professor of law at TAU can make a statement as idiotic as this one: "The university is an institution that the liberal state must fund without taking any interest in the content of the research it produces or the material it teaches."
You just can't make this stuff up.


The "Ground Zero Mosque":
The emerging consensus is: "They have every right to build it, but I don't think they should." Which is silly. If my neighbor wants to build a garish addition on his house, I might think that "He has every right to build it, but I don't think he should," and I might even tell him that. The goal of my protest would be to try to convince the owner of the house to consider alternatives, which would be all I'm really entitled to do. Is that what's going on here? Is all of the opposition to the GZM really intended to convince the Cordoba Initiative to reconsider? I certainly hope so.
Also, does anyone else think it's ironic that the Simon Wiesenthal Center, in the middle of building a Museum of Tolerance atop an old Arab cemetery in Jerusalem, opposes the GZM? I wonder if the new museum will be made of glass...

Rabbis Behaving Badly:
Mazal Tov to Rabbi Marc Schneier on his forth fifth coming wedding.
Some wonder based on recent photos whether R. Schneier is giving Orthodox rabbis a bad name. I would offer that his impact on the reputation of the Orthodox rabbinate is the same as it always was. Vd"l.

8/01/2010

Quick Takes I


Migrant Workers

Israel has decided to allow most children of migrant workers to stay, and to expel others. It could have been a lot worse. I was truly afraid that they'd expel them all. At some point, I hope we realize that having a Jewish State has nothing to do with the relative proportions of Jews and minorities. Our Nevi'im envisioned a state founded on certain cardinal values, not a state with a Jewish majority. [Further reading]


Interns

Tablet Magazine is looking for interns to work in NYC. A word of advice, instead of overpaying for some just-out-of-college wannabe journalist in New York, you can get much more bang for your buck in Israel. There's a heckuva lot of talent in the Jewish State, and it's much cheaper than in New York. Jewish Ideas Daily has figured this out. And frankly, after a hot start, the quality of writing at Tablet has really deteriorated over the past few months. Aim high, guys.


Conversion

Regarding the conversion issue in Israel, I think that putting conversion in the hands of local rabbis is a positive step, but ultimately not far-reaching enough. On a fundamental level, there is a problem when marriage and divorce are controlled by a religious body that does not have the buy-in of large swaths of the population. The only answer is the institution of civil marriage and divorce. People have figured out how to privately check yikhes for centuries without the Rabbanut's help. And if anyone out there wishes to get civilly married outside of Israel and wants an Orthodox rabbi to officiate at a non-Rabbanut ceremony in Israel, let me know. [Further reading]


Statement of Principles

I signed the SOPOTPOJWAHOIOC. Do I agree with every last formulation, implication, etc.? Of course not. But it's crucially important that it be made crystal clear that there is an Orthodox alternative to homophobia, condemnation, and recommendations for conversion therapy. [Further reading]


Conservative Name Change

Apparently, the Conservative Movement is contemplating a name change, and Traditional and Masorti are the leading candidates. I say just leave it. "Conservative" might be a poor descriptor, but so are the rest. Personally, I can't stand the term "Orthodox," but at some point you just accept it and move on. [Further
reading]

7/29/2010

Amar'e Stoudemire's Views on Israelite Tribes; Now Everyone Can Shut Up

The mainstream media has picked up on Amar'e Stoudemire's claim that his mother is a Hebrew and has run with it. Some are even suggesting that he join the Israeli national team. Everyone can calm down now.

Back in May, Amar'e's Pheonix Suns wore "Los Suns" jerseys to protest the new Arizona immigration law. As part of this show of solidarity, 'Re tweeted: "We support the Latin commuity. They are apart of the 12 tribes of Israel. It 1 Nation under YAH (god). Let's come together. Shalom !! 1love. [sic]" At the time, I came across this article during my wide-ranging researches for JID.


