From the introduction to In the Shadow of History: Jews and Conversos at the Dawn of Modernity by Jose Faur‘The Jews are pious with God, with their own, with the aliens, with the pilgrims, with the enemies, with the animals, with the birds, with the trees, and in sum the entire Law is a compendium of kindness, and a declaration of love.’
A principal thesis of this book is that the conversos (singular, converso) were a factor in the collapse of the ecclesiastical society of the Middle Ages and the rise of secularism and modernity. This follows a general rule whereby, when a social group coerces another to forfeit its own values and to integrate with them, the coercers in turn become affected by the very people they wanted to proselytize. Within this context the impact of the forced conversion of Jews in the Iberian peninsula will be explored, and the bearing that these conversions had on Jews and the Christian world. When studying the large number of Jews converting to Christianity in Spain and Portugal, scholars are quick to point out to the Maimonidean tradition—the cultural and philosophical heritage developed in Jewish Andalusia—as a principal factor in the collapse of Jewish life. The general premise is that secular knowledge and sophistication foster defection from Judaism. This judgment itself and the basic suppositions it comprises are the product of one of the most profound religious controversies during the Jewish Middle Ages: whether to accept the religious notions of Christian society as the perimeter of Jewish spiritual life.
Chapter 1 proposes the radical thesis that the anti-Maimonidean movement sweeping French and Iberian communities was itself the result of Christian assimilation. Unknowingly, the anti-Maimoriideans promoted Christian ideology. It should be emphasized that they were not conscious of their mental assimilation. Their opposition to critical thought (itself a result of assimilation) fostered the illusion of total autonomy, barring an analysis of the basic elements affecting their own thinking process. One of the most significant aspects of Christian society at the time was the persecution of disagreeable minorities. Persecution became the central force and the raison d’être of European society. During the eleventh century, but especially in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, Europe witnessed the emergence of a persecuting society, indiscriminately hounding heretics, lepers, and Jews. These groups did not become more distinct at that period to warrant persecution. Their distinctiveness “was not the cause but the result of persecution.” Responding to a mimetic impulse, the anti-Maimonideans hounded Jews who did not adhere to their ideologies, thus creating a distinct group to be marked for persecution. Persecution of undesirables became the most significant characteristic of anti-Maimonidean society. The negative impact could hardly be exaggerated. In a short time, Jewish institutions began to falter. The Jewish golden age was displaced by casuistry and love of the occult. Scholarship dwindled to a trickle, and Hebrew poetry and the study of the humanities were a rarity.
The outbreak of anti-Semitism was connected with that movement. Thanks to the effective leadership of a lay elite educated in the Maimonidean tradition, Spain had been free from anti-Semitic outbreaks. One of the effects of the anti-Maimonidean forces had been the alienation of the lay elite. The ensuing anti-Semitic riots throughout Spain were symptomatic of the level of competency of the new leadership. At the same time, the anti-Maimonidean ideology made creative thinking unacceptable within the confines of the Jewish community. For all practical purposes, scientific knowledge, the study of the humanities, and all forms of creative thinking were ousted from the Jewish community, with the rise of anti-Maimonidean ideology. Jewish creative minds had to operate as Christian converts. This explains the overwhelming fact that, as Américo Castro (1885—1972) has shown, most of all creative thinking in the sciences, humanities, and literature in Spain was the product of conversos. And yet nothing similar was taking place within Jewish communities. It was only in modern times, when Jews were able to function outside their community, that Jewish creativity flourished, and scientific and humanistic knowledge became possible. Thus, the converso phenomenon was the result of internal, as well as external, causes.
