Alan Krinsky
*****
A few weeks ago, the Jewish Press published an article by Alan Krinsky entitled "Purity and Uprightness in the Camp". See http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/opinions/purity-and-uprightness-in-the-camp/2012/06/13/0/
In discussing the article with Alan, I mentioned that I thought he was on to something but felt that there was a need for further clarification of his concepts. In this regard, I offered him to post a follow-up to his article that further defines his terms on Nishmablog. This, I mentioned to him, also would offer him a chance for some feedback and discussion.
In response to my request, this is Alan's addendum to his original Jewish Press article. We truly invite your comments.
RBH
RBH
A few weeks ago, The Jewish Press published my
essay on “Purity and Uprightness in the Camp,” my reaction to the gathering at
CitiField to address the threat of the internet. As you can read in the essay
itself, I expressed concern over the very concept, or at least the heavy
emphasis placed upon the concept of “the purity of the camp.” I raised two
questions or sets of questions and hoped (and still hope) to elicit a
discussion: (1) Is my analysis, in its description of the situation, accurate?
That is, in recent years or decades has there been an increased focus on this
idea of purifying the camp of the people of Israel? And furthermore, is this
value central to our tradition in any sense, or far from it, perhaps even
foreign? and (2) Am I correct, or at least on to something, in suggesting that
this emphasis on the purity of the camp among some segments of the Orthodox
world can help us make sense of a number of phenomena, including the banning of
books and a certain hostility to converts? For example, was the attempt to
annul retroactively thousands of conversions in some fundamental sense done out
of an anxiety over the purity or impurity of the camp? And has there been a new
hostility to potential converts and the erection of barriers to conversion
never witnessed before?
After the fact, it strikes me that perhaps I did not make
clear enough just what I meant by purity. Therefore, let me take this
opportunity to elaborate. I think the purity distinction I meant to highlight,
and probably did not do so explicitly in the published essay, is that between
the purity of the group and the purity of the individual. That
is, I can understand and see in our tradition the ideal of individuals working
on their own purity, their own self-improvement, the purity of their religious
life and discipline, maybe even one’s neshama, but I think the entire
idea of the purity of the camp, of this larger entity, should be viewed with
suspicion, and one of my questions is whether or not this value plays a central
role in the tradition (and enough to call for a gathering of tens of thousands
of individuals). So, I understand how pornography could be a challenge to
individuals, but I think the purity of the camp ideology is more directed at
ideas (book bannings) and converts (potential and already in the fold) and
schools (seeking hashkafic narrowness among fellow students and
families).
And maybe one of the distinctions is that a notion of
purity based in mussar is where I am concerned with my own purity and
growth, whereas with the purity of the camp, one is much more concerned with
the purity of others (and how their impurity poses a danger to me)?!
Related to these matters, I think it would be worth
taking a look at differing notions of chosen-ness and the Jewish soul; whereas
some of us might favor a view that chosen-ness is fundamentally a challenge and
responsibility and that Jewish neshamot are not different in any
essential way from non-Jewish ones, I suspect those of the purity of the camp
group would tend to view chosen-ness as a privilege and Jewish neshamot
as essentially different and “better” (and maybe this is why converts and
“false” or “insincere” converts are experienced as such a threat).
So, if I am on to something, where, when, and why did
this anxiety over purity and impurity arise? And if we can name it and identify
it, can the dynamics within the Orthodox world be shifted?
Alan Krinsky
3 comments:
«I meant to highlight, and probably did not do so explicitly in the published essay, is that between the purity of the group and the purity of the individual. That is, I can understand and see in our tradition the ideal of individuals working on their own purity, their own self-improvement, the purity of their religious life and discipline, maybe even one’s neshama, but I think the entire idea of the purity of the camp, of this larger entity, should be viewed with suspicion, and one of my questions is whether or not this value plays a central role in the tradition (and enough to call for a gathering of tens of thousands of individual. »
--------------------
במדבר פרק ה
א וידבר יהוה, אל-משה לאמר. ב צו, את-בני ישראל, וישלחו מן-המחנה, כל-צרוע וכל-זב; וכל, טמא לנפש. ג מזכר עד-נקבה תשלחו, אל-מחוץ למחנה תשלחום;
==>
ולא יטמאו את-מחניהם, אשר אני שכן בתוכם. ד ויעשו-כן, בני ישראל, וישלחו אותם, אל-מחוץ למחנה: כאשר דבר יהוה אל-משה, כן עשו בני ישראל.
דברים פרק כג
י כי-תצא מחנה, על-איביך: ונשמרת--מכל, דבר רע. יא כי-יהיה בך איש, אשר לא-יהיה טהור מקרה-לילה--ויצא אל-מחוץ למחנה, לא יבא אל-תוך המחנה. יב והיה לפנות-ערב, ירחץ במים; וכבא השמש, יבא אל-תוך המחנה. יג ויד תהיה לך, מחוץ למחנה; ויצאת שמה, חוץ. יד ויתד תהיה לך, על-אזנך; והיה, בשבתך חוץ, וחפרתה בה, ושבת וכסית את-צאתך. טו כי יהוה אלהיך מתהלך בקרב מחנך, להצילך ולתת איביך לפניך,
==> והיה מחניך, קדוש: ולא-יראה בך ערות דבר, ושב מאחריך. {ס}
--------------------
Aderabbah, it stands to reason that the purity of the group trumps.
EG What's worse?
A Consorting with a Zonah, or
B. Intermarrying?
And why?
Shalom and Regards,
RRW
While there is an obvious concern for the 'purity' of the camp, the question, I believe, is where that begins. Are we concern about outside forces that will attack the camp with its impurity or should our concern be the internal members of the camp and how they may affect the collective? Alan's point, as I understand it, is that the concern of the charedi world seems to be the former and so they would seem to be more concerned about the outside influence of the internet than the possible weak links within (to put it mildly). While I don't think the charedi world is as untroubled by these internal problems as some would like us to believe, I think there is something to what Alan is presenting. I do think that our first priority must be the 'purity' of the individual which then affects the collective. The verses that Rabbi Wolpoe quote actually point to this. It is the individual within the camp who becomes impure that has to be removed -- the internal member of the group has to be segregated -- to keep the camp pure.
RBH
It seems to me that the pesukim quoted refer to ritual impurity. And I would suggest that ritual impurity is generally something, in philosophical terms, non-essential. That is, it can be removed from a person, is not part of a person's core being. By contrast, I think the contemporary sense of purity/impurity is one more akin to racial purity/impurity, concerned with the essence of an individual, their souls, and is uncomfortable with the idea of conversion, for example, because it would seem to involve an impossible or at best doubtful/suspicious change of essence. And I am not quite sure where ideological purity/impurity fits within this contrast.
Post a Comment