So the new Knick thinks that Latin Americans are part of the 12 Tribes of Israel (technically speaking, he would not consider them Jews, who are members of specifically the tribe of Judah). This belief is weird, but not as uncommon as one might think. In fact, Black Hebrew Israelites, Rastafari, and Mormons all believe that some or all of the the Israelite tribes made their way to the Americas. To be sure, belief that Amerindians are descendants of the Lost Tribes was extremely popular in the 17th century among Europeans and even Jews. Manasseh Ben Israel (the subject of a feature article in Segula last issue) was probably the best-known Jewish proponent of this theory; in his messianic vision, the exile would be complete - and the redemption could begin - only when Israel would be scattered over the entire globe. This was his impetus for petitioning Lord Protector Oliver Cromwell to admit Jews into England, but I digress.


Let us sum up: Stoudemire has apparently adopted some sort of belief in Hebrew roots of some Africans, Latin Americans, or Amerindians. Adherents of these theories probably take such belief seriously, but the rest of the world, including the scientific community, generally relates to it as a bunch of baloney. Yes, it was fun to entertain the idea that Amar'e is fun unzere, but sadly, no. Farmar and Casspi are still the best we've got.

7/28/2010

The Promise of Ekev

[This is based on a shiur I gave this week, itself based on several older blog posts]

  דברים פרק ז  יד) בָּרוּךְ תִּהְיֶה מִכָּל הָעַמִּים לֹא יִהְיֶה בְךָ עָקָר וַעֲקָרָה וּבִבְהֶמְתֶּךָ
You shall be blessed over all peoples; there shall be no sterile or barren among you or your livestock.

Who cares if there are sterile males amongst the livestock? Not every male needs to be fertile in order for the flocks to be productive; on the contrary, only the ‘best’ males are used to fertilize the females. Is there any kind of value or ideal if there are no infertile male animals?

A few possible answers:
  1. It’s easier that way. Things can happen without the owner having to make them happen, without having to engage in husbandry. Not much net gain, but less work.
  2. The last word is only going back on the word before it. The expanded verse (without contracting by use of conjunctions) would read: There will be no barren males among you. There will be no barren females among you. There will be no barren females among your animals.
  3. We’ll have an abundance of fertile males which we’ll be able to sell to non-Jews, who aren’t recipients of this Divine blessing

As is often the case, looking at something contextually can often supply a better and deeper answer. In the present case, this specific blessing is at the beginning of the larger brakha of “Ekev,” which has some distinguishing features.

In the book of Devarim, there are a number of recapitulations of the consequences for obedience and disobedience in the Land of Israel (R’ Elchanan Samet counts 12); each one is subtly different. In this instance, the word “ekev” is key. It’s a metaphoric term that means “because” – the metaphor points to a heel, as in “on the heels of”, as a result of, as an immediate consequence.
The word עקב appears only 5 times in all of Chumash as a subordinating conjunction.
בראשית פרק כב
יז) כִּי בָרֵךְ אֲבָרֶכְךָ וְהַרְבָּה אַרְבֶּה אֶת זַרְעֲךָ כְּכוֹכְבֵי הַשָּׁמַיִם וְכַחוֹל אֲשֶׁר עַל שְׂפַת הַיָּם וְיִרַשׁ זַרְעֲךָ אֵת שַׁעַר אֹיְבָיו: יח) וְהִתְבָּרֲכוּ בְזַרְעֲךָ כֹּל גּוֹיֵי הָאָרֶץ עֵקֶב אֲשֶׁר שָׁמַעְתָּ בְּקֹלִי:

בראשית פרק כו
ג) גּוּר בָּאָרֶץ הַזֹּאת וְאֶהְיֶה עִמְּךָ וַאֲבָרְכֶךָּ כִּי לְךָ וּלְזַרְעֲךָ אֶתֵּן אֶת כָּל הָאֲרָצֹת הָאֵל וַהֲקִמֹתִי אֶת הַשְּׁבֻעָה אֲשֶׁר נִשְׁבַּעְתִּי לְאַבְרָהָם אָבִיךָ: ד) וְהִרְבֵּיתִי אֶת זַרְעֲךָ כְּכוֹכְבֵי הַשָּׁמַיִם וְנָתַתִּי לְזַרְעֲךָ אֵת כָּל הָאֲרָצֹת הָאֵל וְהִתְבָּרֲכוּ בְזַרְעֲךָ כֹּל גּוֹיֵי הָאָרֶץ: ה) עֵקֶב אֲשֶׁר שָׁמַע אַבְרָהָם בְּקֹלִי וַיִּשְׁמֹר מִשְׁמַרְתִּי מִצְוֹתַי חֻקּוֹתַי וְתוֹרֹתָי:

