Who Is a Religious Jew?

This is an important statement of Sidney Ballon’s religious values and his understanding of the place of Reform Judaism.

It is easy to say what we must do when it is precisely written down. It is more difficult to have to make decisions and to determine for ourselves what character we shall give our Jewish life.

Yom Kippur

A major question often discussed especially in the State of Israel is the question, “Who is a Jew?” However, when the Central Conference of American rabbis met in Israel 18 months ago, the president of the Conference, then Rabbi Roland Gittelsohn[1] of Boston, made the observation that,

More pressing and persistent and than the question “Who is a Jew?” is the question “Who or what is the religious Jew?”

Although Rabbi Gittelson raised this question, he did not at the moment attempt to give a full answer. He did say that Judaism must be intertwined with Jewish nationalism, that Judaism need not be interpreted in precisely the same way by every Jew, and probably mostly for the benefit of the Israeli public, that Judaism has been and must always be dynamic, developing, and growing from age to age to meet the rapid and radical change taking place in our society. But his main point was that the question is a difficult one and Jews must do a lot more thinking and searching before they come up with the answer. This morning let us try to add just a little bit to this thinking and searching.
 
In broaching the question, “Who is a religious Jew?” two opposite extremes come immediately to mind. One extreme is the attitude of the kind of Jew who stones buses on the Sabbath in Jerusalem. In his mind a religious Jew can be only one who fulfills completely the ritual rules and regulations that have come down to us from the past. There can be no deviation. To depart from the Halacha[2], from the Law of Torah, Talmud, and Shulchan Aruch[3] is to depart from the principles of Judaism, and anyone who so deviates may not be recognized as a proper Jew. Such an extremist cares not whether the deviant calls himself Reform, or Conservative, or even Modern Orthodox — he is not a good Jew, and he is even to be shunned. All too often, however, these proponents of tradition seem to overlook the fact that there are many laws which are part of Judaism and which are not ritual, but which have to do rather with the relationships between people, with concern and respect for one’s fellow man, with ethics and morals. We shall read this afternoon from the Torah an especially significant passage which culminates with the admonition, “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” In the stoning of buses there would appear to be very little such love. When the Reform rabbinate met in Israel they were denounced on the floor of the Knesset[4] by one of the ultra-Orthodox rabbis, who was also a member of the Knesset. He threw a Reform prayer book to the floor in his anger, even though also in the Reform prayer book the name of God was printed. Here again it seems there was very little respect for one’s fellow man and this Rabbi was very self-righteous even though it has been reported that this same man has had some business associations with an American racketeer.
 
Unfortunately, this definition of a religious Jew as one who is faithful to the traditional ritual law is often accepted even by those who do not believe in keeping this law. Again, to use Israel as an example, many Jews there do not believe in religion at all, but they insist, nevertheless, that the only way to be religious is to be fully orthodox and to fulfill the traditional requirements. Otherwise, one must consider himself nonreligious. They cannot understand how there can be any middle way, and this is one of the reasons that liberal Judaism makes such slow progress in Israel. Israelis generally do not accept the possibility of being religious other than in orthodox terms, and since they do not want to be Orthodox, they abandon religion altogether.
 
The opposite extreme, to which I referred, is an attitude which is often expressed by non-synagogue Jews, and, perhaps, sometimes even by those who do belong to a synagogue. The religious man according to this view is one who has religion in his heart. The implication seems to be that contrary to the view which holds tradition to be everything, ritual and formalities really count for nothing. What matters is only that one’s heart be in the right place, that one is presumably good, moral, and ethical. I hear this about the heart frequently when trying to convince someone about the significance of the synagogue and the need for attendance. Also at times at a funeral when I triy to find out something about the deceased, I may be told that he did not belong to a synagogue, he was not active in anything Jewish, but, nevertheless, he was a very religious person — he had his religion in his heart.
 
