Download 1 MORDECAI KAPLAN JUDAISM AS A CIVILIZATION 1. Kaplan`s

MORDECAI KAPLAN
JUDAISM AS A CIVILIZATION
1. Kaplan’s statement of the problem
Not long after having assumed charge of the Teachers Institute I was appointed to the chair
of Homiletics at the Seminary……
…As I proceeded with the course, it became apparent to me that the future of Judaism
depended on something more than an acceptable ideology. The significance of Jewish
milieu and atmosphere, social contact and interaction then began to dawn on me, and I
realized that unless the synagogue were more than a place for worship its influence was
bound to wane, and the most eloquent preaching in the world would not check its
obsolescence. This led me to induce a group of Jews, who were on the point of organizing
into a congregation and building the usual type of synagogue, to modify their original
purpose and to establish a Jewish Center on such lines as would enable them to conduct in
it social, cultural and recreational activities. At the same time I participated in the movement
that had been inaugurated in those years to establish a Kehillah, and was active in its effort
to organize a system of Jewish education in New York City.
(xii-xiii)
Kaplan describes the radical change that took place in the nineteenth century about how Jews felt about being
Jewish.
Before the beginning of the nineteenth century all Jews regarded Judaism as a privilege;
since then most Jews have come to regard it as a burden. The first intimation of that change
is recorded in a letter which Moses Mendelssohn wrote to Herder in 1780, explaining what
had moved him to translate the Pentateuch into German. It was, he said, to teach his
children to accept their fate with patience and resignation, especially their fate as Jews.'
Before long many of the Jews who might have accepted their fate with patience and
resignation rebelled against it, and sought to escape it by the road of apostasy. The most
prominent among them was Heinrich Heine, who coined the famous quip about Judaism not
being a religion but a misfortune.' From Germany the crisis in Judaism has spread to all
countries where Jews have come in contact with modern thought and life. At its mildest, that
crisis manifests itself as a sullen feeling of helplessness; at its worst, as bitter resentment
and revolt.* Not even the Jewries of eastern Europe which until recently seemed strongly
intrenched in their traditions have been spared. In Russia, whatever Jewish historical
continuity and identity with the rest of world-Jewry the Communist regime might have
tolerated the Jewish Communists have fanatically sought to destroy, and in a large measure
have succeeded. In the west European countries, it is only anti-Semitism, which refuses to
recognize even intermarriage and baptism as sufficiently dejudaizing, that prevents Judaism
from disappearing completely. When we direct our attention to the American-Jewish scene,
we note that it, too, abounds in signs of ill omen for the future of Judaism." * The number of
Jews who regret they are not Gentiles is legion. **If I had my choice," a prominent
American- Jewish woman is quoted as saying, "I would have asked God to make me a
Gentile, but since I had no choice I pray to Him to help me be a good Jewess." Such a
1
woman would scarcely approve of the traditional benediction, "Praised be thou, O Lord our
God, King of the universe, that thou hast not made me a Gentile." She is at least deterringmined to make the best out of what she views as a bad situation. But most of those, who
feel as she does, succumb to what they regard as an inescapable misfortune. "The great
majority of Jewish youths at the colleges," writes a Harvard graduate, "consider their Jewish
birth the real tragedy of their lives. They constantly seek to be taken for Gentiles and
endeavor to assimilate as fast as their physiognomy will allow." In “Escaping Judaism,'' the
author describes vividly the sense of frustration and rootlessness which gnaws at the heart
of many young Jews, and the wistful yearnings by which they are tortured as they contrast
what they consider the rich and colorful life of their Christian neighbors with the drab
existence of their own people. He then comes to the conclusion that Jews should reconcile
themselves to their fate on the ground that "all men are not born equal; some are born blind,
some deaf, some lame, and some are born Jews." That an entire chapter in Jewish
Experiences in America * has to be devoted to the problem, "How to Combat Anti- Semitism
Among Jewish Children," indicates how widespread is the disease of self-hate among
American Jews.
(3-4).
In what respects do the problems identified by Kaplan persist? What has changed for the better, or for the
worse?
***
Kaplan considers some of the causes of the unwillingness of Jews to identify with being Jewish. He begins by
rejecting the claim that anti-Semitism is the cause, on the basis that anti-Semitism long predates what he
describes as a Jewish “sense of inferiority”.