במדבר פרק יד
כד) וְעַבְדִּי כָלֵב עֵקֶב הָיְתָה רוּחַ אַחֶרֶת עִמּוֹ וַיְמַלֵּא אַחֲרָי וַהֲבִיאֹתִיו אֶל הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר בָּא שָׁמָּה וְזַרְעוֹ יוֹרִשֶׁנָּה:

The last two are in this parsha, at the beginning of the blessings and the end of the curses. 7:12 and 8:20.
There are several commonalities between each instance of the term:
  • In EVERY occasion, the consequence is predicated as a reward for having hearkened (or not hearkened) to the word of God (the root שמע appears each time)
  • In EVERY instance, the promise of children is reiterated.
  • EVERY instance is related to God’s covenant with the Patriarchs.
  • In 4 of the 5 occasions, the ‘consequence’ introduced by the term ‘ekev’ is inheriting the Land of Israel. The exception is Bereishit 22:18, at the end of the Akeida. However, according to the Rashbam, the entire episode may have been a test of Avraham’s` relationship to the land.
  • 4 of the 5 instances are related specifically to brit Avot, the original covenant between God and the Abrahamic family.

Throughout the Torah, the most consistent consequences for obedience are possession of the land for ourselves and our posterity, and the land yielding its fruits to us, as an expression of the covenant between God and Abraham. Ekev seems to be a code word that invokes this covenant, and the unique character of the blessings and curses at the beginning of the parsha lies in the fact that it’s a restatement of Brit Avot. But there’s more.

The second verse of the parsha, in addition to invoking the Land of Israel as the locus of the fulfillment of God’s covenant, restates the very first brakha to man: Be fruitful and multiply. Throughout the book of Bereshit, this brakha is reiterated whenever God establishes or re-establishes His Covenant. This is straight through until Ve-Yechi, where Yaakov takes the birth of Ephraim and Menashe as the ultimate fulfillment of the promise that God made to him during his second visit to Beit-El. In essence, Bereishit charts the course of this brakha from Adam through Yaakov, after which it becomes the blessing of a whole family, not just an individual. The brakha continues at the beginning of Shemot – the description of the Israelite population explosion uses those terms of pru u-revu. As is well known, Chazal comment on that description that sextuplets were the norm. This blessing is one of uncontrolled fertility and boundless virility. In fact, before that brakha was given to man, it was given to animals. The brakha of Ekev, as the manifestation of this original brakha extends to the animal kingdom as well. Thus, the animals will also experience this incredible fecundity.

Conceptually, the promise and consequences of Ekev bear similarity to the man’s initial conditions in the world: fruitfulness and control of the land on one hand, versus exile and unproductivity on the other. In Eden, Adam’s disobedience resulted in exile and in having to work much harder to be productive. It also carried a terrible curse that affected human fecundity – the pain of childbirth. And in fact, the first time that the root עקב is used in the Torah, meaning “heel”, is related to that first disobedience and subsequent exile: ve-hu yeshufenu akeiv – in the sentencing of the Snake.

The upshot of this connection to Eden is that life in the Land of Israel is to correspond to life in Eden – disobedience results in expulsion. It also means that it is insufficient for the goal of Jewish life in the land to be the fulfillment of “Jewishness” – it is supposed to bring about the fullness of our humanity.

What does that mean? What are the duties or values that “Ekev” calls upon us to embody? What “humanity” does it wish us to fulfill?

The opening verse of the parsha refers specifically to obeying Mishpatim – the laws that govern interpersonal relations. Throughout Tanakh, Mishpat, law, is seen as a key to redemption – Tziyon be-mishpat tipadeh.  Rashi, as is well known, speaks of the “little things that one tramples underfoot.” Combining these two elements yields an awesome insight – that the fullness of our humanity, the ultimate goal of life in Israel, is realized through the ‘little things’ of our interactions with other humans. We might have been tempted to say that Rashi's instructing us to be vigilant about the observance of lesser rituals, the small print of Orach Chayim. But the presence of mishpatimtzedakah and chesed, taking care of widows and orphans, welcoming the stranger, etc. – radically alters the implications of Rashi’s words. It's the 'little' and 'trampled', routine engagement with other people which form the basis of this promise.