A variation of this is also that “He lived by the Ten Commandments; that was his religion.” The Ten Commandments for some people are a catch-all. To live by the Commandments is a symbol of the perfect life, and if you do so, you do not need the synagogue and need not be concerned with any of the formal aspects of religion. Of course, I sometimes wonder whether the person in question really knew what  was in the Ten Commandments, because these commandments do say something about observing the Sabbath, and Sabbath observance must very definitely be considered ritualistic. I am moved to be somewhat skeptical about this type for other reasons as well. It surely is possible to live in accord with a humanistic philosophy of life and be quite moral and ethical and decent, but when there is talk about religion being in the heart, I wonder if  this is not just a euphemism for indifference to the Jewish people, whether it does not really mean that the individual did not choose to give in support of a synagogue, whether it does not really point up a lack of concern for Jewish values. Very often people pretend to be above the performance of ancient rituals, but they never fail patriotically to salute the flag. They do not question the ritual procedures of their fraternal orders or lodges. It is only the ritual of Judaism that is naïve and passé.
 
No, I do not believe the meticulous follower of Halacha is necessarily a religious Jew, but neither do I believe that the man who disparages the formalities of religion completely and emphasizes the power of his heart can be called a religious Jew. The religious Jew, I believe, stands at neither extreme but must take a stand somewhere in between, and Reform Judaism today is in search of just such an appropriate stand.
 
There are some who want to equate Reform with the religion of the heart, of which I have just spoken, but this is wrong. Because Reform did rebel against the rigidity of the tradition and did try to adapt to the times, many people think it is automatically opposed to or indifferent to rules and regulations, to rituals and ceremonies, but it is not ritual and rules as such with which Reform has quarreled, but rather with the attitude toward them that orthodoxy has had. If one regards these rituals as unyielding and unchanging because commanded by God on Sinai, then Reform dissents, but if one regards them as a guide, as a desirable norm of conduct for the Jewish people or as practices which must be capable of meaningful interpretation, subject to selection and variation, then this is the Reform point of view. But Reform does not mean to cancel them all out and to leave ourselves without any Jewish distinctiveness whatsoever.
 
To suppose that Reform is some kind of system of Jewish thinking which did away with all rules and regulations is a totally unfounded notion. In Reform Judaism there is still a religious calendar which we are bound to honor if we consider ourselves religious Jews. That is the reason we are here today. Our calendar commands it. It is the most sacred day of the year and we may not ignore it. The Sabbath is still very much a part of that calendar and the other holidays as well. The Union prayer book and the Rabbi’s Manual[5] also defined procedures of ritual which make up Reform Judaism. No one can say that Reform implies religious anarchy. It does not mean that every man may do just as he pleases. There is, indeed, room for experimentation and selectivity, but within the framework of procedure as outlined by our literature and the religious leaders of our time. It is true that much of the past has been more or less officially discarded in Reform, but this is essentially when what is involved has lost its meaning and its usefulness, and even this is not necessarily a break with the past. Change was also a principle of the past. Our teachers did not regard the Halacha as fixed or permanent. They constantly reinterpreted it according to the need. The Halacha of the Mishna[6] was based on the Halacha of the Bible, but it is not the same, and the Halacha of the Gemara[7] was based on the Halacha of the Mishna, but it is not the same. We are acting today in the true spirit of the rabbis of old when we adapt according to need. What we must remember, however, is that this change must be responsible, not haphazard. It must be improvement, not abandonment. It must enhance our Jewishness, not diminish it. Dr. Jacob Lauterbach[8], who was one of my teachers at the Hebrew Union College wrote:

The modern Halacha just as the ancient Halacha aims to preserve Israel as the priest teacher of the nations. The ancient teachers of the Halacha realize that if Israel was to accomplish this task of spreading the knowledge of God on earth, they must preserve the agent who is to do this work, they must see to it that Israel should not become submerged among the nations of the world, and we, today, whose task is to continue to do the work of the prophets and of the ancient teachers realize likewise, that in order to carry out our mission it is absolutely necessary that we preserve our Jewish religious individuality.”

Our purpose and the purpose of the ancient teachers of Jewish law is the same. Hence also our continued concern for ritual, though it may be in a different form. We still desire to preserve our Jewish religious individuality.
 