In accounting for this sense of inferiority and self-contempt which is eating like a canker into
the Jewish soul, it is usual to point to the fact that Jews find their Jewishness a handicap to
them in all walks of life. As a minority group they are a shining mark for all mob viciousness
and xenophobia. Since their Jewish origin stands in the way of their happiness and
ambition, how can they help deploring it? However plausible this may sound, it cannot
possibly be the true explanation of the way Jews nowadays feel toward Judaism. Jews have
always had to bear the vexations and indignities which are the lot of a minority group. Ever
since they have been dispersed among the nations of the world, they have been treated as
defenseless aliens and compelled to migrate from land to land. Yet, until recently, there
existed among the scattered fragments of the Jewish people more of common life and
singleness of purpose than among the members of peoples living in their own lands and
under their own governments. This unparalleled sense of unity was accompanied by an
implicit confidence in the validity of that which kept them united, and by a self-esteem which
rendered them impervious to the derision heaped upon them. Nothing short of a spiritual
cataclysm could so radically have changed the Jew's attitude toward his heritage. The
forces at work in the present-day environment must have completely shattered the
foundations of his faith in the worthwhileness of being a Jew.
On what was that faith based? The answer to that question would solve the mystery of
Jewish survival in the past. It would also indicate to what extent the force or forces that
made for Jewish survival in the past can be counted on to check the present disintegration
of Jewish life.
2
As a rule, the answer to that question is: the Jew never doubted the advantage of being a
Jew because he believed implicitly in the religion which had been transmitted to him by his
forebears and which united all Jews into a common brotherhood. It is, therefore, assumed
that, since Jews no longer subscribe wholeheartedly to that religion, they see no reason for
continuing as a group apart. But, unless we can understand what in that religion imparted
such self- confidence to the Jew and such solidarity to the group, we are back to our original
question. Why did Jews in the past hold on so tenaciously to their religion in the face of
universal opposition? Why are they now so responsive to environmental influences as to be
ready to abandon their faith at the first opportunity? Throughout the past, Jews surely felt
the impact of surrounding antagonism to their religion, yet that did not in the least weaken
their loyalty to it. Consequently, we are merely deluding ourselves, if we believe that by
resorting to the usual commonplaces about religion having been the source of Jewish selfconfidence in the past, and the environment having undermined that self-confidence, we
have diagnosed the spiritual maladjustment of the Jew of today.
(4-5).
Do we agree with Kaplan that earlier generations felt more confident about being Jewish than we do? Do we
feel more confident than our children about our Jewishness? What might be the causes of a change of our
level of confidence in our Jewishness, or in what being Jewish means?
***
Kaplan makes what we may find (at least I found) a surprising assertion. He contends that the Mosaic faiths
(Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) all had a similar world view. As surprisingly, he asserts that a core of that
world view was the perspective that this life did not matter so much for itself, as in its nature as a portal to
the next world.
To get to the root of Jewish survival in the past, it is necessary to take into account a highly
significant leverage which the Jewish religion possessed during the pre-enlightenment
period, and which it has since lost. That leverage consisted in the fact that, before the
enlightenment, the religion of the greater part of mankind was based on the same worldoutlook as was the religion of the Jews. Christians and Mohammedans accepted as
axiomatic three such basic and far-reaching assumptions as the following: i. The Old
Testament account of the creation of the world and of the beginnings of the human race is
not only authentic, but constitutes the premise of all that man should believe in and strive
for. 2. Human life on this earth, being full of sin and travail and ending in death, can attain its
fulfillment or achieve salvation only in that perfect world which is known as the world to
come. 3. The only way man can attain such salvation is by conducting himself in accordance
with the super- naturally revealed will of God. It is, therefore, a mistake to assume that in the
past the Jews were able to ignore or defy their environment. They were, on the whole, just
as responsive to it then as they are now, though they lived entirely segregated from their
neighbors. But to be responsive to their environment, formerly meant to be confirmed in
one's adherence to Judaism. To be responsive to it now, means to be perplexed by doubt
and torn by inner conflict.
Before the enlightenment the one dominant concern of human beings was their fate in the
hereafter. Salvation meant to them the fulfillment of their destiny in the life beyond the grave.
Men and women were so dissatisfied with their lives, with the imperfections of the physical
order and of human nature, that they despaired of ever attaining salvation in this world. It
was only the hope of enjoying in the hereafter a life free from fear and death that reconciled
3
them to the trials of this life, to the frequent wars and plagues and famines, to the
ruthlessness of nature and the cruelty of man. No wonder then that the Jews, who had even
better reason than the rest of mankind to be dissatisfied with what this life offered them, had
all their thoughts centered upon their destiny in the hereafter. The prospect of attaining bliss
in the world to come, which constituted the Jews' conception of salvation, was thus in
keeping with the conception of salvation which until recently prevailed throughout the world
with which Jews came in contact.