There is often a great danger that when one believes in a “big idea,” in a “greater good,” it ends up obscuring the “little things” that we trample underfoot. There is a tendency to see the blood of revolution as inevitable, to accept collateral damage, to regard evil as “necessary.” Rashi is warning us about the dangers of focusing on the greater good and allowing the individual to get caught in its gears.

The following passage expresses those dangers better than I ever could. It’s from a book called Life and Fate by Russian-Jewish author named Vasily Grossman, and it appears in an essay called “Beyond Memory” by Emanuel Levinas, in his book In the Time of Nations. Grossman writes:

...I do not believe in the good, I believe in kindness...Not even Herod shed blood in the name of evil...

Humanity had never yet heard those words [from the New Testament - AR]: "Judge not, that ye shall not be judged...Love your enemies, do good to them that hate you. Bless them that curse you. Pray for those who curse you..."
What did that doctrine of peace and love bring to humanity? The tortures of the Inquisition, the struggle against heresies in France, Italy, and Germany, the war between Catholics and Protestants...

I have been able to see in action the implacable force of the idea of social good born in our country (i.e., Russia - AR). I saw it again in 1937; I saw that in the name of an idea of good as humane as Christianity, people were exterminated. I saw entire villages starving; in Siberia I saw the children of deported peasants dying in the snow...

There exists, side by side with this so terrible greater good, human kindness in everyday life. It is the kindness of an old lady who gives a piece of bread to a convict along the roadside. It is the kindness of a soldier who holds his canteen out to a wounded enemy. The kindness of youth taking pity on old age, the kindness of a peasant who hides a Jew in his barn. It is the kindness of those prison guards who risk their own freedom, smuggle the letters of prisoners out to wives and mothers...

The history of man is the struggle of evil trying to crush the tiny seed of humanity. But if even now the human has not been killed in man, evil will never prevail.

7/17/2010

In-Vitro Meat

5 years ago, I wrote this post about the halakhic implications of in-vitro meat. This recent article (HT: Yitz) has brought the issue back into general discussion. There ought to be some treatment of the issue in a journal like Tchumin or the RJJ Journal.

Still waiting for that cheeseburger.

7/15/2010

Beyond the Melting Pot: A Review of Haim Sabato's "From the Four Winds"

[This review appears in the June-July issue of Segula and is posted here with their permission.]

For all of the acclaim that Haim Sabato has won during the past decade or so of his literary career, he remains underappreciated. His best-known work, Tiyum Kavanot (translated into English as Adjusting Sights), drew interest for its portrayal of the Yom Kippur War through the eyes of a religious soldier and budding Torah scholar, a perspective that had been overlooked despite the ubiquity of things military in the Israeli cultural milieu.

In his other three works, Sabato portrays cultures that have largely been marginalized in Israel or that have vanished altogether. In this sense, Sabato is creating an Israeli postcolonial literature, recovering the voice of Israel’s Mizrahi subaltern (indeed, the religious soldier of Adjusting Sights can be read this way as well) as he tries to find his way in the modern, westernized State of Israel. By giving voice to Israel’s Jewish “others,” Sabato’s oeuvre decouples Zionism from the colonialist elements of its European proponents, paving the way for a much-needed and refreshing postcolonial Zionism.

A meeting of cultures
In the semi-autobiographical From the Four Winds (Hebrew: Bo’ee Ha-ru’ah), Sabato describes his own naïve and bookish childhood in the Beit Mazmil (today’s Kiryat Hayovel) immigrant neighborhood in Jerusalem, in which Jews from Arab countries and from Hungary lived side by side. The historical circumstances that threw these unlikely groups together were the near simultaneity of two major events on different continents in the Autumn of 1956: the Suez Campaign and the Hungarian Revolution. As a result of the former, Egyptian Jews were declared enemies of their home state, causing tens of thousands of them to flee for safer havens, including Israel. A similar number fled Hungary in the wake of the failed revolt against the Communist regime and subsequent Soviet occupation of the country. Sabato, however, offers no background information. He writes through the eyes of his second-grade self, for whom the global forces that threw these two immigrant groups together would have held little interest, certainly much less interest than the situations created by their daily interactions.

