David Brooks, "The Orthodox Surge"
David Shasha
The Orthodox Surge
By: David Brooks
At a time when sexual abuse scandals and radical messianic Zionism pervade the Orthodox Jewish community in Brooklyn, it is quite odd to see what in effect is a deeply reactionary community be presented as “counter-cultural.”
But leave it to David Brooks, bless his PILPUL-infested soul, this is precisely what we have in this bizarre article.
What the Orthodox community has done is not all that odd as Brooks would have us think. They have taken a static, conformist, and unthinking Jewish tradition and merged it with the very lavish accoutrements of the modern world.
It is not that these Jews are sitting in coffeehouses – like the Arab Jews of old – debating the merits of Galen, Pythagoras, and Aristotle and writing metrical poetry. No, these Jews have changed nary a jot or tittle of their medieval Ashkenazi Talmudic heritage – itself the most obscurantist and reactionary in the Jewish tradition – and used its interesting way of viewing social ethics in the Gentile world as a means to rise up and grab the golden ring of the “Good Life.”
Just like certain parts of the Christian fundamentalist community, these Orthodox Jews live according to the Gospel of Prosperity, which they nudge along by conducting business in ways that involve the PILPUL values that shade the letter of the Law in a way that redounds to the economic advantage of the community. In this context it is legitimate to cut ethical corners when it comes to the Gentile world as it allows the community to maximize its profit margins.
While it is true that the Orthodox Jewish community is deeply committed to serving its members in an altruistic manner, it is equally true that this altruism is strictly limited to those Jews who live by the reactionary conservative code of the community. Jews who are not committed to behaving according to the strict rules are left out in the cold and treated like unwanted pariahs.
It is therefore eminently possible to live in the 13th century and have a Lexus and a million dollar home apportioned with all the best furnishings.
It is interesting to see Brooks mention both Meir Soloveichik and Jonathan Sacks; two very different figures in the Orthodox world. The two men share their Modern Orthodoxy which is itself a dying institution in an Orthodox world that leans more towards Lakewood than Washington Heights (the home of Yeshiva University), but differ in important ways.
When I began to promote the work of Rabbi Sacks in the Orthodox community there was an immediate outcry over what was considered to be his radical positions on Israel and on how to deal with the Gentile world. Rabbi Sacks promoted a form of Jewish Humanism that was seen as alien to an Ashkenazi Orthodoxy intent on maintaining radical ritual and social standards that shut out the Gentile world. His outreach and Liberal values were too much for the well-heeled Orthodox machers.
When I published the preceding article in the Edah Journal, a Modern Orthodox publication, the editors felt the need to publish an additional article critical of Rabbi Sacks’ thought in order to “balance” out the discussion. Although things have changed – largely because of Rabbi Sacks’ conciliatory diplomatic skills and the ongoing leadership vacuum in the Modern Orthodox world – there remains a deep suspicion of Rabbi Sacks’ open, pluralistic religious vision.
The story of Meir Soloveichik is a bit different. Soloveichik has made his mark by allying with Right Wing political forces in America. He appeared at a Congressional hearing in 2012 that was aimed to tamp down on the legality of Birth Control. An article on the matter appeared in SHU 540:
Rabbi Soloveichik has worked in the Right Wing media and regularly parrots the Ultra-Conservative talking points in a way that links Orthodox Judaism to the radical Right in this country.
Although Rabbi Sacks has finally been accepted in the Orthodox Jewish world, his wide learning with its Religious Humanist values remains an object of mistrust and skepticism in a community that seeks religious conformity at any cost. It is an ugly and violent situation for those caught in the crosshairs of the battle.
What we see in Brooks’ article is the grafting of vulgar materialistic values onto the trunk of an atavistic Orthodox Judaism that continues to increase what in the Talmudic nomenclature is called “Humra” – that ritual Halakhic stringency which sets Orthodox Jews apart from other Jews as they have adopted the most restrictive behaviors and demand that all members of the community act according to these extreme rules.
Brooks’ tour must not have included the shops here in Midwood that have signs on their windows touting that they use water filters for their food preparations. The reason for this is that many Orthodox authorities have ruled that the water in New York is not Kosher and that the municipal filtration system permits non-Kosher bugs to remain in the water. In addition, the Kosher authorities have increasingly outlawed the eating of certain fruits and vegetables that the rabbis claim cannot be properly washed:
http://www.uswaternews.com/archives/arcquality/4orthjews6.html
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C04E7D6123CF934A35752C1A9629C8B63
Now these are extreme positions that are not necessarily applied in uniform way, but the general climate of the Orthodox Jewish community is one – not of “counter-culture” and ethical goodness – but of an obsessive need to conform to the extreme views of their rabbis without deviation. It is not the Jewish Law that is central in this community, but the authority of the rabbis.
There has been an upswing in classes on business ethics given all the corruption scandals that have plagued the community – most notably the Bernie Madoff scandal which involved scores of Orthodox Jews:
http://www.jta.org/news/article/2009/10/05/1008320/orthodox-focus-on-jewish-ethics-at-high-holidays
http://forward.com/articles/14749/merkin-seen-as-enabler-for-madoff-/
This corruption is enabled by the isolation of the Orthodox Jewish community and the deep contempt it harbors for the non-Orthodox world. None of this is advertised to the public – it would be bad for business.
There is much anecdotal material based on personal experience that can be discussed, but it is clear to those who live in Midwood that Brooks has it all wrong. He has been – as is usually the case – blinded by two central factors that guide his work: Love of the rich and esteem for religious values that he neither understands nor practices.
