University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

An exploratory study of the development of Jewish studies in American higher education with special emphasis on three contemporary programs

(USC Thesis Other)

An exploratory study of the development of Jewish studies in American higher education with special emphasis on three contemporary programs

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content AN EXPLORATORY STUDY OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF JEWISH
STUDIES IN AMERICAN HIGHER EDUCATION WITH
SPECIAL EMPHASIS ON THREE CONTEMPORARY
PROGRAMS.
by
Rubin Aaron Huttler
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
(Education)
June 1979
UMI Number: DP24645
All rights reserved
INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.
Dissertation Publishing
UMI DP24645
Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author.
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This work is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY PARK
LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 9 0007
o
9 OS +
£
This dissertation, written by
......Rubin Aaron Huttler
under the direction of h..Dissertation Com
mittee, and approved by all its members, has
been presented to and accepted by The Graduate
School, in partial fulfillment of requirements of
the degree of
D O C T O R O F P H I L O S O P H Y
Dean
Date. May 21,_ 19 79
DISSERTATION COMMITTEE
DEDICATED TO
MY BELOVED PARENTS
Louis Huttler (May his soul rest in peace) and
Frieda Huttler (May I be privileged to give;; her many
years of happiness and contentment.
through the efforts which she inspired).
DEDICATED TO
Dr. Max Rauch, Deceased
Who was an inspiration and a sincerely devoted friend.
ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
My first and foremost acknowledgment must go to my
dear wife, Miriam, without whose inspiration and devotion
this project would never have come about and to her
parents: Grand Rabbi Eliezer and Bat Sheva Adler who
have warmly supported my advancement in Judaism and
Education.
Next, I would like to acknowledge my dear children,
from whom I took very precious moments while they
were growing up, in order to continue my education,
and from whom I ask forgiveness and understanding. The
pursuit of knowledge is a noble and unending cause which
I sincerely hope will be emulated by them.
My eternal gratitude to Professor Earl V. Pullias who
from 1972 onward, when I took my first course in higher
education at USC, became my beacon of light and my mentor.
Without his generous assistance and time, this project
would never have seen the light of day.
I would also like to thank Mrs. Pullias, a woman of
valor and virtue, whose noble character has been an
inspiration to many students of Professor Pullias.
Last, but not least, to the wonderful members of my
graduate committee: Dr. Steven Krashen, and Dr.
William O ’Neil who were most lenient and considerate in
assisting me that I might complete this dissertation.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION........ ............................... ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................................. iii
LIST OF TABLES.......... vii
Chapter
I. BACKGROUND STATEMENT AND SIGNIFICANCE
OF THE PROBLEM .............. . 1
Background of the Problem
Statement of the Problem
Significance of the Problem
Purpose of the Study
Procedure of the Study
Basic Assumptions
Questions to be Answered
Limitations
Delimitat ions
Definition of Terms
Organization of the Study
II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE................... 11
Introduction: Historical Perspective
Wissenschaft des Judenthums
Hebrew in American Colleges & Universities
Summary
III. REVIEW OF LITERATURE: ISSUES AND PROBLEMS. . 47
Introduction
The Nature of Jewish Studies
Rationale for Jewish Studies
Jewish Studies versus Jewish Education
Where Do Jewish Studies Belong?
Curriculum
Jewish Studies and the Jewish Community
Summary
IV. RESEARCH PROCEDURE ......................... 74
Introduction
Delineating the Area of the Study
Historical Overview
Empirical Study of The Three Major Programs
At The University of California at Los
Angeles, The Los Angeles Valley College
and The Hebrew Union College
iv
V. FINDINGS OF THE EMPIRICAL STUDY COMPARING
AND CONTRASTING THREE JEWISH STUDIES
PROGRAMS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
AT LOS ANGELES, THE LOS ANGELES VALLEY
COLLEGE, AND THE HEBREW UNION COLLEGE . . . 86
Introduction
Findings On University Of California
At Los Angeles
Findings On Los Angeles Valley College
Findings - Jewish Studies Programs
At Hebrew Union College-Jewish
Institute of Religion
VI. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS IN HIGHER
EDUCATION AND JEWISH STUDIES ............... 206
Introduction
The Higher Learning
Cultural Pluralism
Fragmentation of the Higher Learning
Cultural Pluralism Restated
Jewish Studies and Higher Education
VII. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
BASED ON THE RESEARCH OF JEWISH STUDIES
PROGRAMS AT UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT
LOS ANGELES, LOS ANGELES VALLEY COLLEGE,
AND HEBREW UNION COLLEGE ................... 234
Summary
The Procedure
The Findings-A General Historical Study
Findings From The Review of Literature
On Current Issues
Summary Of Findings At University Of
California At Los Angeles
Summary Of Findings At Los Angeles
Valley College
Summary Of Findings At Hebrew Union
College-Jewish Institute of Religion
Conclusions
General Conclusions About The Three
Jewish Studies Programs
Recommendat ions
v
FOOTNOTES ...................................... 275
APPENDIX A .......... 294
Materials Relating to Jewish Studies and
Hebrew Undergraduate Majors at UCLA
APPENDIX B .................................. 294
Unpublished Papers On Consultation Of Jewish
Studies, New York City, October 9th to 10th,
1972.
APPENDIX C ............ 347
Faculty and Student Questionnaires
vi
LIST OF TABLES
1. Total Student Enrollment for Jewish
Studies at UCLA, 1975-1978 ..............'. . 108
2. The Age Grouping of the Student Sample
at UCLA, N = 8 8 ................................ Ill
3. The Number of Male and Female Students
in the Sample, N = 8 8 .............. 112
4. Religion of Students Enrolled in Jewish
Studies at UCLA, N = 8 8 .............. 113
5. Citizen Status of Students Enrolled in
UCLA Jewish Studies, N = 8 8 ....................113
6. Student Status at UCLA Jewish Studies
Department, N=88 114
7. Response To: Is Jewish Studies or Hebrew
Studies Your Major? N=88......................115
8. Previous Education of Students at UCLA
in Jewish Studies, N = 8 8 ......................116
9. Previous Religious or Hebrew Instruction
Among Students Enrolled in Jewish
Studies at UCLA, N=88 116
10. Should Jewish Studies Be Organized
As A (An), N=88 . . 117
11. Response of Students at UCLA to
Possible Career Goals, N=88 118
12. Responses to Religious or Other
Jewish Affiliation, N=88 119
13. In Answer To: Should Jewish Studies
Do The Following? N=88 120
14. Reasons for Taking Jewish Studies, N=88 . . . 121
vii
15. Student Enrollment at Los Angeles Valley
16. Jewish Studies and Hebrew Majors From
Fall 1975 to Fall 1978 at L A V C .......... 145
17. Enrollment From Fall 1976 to Spring 1979
LAVC ............................ 146
18. The Percentages of Day to Evening Session
Students in Jewish Studies ........ 148
19. The Age Grouping of Students Enrolled at
LAVC, N=78, ................................ 150
20. The Number of Male and Female Students
in Jewish Studies at LAVC, N=78.......... 150
21. Religion of Students Enrolled in Jewish
Studies at LAVC, N=78 . . . 151
22. Citizen Status of the StudentN=78 ......... 152
23. The Student Status in Jewish Studies
of the Enrollment, N=78 153
24. Response To: Is Jewish Studies or Hebrew
Your Major or etc?, N=78................... 154
25. Previous Secular Education of Jewish
Studies Students, N=78 155
26. Previous Religious or Hebrew Education
Among Students Enrolled in the
Jewish Studies Program, N=78 156
27. Should Jewish Studies Be Organized
as a (an), N=78 157
28. Response of Students in Jewish Studies
to Possible Career Goals, N=78. 158
29. Response of Students in Jewish Studies
to Religious or National Affiliation, N=78. 159
30. Respondents Were Asked:. Should Jewish Studies
Do the Following: N=78. . . . 160
viii
31. Reasons For Taking Jewish Studies, N=78 . . . . 161
32. Enrollment Figures - Fall Semester of
1978 Hebrew Union College-Jewish
Institute of Religion ..................... 189
33. Enrollment Statistics by School
Hebrew Union College-Jewish
Institute of Religion for 1978 ....... 191
34. The Age Groupings of the Student Sample
at Hebrew Union College-
Jewish Institute of Religion, N = 6 6 ..........194
35. Number of Males and Females in the Sample
at Hebrew Union College-Jewish
Institute of Religion, N=66 195
36. Religion of Students Enrolled in
Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute
of Religion Programs, N=66.............. 196
37. Citizen Status of the Students Enrolled
in Hebrew Union College-Jewish
Institute of Religion, N=66.................. 197
38. Student Status at Hebrew Union College-
Jewish Institute of Religion
For Sampling of Enrollment, N=66.............. 198
39. Response To: Is Jewish Studies or
Hebrew Your Major or etc? N = 6 6 .............. 199
40. Previous Education of Students at
Hebrew Union College-Jewish
Institute of Religion, N=66 ‘200
41. Previous Religious or Hebrew Instruction
Among Students Enrolled in Hebrew
Union College-Jewish Institute
of Religion, N=66 200
42. Should Jewish Studies Be Organized
As A (An), N=66 201
43. Response of Students at Hebrew Union
College-Jewish Institute of Religion
to Possible Career Goals, N=66 ............ 202
44. Responses to Religious or Other
Jewish Affiliations............................203
45. Respondents Were Asked: Should Jewish
Studies Do The Following: N=66 ........ 204
46. Respondents Were Asked to State
Reasons for Taking Jewish
Studies, N=66 205
x
CHAPTER I
BACKGROUND STATEMENT AND SIGNIFICANCE
OF THE PROBLEM
Background of the Problem
The phenomenal growth of Jewish studies in American
higher education has been receiving a great deal of
attention by both the world of higher education and the
Jewish community. Scholars in particular are searching
to understand the underlying reasons for this growth
and for answers to the basic questions of method and
purpose for Jewish studies as an academic discipline
within the university as a whole. Hence, there is a
growing list of articles in the professional journals
plus a great deal of discussion at various functions and
conferences to help understand more fully this phenomenon
and how to come to terms with the problems and challenges
that this new field presents to the world of higher
education and scholarship.