The main point at issue among the three great religious groups had little to do with the
nature of salvation, or with the general method of attaining it. It turned entirely upon a
question of fact; namely, which group was in possession of the authoritative revelation of
God's will? '* The church maintained that having been founded by Christ, who was God
incarnate, it alone, through its bishops, was the final and authoritative instrument of divine
revelation. Allegiance to the church and obedience to its ordinances were the sole means to
salvation. No salvation was therefore possible to anyone who remained outside the church –
“nulla salus extra ecclesiam”. Likewise, Islam placed the main emphasis upon the Koran as
the final revelation of God's will. Adherence to the teachings of the Koran, together with the
recognition of Allah as God, and Mohammed as the greatest of prophets, constituted for the
Moslems the sine qua non of salvation.
The Jews were not quite as emphatic as were the Christians and the Moslems in declaring
the rest of mankind ineligible to salvation. Rabbinic teaching was inclined to concede that
Gentiles, who were righteous or saintly, had a share in the world to come.^^ The Jewish
religion made this concession because, from its point of view, the Gentiles had the
opportunity of achieving salvation by conforming to the laws contained in the revelation
supposed to have been vouchsafed to Noah. That revelation was the source of the seven
Noahidian laws which, with the exception of the one law which prohibited idolatry, dealt with
matters of universal moral import. Hence there was room in the Jewish scheme of salvation
for those Gentiles who, in addition to abrogating the worship of idols, conformed to the
fundamental laws of the moral life.
(5-7).
Does our understanding of history, and Jewish history, accord with Kaplan’s claims? Do we feel perplexed in
our interactions with the larger community?
***
Kaplan continues by arguing that Jews remained loyal to their faith because of their belief in the impossibility
of connection with the life to come in any other way. Today, we tend to read in our views to preEnlightenment ancestors, because their world-view is impossible for us to comprehend. Kaplan offers
evidence for this claim.
But other things being equal, the Jews were confident they stood a far greater chance of
attaining salvation than the rest of the world. "All Israel have a share in the world to come,"
the Mishnah teaches.^' They also derived considerable self-assurance from the fact that
both Christians and Mohammedans had to admit that originally the Jews were the only
people in possession of the means of salvation."' For a Jew, therefore, to forfeit that privilege
by renouncing Judaism for the sake of worldly advantage, was to exchange life eternal for a
temporary good. Accordingly, no earthly temptation could lure the Jew away from Judaism,
nor threat compel him to renounce it. No Jew could possibly conceive the validity of the
4
claim advanced by either of the rival groups. Salvation was inconceivable, except as a
reward of obedience to the will of God, and where was the will of God set forth so clearly as
in the Torah?
Only on the rack of torment was the Jew likely to surrender his religion.
The only way in which the Jew believed it was possible for him to achieve salvation was by
remaining loyal to his people, for it was only by sharing their life in this world that he was
certain to share their life in the next world. This belief was the great cohesive force of Jewish
life in the past. Jews conceived their salvation in terms both national and individual…The
reward of a life of obedience to the will of God, as made known through the Torah, was to
be meted out in the world to come. That world to come, olam ha-ba, meant to those whose
outlook had been formed entirely by rabbinic lore, the creation of a new world-order, a new
heaven and a new earth, in which death would be abolished…Thus was the Jew in olden
times animated by the twofold hope: the hope of national restoration and individual
salvation. This is borne out by the prayer recited after each meal, "May the All-merciful make
us worthy of the days of the Messiah and of the life of the world to come."'° And the Jew well
knew that the only way he could prove worthy was by casting his lot with his people and
doing his utmost to obey the laws which God had revealed to them.
We are so far removed from the world-outlook and thought- habits of pre-enlightenment
days that, with the best of intentions to know and understand the past, we find it hard not to
read into it our own ideas. We are habituated to the modern emphasis upon improvement of
life in this world as the only aim worthy of our endeavors. We take for granted that, if we do
our best here, we can afford to let the hereafter take care of itself. So much a part of our
thinking has this modern conception of human life become that we can scarcely conceive
that not so long ago the center of gravity of human existence for Jews, Christians and
Mohammedans alike, lay not in this world, but in the world to come. They differed
considerably as to what a human being must do in the here and now to deserve a share in
that world to come; but they all agreed that this world was a mere prelude to the hereafter.