The reality of the Orthodox world can be best understood as a combination of outmoded religious values incompatible with the modern world and the desperate need to acquire material possessions. This means that it is possible for Orthodox Jews to enter the elite professions while continuing to be severely at odds with the cultural values of the society they are living in.
It might seem paradoxical, but it is practically undeniable. Lawyers, doctors, accountants, and politicians (Senator Joe Lieberman comes to mind) can rise to great professional heights and yet at the end of the day sit down to study Talmud from the ArtScroll edition. Refusing the knowledge of general civilization as a way to understand Judaism and conduct their lives, the Orthodox Jews that Brooks lionizes live out a hypocrisy that enables them to make loads of money but remain intellectually benighted and removed from the Humanistic values in our civilization.
The Ashkenazi refusal to adopt the Maimonidean system remains a sticking point in the failure of Orthodox Judaism to process the Torah in terms of Religious Humanism.
Buying expensive things is not a sign of being modern and liberal. Connecting atavistic notions of religion to a crass materialism is a disastrous combination that has served to undermine the strength and sophistication of the Jewish tradition as it has been understood in the classical Sephardic tradition.
Displaying Midwood’s Orthodox Jewish community as some paragon of virtue and enlightenment is a serious mistake that reflects the inability of Brooks to process the reality that he sees.
Not that this comes as any surprise to those of us who follow his work closely.
DS
In Midwood, Brooklyn, there’s a luxury kosher grocery store called Pomegranate serving the modern Orthodox and Hasidic communities. It looks like a really nice Whole Foods. There’s a wide selection of kosher cheeses from Italy and France, wasabi herring, gluten-free ritual foods and nicely toned wood flooring.
The snack section is impressive. There’s a long aisle bursting with little bags of chips and pretzels, suitable for putting into school lunch boxes. That’s important because Orthodox Jews spend a lot of time packing school lunches.
Nationwide, only 21 percent of non-Orthodox Jews between the ages of 18 and 29 are married. But an astounding 71 percent of Orthodox Jews are married at that age. And they are having four and five kids per couple. In the New York City area, for example, the Orthodox make up 32 percent of Jews over all. But the Orthodox make up 61 percent of Jewish children. Because the Orthodox are so fertile, in a few years, they will be the dominant group in New York Jewry.
Another really impressive thing about the store is not found in one section but is pervasive throughout. That’s the specialty products designed around this or that aspect of Jewish law. There are the dairy-free cheese puffs in case you want to have some cheese puffs with a meat dish. There are the precut disposable tablecloths so you don’t have to use scissors on the Sabbath. There are the specially designed sponges, which don’t retain water, so you don’t have to do the work of squeezing out water on Shabbat.
Pomegranate looks like any island of upscale consumerism, but deep down it is based on a countercultural understanding of how life should work.
Those of us in secular America live in a culture that takes the supremacy of individual autonomy as a given. Life is a journey. You choose your own path. You can live in the city or the suburbs, be a Wiccan or a biker.
For the people who shop at Pomegranate, the collective covenant with God is the primary reality and obedience to the laws is the primary obligation. They go shopping like the rest of us, but their shopping is minutely governed by an external moral order.
The laws, in this view, make for a decent society. They give structure to everyday life. They infuse everyday acts with spiritual significance. They build community. They regulate desires. They moderate religious zeal, making religion an everyday practical reality.
The laws are gradually internalized through a system of lifelong study, argument and practice. The external laws may seem, at first, like an imposition, but then they become welcome and finally seem like a person’s natural way of being.
Meir Soloveichik, my tour guide during this trip through Brooklyn, borrows a musical metaphor from the Catholic theologian George Weigel. At first piano practice seems like drudgery, like self-limitation, but mastering the technique gives you the freedom to play well and create new songs. Life is less a journey than it is mastering a discipline or craft.
Much of the delight in life comes from arguing about the law and different interpretations of God’s command. Soloveichik laughingly describes his debates over which blessing to say over Crispix cereal, which is part corn, but also part rice. Jonathan Sacks, the chief rabbi of the British Commonwealth who is on a tour through New York, notes that Jews are constitutional lawyers: “The Torah is an anthology of argument with a shared vocabulary of common restraint.”
But there are still obligations that precede choice. For example, a young person in mainstream America can choose to marry or not. In Orthodox society, young adults have an obligation to marry and perpetuate the covenant and it is a source of deep sadness when they cannot.
“Marriage is about love, but it is not first and foremost about love,” Soloveichik says. “First and foremost, marriage is about continuity and transmission.”
The modern Orthodox are rooted in that deeper sense of collective purpose. They are like the grocery store Pomegranate, superficially a comfortable part of mainstream American culture, but built upon a moral code that is deeply countercultural.
This sort of life involves a fascinating series of judgment calls about what aspects of secularism can safely be included in a covenantal life. For example, Soloveichik’s wife, Layaliza, was admitted into Harvard, but she went to a religious college, Yeshiva, instead. Then she went to a secular professional school, Yale Law, and now works as an assistant U.S. attorney.
All of us navigate certain tensions, between community and mobility, autonomy and moral order. Mainstream Americans have gravitated toward one set of solutions. The families stuffing their groceries into their Honda Odyssey minivans in the Pomegranate parking lot represent a challenging counterculture. Mostly, I notice how incredibly self-confident they are. Once dismissed as relics, they now feel that they are the future.
From The New York Times, March 8, 2013