1
Dr. Arnold J. Band in the American Jewish Year Book
1
of 1966, chartered the expansion of Jewish studies in
American colleges and universities and found that not
only was classical Hebrew being taught as the key to
the Bible with a sectarian Christian religious aim, but
also that courses in modern Hebrew and Jewish content
were being offered in many of the well-known colleges
and universities in the United States.
An outstanding event took place at Brandeis University
in 1969 which underlined this development in higher
education. A colloquium was held for scholars of Judaica
in higher education to deliver papers in their respective
disciplines and to discuss their work and the problems
2
of their field. A volume by Leon Jick, Editor, in 1970
was published containing the substance of their delibera
tions and a plan was formulated to create the Association
of Jewish Studies hereinafter referred to as AJS. Since
the inception of this association, it has grown from
approximately one hundred to nine hundred members.
Regional and national conferences are held regularly
where papers are read on the whole gamut of Jewish studies
and attempts are being made to define the field and to
enhance the quality and quantity of Jewish studies in
higher education. In addition, the AJS has a placement
bureau that has served to match the position available
with the suitable individual instructor and scholar.
Statement of the Problem
This study undertakes to trace the historical
reasons why Jewish studies entered the field of higher
education only recently. It, furthermore, describes
the step by step evolution and growth of Jewish studies
in American higher education. An attempt was made to
define the field and to describe the rationale for being
in the curriculum. Finally, an empirical study was made
consisting of an analysis of three Jewish studies
programs offered at the University of California at
Los Angeles, the Los Angeles Valley College, and the
Hebrew Union College in order to observe similarities
and differences in the structure and philosophy of
the program.
Significance of the Problem
The United States of America is a pluralistic
society consisting of many ethnic and religious groups.
Higher education should reflect the many fibers woven
into the tapestry of our civilization; consequently, by
3
expanding the curriculum and permitting all cultures and
religions to be studied, America thereby manifests
its own highest ideals of democracy. Therefore, it is
of great importance to follow the historical path of a
people that was discriminated against and a culture denied
entrance into higher education as a field of study.
The fact that Jewish studies have finally been accepted
by higher education make it all the more imperative
that educational issues pertaining to the field be
analyzed and that individual programs be described.
In this way, the field will grow and higher academic
standards will be attained.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of the study was:
A. To survey the position of the Jew in Western
society— especially since the emergence of Christianity
with special reference to the denial of their political
rights and the general neglect of their cultures and
history by the scholarly world.
B. To review the literature which attempts to
define the field and issues that have emerged as a result
of the newly acquired university status of Jewish studies.
C. To describe and analyze the three Jewish studies
programs found in the local area including the University
4
of California at Los Angeles, the Los Angeles Valley
College, and the Hebrew Union College, in order to compare
and contrast their history, educational philosophy,
students and faculty.
Procedure of the Study
In order to achieve the purposes of the study, the
following research procedures were used:
A. A brief history was sketched of the Jewish
people and Judaism to determine the factors which lead
to the discrimination of the Jew and his culture.
B. The professional literature was carefully read
with the purpose of determining the educational issues
that presently are being discussed in the field, e.g.,
definition, rationale and curriculum.
C. An in-depth study was made of three local
programs at the University of California at Los Angeles,
the Los Angeles Valley College and the Hebrew Union
College using questionnaires, interviews, catalogues,
brochures and departmental publications. A comparative
picture was drawn of these programs.
Basic Assumptions
For the purpose of this study, it was assumed that:
A. The research design was appropriate.
5
B. A brief study of Jewish history would yield
insights as to why Jews were discriminated against and
why their culture was not previously taught at the
university.
C. Reviewing the professional literature would
help define the field of Jewish studies.
D. There was a need to analyze and describe actual
Jewish studies programs in existence at the present time.
E. The three programs selected from the empirical
study, although having similarities, would also have
differences in educational philosophy, the types of
students they attract and the faculty that teaches due
to the nature of the institution, i.e., one being a
university (UCLA), one a two year community college (LAVC),
and the last being a Hebrew College.
Questions to be Answered
The study was designed to answer the following
questions:
A. From the historical overview:
1. What is the origin as found in history for
the neglect of the study of post-biblica Jews, their
history and culture?
2. How did Jewish studies begin? What is
the chronology of the evolution, development and expansion
of Jewish studies in higher education?
6
B. From the empirical study:
1. What is the educational philosophy with
regard to Jewish studies at the University of California
at Los Angeles, the Los Angeles Valley College and the
Hebrew Union College?
2. What are some of the differences and
similarities between the schools in student body
characteristics, faculty and curriculum?
3. Why do students take courses in Jewish
studies and what are some of their objectives?
Limitations
The limitations of this study consist of the following
A. The writer lives and works in Los Angeles;
hence, he could not observe first hand other Jewish
studies programs outside of the Los Angeles area.
B. The writer was limited in his research, except
for a few brief trips to New York, to libraries and
sources found in the local area.
C. Because this study was geared to American
higher education, the author limited himself to sources
written in the English language.
Delimitations
The delimitations of this study consisted of the
following:
A. Only a minute portion of historical sources
7
could be examined and cited.
B. Only three institutions of higher learning
were examined for the empirical study.
C. The institutions selected were a public
university (University of California at Los Angeles),
a two year college (Los Angeles Valley College, and a
Hebrew College (Hebrew Union College).
D. For students, both interviews and questionnaires
were used, but for the faculty, only interviews were
utilized.
E. Opinions obtained from administrators, faculty,
and students naturally reflected some personal biases and
prejudices.
F. Samples obtained were the best under the
circumstances, but were somewhat limited.
3
Definition of Terms
Jewish Learning. The systematic study of the beliefs,
actions, literary and cultural products of all persons
who have been called or have called themselves Jews.
Study of Torah. The traditional, religiously
motivated activity developed over the centuries and
focused upon study of the Talmud, commentaries, legal codes,
Rabbinic interpretations of the Hebrew Bible and similar
sacred sciences pursued in classical Jewish academies and
seminaries.
8
Hebraica or Hebrew Studies. The study of the
Hebrew language Biblical, cognate and modern literature
which was undertaken in American universities and
Protestant divinity schools from the very beginning and
now continues in departments of Near Eastern languages
and literatures, linguistics or comparative literature.
Judaica. The systematic study of Judaism, its
history and theology, law and practices and of the Jews
as a group, generally carried on in departments of
religion or in the social sciences.
Jewish Studies Programs. A collegiate program in
which courses are offered for degree or non-degree
credit in the cultural experience (or civilization) of
the Jews throughout the ages and in the contemporary
world.
Organization of the Study
The study is organized as follows:
Chapter I introduces the problem under consideration
in this study. The background is discussed followed by
the statement of the problem and its significance. The
purpose and procedure of the study is outlined and basic
assumptions and questions to be answered are stated.
Limitations and delimitations are also stated followed by
definition of terms and the organization of the study.
Chapter II surveys briefly the history of the Jew
with particular emphasis on the dichotomy between the
biblical Jew and the post-biblical Jew as seen in the
Western world after the advent of Christianity. The
reason for discrimination of the Jew was developed and
the resultant neglect of Jewish history and culture
were shown.
Chapter III consists of a review of current litera
ture dealing with Jewish studies programs and educational
issues that have emerged as a result of the new setting
in higher education for these studies.
Chapter IV explains in detail the procedures utilized
by this study to acquire data in order to present findings
with reference to the stated problem.
Chapter V presents the actual findings including
results from interviews,questionnaires, and other
pertinent data.
Chapter VI contains the discussion and implications
of Jewish studies and their place in American higher
education in terms of the new unity of cultural
pluralism.
Chapter VII contains the summary and conclusions
based on the findings and makes recommendations concern
ing the study.
10
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Introduction: Historical Perspective
The purpose of this chapter was to examine reasons
why Jewish studies have come into the academic world
only recently. The research project traced briefly the
history of the Jewish people pointing out its roots in
Antiquity. It also showed that this history was rich
in culture and highly related to many vital historical
movements of the Western world. The questions that
were raised were: "(1) Why was this history generally
ignored? (2) Why has this culture not been studied?"