Judaism may have emphasized more than did Christianity the opportunities for worthy
action presented by the life in this present world; nevertheless, even in Judaism, the worth
and significance of those opportunities consisted chiefly in their being a preparation for the
hereafter…
To prove that for traditional Judaism the center of gravity of human existence lay not in this
life but in the hereafter is both as simple and as difficult as proving that to the ancients the
earth was the center of the universe. The entire rabbinic literature is based on an otherworldly orientation. Moses Hayyim Luzzatto (1707- 1747), who wrote the ethical code
Mesillat Yesharim in the spirit of rabbinic Judaism, opens the first chapter, which is entitled
"Of Man's Duty in the World," with the following:
“It is fundamentally necessary both for saintliness and for the perfect worship of God to
realize clearly what constitutes man's duty in this world, and what goal is worthy of his
endeavors throughout all the days of his life. Our Sages have taught that man was created
only to find delight in the Lord, and to bask in the radiance of His Presence. But the real
place for such happiness is the world to come, which has been created for that very
purpose. The present world is only a path to that goal. 'This world,' said our Sages, 'is like a
vestibule before the world to come.' Therefore, has God, blessed be His name, given us the
mitsvot. For this world is the only place where the mitsvot can be observed. Man is put here
5
in order to earn with the means at his command the place that has been prepared for him in
the world to come.”
The foregoing was not the esoteric doctrine of isolated mystics but a truism with the rank
and file of Jewry…Even in Jewish folk songs and lullabies which may be heard in our own
day there is frequent allusion to the hereafter as the goal of life. One need only come in
contact with the survivals of traditional Jewish life, which have not been influenced by
occidental ideas, to be convinced that, in the past, Judaism was decidedly regarded as a
means to the salvation of the soul in the world to come. Even Mendelssohn, apostle of the
enlightenment though he was, could not altogether escape the momentum of tradition, as is
evident from the following statement in his Jerusalem'.
“It is essential that man should be constantly reminded that with death there is not a
complete end of him; on the contrary, an interminable futurity awaits him, to which his
earthly life is only a preparation; the same as all through Nature every present is a
preparation for the future. The rabbins liken this life to a lobby, in which we are to fit
ourselves in the manner in which we wish to appear in the inner-room. Then take heed you
no longer put this life as the opposite of futurity, and lead men to think that their true welfare
in this world is not all one with their eternal welfare in the next.^'”
Since all Jews had but one conception of salvation and regulated their conduct in
accordance with that conception, the life they led was bound to be conspicuously uniform in
content and mode of self- expression. Although they did not lack the variety of dispositions
and opinions that naturally springs from differences in character, in abilities and in station,
their way of life, their interests and aspirations which resulted from their status as a people
apart, were fundamentally the same. Philosophic dissent or social ambition never impelled
the Jew to break away from his people, for the salvation he regarded as worthwhile could be
achieved only by participating in its life. Thus did the belief in other-worldliness sustain the
solidarity of the Jewish people.
(7-11).
How persuasive do we find Kaplan’s quotations from Luzzato and Mendelssohn? Do we hear echoes of the
perspective Kaplan discusses in the M’chayeh Meitim berachah in the Amidah?
***
Kaplan points out that the rejection and hostility which Jews faced from the communities in which they
resided, reinforced adherence to their fellow Jews. Among other Jews, they could experience the dignity of
being treated as fully human.
The very same belief in the other-worldly salvation which acted as a cohesive influence on
the Jews, was used by the peoples among whom they lived as a reason for excluding the
Jews from all the rights and privileges accorded only to believers. So long as the doctrine of
salvation as a privilege limited to believers was accepted by the generality of mankind, only
those who professed Christianity could be eligible to civic status. For how could those who
were doomed to perish and who, therefore, belonged to a lower order of creation, be treated
on a par with those who were destined for life eternal? They were not merely excluded from
civic and social intercourse; they were treated as an inferior species of humans…It took the
genius of a Shakespeare to discover that a Jew was as human as a Christian.
6
As a result of the generally accepted notions with regard to other-worldly salvation, the Jew
needed his people not only to achieve life eternal but also to be able to live in this world. The
Gentile populations treated him at all times as an alien, and often as an outlaw. If they
allowed him to live among them, it was only because they needed him for such uses as
money-lending, itinerant trading, or, at best, tax farming — occupations which only served
to render the Jew even more odious. There was no ground where Jew and Gentile could
meet on a footing of equality.