His encounter with Hungarian Jews in the late 1950s allows Sabato to take on another 800-pound gorilla of (Ashkenazic/ European) Israeli culture: the Holocaust. The most poignant and touching scene in this regard takes place toward the end of Chapter 9 (pp. 74-75). Haim (for the sake of convenience, I will refer to the character as “Haim” and the author as “Sabato”) recites a Holocaust elegy of his own composition, based on stories he had heard from his teacher. His audience is Mr. Farkash, a Holocaust survivor; the normally garrulous Farkash responds with silence.

One gets the sense that Sabato is communicating the predicament of a Mizrahi youth growing up in Israel in the aftermath of the Holocaust. On one hand, it would have been impossible to grow up in the early years of the state without the Holocaust impressing upon one's understanding in significant ways, especially for a sensitive and imaginative child like Haim. At the same time, the experiences of a Holocaust survivor were not his or even of those closest to him. As a result, his “memory” of the Holocaust would ring hollow to those who experienced it directly. By juxtaposing Haim’s elegy with Farkash’s silence, Sabato manages to recover the voice of a community whose indirect but significant and unique experience of the Holocaust has been all but ignored (though, to be sure, Prof. Hanna Yablonka has written extensively on Sephardim and the Holocaust); although Egyptian Jews did not endure the Holocaust, those who grew up in Israel did experience it through the very fabric of their cultural milieu, and the prior generation experienced the dread of Rommel’s advance toward Cairo and beyond toward Eretz Israel. Sabato describes those anxious times:

Father remembered that Hakham Anteby had gathered a whole group of children, ninety-one in total, into the Ahavah ve-Ahvah synagogue in Cairo, to recite the ninety-first Psalm… as a means of warding off the enemy. They did so in a dreadful din, with great fervor, chanting beautifully while concentrating their minds on the German soldiers… during Rommel’s advance the kabbalists of Jerusalem had gathered in fast and prayer to ward off the decree. (pp. 18-19)

Transcending Bitterness
After describing the multiethnic matrix of Beit Mazmil in the early chapters, Sabato focuses on the development of Haim’s relationship with Moshe Farkash, the Hungarian Holocaust survivor who is about 30 years Haim's senior as it progresses from a point where Farkash takes a very young Haim under his wing, through a phase in which Haim becomes Farkash's Talmud teacher, to the point where Farkash, at the end of his life, charges Haim to carry out three tasks that Farkash himself had been unable to fulfill.

The first part of the book is rife with references to Farkash's past that become clarified as the narrative progresses; in fact, Haim's refrain throughout the early part of the story is “everything must become clear on its own.” These references are sometimes explicit but often allusive. The reader learns why Farkash feels so strongly that childhood should be filled with happiness; why he insists of “wearing a mask” on all days but two; why he suggests a particular chapter of a particular talmudic tractate to study with Haim; how he became such a proficient baker; why he undertakes to ensure that every child in the neighborhood enjoys a bar mitzva celebration.

From the Four Winds tells the story of the lives of two people: Haim and Farkash. The narrative arc follows the chronology of Haim’s life, beginning when he is a child and ending as he approaches middle-age. Farkash’s story, on the other hand, is presented in the order that Haim, the first-person narrator of the story, hears it. The reader thus pieces together Farkash’s past along with Haim and shares Haim’s esteem for a man whose twinkling eyes belie his tormented past and true heroism.

On the surface, Farkash's struggle is against circumstance – the events that brought about the early death of his father, a veteran of World War I, when Farkash was six years old, the poverty he faced with his widowed mother, the travails of apprenticing under a brutal mentor, and ultimately the horrors of the Holocaust – in order to make a new life and raise a family in Israel. On another level, Farkash's struggle is internal, against the impulse toward blaming circumstance, bearing grudges, or surrendering to the blackness that succeeded in pervading the lives of so many others – be they Holocaust survivors or refugees from whichever suddenly inhospitable land. Farkash (the character) mirrors Sabato (the author) in that his contrived naïveté is not an attempt to recast past horrors in pastel colors. It is an argument that sometimes one must “pretend not to hear” (a trope that recurs in the book) in order to keep the demons at bay, that once certain forces come into existence, like the typhus outbreak along the Central and Allied trenches along the Eastern front that claimed so many of Farkash’s father’s comrades and enemies alike, the destruction they create is indiscriminate and uncontainable. Farkash is a hero not because he survived his terrible suffering, and not even because he managed to create a new life, but because he succeed in keeping the blackness of his past from causing paralysis or breeding anger.