It is the opinion of this writer that an under
standing of this problem can be of great value to the
American way of life. By acknowledging and understanding
the evils of the past, an opportunity is afforded to
America and to higher education to avoid similar pitfalls
in the future.
11
America is composed of many cultures and ethnic
and religious groups. The university which is the arena
for the search for truth must be open to all cultures
and ethnic groups and religions for study. By doing this
the diversity of man and his experience are explored. Thus
the ideal of the universality of the university can be
fulfilled and the ideal of American life giving all a
share in its material, spiritual and intellectual
benefits can be realized.
The Jewish people have had a long and continuous
4
history. Solomon Grayzel states: "The Jews have lived
through four thousand years... having begun their career
in Antiquity when nations existed of whom nothing but a
vague memory survived.” This time depth of Jewish
history is unusual and the only other historical people
who have equal or greater longevity are the Hindus and
Chinese. However, unlike Hindus and Chinese whose history
is confined to a particular geographical area, Jewish
history spans and touches every corner of the earth.
Political misfortunes have dogged them throughout
their history with, exile from their homeland two times:
in 565 Before the Common Era, and in 70 After the Common
Era. Harassment and persecution became regular occurrences
of Jewish history:
Jewish communities from Hellenistic
times to the present, by voluntary
12
migration or actual expulsion spread
out in circle after circle...bringing them
to many of the economic and cultural
centers of the world.
In every clime, country or continent that they lived in,
they developed their historical heritage.
Another important element of Jewish history due to
its longevity and geographical spread is language. In
order to follow Jewish history through its various
numerous phases, one needs to be fluent in many languages
and cultures. The Bible is of course in Hebrew and many
of the texts in post-biblical times are in Aramaic.
Jews living under Hellenistic influence especially in
Egypt wrote in Greek. In the Middle Ages, Arabic was
the medium of expression of Jewish medieval philosophy
and poetry side by side with Hebrew. For the modern
periods of Jewish history German, French, Polish and
Russian are necessary scholarly tools. Jewish ethnic
languages such as Yiddish and Ladino are quite numerous,
too. This bewildering use of language and culture is
6
without parallel in the annals of mankind.
Because of the wide dispersion of the Jew through
out the world, he has come in contact with many other
nations and people. There has resulted a considerable
interchange of culture, ideas, and philosophy. However,
13
to maintain its identity, Judaism had to exercise an
"absorption-rejectionM process. It is difficult to
isolate the Jewish and non-Jewish elements in the
cultural fusion precisely at times but scholarship
can be discerning in this respect. The acceptance or
rejection of various cultural elements depended on its
7
consonance with Jewish thought and philosophy.
Although it is difficult to divide and categorize
Jewish history, it is generally divided into four
periods: Biblical, Rabbinic, Medieval and Modern.
8
Martin Cohen, in an unpublished paper, A Word
On The Field of Jewish History, divided Jewish history
into the following periods: Biblical, Rabbinic, Jewish
history under Islam, Jewish history in Christian Feudal
Europe, Jewish history from Western European Renaissance
through the Eighteenth Century, Jewish history in Eastern
Europe, Jewish history from the Nineteenth Century through
the holocaust, and American Jewish history to 1948, and
Israel and Contemporary history.
9
Grayzel divides history into seven stages. However,
this is done, the fact of the matter is that the only
history that has been studied or known about Jews is their
biblical history. Even in this case, there has been
isolation in general historiography of the ancient
14
10 -----------------------------
Near Eastern matrix. Nevertheless the only knowledge
of Jews in the Western world and in the university as
a whole has been relegated to the Biblical period.
With this wide spectrum of historical experience, the
question arises as to why Jewish history and Jewish
learning have been ignored generally by the Western
world of scholarship?
Hallo pointed out:
The vast spread of the Jewish experience, in
both time and space, and its ample documentation
are both unique phenomena. They provide
available paradigms for countless areas of
research: historical, linguistic, religious and
many others. There is every reason for non-
Jewish scholars and scholarship to participate
in Jewish studies for the light these can shed
on their disciplines, and to benefit from the
results.
The research indicates that many treasures of
literature and humanities did not see the light of day
because of the policies of the university and the short
sightedness of Western scholarship. Why this neglect
occurred requires some kind of explanation and this is
attempted in this part of this paper.
12
According to Langmuir, the study of the Jews which
includes their history, culture and religion has been
subjected to an approach which might be referred to as
’ ’ majority history.” This theory of general historiography
15
accepted widely by the majority of historians throughout
the ages either ignores Jews or deals with them in a
stereotype fashion as moneylenders or worse. Why did
this happen?
Yerushalmi, in his introduction to Bibliographical
Essays in Medieval Jewish Studies says:
Western conceptions of Jewish history trail
an exeedingly long and burdensome pedigree.
The fundamental attitudes were forged in the
earliest centuries of Christianity, and
remained surprisingly consistent down to
modern times. As the incarnation was seen
to bisect all historical time, so, in the
Christian scheme, the crucifixion split
Jewish history into two radically disparate
segments.
Thus, the Jews of biblical times are worthy of historical
interest for they are after all God’s chosen people but
the post-biblical Jews having.rejected Christ, are
shunted from the scene of history as a pariah people.
14
Yerushalmi bitingly characterizes Jewish history from
the point of view of the "majority historians" as being
"no history." Rather he calls it an implacable curse"
for the Jew to bear throughout his history. Again in
15
the words of Langmuir: "Before the first century A.D.
the Hebrews were of great historical significance;
thereafter the Jews are of little significance."
V , : ■ 16 17
Furthermore, Langmuir and Yerushalmi maintain
16
that this notion of Christian triumphalism” has become
ingrained in Western civilization. No matter what the
commitment of the writer whether religious or
secular, believing or non-believing Christians or even
rationalists, the attitude has remained surprisingly
constant for twenty centuries.
Langmuir states:
After the emergence of Christianity,
a reprobation falls on the Jews,
and a dark night of ignorance conceals
their activities from historical consciousness
for most of Western society until Dreyfus, the
Balfour Declaration, or Hitler once more
draws attention to the Jews.
This attitude can be traced in the following: the
Gospels where it is adumbrated; in the Church Fathers
where it is expressed in their early writings, the
Middle Ages, the Renaissance, the Reformation, the French
rationalist historians, the nationalist period and finally
19
right up to our modern period of history.
G. F. Moore in 1921 writes that ’ ’ Christian interest
in Jewish literature has always been apologetic or polemic
20
rather than historical.” The New Testament writers
attempted to prove from Scripture that Christian concepts
such as the Messiahship of Jesus, his nativity, teachings
and miracles including the rejection of Christ by the Jews
was foretold by prophecy. This literature or apologetics
17
which evolved over centuries was directed to controversial
points of interpretation and application of passages
in the New Testament.
These views that Jews had no history to speak of
and that the worthiness of the Bible lay mainly in its
prophecy of Christianity remained fundamental in the
Middle Ages as well. Here, however, apologetics spilled
over into polemics and intense pressures were focused on
the Jewish masses to convert to Christianity. Jewish
apostates were enlisted or volunteered in this effort to
missionize and convert Jews to Christianity. The Jews
were degraded and suffered enormously from prejudice.
The Lateran Council in 1215 called by Pople Innocent III
severely limited Jews economically and degraded them
by decreeing that they wear distinctive dress identi-
21
fying them as Jews. He was succeeded by Pope Greogry IV
and with the assistance of Louis IX of France, the Talmud
was put on trial. A vicious apostate Nicholas Donim
brought together a number of passages in the Talmud
proving that it libeled Christianity. The strange trial
was held and the Talmud was found guilty of blasphemy.
"In 1242, twenty-four carloads of Talmudic literature
22
was destroyed in the public square of Paris."
The negative attitude towards Jewish history and life,
plus the total disregard of one of the great works of man,
18
the Talmud, show to what lengths this initial approach
to Judaism could go.
The development of Christian Hebraism of the
Renaissance and Reformation did not change the attitude
appreciably. Yerushalmi writes that: ’ ’the interest was
23
in post-biblical Judaism not in post-biblical Jews.”
By this he means that although Jewish literature was
studied, for example the Talmud and Midrash, it was for
the purpose of evidence of Christinaity or vituperation
and ridicule, no attempt being made to understand or
study contemporary Jews. Even Christian scholars who
resisted the obscurantist attitudes which called for the
destruction of the Talmud defended it on the supposition
24
that it would prove Christianity.
The Kabbala was discoverd at this time and thought to
be of great value in this regard. The Reformation
Christian Hebraists enlisted Jewish exegis and commentaries
to prove Christian dogma and Protestantism against the
Church. This led to a notable improvement in knowledge
of Jewish sources and literature. In addition:
Christian Hebraists looked into Rabbinic
literature for philological reasons, for
archaeological data on ancient Palestine,
or for the elucidation of Christian
Scripture.^5
Monumental bibliographies covering the whole range of
19
Jewish literature since the Bible, translations of post-
biblical works and even illustrations of many passages
in the Old Testament from later Jewish law and customs
as well as for the New Testament were written at this
25
time. Yet, Yerushalmi claims that:
...to an astonishing degree Christian Hebraists
were able to mentally divorce the texts they
studied from the living bearers of the tradition...
with very few exceptions. These scholars turn
out to have been either overtly hostile to Jews,
indifferent to their fate, or interested in
them largely as objects for polemics and
conversion, with the latter type predominating
by far.^6
27
An exception to this seems to have been Basnage,
who in 1870 wrote Histoire des Juifs Depuis Jusus-Christ
Jusqu1 a Present, yet whose final chapter was entitled,
"Diverses Remarques Sur la Conversion des Juifs.”