The Jew, however, was amply compensated for the hostility and contempt he encountered
in the outer world by the sympathy, understanding and help he found in his own Jewish
world. It was from his fellow-Jews that he received all that made life worthwhile and that
crowned his life with a share in the world to come. A well-known poem by Heine depicts
what the Sabbath did for the Jew who, during the week, went about peddling his wares
among the Gentiles, and who returned for the Sabbath to his home in the ghetto." It was the
Sabbath, the holy day which God had given to his people and in which the uncircumcised
had no portion,"** that performed the miracle of transforming the Jew from a dog into a
prince. This transformation came about through his contact with his people and participation
in their life. It was thus that he received a foretaste of the salvation for which he prayed on
the Sabbath. "May the All-merciful let us inherit the day which shall be wholly a Sabbath and
rest in the life everlasting." ''" No wonder, then, that whatever he may have thought of the
individual fellow-Jews of his acquaintance, the Jewish people as a whole was to him not an
abstract or invisible entity which demanded loyalty and gave little or nothing in return, but a
living nation which conferred upon him a privileged status in the order of creation, believed
in him, and assured him bliss eternal. The Torah was to him the lettres patentes which
bestowed nobility upon his people, and, therefore, upon him. "Blessed be Thou, O Lord our
God, King of the universe," the Jew would recite every time he was called up to the reading
of the Torah, "who hast given us the Law of truth, and hast planted everlasting life [salvation]
in our midst." ""^
(10-12).
Do Jews still face a situation in which we find ourselves best served by turning inward to sense being fully
recognized as valuable human beings? What is our role as Jews in assuring that no one else is treated as being
less than fully human?
***
Turning to the Enlightenment, Kaplan discusses the radical change that took place in the world view of Jews
and non-Jews alike, at least in the Western world.
The revolutionary philosophies of men like Locke and the Deists in England, and of
Rousseau, Voltaire and the Encyclopaedists in France, gave rise to the modern conception
of religion as based upon human experience and reason, Lessing's drama, Nathan the
Wise, published in 1779, in which he made use of Boccaccio's The Three Rings, may be
said to mark the turning point in the western world's conception of salvation. Though by no
means denying that objectively there can be only one true religion, the parable implies that
all men who seek to live in accordance with the will of God are eligible for salvation. This
meant the final undermining of the assumption that salvation was the exclusive privilege of
any one particular group of believers. Simultaneously, Mendelssohn taught that the
prerequisite to immortality was not conformity with any supernaturally revealed teaching, but
a life based upon the highest dictates of reason. This is the main thesis of his Jerusalem.
7
The eternal truths which are essential to human salvation, he argues, must necessarily be
accessible to all human beings, for it would be contrary to the goodness of God for him to
reveal only to a portion of mankind such truth as is indispensable to all men.°*
The denial of the traditional assumptions with regard to the nature and means of salvation
paved the way for what is generally termed "the enlightenment," which identified man's
salvation with his self-realization in this world. The effect of the enlightenment was to do
away with the theory that one had to be qualified for life eternal to be eligible for citizenship
in the state. Church and state began to drift apart. The Christian, who no longer took literally
or seriously the doctrine of exclusive salvation taught by the church saw no reason why he
should treat the Jew as an inferior being. It was thus inevitable for the Jew to be granted
political and civic rights. As a consequence of his emancipation, new and manifold
opportunities for the utilization of his long-suppressed energies and talents were opened to
him, and he has availed himself of these opportunities with all the avidity of a starved man.
But the more the abilities of the Jew find a field for expression in his new milieu, the less
does he need the Jewish community and its spiritual heritage. The average Jew has come
to feel that his immediate interests lie far less with the rest of Jewry than with whatever
group, political, economic or cultural, enables him to achieve the salvation which is of this
world. To most Jews, salvation has come to mean self-expression in industrial, commercial,
artistic or social endeavor. Their attachment to any group other than the nation of which they
are citizens is therefore conditioned by the opportunity it offers for self-expression and
creative effort. The traditional scheme of salvation has become meaningless particularly to
the large body of the wage-earning class. If they are socially minded, they look for salvation
to some program of social reform or upheaval. For the most part, however, they are too
much absorbed in the problem of earning a livelihood and in securing themselves against
sickness and old age to be worried about anything but their own immediate future.