What we lack in Reform, of course, is the compulsive nature of orthodoxy. This has its advantages and disadvantages. It means, of course, there is the danger of ignoring what we do not feel absolutely compelled to do, but on the other hand it gives us the freedom to create new practices and customs, to express our faith in modern terms. It means we are not stifled by dogmatism and not pinned down to what no longer has meaning. But it leaves us with greater responsibility. It is easy to say what we must do when it is precisely written down. It is more difficult to have to make decisions and to determine for ourselves what character we shall give our Jewish life. There is a sense of responsibility needed that keeps us from abusing our freedom and neglecting everything. We should be moved to use ritual in a meaningful way to Judaize our lives, to symbolize the ideas of our faith.
 
It should hardly be necessary, but sometimes we do need to be reminded, that Reform Judaism, of course, also lays stress upon the ethical, both personal and social. We, too, have our adherents who think their religious obligations are fulfilled when the Temple is visited and their prayers are said. To define a religious Jew without reference to personal and social ethics is an impossibility. Because we disparage the so-called religion of the heart does not mean to imply that we turn away from it all together. From its very inception Reform called for a heightened emphasis on prophetic teaching with its call for integrity, social justice, and peace. I referred before to the Torah reading of the afternoon. Let me now call your attention to the Haftara reading of this morning. “Wherefore have we fasted?” the people ask. “Wherefore have we afflicted our soul, and Thou hast taken no knowledge?”[9] And the prophet answers:

Behold in the day of your fast, ye pursue your business, and exact all your labors. There has been no sincerity, no integrity. Will thou call this a fast and an acceptable day unto the Lord? Is not this the fast I have chosen, to loose the fetters of wickedness, to undo the bands of the yoke, and to let the oppressed go free….Is it not to deal thy bread to the hungry, and that thou bring the poor that are cast out to thy house? When thou seest the naked that thou cover him, that thou hide not thyself from thine own flesh?[10]

A deep social concern is at the heart of prophetic teaching, and this surely cannot be ruled out as an ingredient of Reform Judaism, and we must remember this especially when our leadership speaks up on social issues.
 
Who then is a religious Jew? We still have not defined him precisely. We still have undoubtedly left some questions open, but he is neither the fanatic inherent of tradition nor is he the indifferent scoffer at ritual. He must combine in some acceptable manner respect for the formalities of Judaism and concern for his fellow man. The Jew who shuns the ritual and the Jew who neglects the ethical are both alike disqualified from being called a religious Jew.
 
 
 


[1] Rabbi Roland B. Gittelsohn (1910-1995), a scholar on religious and governmental issues, served the Central Synagogue of Nassau County in Rockville Centre, Long Island from 1936 to 1953 and  Temple Israel in Boston from 1953 to 1977.

[2] Halacha (Hebrew: הֲלָכָה) is the collective body of Jewish religious laws derived from the Written and Oral Torah.

[3] The Shulchan Aruch (Hebrew, literally: "Set Table") with its commentaries, is the most widely accepted compilation of Jewish law ever written. It was authored in Safed, Israel, by Yosef Karo in 1563 and published in Venice two years later.

[4] The Knesset is the name for Israel's parliament, located in the capital Jerusalem.

[5] Published by the Central Conference of American Rabbis, The Rabbi's Manual contains traditional and innovative services, ceremonies and prayers for life cycle events, times of illness, conversion, and significant moments in life.

[6] Mishna (Hebrew: מִשְׁנָה, "study by repetition") is the first major written redaction of the Jewish oral traditions known as the "Oral Torah". It is also the first major work of Rabbinic literature.

[7] Gemara (גמרא noun - from Aramaic verb gamar, literally, "study") is the component of the Talmud comprising rabbinical analysis of and commentary on the Mishnah.

[8] Jacob Zallel Lauterbach (1873–1942) was an American Judaica scholar and author who served on the faculty of Hebrew Union College and composed responsa for the Reform movement in America. He specialized in Midrashic and Talmudical literature.

[9] Isaiah 58:3

[10] Isaiah 58:3-11