Suffering in Translation
No review of a work by Sabato is complete without a treatment of his language (and the translation of his language). Often described as Agnonesque, Sabato's frequent intertextual allusions and use of Lishna De-Rabanan, the rabbinic Hebrew that remained the lingua franca of rabbinic literature throughout the centuries in which Hebrew was not spoken, lends Sabato's work a beauty that is hard to duplicate and that allows for a wealth of meaning to be packed into relatively terse descriptions. Sabato will often signify his intertextual allusions in the Hebrew original though the use of diacritical marks (nekudot), but occasionally will not, especially if the particular reference has entered standard Israeli parlance. The book – in Hebrew and especially in English – would have benefited from an unobtrusive style of end notes (e.g., ordered serially but sub verbo, leaving out encumbering superscript numerals) in which the frequent allusions are explained and their sources cited. Hebrew readers are hard-pressed to catch all of Sabato’s allusions; without any type of citation, it is even more difficult in translation.

In order to adequately render Sabato’s loaded formulations the translator should have deployed a variety of strategies and should not have been concerned about providing too much explanation – in a work that is only 160 pages long, using an entire sentence to describe a single term or concept is fine. I will provide an example or two of each of the more serious types of translation blunders, and the astute reader will no doubt encounter others.

Va-yiten Lekha” is the name of a prayer according to the Ashkenazic rite; a bit of explanation of this prayer and when it is recited would enrich the English rendering. Simply translating the title of the prayer, the strategy chosen by Dweck, is not very helpful, and simply transliterating the title only helps those who are familiar with Ashkenazic custom. There is also the matter that the title of the prayer derives from Genesis 27:28. A good translation strategy would have transliterated the title but also provided enough peripheral data for the curious reader to recover more meaning.

The English reader would only be confused when reading the italicized sentence “Might made right” in the middle of a description of a large group of children trying to enter into a single door. The corresponding Hebrew saying is the talmudic “Kol de-alim gevar,” which literally means “who is violent will prevail.” A translator has several options when rendering such a dictum: he may choose to ignore it and simply render the passage idiomatically; he may choose to render the statement from a foreign body of literature and provide enough context for the reader to appreciate the intertextual playfulness of the original version, even if only in some rudimentary way. Yaacob Dweck chose a third option – to render the statement in a way that is superfluous at best and frustrating at worst. The reader encounters a sentence that contributes little to the understanding of the overall passage and that includes a signifier – namely, the use of italics – that promises but does not deliver some sort of larger meaning.

In some cases Dweck simply misses the reference, such as when Farkash refers to the Holocaust era, based on Psalms 90:15, as “shenot ra'inu ra'ah”, which Dweck renders as “the years that saw wickedness” with no indication that it is, in fact, a reference to an external work. It comes off as merely an awkward reference to the Holocaust.

Dweck does not seem to have any consistent strategy for when he translates and when he transliterates foreign words (due to its multi-ethnic setting, this particular novel includes words from eight different languages: Hebrew, Hungarian, Romanian, Yiddish, Arabic, French, English, and Aramaic). It should be noted that Sabato effectively deploys these foreign words in a manner that contributes to the tone of the scene. Dweck, however, does not always follow Sabato's lead and sometimes fails even when trying. For example, Sabato’s Yiddish “vecker,” charged with waking up the boys in the yeshiva, is rendered by Dweck as “the alarm-clock.”

Sabato words for kite and spinning top are the Arabic “tayara” and “forera,” respectively. Both of these words have penetrated Israeli usage to a greater or lesser degree. Dweck chose to keep the Arabic terms, a defensible decision, but then does not provide the contextual clues that would allow the English reader to immediately decipher their meaning. Furthermore, he mistransliterates tayara as “tiara.” Finally, Dweck renders the plural of forera as forerot – applying a Hebrew grammatical form to an Arabic word – and the plural of tiara as tiaras.