How does Kaplan say the Enlightenment changed the non-Jew’s perception of Jews? According to Kaplan,
what was the effect of the Enlightenment on Jewish self-perception?
***
Kaplan goes on to describe limits on the acceptance of Jews by the non-Jewish world. While Jews were
granted political equality, this did not extend to other milieus. Note in particular that the last part of this
reading may be the one that has changed to the greatest extent, in some respects.
Had the Jews been accorded not merely political but also social and economic equality, they
would long ago have disappeared as a distinct group. The universal breakdown of traditional
religion among the Gentiles would have facilitated the process of complete assimilation. But
the prospect of the Jew's attaining social and economic equality is a very remote one. They
experience all the tortures of Sisyphus. Brought to the point where they see the chance of
bettering their condition, of attaining social standing and a relative degree of economic
security, they are told these things are not for them. For the Jew, the primary need of
earning a livelihood is beset with humiliating obstacles.
The fact that being a Jew is coming to mean more and more of a hindrance in the effort to
find gainful employment is an indication of a very ominous trend to crowd the Jew from the
economic framework of society. In the Middle Ages the Jew had no civic rights, and was
therefore at a disadvantage economically; but then the economic order in general was still
inchoate. As an itinerant people, the Jews were able to fill a gap in the processes of
8
exchange, and so managed to eke out a place for themselves in the interstices, as it were,
of the economic order. In addition, there was in those days no uniform policy toward aliens.
If the Jews were driven from one country, they could usually find refuge in another. Today all
this is changed for the worst. Nominally the Jews have been admitted into the political
framework of the Gentile world, but economically in many parts of the world they are as
badly off as in the Middle Ages, in other parts worse, and in no country on a footing of
security. With the growing scarcity of economic opportunities, due to the substitution of
machinery for manual labor, to the gradual elimination of foreign markets, and to competition
in the domestic market, and with the resulting formation of all kinds of collectives for the
sake of mutual help in the struggle for a share in the diminishing number of opportunities,
the Jew is in danger of being deprived of all opportunity to earn a livelihood.
In addition, the Jew is snubbed socially. Whether he tries to send his child to a private
school, to rent a better class apartment, to register at a country hotel, or to join a club or a
fraternity, he is given to understand that he is not wanted. This hurts him to the quick. He
has grown far more sensitive to social discrimination than was his ancestor to brutal
persecution. In the past, the Jew submitted resignedly to the indignities inflicted on him by
Christian potentates and mobs. He accepted such treatment as part of what a conquered
people must expect from its conquerors. But mentally and spiritually he was lord in his own
demesne. Living in a world altogether his own, he was immune to the demoralizing influence
of hate and derision. The loss of human rights and privileges could not in the least lower the
Jew's self-respect. Ostracism from the social life of the Gentiles found its compensations in
the assurance that in the hereafter his would be the privileged rank…
But now that the aura of divine election has departed from his people, and his Jewish origin
brings with it nothing but economic handicaps and social inferiority, the Jew rebels against
his fate. This is the fundamental reason for the change in his attitude toward Judaism. It is
not merely that Judaism as a world-outlook or system of life is in danger of extinction, but
that the Jew is maladjusted morally and spiritually as a result of losing the traditional
conception of salvation. He has to evolve some new purpose in life as a Jew, a purpose that
will direct his energies into such lines of creativity as will bring him spiritual redemption. That
purpose will have to constitute his salvation. It is only then that he will gladly identify himself
with Jewish life.
Before we can attempt to formulate any such purpose, there are a number of considerations
to be taken into account. First, we have to familiarize ourselves with the specific nature of
the present- day challenge to Judaism. The passing of the belief in other-worldly salvation is
both the effect and the cause of the changes which have taken place in the ideological, the
economic and the political order of mankind. A survey of these changes will help us realize
the true character of the predicament in which Judaism finds itself. Second, this will be
followed by a survey of the reserve energy and the still functioning resources which we shall
have to fall back upon in our efforts to bring order out of the chaos of Jewish life. Such
efforts have been made during the last century. Why have they not proved successful? We
must answer this question before proceeding to formulate that conception of Judaism which,
we believe, will enable Jewish life to evolve as satisfying a substitute for the traditional
conception of salvation as is possible in an age like ours.
(12-15).
9
What are the major changes in the past 80 years to the situation that Kaplan describes? What concerns linger?
How do the arguments Kaplan makes apply to Israel? What do we see as our present-day challenges to
Judaism? In what respects are these similar, and in what different, to the problems Kaplan perceived?
10