Your editorial on the need for Hebrew in order to sustain Jewish life in America is particularly surprising coming from the Forward, which throughout its 100-plus year history, and even today, has as a core mission sustaining and advancing Yiddish as a culture and a language (“Taking Hebrew Seriously,” January 29).
Although the language of Jews in America is really English, the need for Jews in any country to sustain a culture does require some association with a Jewish language. If one desires the focus of that culture to be Israel or religious Judaism, then Hebrew is relevant. But I believe that, without rejecting Israel-centered or religion-centered Jewish identity, there remains a secular Jewish identity which, although in every country uses the national language as the principal means of communication, has a common root in Yiddish that serves as a culturally binding force.
Hebrew is fine, but to neglect the influence and ability of Yiddish to foster a sense of Jewish identity is short-sighted — especially for the Forward.
Robert A. Kaplan
President
Workmen’s Circle/Arbeter Ring
New York, N.Y.
In your January 29 editorial “After the Earth Moved,” you identify an “inner struggle” that many American Jews face, to wit, “How much should they support other Jews, and how much should they give to causes in the wider world?” You resolve the question with the answer that American Jews should not make an “either/or” decision; they should “do both.”
I take no issue with that assertion. I agree we should do both. However, the question of “how much” posed in your editorial remains unanswered.
Assuming each of us has limited resources, then how should we divide those resources? There is a subtle (and sometimes not so subtle) battle going on for Jewish hearts and minds on this front. On one side is what I call the universalist camp. On the other side is the Jewish mutual responsibility camp. Neither camp is exclusively universal or exclusively Jewish regarding those whom they assist. But each side does favor either universal or Jewish needs over the other.
So which approach should a Jewish donor or volunteer favor (not exclusively but substantially)? I place myself squarely in the Jewish mutual responsibility camp.
We are called to be a “light unto the nations,” so that other peoples will learn from our example and improve the ethical, caring relationships within their own communities and nations. We need to put a greater portion of our individual resources toward our own community members’ needs, not because of some tribalistic self-centeredness, but because if other people see how we take care of our brothers and sisters, perhaps they will follow our lead and all communities will benefit. I would suggest that a greater focus on the particular is the faster route to tikkun olam — repairing the world — than the chaos of trying to respond to each and every need in a world of unfathomable and unlimited needs.
This does not mean that we should ignore crises such as Haiti, Hurricane Katrina and the 2004 Asian tsunami. The issue is not either/or, but rather how much and to whom. And, how can we most effectively help not only our own but all?
Gary O. Aidekman Madison, N.J.
Letters to the editor may be sent via e-mail to letters@forward.com or mailed to the Forward, Attn: Letters to the Editor, 125 Maiden Lane, New York, N.Y. 10038. Shorter letters stand a better chance of being published.
The Forward welcomes reader comments in order to promote thoughtful discussion on issues of importance to the Jewish community. In the interest of maintaining a civil forum, the Forward requires that all commenters be appropriately respectful toward our writers, other commenters and the subjects of the articles. Vigorous debate and reasoned critique are welcome; name-calling and personal invective are not. While we generally do not seek to edit or actively moderate comments, the Forward reserves the right to remove comments for any reason.
To post a comment, click to login:
Copyright © 2012, Forward Association, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Robert A. Kaplan - American Jews don't know either Hebrew or Yiddish. There is a tremendous importance in a return to a Jewish language, as you yourself admit ("the need for Jews in any country to sustain a culture does require some association with a Jewish language"). Now, in a situation in which the Jewish public knows only English - which Jewish language should be chosen as the target language in this effort to sustain Jewish culture? In realistic terms, neither language is going to be brought back to life in the North American continent. Most Jews receive very little Jewish education - so, there simply is no classroom time to provide language skills. However, in ideal terms, if it were possible to convince to Jewish public of the urgent importance to return to a Jewish language, and if the Jewish public would provide the classroom time for this aim - which language should be chosen?
The Forward is absolutely right in choosing Hebrew. It is the key to the Jewish text - first and foremost the Tanakh. Moreover, it is the living language of the largest and most impressive Jewish society in the world. Just like Yiddish, it is the language of creativity in both religious and secular Jewish life.
Y.L Peretz, the great Yiddish writer (who also wrote in Hebrew), once noted that the Hebrew component of the Yiddish language is the "very soul of Yiddish". It shouldn't be so surprising to you that the Forward, an important Yiddish newspaper, understands the importance of Hebrew in the struggle for Jewish cultural survival in the Diaspora.
Sadly, neither Hebrew nor Yiddish will re-enter Jewish life in America. The call for Jewish language skills has come about two generations too late. Your protest to the Forward reminded me of the old language war. One could only pray and hope that the Yiddishists and the Hebraists would again be at each other throats, fighting the ideological battle about "which language is the national language" of the Jewish people. Today, the grandchildren of those enthusiatic ideologues are generally monolingual English speakers for whom Jewish peoplehood is no longer a topic of interest. And with the loss of peoplehood, the need for a Jewish language (be it Hebrew or Yiddish) is not understandable.
The ideal, and not impossible at all, is to honor the monumental creation of Israel by promoting in America (and all the rest of the world's Jews) to learn Hebrew. However, side by side Yiddish should also be promoted everywhere, especially in these sadly dividing times even among the Jews (many bitterly criticizing Israel despite its being injured and down) and the entire world's antisemites are seriously hurting the Jewry towards, AGAIN, anihilation!
Just as in line folk dancing we link securely hand in hand, so both Hebrew and Yiddish will keep us together despite the sorrow and the distances. The more we leave behind us our precious past links that acted as strong help and/or consolation in troubled times (such as the ones we'll suffer if the arab muslims islamics get their way), the more we will become the pariahs of the world.
Isn't it strange that such a little thing as a language or two should help unite an entire people? NO! IT AIN'! :o)
Adela
P.S. I notice how young Jewish men and women more and more show interest in learning both languages. They aren't expensive, they are fun to learn and at least Hebrew is often offered for free.