Christian Hebraists were bound to theological
suppositions and this explains their inclination. One
would have expected from the Eighteenth Century
Enlightenment, a more liberal attitude. As a matter of
fact, the lack of Christian framework for history created
new receptivity for Muslin and Chinese history and even
for the South Sea Islanders but little for Jews. Yet
Voltaire displayed open anti-Semitism; Diderot attacked
the Inquisition without referring to the Marranoes
28
who were the main victims of that infamous Church decree.
20
: 2 1 5 ;
David Hume whose History of England in 1879 gave
considerable attention to the persecutions of the Jews
during the Middle Ages, "believed that Jews carried usury
30
to the utmost extremity in recompense for their perils."
31
Gibbon v whose The Decline and Fall of the Roman
Empire indicted Christianity for the end of the
Golden Age also referred to the Jews as enemies "who
boldy professed, or faintly disguised their implacable
hatred for the rest of human mankind."
Jules Michelet's Histoire de France which was a
production of the romantic movement could nevertheless
state:
To remain tied to one's origins, to preserve
one's self from external influences and to
reject the ideas of others is to remain
incomplete and weak. This it is that has
constituted both the greatness and the
feebleness of the Jewish people. It has
only had one idea, has given it to the nations,
but has received practically nothing from them.
It has always remained itself, strong and
limited, indestructible and humiliated, the
enemy of humankind and its eternal slave.
In the Nineteenth Century when history came into
its own as an autonomous discipline, historians claimed
all of mankind and his past as being of interest for
study. "No period could be considered too remote, no
culture too exotic (indeed, no subject too obscure), for
33
historical investigation." There was some interest
21
in the Jews and the question of emancipation prompted
34
some "publications of relevant documents." Some
articles appeared but the major histories had little to
say about the Jew. In the words of Langmuir, "...majority
historiography as it related to the Jews has been marked by
lack of interest and by ignorance when it has not also
35
been marked by derogatory attitudes."
The Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries were largely
the history of given peoples such as the Romans, the
French, the Germans, etc. The Jews being stateless did
not exactly fit in this framework of historical analysis.
The undercurrent was really the old "majority history"
theory in addition to modern national and racial prejudice
that excluded the possibility of a fair look at Jews.
It was finally the Jews themselves that began to develop
their own historiography and cultural analysis.
Wissenschaft des Judenthums
In Germany a movement was born dedicated to the
scientific study of the Jewish past called Wissenschaft
36
des Judenthums. Yerushalmi says that the words translate
3?
best to "the scientific study of the Jewish past."
Brubacker and Rudy wrote about the Wissenschaft idea
22
of German scholarship:
German academic practices and methods of work
impressed American advocates of pure science
more than German idealistic search for under
lying spiritual unities or the German concept
of Wissenschaft as a form of investigation
which would proceed always in a broad, deep
contemplative context.
For the men of this intellectual movement, the search
for "underlying spiritual unities of Judaism^ was paramount
and it did indeed proceed in a "broad, deep and contempla
tive context." Glatzer in fact called this moment
"the most significant intellectual movement of Western
39
Judaism in the recent period of history." The
founders wanted to subject the total Jewish past in
cluding its history, culture, religion, literature and
philosophy to criticism and to the German method of
research. This new science of Judaism was:
...the historical--philological
exploration of the Jewish heritage
from the Bible and the Talmud to medieval
poetry, philosophy, Kabbalah, and including
Jewish history.^
Leopold Zunz is generally given credit for being the
true founder of the movement for scientific study
of Judaism with the publication of his pamphlet Etwas
ueber die rabbinische 'Literat'ur in 1818, and his journal
launched in 1822 called Zeitschrift fuer die Wissenschaft
41
des. Judenthums. Zunz outlined his program for the
23
scientific study of Judaism in Etwas ueber die rabbinische
Literatur which included:
Theology, religious worship of Israel,
Jewish law, Hebrew literature in particular,
of every category and form, including that
on the natural sciences and technology and
the contribution of the Jews to their
development
Zunz suggested methods to examine sources "to ascertain
the periods and the places of authors, their personalities,
and the reliability of the evidence which they had
43
handed down." Zunz also wanted to study contemporary
Judaism and was the father of the sociology of Judaism
or the Jewish people.
To quote from the Encyclopedia Judaica:
The knowledge of Judaism... by a
statistical knowledge of Judaism in
relation to the Jews of our time in
all the countries of the world,
was also part of his proposed program.
Prior to this development, Jewish learning from
Pharisaic times onwards was mainly concerned with the
study of traditions as having been revealed to the faithful
on Mount Sinai. The modes of study were first biblical,
referring to the Pentateuch as written revelation and
the prophetic books as divinely inspired. An oral
tradition which was later written down in the form of the
24
Babylonian and Palestinian talmudim with various exeges
known as midrashim and other cognate literature was part
of the agendum of learning followed by the development
of Jewish philosophy and metaphysics mainly under the
impact of Moslem rationalism and a mystical literature
generally known as Kabbalah which came into its own in
the Middle Ages. A fifth mode of Jewish learning was
liturgical literature which to an extent was bellestristic
producing a large body of both religious and secular
45
poetry. Needless to say, this learning, not to nigrate
it, was as Glatzer stated "religion-accentuated
46 47
and directed scholarship." Yerushalmi felt that
its chief noteworthy achievement was to subject Jewish
sources to dispassionate application of the critical
methodology and techniques of German historical scholarship
According to Glatzer:
...time honored institutions, usuages, and
beliefs were presented in the relative
positions they occupied in the context of
history. It (Wissenschaft) called for a
transformation of Jewish learning from a
literature of glosses, commentaries, biblio
graphical lists, and collection of chrono-
graphical materials into comprehensive
presentations of Judaism as found in its
literature, its philosophy, and its history—
manifestations of the new vistas of learning,
marked by scholarly objectivity, broad scope,
meaningful context, prosper form and style,
and respectability.4°
25
Perhaps the most significant fact of Wissenschaft as
understood by Glatzer was the new philosophy of
historicism. Judaism was not to be seen as merely,
tradition and truth fixed and permanent but rather it was
looked upon as evolving and changing and open to research
for historical roots.
Karl Lowith has demonstrated the evergrowing
historicism in the various disciplines. By
the mid-nineteenth century Christian dogmatic
theology had become history of dogma, economics
had been replaced by Karl Marx by a materialistic
philosophy of history..."49
Toral study was in essence secularized and open to the
critical and historical modes of learning.
The intellectual movement of research into the
Jewish past produced "a veritable library of historical
50
scholarship." It is further observed that the
Monatsschrift fur Geschicte und Wissenschaft
des Judenthums which replaced the Zeitschrift
which was founded in 1852 and continued until
1939, and Revue des Etudes Juives (1880)
can compare favorably with Historisch Zeitschrift
or the Revue Historique.
Some of the important figures in the movement were:
S.J. Rapoport, Leopold Zunz, S.D. Luzzatto, and N.
Krochmal. The next generation included these great
scholars: Z. Frankel, Geiger, Munk and Steinschneider.
26
This intellectual circle had wrought a major change
in scholarship of Judaica. They published in their own
journals and exchanged epistles and letters of scholarship.
However, they did not have the university as a base.
This they tried to accomplish but were rejected by the
university. Zunz and later Steinschneider offered their
research to the university. "Zunz submitted a memorandum
to the University of Berlin on the allocation of a place
to the 'Science of Judaism,' but the university rejected
52
the proposal." It took the American university to
grant respectability to Jewish studies and that we will
turn to presently.
Gershom Scholem who had reservations about their
hisoriography still could say:
These eminent scholars and great personalities
have left us all a great and positive heritage
for which each of us can never be sufficiently
thankful, for it forms the foundation of our
work.
Hebrew in American Colleges and Universities
Rudavsky writes that:
Before the Reformation European colleges and
universities generally taught Hebrew with a
religious aim in mind— to seek in Hebrew
scriptures and post-biblical Hebrew works
support for Christian doctrines and interpretations.
27
He continues that, "Hebrew learning was brought to
America from England by a number of Christian scholars,
including Governor William Bradford and Elder William
55
Brewster, who came on the Mayflower. T T
The Puritans patterned their lives on the Old
56
Testament. R.S. Storrs in The Puritan Spirit wrote
that the Puritans conceived of themselves in biblical
terms finding parallels between their situation and
that of the Hebrews. Thus New England became their
Canaan; their leaders were compared to Moses and Joshua
leading the people to the promised land, America.
In Cotton Mather's Magnalia Christi Americana,
we find John Winthrop of Massachusetts Bay Colony compared
to Moses as follows:
Accordingly when the noble design of carrying
a colony of chosen people into an American
wilderness was by some eminent persons
undertaken, this eminent person was/:, by the
consent of all, chosen for Moses.
In John Davis' New England Memorial the following
tombstone reading epitaph is recorded:
But let this mourning flock be comforted.
