Post #1770946

Als er een directe intellectuele erfgenaam van Jacob Israel de Haan kan zijn, dan is het Daniel Boyarin. Zijn studie over het talmoedische mannelijkheidsideaal maakte op mij grote indruk. Net als bij de Haan is ook Boyarin's eindafrekening anti-zionistisch diasporisme https://ayinpress.org/the-no-state-solution-a-conversation-with-daniel-boyarin/ It’s something that forms a language, a kind of aesthetic. An aesthetic of living, and an aesthetic of speaking and thinking. And you’re absolutely right. That’s exactly my project. I want to make a kind of Judaïté [a term Boyarin prefers to Yiddishkeit so as to include all Jews] that doesn’t first have to name people as Orthodox or not, that doesn’t have to do so at all. Some may do more mitzvahs, some may do fewer mitzvahs. But my project leaves behind that conceptual framework of determining Jewishness by levels of halachic “observance,” which is after all a very modern framework. But it also doesn’t leave the traditional practices and texts behind. I mean there’s nothing new in saying that, right? The same expanded frame was used by Jews who developed movements or whatever you want to call them. For example, was Rashi Fuenn [a leading figure of the Eastern European Haskalah23] Orthodox? I mean, what was he, Conservative? No, he was a Jew. Professor Dimitrovsky24 taught that every time Rashi Fuenn passed the synagogue in Vilna where they were praying mincha,25 he went in and prayed because he didn’t want people to say, “Oh, the maskil, the enlightened Jew, doesn’t daven mincha.” So sometimes he would daven mincha five or six times in a day. That’s a Jewish joke, Vilna style.