Five chapters (2—6) are devoted to the study of conversos living as Christians. Essentially, these Jews had no idea of the norms and ideologies regulating life in the Christian world. Many of the rights and privileges that they took for granted as Jews, particularly the right to individuation and individual autonomy, could not be maintained in the Christian world. Western society, particularly in Spain and Portugal, had not reached a stage of individuation comparable to that of the Jew. A fundamental premise was that accepting Christianity would result in more, not less, rights. Chapter 2 explores the most basic structural ideology of Christianity, that of corpus Christi, and the sense of loss and devastation overtaking the conversos upon discovering what membership in that corporation actually meant. The converso reaction was not uniform. Chapter 3 analyzes converso strategies and ideologies. An important group within these converts, generally scorned by both Jewish and Christian historians, were individuals who, as a result of their experience both as Jews and Christians, had become disenchanted with all forms of organized religious life. Many of these individuals chose literature as a means of expression, giving birth to some of the greatest literary masterpieces of their time. Chapters 4 and 5 examine some of the works they produced. A subdivision within that group chose a different avenue of expression. Within this context, chapter 6 studies the genesis of modern skepticism and its bearing on the development of scientific methodology. These chapters challenge both Jewish historians and teachers of Spanish literature for not pursuing the basic research made by scholars such as Américo Castro, Marcel Bataillon (1895—1977), and Stephen Gilman concerning the role of the converso in the development of European thought and literature.
Two strategies were developed as alternatives to the ecclesiastical society: secularism and pluralism. Chapters 7 and 8 examine some of the radical ideas circulating in the Jewish community of Amsterdam leading to secularism. On the one hand, secularism fulfilled the highest hope of the conversos: a society free from religious duress. On the other hand, it rejected the basic theo-political principles of Judaism. The novelty of these chapters is in the biographical and historical material, bearing directly on the lives and ideas of these men. To evaluate Jewish reaction, it is vital to examine their teachings from the Jewish perspective of their time. This approach exposes some fundamental dark aspects of both da Costa and Spinoza, and directly questions their character and integrity. It also discloses the dark side of Spinoza’s political thought. Elsewhere I examined the psychological grounds underlying the process of deauthorization of the Law, which they initiated. These chapters constitute a direct challenge to Jewish secularism.
The only viable alternative to secularism is pluralism. The last chapter investigates some of the seminal ideas leading to religious and cultural pluralism developed by Iberian Jews and conversos. Whereas the conversos remaining outside Jewish life or at its perimeter favored secularism, those wishing to live a full Jewish life supported cultural and religious pluralism.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ymarkov
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-06-16 02:23 pm (UTC)А ты вааще известный капаховец и не признаешь Ашкеназскую Традицию, и неча с тобой разговаривать.
no subject
Date: 2009-06-16 02:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-06-16 02:54 pm (UTC)(1) Распад на секты, когда каждая секта считает себя единственной аутентичной и не признает другие еврейскими.
(2) Демографический вопрос: любой еврейской идее, включающей в себя "поблажки" в отношении вопроса размножения ("пру урву") грозит естественное вымирание.
no subject
Date: 2009-06-16 04:16 pm (UTC)It follows that the current division of "religious/secular" (dati/hiloni) is contrary to the fundaments of the Torah: another instance of spiritual assimilation to non-Jewish conceptual models. The diversity of views and attitudes prevalent among Jews warrants appreciation, rather than soblanut (tolerance), because it is only through the dynamic interaction of all the members of the team that my acts gain meaning and coherence.
Если он прав, то иудаизм как раз плюралистичен в определённых границах. (Конечно, идёт постоянный базар о том, где эти границы.) Я могу, ни в чём не соглашаясь с реформистами, тем не менее признавать их секту еврейской.
И если идея хорошая (а не, скажем, аскетизм а-ля Шэйкеризм), то демография ей не грозит. ПМСМ.
no subject
Date: 2009-06-16 04:25 pm (UTC)Ашкеназы и сефарды таки считают друг-друга полноценными евреями.
Даже к оголтелым хабадникам-машихистам (а есть и вовсе не оголтелые) относятся не как к идолопоклонникам, а как к маленьким детям - лишь бы не плакали. И даже совсем слабо союблюдащим евреям дают титул "тинок ше-нишба", и радуются когда такой тирок чему-то учится и проявляет проблески разума.
Конечно есть границы, но они весьма широки и многие в них помещаются.
А о тех, кто вышел даже за эти границы, молятся, чтобы прозрел и вернулся. И таки нередко возвращаются - не сами, так их дети.