Though Moses be, yet Joshua is not dead;
I mean renowned Norton, worthy he
Successor to our Moses is to be,
0 happy Israel in America, ^g
In such a Moses, in such a Joshua.
28
Even in their use of invective, the Puritans
frequently employed biblical expressions and allusions.
Anne Hutchinson famed heretic was 'wretched
Zebel' and a wild coachman was Jehu, well-
known biblical character. Their fondness
for the Bible led them to the extensive use
of biblical names such as Daniel, .
Esther, Enoch, Ezra, Rachel and othersrr-^
Inasmuch as the Bible was an important aspect of
colonial life, the language of the Bible took on a very
special importance. Thus Katsh writes:
The prime task of the Colonial school
was to transmit the accepted religious
beliefs of the time to the minds of
eager students. The prime task of the
college was to produce scholars to
interpret these beliefs and ministers to
preach them.^O
Brubacher and Rudy wrote:
The desire of important religious
denominations (such as Anglican and
Calvinist) for a literate college-
trained clergy was probably the most
important factor explaining the founding
of the colonial colleges.
Harvard, the first colonial.college, founded in
1636 began Hebrew instruction in 1640 along with Chaldaic
and Syriac followed some years later by Arabic. Katsh
writes, "many generations of students at Harvard devoted
one day each week for three years to the study of Hebrew
62
and allied tongues." According to Rudavsky:
Yale, the College of Philadelphia (the
University of Pennsylvania), the College
29
of New Jersey (Princeton), the College of
Rhode Island (Brown), Dartmouth all had
instruction in Hebrew.
Yale, under Ezra Stiles as President, was devoted to
teaching of Semitics. He particularly "drilled his
pupils especially in one of the Psalms which he
64
thought would be the first to hear in heaven."
According to Rudavsky:
In the Seventeenth Century, the teaching of
Hebrew took on another form. The Paris
Polyglot Bible (1645) and the London Polyglot
Bible (1657) focused attention on Hebrew
as a Semitic language in relation to other
Semitic tongues. Work by the Dutch Orientalist
Albert Schultens (1685-1750) and the German
Friedrich Wilhelm Gesenius (1785-1842)
helped establish the scientific study of
Semitic languages... thereby modifying the
prevailing sacrosanct attitudes toward it.
Also the new archaeological movement spurred on by the
discovery of the Rosetta stone (1797) on the Western bank
of the Nile gave impetus to the study of ancient Semitic
languages in order to train people for the deciphering
of inscriptions and texts uncovered by archaeological
digs and findings.
To provide effective instruction in ancient
Semitic languages, a number of institutions
of higher learning established Semitics depart
ments where Hebrew was taught as part of the
Semitics curriculum. The following schools
had Semitics departments: Princeton Theological
30
Seminary 1822, New York University 1831,
Vanderbilt 1875, Johns Hopkins 1876,
Pennsylvania 1886, Columbia 1887, Bryn Mawr
1891, Chicago 1892, and Michigan 1894.
Generally Semitics were graduate study
programs.
The first three decades of the Twentieth Century continued
in this way. Classical Hebrew was taught as a key to
understanding and study of the Bible particularly by
denominational colleges and seminaries and as part of
the Semitics language programs that were to be found on
certain campuses.
Our study shows that Hebrew language instruction
occupied an important place in the curriculum because of
the religious motivation and aims of the colonial
colleges. In the Nineteenth Century, education shifted
67
from a more religiou outlook to a secular one.
’ ’ The ancient supremacy of the classics could no
longer be maintained now that ’the ancient tree of
learning had become top-heavy with numerous new branches,’”
68
according to Brubacker and Rudy.
Higher education which began with the training
of men for ministry or to create the ’ ’gentleman-Christian
layman” for leadership in society, now aimed at training
men for the new growing scientific and technological society.
31
This utilitarian philosophy had little use for an
education that used the classics for mental discipline or
69
for learning for its own sake. In this new pragmatic
view of education the classics had little value and
Hebrew even less. The colleges established in the Nine
teenth Century and state universities did not generally
provide for Semitics, although they offered Bible,ini
70
English translation as part of general education.
A number of American universities in the Nineteenth
Century transferred their theological function of training
for the ministry and courses in Hebrew to their Oriental
or Semitics departments which were mainly graduate studies.
Furthermore, the practice of choosing clergymen as
presidents, themselves Hebrew scholars and instructors,
all but faded away so that universities allowed their
Semitics to lapsefor lack of endowment, and financial
support. With the death or retirement of Semitics or
71
Hebrew professors, many departments were discontinued.
72
In the American Jewish Year Book of 1917 a one
page table appeared with a listing of fifty-six colleges
and universities teaching Hebrew. Although not much
information was available concerning the curriculum, it
is assumed that the Hebrew taught was classical with a
religious motivation in mind. However, two very important
32
chairs were established in Jewish studies which appeared
to be in the Wissenschaft tradition of study of Judaica
in a more comprehensive point of view reaching beyond
the biblical Jew and encompassing the study of Jewish
philosophy, law, religion, and literature throughout the
ages; one, the Lucius Littauer Chair of Jewish Literature
and Philosophy at Harvard, (1925), occupied by the
renowned Harry A. Wolfson, noted scholar of medieval
Jewish philosophy, and the creation of the Nathan Miller
Chair of Jewish History, Literature and Institutions at
Columbia in 1927. The first incumbent was Dr. Stephen S.
Wise (1874-1947) followed by Salo Baron, distinguished
73
scholar and historian.
74
Rudavsky showed the relationship between the growth
of modern Hebrew in higher education and its acceptance
as fulfilling foreign language requirements in New York
high schools. In 1923, the Board of Education of New
York agreed to introduce experimental classes in Hebrew
and in 1930, experimental classes in modern Hebrew were
begun in the public high schools in New York City. The
classes attracted many students and the Board of Education
consented to offer Hebrew on a fully accredited basis.
75
This gave encouragement to Katsh to seek to influence
76
New York University to offer courses in modern Hebrew.
33
77 78
According to Katsh and Rudavsky this was the first
non-Jewish and secular university to offer modern Hebrew.
It was followed by Brooklyn and Hunter colleges in New
York.
79
In 1944, the Chhir of Hebrew Culture and Education
was established in the School of Education at New York
University. Unlike the Semitics departments in
universities or theological seminaries which were
interested in classical Hebrew language and civilization,
this chair offered the student the possibility of
studying the whole history and culture of the Jewish
people even beyond the biblical period--a significant
and meaningful development.
Thus the situation began to change from the 1920s
to 1940. From fifty-six institutions teaching Hebrew
in 1917, there were now one hundred twenty-four and
80
among them, ten offered modern Hebrew. Another
important development was the acceptance of Hebrew by many
institutions of higher learning as fulfilling foreign
81
language requirements for college entrance. This
signaled the re-emergence of Hebrew in the curriculum and
especially the teaching of modern Hebrew which indicated
82
that a new trend was in the making.
34
83
Rudavsky verified the pattern of growth of
modern Hebrew in American higher education. He showed
that in 1940, only nine colleges taught modern Hebrew
whereas sixty-eight others taught classical-biblical
Hebrew.
84 85
Discrepancies between Rudavsky and Katsh
may be due to the fact that Katsh in the 1940 survey had
a forty-four percent response and Rudavsky, working
later on the same issue, might have had additional
information that he published. Rudavsky indicated several
factors that were responsible for this development in
cluding the creation of the state of Israel and the rise
of student population on campus which included a great
many Jews. Rudavsky further shows in 1974 that in the
survey of the Modern Language Association of foreign
language instruction begun in 1958 under contract with
the United States Office of Education that there were
3,843 students of modern Hebrew reported in 1960. He
further stated that in the fall of 1972, one hundred
thirty-six colleges taught modern Hebrew to 16,460 students
This represented an increase of twenty-five percent
in two years from 1970 when at the same time there was
a decline of ten percent in the more traditional languages.
According to Rudavsky, this showed that ethnic awareness was
playing an important role in the increase and expansion
of Hebrew courses.
35
In 1974, a Catalogue of Jewish studies was compiled
by J. Saypol for the Bnai Brith Hillel Foundations
listing three hundred twenty-four colleges offering at
least one course in Hebrew language and literature. One
third of the schools offered only one course in Hebrew
86
but another one third offered five or more courses.
87
Arnold J. Band also reported in his survey on the
growth of Judaica on American campuses. He found that
from 1945 to 1965, there was an increase of full-time
positions in higher education in Jewish subjects from
twelve to sixty-five plus many part-time positions in
the field.
88
Ritterband's study of 1973 was interesting for
it employed an involved statistical approach which
arrived at the startling figure of between 45,000 to
50,000 students taking some form of Judaica. This
finding tended to verify the figure of between 55,000
to 60,000 registrants in Hebraic or Judaic studies
arrived at by Rudavsky in 1974.
It should be noted that in 1950, the National
Association of Professors of Hebrew in American Institutions
of Higher Learning known as NAPH was founded by Dr.