Dweck’s nomenclature cannot be described as other than careless. He often transliterates names and terms from Hebrew into English without realizing that the Hebrew itself is a transliteration from a language with Latin characters. Thus, Janusz Korczak becomes Yanush Korzak. Similarly, there is no consistency regarding when a Hebrew name is phonetically rendered (e.g., Binyamin) and when it is Anglicized (e.g., Moses), even when context would indicate a preference (Dweck has “Yosi is short for Joseph”). Some of Dweck’s renderings ignore conventional spellings or pronunciations: anyone who has flown into or out of Israel knows that the airport is in Lod, not Lud.

Finally, there are instances in which Dweck’s simply misunderstood Sabato or was unfamiliar with the relevant idiom: although “dag malu’ah” literally means “salted fish,” it refers to herring. Hayyim ibn Attar’s father’s name was Moshe; “Hayyim the son of Attar” is simply a mistranslation. In the final scene of the book, the reader meets Farkash's grandson and namesake. The boy's full name is Moshe Aviad Farkash. The name 'Aviad', based on Isaiah 9:5, means “my eternal father,” a fitting memorial name. Dweck, however, renders this final line in the book as “a witness to my father,” misunderstanding 'ad' as 'eid'.

Rising to the Poetic Challenge
To his credit, Dweck does an admirable job rendering the various poems – liturgical and otherwise – that frequently appear in the book. To the extent possible, his translations of the poems keep the scheme of the original – rhyming when the original rhymes and forming an acrostic when the original does so. One of the most dramatic scenes in the book, recalling the opening scene of Adjusting Sights, is set during the afternoon of Yom Kippur, when some Sephardic congregations pass the time between the morning and afternoon services by reciting a liturgical composition describing the Binding of Isaac. Sabato describes how in 1973, the first military call-ups took place at precisely that hour. The poem's vivid description of the sacrifice of Isaac by his father is punctuated by the names of the boys from Beit Mazmil who fought in the Yom Kippur War, and which of them never returned. Dweck succeeds in capturing the tension and drama created by the juxtaposition of frantic military activity with the chanting of a heart-rending composition. Sabato is at his best in scenes such as this, and this is reflected in the English as well:

                        “See how my mother’s joy is gone,”
                        Said the son she bore at ninety years of age.
                        “Consumed by the flame and consigned by the knife,
                        Now I shall beg her forgiveness,
                        It pains me that Mother shall cry and sigh.”
                        The binder and the bound by the cord, upon the altar of the Lord

The poem gripped the heart. It was as if it had been written by the matriarch Sarah herself… the sirens continued their menacing wail. Captain Nissim Israel, whose mother, Mrs. Israel, had emigrated with us from Egypt, and who used to spread a thick helping of jam on the pieces of bread the children of immigrants received in the Tikvateinu community center – folded his tallit and parted from his father in a whisper… He was the commander of an artillery battalion…

The recitation of the poem continued in the circular cavity of the synagogue. (pp. 115-116)

The translator faces the daunting task of reproducing great literature in another language. This task, more art than skill, has been described as follows by Spanish-English translator Edith Grossman (whose renditions include a 2003 edition of Don Quixote) in her work Why Translation Matters:

...what we do is not an act of magic, like altering base metals into precious stones, but the result of a series of creative decisions and imaginative acts of criticism. In the process of translating, we endeavor to hear the first version of the work as profoundly and completely as possible, struggling to discover the linguistic charge, the structural rhythms, the subtle implications, the complexities of meaning and suggestion in vocabulary and phrasing, and the ambient, cultural inferences and conclusions these tonalities allow us to extrapolate. This is a kind of reading as deep as any encounter with a literary text can be.

In the final analysis, the present translation is not terrible. It is very readable and faithful to the original, and the reader of From the Four Winds will not be disappointed. However, Sabato produces Hebrew literature of the first rank, and Bo’ee Ha-ru’ah is no exception. Unfortunately for English-speaking audiences, Dweck is deaf to the vast array of tonalities to which the translator must be attentive, and which mark the difference between a good book and great literature.