296 Judentum
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of Periodical (30)
- Book (17)
- Article (12)
- Other (10)
- Working Paper (9)
- Report (8)
- Periodical (2)
- Part of a Book (1)
- Conference Proceeding (1)
- Lecture (1)
Language
- English (92) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (92)
Keywords
- Antisemitismus (2)
- Abraham Geiger (1)
- Aliya (1)
- Alliance Israelite Universelle (AIU) (1)
- American Jewish Joint Agricultural Corporation (1)
- American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee (1)
- American Joint Distribution Committee (Joint) (1)
- Ashkenazic Jewry (1)
- Australia / Australian Association of Jewish Studies (1)
- Babylonian Gemara (1)
Institute
What is an exilic law? The Talmud was itself located 'in exile' without ever being considered 'exilic': the self-representation of the Talmud is consistent with the idea that Jewish law might be redacted in diaspora but is still centred on the Temple of Jerusalem. Yet the Zohar offers a unique representation of Jewish law as a central legal product and a metaphysically exiled reality. Hence, Jewish law has not only been born 'in exile' but also has an 'exilic' nature. An exilic law, then, is a tenebrous 'path' that inverts the 'moral ways' of Jewish law, as it departs from the 'exilic centre' of Babylon and installs a 'non-exilic centre' on Mount Moria, where Isaac was almost sacrificed and the Temple of Jerusalem was erected. When Scripture is brought out in an 'exodus', it departs from the solid terrain of an 'exilic law' and radicalizes the event of Abraham's being called to sacrifice his own son by producing a notable inversion of the notion of 'literal sense'. And yet this 'literal sense' that has always been there had almost been neglected, just like a 'purloined letter' - in every sense of the expression.
Newsletter No 36 Special Pesach edition, April 2008 / Australian Association of Jewish Studies
(2008)
Muhr veröffentlichte 1813 seine Schrift "Jerubaal" als Antwort auf David Friedländers "Ein Wort zu seiner Zeit" (Über die, durch die neue Organisation der Judenschaften in den preußischen Staaten notwendig gewordene, Umbildung). Friedländer hatte zu weitreichenden Reformen in Liturgie und Erziehung aufgerufen als Reaktion auf das Preussische Emanzipationsedikt von 1812. Obwohl Muhr dessen Abkehr von der Tradition ablehnte, schlug er dennoch selber vor, auf manches Althergebrachte zu verzichten und beispielsweise Predigten in deutscher Sprache und Chorgesang im Gottesdienst zu erlauben.
This article unpacks Margarete Susman’s political and theological arguments at the core of her reading of the Book of Job. As I show through a reading of her oeuvre, Susman rejects political projects that she takes to be based on eschatology such as political Zionism. However, Susman should not be viewed merely as a critic of Zionism. I argue that an analysis tuned to the historical circumstances of her writing should recognize her stance on the nation-building project in Palestine as ambivalent rather than antagonistic. Susman’s conception of the Jewish spirit as rooted in self-sacrifice allows her to appreciate the national aspirations at the core of the Zionist project while rejecting Zionism’s exclusion of other Jewish national projects. I contend that Susman’s understanding of Jewish messianism as immanent rather than teleological informs her ambivalence toward Zionism as well as her original vision of Jewish political action. I argue in closing that Susman’s theodicy offers a novel vision for Jewish ethics that is not limited to the historical moment of its formulation. Susman’s theodicy also resonates within contemporary debates on Jewish diaspora in providing a non-centralized vision of Jewish national projects.