Abraham I. Katsh, one of the prime movers and the first
36
president of the association. This new "fraternity of
scholars" from the United States and Canada from secular
as well as denominational universities, colleges and
seminaries, both Jewish and non-Jewish, with the mutual
interest in the study of Hebrew language and literature,
began to publish Hebrew Abstracts and Igereth, a newsletter-
NAPH through its publications and national and regional
gatherings and conferences became a forum for scholarly
papers dealing with Hebraic and biblical studies.
In 1965, the National Association of Professors
of Hebrew in American Institutions of Higher Learning
published a Festschrift in honor of Dr. Abraham I. Katsh
who was one of the founders-of the association and who had
introduced modemHebrew to New York University. The
Festschrift was entitled Doron. Chapter one was Rudavsky’s
article entitled, "Hebraic Studies in American Colleges and
Universities with Special Reference to New York University"
89
which we have quoted above.
90
In 1965, Arnold J. Band conducted a survey of
offerings in Judaica and Hebraica in higher education in
America. The findings were reported in the American
Jewish Year Book of 1966 and also replicated in The
Education of American Jewish Teachers, edited by Oscar
I. Janowsky. The article is considered in the field to
37
be a landmark inasmuch as it gave some impressive
statistics about Jewish studies and also asked some
important and relevant questions about the programs
on campus. The term Jewish Studies was used for the
first time, and very intentionally. Dr. Band claimed
that the use of the term Jewish Studies "... reflects
our purposes and chosen historical framework, i.e.,
91
Emancipation." Band seemed to have broken with the
earlier Katsh-Rudavsky school which had always had an
affinity with the classical Hebrew that had been taught
from the times of Harvard onwards. Band instead
emphasized the Wissenschaft des Judenthums school and
identified his work and that of those who would become
the founders of the Association of Jewish Studies (AJS)
with this particular school.
Essentially, Dr. Band stated that the study of Jews,
their history, religion and culture had been left out
of the curriculum of higher education. The fact that
Hebrew was taught in the Protestant denominational college
or historically in the colonial college did not indicate an
interest in post-biblical Jews or Judaism. By selecting
Jewish studies and not Hebraica or Judaica, he was
accentuating the word Jewish or that the content of the
courses should stress the historical Jew and his literature
38
and culture, especially in post-biblical times. Band
thus echoed a theme which was part of the Wissenschaft
movement.
Katz, in his article, "Emancipation and Jewish
Studies" said:
In this I take my cue from Leopold Zunz, the
founder of Wissenschaft des Judenthums...who
remarked that the political emancipation of
the Jews would be attained only when the study
of Judaism was similarly emancipated— that is,
established within the academy.
Band expressed the same feeling and thus allied himself
with Wissenschaft instead of the indigenous American
movement of teaching Hebrew (i.e., classical from the time
of Harvard onwards.) The teaching of Judaica on American
campuses was a true barometer of American democracy which
allowed for minority cultures and was an indication of
the general emancipation of man and also of the Jew.
This new curricular development had a different rationale
from the Hebrew traditionally taught at American colleges
93
and universities. It was not taught to initiate the
student into Christianity but to acquaint the student
with ongoing Jewish civilization that was still very
much alive. Rudavsky and Katsh tended to minimize the
impact of Wissenschaft.
Rudavsky in 1974 stated that,
The inclusion of the teaching of Hebrew and
Judaism as relics of an ancient civilization
39
was the cherished hope, it may be observed, of
the leaders of the Nineteenth Century Wissen
schaft movement... Moritz Steinschneider, who
as late as 1970 declared that his colleagues
in that movement had ’only the obligation to
prepare an honorable burial for the remains
of Judaism.
Konvitz in 1974 correctly noted that the Wissenschaft
movement despaired of the future and hoped only to gain
for Hebrew as much status as a dead classical language such
as Greek or Latin or at the very least, the status of a
dead Semitic language such as Ugarit or Akkadian; yet,
Konvitz sees the three basic principles of Wissenschaft
as having been adopted by the Jewish Studies movement
in America including:
(a) The Science of Judaism must set as its
goal the study of Judaism in its most compre
hensive sense; (b) It must be a study of
Judaism conducted systematically, so that
subjects would be seen as parts of a whole;
(c) It must treat the subject for its own
sake; the study must be 'Torah lishmo,'
(the Hebrew term for study for its own sake
without any other motives) and not for
any special purpose. It must not start from any
pre-conceived opinion and must not be concerned with
final results.
These generally were the sentiments at the Colloquium when
the Association of Jewish Studies was founded at Brandeis
in 1969 and whose presentations were published in The
Teaching of Judaica in American Universities, The Proceed-
96
ings of a Colloquium.
40
Professor Leon Jick (1970) in the introduction to the
proceedings of the Colloquium, said:
A number of organizations of Jewish scholars
do exist in the various areas of Jewish culture,
who participate in the deliberations of their
specific disciplines. However, there has not
been a forum where all teachers of Judaica in
universities could meet to discuss their work
and the problems of their field.97
The Colloquium was attended by a number of individuals
who spoke of a variety of fields that had blossomed since
World War II., and who broadly represented the totality
of Jewish studies in American institutions of higher
learning. In addition, it gave birth to the American
Association of Jewish Studies in higher learning in
America. Here finally was the creation of a com
prehensive association of academicians in Judaica,
composed of biblical and Semitic scholars, historians,
sociologists, literary men of letters, anthropologists
who, taken in totality, showed interest in every aspect
of Jewish learning and in all periods of time. This
development was truly a remarkable accomplishment and
has yielded results of far reaching consequences for the
field.
Since the inception of the American Association of
Jewish Studies, the following important events were held
and papers published: In 1972, the Association for Jewish
41
Studies in cooperation with The American Jewish
Committee sponsored a Consultation of Jewish Studies.
The papers were not published but this author obtained un
published presentations. They are a noteworthy contri
bution to the field and many of the papers attempt both
definition of the field and suggestions for curricular
structuring. In the Winter edition of Conservative
Judaism of 1973, "A Symposium on Jewish Studies in the
University" was published. These papers are also valuable
contributions to understanding and defining the field of
Jewish Studies. Discussions of rationale, philosophy,
curriculum, methodology and other problems are dealt
with by the authors of the articles. Colloquium papers
were published in the American Jewish Quarterly Review
of 1973-1974. Here the issue discussed was contemporary
Jewish studies. This matter was touched upon earlier when
the fact was mentioned that Zunz in his program called for
knowledge of contemporary Judaism through "...a
statistical knowledge of Judaism in relation to the Jews
98
of our time in all the countries of the world.M
This colloquium featured some of the great historians and
sociologists from the Hebrew University Institute of
Contemporary Jewry. Marshall Sklare also presented a
paper and he indicated that the field of contemporary
42
Jewish studies although relatively new had won some
respectability and was gaining ground although many
99
problems still needed solutions.
Milton R. Konvitz as chairman of a special inter
national commission for the Memorial Foundation for Jewish
Culture prepared a report on Jewish Studies in Higher
Education. His introductory remarks to the report
were published as an article in the January 24, 1975
issue of Congress Monthly. He gave the following reasons
for the expansion of Jewish studies:
(a) greater receptivity on the part of colleges
and universities to offer non-traditional
courses and the general breakdown of rigid
academic orthodoxy; (b) increased Jewish
consciousness stimulated by the holocaust
and the creation of the state of Israel;
(c) Jewish nationalism and Zionism supplied
an impetus to the development of the field;
(d) the great increase in Jewish enrollment
at institutions of higher learning; (3) recog
nition of Judaism as an essential component
of higher education; (f) the greater acceptance
of Jews and Judaism by society generally;
(g) the recent development of area studies leading
naturally to the Near East as a proper area
subject for research and teaching; (h) the
development of departments of religious studies
from which Judaism cannot be justifiably excluded;
(i) the introduction of ethnic studies influenced
Jewish students to think of the propriety of
Jewish studies as an academic field.
In addition, Konvitz mentioned seed money available
to establish programs from such organizations as the
Hebrew Culture Foundation, the National Foundation for
43
Jewish Culture, the Memorial Foundation for Jewish Culture
and private family foundations as well as Jewish community
funds and agencies. However, in connection with this
phenomenon of seed money from Jewish organizations,
101
Alter warned against making these programs "Sunday
Schools." The money was welcome but high academic
102
standards had to be maintained. Arnold J. Band
103
also referred to this problem as well as Cohen.
This chapter is concluded with an important name,
Jacob Neusner, who has written on the subject of Jewish
studies for the last sixteen years. Fortunately, all
his essays have been brought together in two volumes; both
entitled: The Academic Study of Judaism: Essays and
104
Reflections, first series in 1975, second series in 1977.
For the student of Jewish studies these essays are very
significant for Neusner deals with practically every issue
that has been raised.
44
Summary
This chapter outlined briefly the antiquity and
continuity of the history of the Jews. It was shown that
this history was rich in culture and had intrinsic value
for study. The vast spread of Jewish experience had
touched both in time and space many movements in Western
civilization and its study would prove beneficial to both
Jewish and non-Jewish scholarship and scholars. Further
more, Jewish history was blessed with a literary tradition
which virtually documented itself through its many
literary works, its folklore and its social and
political institutions. With this wealth of cultural
artifacts and literature, why was this history largely
ignored by the Western world and its intellects? It was
suggested that Christianity and its general hostile
attitude towards Jew and Judaism was chiefly responsible.
