Prof. Sam Lehman-Wilzig-Jonathan Neumann, To Heal the World: How the Jewish Left Corrupts Judaism and Endangers Israel
Jonathan Neumann, To Heal the World: How the Jewish Left Corrupts Judaism and Endangers Israel. NY: St. Martin’s Press, 2018.
Sometimes a screed gets it (mostly) right. In his well-argued diatribe against the use of Tikkun Olam as the Jewish be-all and end-all for many American Jews, Jonathan Neumann is on to something that needs to be heard – despite two significant lacunae and his slightly exaggerated central claim.
The main argument of this book is that “Fixing the World”, in Hebrew and traditional parlance Tikkun Olam (loosely defined today as “social justice”), has become the de factor religion of American Jewry – to the detriment of Jewish ritual, commandments, and theology. For starters, Neumann does a very admirable job of collating quotes, speeches, sermons, essays and the like from a very wide spectrum of Jewish-American religious leaders (and several central political leaders as well, not all of whom are Jewish) to buttress this thesis. However, the real strength (and one weakness) of his approach is found in his analysis of the Jewish heritage, and how Tikkun Olam has not been a core precept until the 19th century when Reform and later Conservative Judaism brought it to the forefront of Jewish social activism in lieu of traditional religious practice.
Why is he so worked up over this – and we ought to be as well? Because, he argues, Tikkun Olam places Jewish universalism far above Jewish particularism; indeed, in certain quarters it completely replaces the particularistic ethos and religious culture of the Jewish heritage. If the Jews’ main task is to focus on making the world a better place, what’s left of Judaism? After all, bettering the world is not something exclusive to Judaism. And if the task of Jews is to be (the better) part of human society, why need a State of Israel? The job can easily – and perhaps more efficiently – be accomplished within the Gentile world. Such universalism, Neumann argues, goes against the grain of what Judaism has always been about: a particular religion and way of life that through its own moral teachings and internal social behavior can be a “light” unto others.
A Neumann cogently points out, the irony (paradox?) here is that the Jewish Left would never ask any other ethnic, cultural or religious group to self-destruct or even eliminate its traditional practices. The response of the Tikkun Olam proponents is to claim that there is no self-abnegation here, if Tikkun Olam has always resided at the core of Judaism – which is why the author’s wide-ranging analysis of the Tikkun Olam trope throughout the ages is a welcome antidote to that (mostly) spurious claim.
Why “mostly” and not “completely”? It is here that Neumann falls into what I would call the “polemicist trap”, i.e. over-arguing his case. Again, he is eminently correct that Tikkun Olam as understood and expressed today was never the main “commandment” or even the underlying ethos of Judaism through the ages. However, this does not mean that Judaism never proclaimed and promulgated the concept. Neumann is clever and careful: he argues correctly that the Bible has no mention of Tikkun Olam in the modern sense of the term – and goes on to show how that term in the Talmud had a very narrow meaning. But this ignores the fact that the Talmud quite explicitly encourages Tikkun Olam without expressly using the term. One very famous Talmudic pronouncement (Tractate Shabbat, 54b) should suffice here (others can be brought): “Anyone who can protest/scold against the bad deeds of his household is as guilty as they are; against fellow city residents, he carries their guilt; against the whole world, is as guilty as the rest of the world.”
Thus, the contemporary Tikkun Olam proponents have not performed a theological creation ex nihilo – there are a Jewish few sources that can form the foundation of such a creed. However, what they have done is to tendentiously take one nice idea among many of secondary importance in the Jewish tradition and turn it into the core principle of the Jewish religion, thereby eviscerating such central elements as prayer and adherence to (at least some of) the 613 commandments.
What is missing in this book? Two things. First, although Neumann brings numerous contemporary theologians and Jewish activists to make his case, it is not at all clear that this is the universal (or at least majority) ethos of all Jewish progressives. Obviously, one can’t expect a complete – or even fully comprehensive – survey of the contemporary Jewish-American leadership (non-affiliated, Havurah, Reconstructionist, Reform, Conservative; the Orthodox are not [yet?] part of this approach). Yet it is hard to believe that there aren’t some other significant voices out there who don’t view Tikkun Olam as the core of Judaism. He does bring two leading lights (p. 163) who recently criticized the direction of “progressive Judaism”, but neither addressed the issue of Tikkun Olam directly.
Second, although this is a book of “political theology”, i.e. analyzing the thoughts and writings of Judaism’s (non-Orthodox) lay and rabbinical leadership, the book would be even more persuasive if it had offered some sociological data regarding the phenomenon. Are there no survey/poll results regarding what the average American Jew thinks about Tikkun Olam – whether in principle or in action? My gut feeling – based on what I have seen in numerous bar/bat mitzvahs around the U.S. in the past several years is that, indeed, at least for the younger generation, Tikkun Olam (helping the homeless, caring for the sick, conversing with the elderly etc) is what Judaism “is all about”. But that’s only my personal impression; what is really going on in the field?
Notwithstanding these “quibbles”, this book should be read – and taken to heart – by American Jewry. It is easy reading from a literary standpoint; it will be very hard reading psychologically for many American Jews brought up in the Tikkun Olam ethos, not realizing how far they have strayed from Judaism as practiced for 3000 years. Another very Jewish saying – technically about charity, but traditionally understood in a wider, metaphorical sense – is appropriate here: “A’ni’yay eer’khah kod’mim” – your own kind should take precedence.