Post-biblical Jews were looked upon as a pariah people
to be shunned rather than to be studied. Although
historiography grew in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth
Centuries, there was no change in this negative attitude
towards Jews.
It was the Wissenschaft des Judenthums movement
that began the study of Jew in an objective and scholarly
manner. This movement was founded by Jews but could
not gain entrance into the German university. It remained
45
for America where cultural pluralism is a way of life
to allow Jewish studies to become an integral part of
the higher education scene. It is in America that
Jewish learning was developed and expanded into a
respectable field of research and scholarly endeavor
manifesting thereby America's true democratic spirit
and the ideal of the higher learning which is the
search for truth among all of mankind.
46
CHAPTER III
REVIEW OF LITERATURE: ISSUES AND PROBLEMS
Introduct ion
The purpose of the following chapter is to review
the literature concerning Jewish studies with special
emphasis on current issues and problems.
As a result of the secularization of Jewish learning
with its shift from the sectarian Yeshiva or seminary
to the university, many chnages have taken place in
the methodology of handling the materials and sources.
A growing literature in the field has resulted and
lively discussion has ensued.
This chapter surveyed the key issues being discussed
in the professional literature on Jewish studies. Thus
the chapter is concerned with the issues and problems of
a new field in higher education which seeks to integrate
itself as part of the higher learning.
47
The Nature of Jewish Studies
A number of writers have offered definitions of
Jewish studies. According to Hyman:
Jewish studies may be described as the analysis and
study of the cultural experience (or civilization)
of the Jews throughout the ages and in the con
temporary world. They form a distinct yet integral
part of the heritage of Western civilization, both
in past and present times. Christianity and Islam
are not fully intelligible without a knowledge of
Judaism, and the Jewish experience has played a
significant part in^gjae rise and development of
Europe and America.
Levine writes:
The purpose of Jewish studies in American universities
is to afford students, both Jewish and non-Jewish,
an opportunity to appreciate the Jewish heritage
in all its aspects, as well as to gain insight
into the present condition of world Jewry.
Band defines Jewish studies as follows:
We would rather consider Judaic studies as the
discipline which deals with the historical
experiences, the intellectual, religious, and
social spheres, of the Jewish people in all
centuries and countries... It is, after all, no
less reasonable to posit that Judaic studies
have to do with the experience of the Jews and
its intrinsic shapes and attitudes, than to
assume that Chinese studies, for instance, have
to do withythe historical experience of the
Chinese.
48
Neusner writes:
Jewish learning, broadly construed, is most
nearly analogous, in university terms, to
an area study, in which various disciplines,
drawn from the humanities, such as philology,
art history, musicology, or literary criticism,
and from the social science, such as political
science, economics, sociology, or the like
are brought to bear upon a certain region, or
nation, or segment of s o c i e t y . 1^8
The following elements may be distilled from these
definit ions:
(a) There is a body of data or knowledge that
may be referred to as Jewish studies or
Judaica.
(b) That knowledge:
(1) comprises that Jewish experience or
heritage and consists of religious,
social, historical, literary and
anthropological data concerning
the past and present;
(2) has a right to university status on
its own, needing no other justification;
(3) is certainly no less important to be
studied and researched than other area
studies, e.g., Chinese Studies;
(4) may on the contrary have greater
significance than ordinarily thought
because of its inter-relationship with
Western civilization, Christianity and
I s 1 am.
49
Rationale for Jewish Studies
Ideally, the university is committed to the study
of the diversity of cultures and civilizations as an
expression of liberal education. Members of subcultures
and non-mainstream religions have expressed resentment
at the ignorance and lack of knowledge bf their cultures
and life styles. Higher education has been accused by
them of fostering a narrow parochialism in limiting the
curriculum to the normative cultures, namely, that of
Britain, France, Germany, Spain and the classical cultures
of Greece and Rome. This policy could probably be defended
on the grounds that our civilization is mainly derived
from these normative cultures and the fact that the
university does not have the resources to teach everything.
This, nevertheless, should not exclude the possibility
wherever feasible to extend the curriculum to include
other contemporary and ancient languages and cultures.
The university laying claim to universal interests owes
it to itself to make room for more diversity simply on
the grounds of being that which it is, a liberalizing
institution.
Furthermore, advocates of ethnic and Jewish Studies
or Women's Studies argue that to exclude such studies
50
is unjust for it distorts history. Durham expresses
this idea explicitly as follows:
In order for American history to be accurate,
it must present an inclusive record of the
deeds and achievements of all peoples. In the
past, there has been an unfortunate and ill-
advised tendency to exclude substantial portions
of the history of the Negro in America from the
record of national experience. This omission
is not only unjustifiable from the standpoint
of historical scholarship, but it has allowed
generations of Americans to grow up with a
distorted view of our nation’s development and
the part Negroes have played in it.
Cecil Roth felt that neglect and ignorance of the
Jewish contribution to civilization was one of the reasons
for prejudice leading to violent anti-Semitism. In
The Jewish Contribution to Civilization (1940), he attempted
to combat the rising tide of anti-Semitism in Germany
by stating in his book:
This work is intended as a contribution towards
the settlement of a discussion of long standing...
that the Jew...has produced nothing; that he
is an alien excrescenece on Western life; and
that the influence which he has had on the world's
culture, during the past two thousand years, has
been entirely negative, if not deleterious...
I have tried to assemble and set down in this volume
a representative selection of the contributions
made to the civilization, the culture, and the
amenities of the Western world by persons of
Jewish lineage.
From this point of view, Jewish studies is not only
a question of balancing the intellectual ledger sheet,
so to speak, but also a necessary antidote to a social ill
51
of anti-Semitism. The eminent critic Edmund Wilson also
stressed the importance of Jewish studies for the purpose
of understanding the place of the Jew in Western civili
zation and his contribution to it. He made the following
statement in 1958: ’ ’ The Jews should have at least as much
place in our picture of civilization as they have had in
111
our heritage of superstition.” Wilson appears to
suggest that it was worthwhile to teach the history
and literature of the Jew at the university just as we
teach Greek and Latin and the history of the Greeks
and the Romans.
112
Runes in 1965 edited The Hebrew Impact on
Western Civilization to which Katsh contributed "Hebraic
Foundations of American Democracy.” Thus, for this
school of thought, the rationale is that there is a definite?
need to understand the place of the Jew in Western
civilization both out of fairness, and in order not to
distort history.
The emergence of the concept of cultural pluralism
in America has given further impetus to the teaching of
Jewish studies as well as other ethnic and religious
studies. It is generally known that America is an
immigrant society.
52
Handlin writes in 1959 that
...the whole history of the peopling of the
continent has been one of immigration. Basically
two theories have held sway in regard to this
historical phenomenon. One is the "melting
pot" theory and the other which has gained vogue
recently is the one of "cultural pluralism."
The concept of the melting pot was that the
amalgam of many strains of culture could be
absorbed into America and would produce a new ^^3
national character for the American civilization.
The theory of cultural pluralism was a reaction to this.
A denial was put forth that "...it was possible or
desirable for the immigrant groups to lose their identity
and argued that our culture had much to gain by permitting
114
each of them to develop its own particiular tendencies.
Kallen in 1915 argued persuasively against the policy of
fusing the immigrants into a homogeneous mass. This
new movement of Ethnicity is being strongly proclaimed
115
by Novak in The Rise of the Unmeltable Ethnics (1972)
116
and Greeley's Ethnicity in the United States.
Greeley at the National Opinion Research Center (NORC)
has with other scholars been active in a "definitive
volume of American ethnic diversity." Greeley quotes
Shills (1974) to the effect that group ties are a
primordial attachment. ' Thus:
By a primordial attachment is meant one that stems
from the "givens"— or more precisely, as culture
is inevitably involved in such matters, the assumed
53
givens--of social existence: immediate contiguity
and kin connection mainly but beyond them, the
givenness that stems from being born into a
particular language, or even a dialect of
language, and following particular social patterns.
These congruities of blood, speech, custom, and
so on, are seen to have an ineffable, and at times
overpowering, coerciveness in and of themselves...
The general strength of such primordial bonds,
and the types of them that are important, differ
from person to person, from society to society,
and time to time. But for virtually every person,
in every society, at almost all times, some
attachments seem to flow more from a sense of
natural — some would say spiritual--affinity
than from social interact ion.
America is a country of immigrants many of whom have
come from different parts of the world. They have come
from different racial, ethnic and religious strains.
To seek to eradicate differences appears to be futile if
Greeley and Shils are correct. Furthermore, one can argue
that it is undemocratic and immoral and self-defeating.
118
Kallen in 1924 argued that diversity is basic
to the biological species and to cultures. Novak (1973-
1974) also claimed that culture must flow from one's in
stincts. He says:
The phrase "our common culture" has in recent years
been used with more glibness than hard reflection.
A culture is not put on like a suit of clothes.
One can mimic a culture, absorb it, even use it
as a vehicle of one's own self-expression.
If, however, the culture does not flow out of one's
own tutored instincts and aspirations, it is not
54
yet one’s own and does not yet exhaust one’s own
intelligence, perceptions or dreams. So for
many millions of immigrants and their descendants—
for a majority of Americans, what is currently
available as ’’ mainstream” culture does not spring
from the heart.
Novak goes on to argue that besides our common Western
culture as represented in our humanities in the curriculum,
we also need more diversity in the subcultures of
America and of the whole wide world. He says further:
”Our diversity is proof that we are human.” Therefore, it
is most advantageous to expand the curriculum to take
in other cultures, regions and religions. For Itzkoff
(1969) this would be the essence of the American way of
life or democracy, not only to provide for equality
before the law but the practice of individual choice in
selecting one’s community, culture and symbolic system
to live in.
Jewish Studies versus Jewish Education
Jewish book learning which includes a form of
higher education has existed for approximately three
thousand years. The traditional setting has been the
Yeshiva or some other parochial setting. How does the
learning at the university differ from the Yeshiva or
seminary?
55
Jacob Neusner observes in 1977 that:
Universities are different from Yeshivot (plural
of Yeshiva) or seminaries not only in structure
but in intellectual character. The purpose of
Jewish learning in the Yeshiva or seminary is
primarily devotional or pietistic. The object
is to inspire an appreciation for and a loyalty
to Judaism, as well as an active philosophy of
Jewish life. Therefore, Yeshiva scholarship is
not objective and is not meant to be but is
committed to a point of view. It is not value-
free since Yeshiva is a protagonistic institution.
This is not meant as a criticism of the Yeshiva
but rather to point out the true function of
that institution. Jewish learning at a university
adopts the academic value system.120
McGill in 1970 writes that the primary condition
12 i
for true.knowledge arises from "autonomous inquiry.”
This position was adopted by the faculty of arts and
sciences from the physical sciences where the search for
truth is characterized by a relatively value-free
philosophy. In this search for truth, the university
must be free of any ecclesiastical, political, or
commercial interests.
As expressed by the German university, the concepts
of lerrifreiheit (freedom of learning) and lehrfreiheit
(freedom of teaching) must prevail. In American terms
it is called academic freedom, i.e., "...the right of
the professor to follow an argument wheresoever it may
122
lead either in his research or teaching.”
56
The sectarian Yeshiva cannot in good conscience make
an autonomous inquiry. It operates under a philosophy
3 priori truths.
As for the conservative and reform seminaries, the
situation seems to be somewhat different. Neusner writes
in this regard: "The difference between the world of
discourse of seminaries (meaning conservative and
reform) and that of universities should not be
123
exaggerated." Thus it appears that seminaries have
moved closer to the university methodology of autonomous
inquiry. Yeshivot have not and do not intend to. The
Yeshiva sees itself as primarily an institution where
another kind of learning takes place and whose chief
function is propagating the faith.
Furthermore, the teaching of religion or Jewish
studies in the university differs from the sectarian
Yeshiva in that it is taught (or should be) in a dis
passionate, non-dogmatic manner. There is a relatively
value-free atmosphere and scholarly research is
conducted in the positivistic or historicistic model.
The university scholar in theory is committed (and may
be attached only) to his scholarly method^and its results
which are guided only by reason. In the parochial
57
institution such as Yeshiva, it is the content and its
sectarian treatment that is important. For Yeshiva,
scholarship is devoted to the promulgation of the faith and
instruction to the faithful.
Methodically, Jewish learning istT. . . ahistorical,
exegetical, deductive,...rigidly canonical, episodic and
124
discrete.” According to Neusner, Jewish studies must
develop its "cognitive identity” which reflects the
university's mode of learning. Thus it must seek to be:
...historical, comprehensive, inductive, broad
in scope and unlimited by canon and concerned
with larger structures and even
of social weight and relevance.
Summarizing, we may say that the Yeshiva or sectarian
school takes a position of advocacy and commitment as it
probably should, but the university upholds detachment
and objectivity.
Hyman (Unpublished Papers, "Consultation on Jewish
Studies,” summarizes the issue and writes:
Jewish studies must be taught in a manner
appropriate to the university rather than
the theological seminary. It follows that
the subject matter of Jewish studies must be
in the public domain; that Jewish studies must
be taught without special pleading (religious
or secular); and that standards appropriate to
any academic discipline must apply. There is
no special methodology for Jewish studies and
the methods used are those of the humanities and
the social sciences. Since Jews were in contact
with other civilizations and cultures during the
major portion of their history the materials
must be studied comparatively. ^
generalizations
125
58
Where Do Jewish Studies Belong?
Blumenthal in 1976 writes that:
Jewish studies comprise data and not a method...
data field of Jewish studies should be treated by
the various methodologies of the traditional
humanistic disciplines so that... philological
methods, comparative literature methods, sociological
methods, historv-of-religions methods... are applicable
to the field.127
He sees Jewish studies as compared to other studies such
as Slavic Studies, Black Studies, Women’s Studies, Classical
Studies, Romance Civilization Studies which are basically
data-fields upon which the various disciplines and their
methodology can be used.
128
Neusner also stressed the fact that ”... Jewish
learning does not necessarily fit into a special depart
ment. ..” He felt, however, that Judaica which he con
sidered the study of Jewish religion belonged more
appropriately in a department of religion and Hebrew
Studies or Hebraica more aptly fit into a Near Eastern
Language department. Incidentally, Neusner was instrumental
in designing and forming the doctoral program at Brown
University, called History of Religions: Judaism which
is in the Department of Religious studies at that uni
versity. Neusner continues that Jewish studies pursued
from a historical, sociological, or anthropological point
of view really belong in those departments.
59
129
Neusner thus agrees with Blumenthal that Jewish
learning or studies is really a data field that must be
treated by traditional university disciplines or method
ologies. He states that Jewish studies might become
an area studies in which the various specialists from
many departments and disciplines would be brought together
to work on Jewish materials. It is interesting to note
130
what Band had actually found with reference to Jewish
studies programs at forty-one colleges and universities;
Near Easter Languages (including Oriental Studies) had
fourteen ; Religious Studies - twelve; Classics - four;
Foreign Languages (Modern Languages, Linguistics) -
five; German - two; Jewish Studies (or Hebrew Studies) -
two; English - one; Philosophy and Religious Studies - one.
To summarize this position of Blumenthal and Neusner:
The optimum approach to Jewish studies is through the
existing university modes of learning, the traditional
humanistic disciplines and methodologies. However, inter
departmental or area studies are encouraged wherever
131
feasible. Neusner in 1977, referred to this position
as: the integrationist one. He says: "The theory of
integration further holds that Jewish data are to be
subjected to the same methods and interpreted in accord
60
with the same principles as pertain to all other data
in the humanities and social sciences."
The contrary point of view was expressed by Silberman
132
in 1970, who advocated the treatment of Jewish studies
as a "gestalt"— wholeness of form and matter. He
opposed strongly the interdepartmental approach. He wrote
the following in 1970:
...That the dismantling of Jewish learning as
a totality, part being given over to Religious
Studies, another to Near Eastern history and
languages, a third to Germanic Studies, etc. etc.
so that it may be eased into existing structures of
the American university is to sacrifice the
future to immediate advantages.
Silberman speaking in the late 1960s was influenced by
student demands for relevance and curriculum change. He
saw the possibilities for a new Mgestalt" in Jewish
studies just as it would occur in other ethnic studies
as well. Neusner, in an excellent analysis of the problem
found two basic approaches to the problem of the new
setting of Jewish studies at the university. He called
one the separationist approach and the other, the integra-
tionist approach. He wrote in 1977:
The first [separationists position] holds that
we do in the new home what we did in the
old, but we pretend to be doing something fresh.
The second maintains that the task is integration
and assimilation, primarily in disciplinary
departments, perhaps joined through interdisciplinary
committees or programs... The separationists identify
with ethnic studies; the integrationists do not.
61
According to this interpreation the separationists
see themselves as furthering Jewish identity and raising
Jewish consciousness with social action as part of the
program. Thus they are doing what Jewish education has
always done. On the other hand, the integrationists
wish to integrate fully into existing university structures
and reject identity objectives. These are the two polar
ities postulated by Neusner. It is useful to analyze
programs in these terms. However, it is obvious that
no program will be either one or the other. One can
distinguish between academic and Jewish identity goals.
For example, one can argue that it is better administra
tively to keep Jewish studies together as a gestalt and
still retain a strong commitment to an academic department
and goals. On the other hand, instructors in the inter
departmental setup may teach their courses in a sectarian
atmosphere or with Jewish consciousness goals in mind.
What would seem to be more significant is not the structure
of the program in terms of autonomous Jewish studies
departments or an integrated interdepartment structure,
but rather the attitudes of the instructors and the
philosophy adopted by the program. It is interesting to
note however that student motivation is largely ethnic.
It is important to raise the student's outlook to higher
academic concerns and goals.
62
As Levine says in 1973:
Although the point of departure established by the
student is crucial in the learning process, there is
a difference between the point at which we start
and the point at which we hope to arrive... After
three to four years, the student himself should be
able to go back and woj^gr at the limitations of
his initial interests.
Thus Levine underscores the need to go beyond ethnic
motivation. Interviews with professors and instructors in
the latter part of this study, the empirical part of
the study, indicates a strong consensus in regard to
academic goals. Whether or not the professors advocated
Jewish identity goals, there was ;a strong consensus that
a Jewish studies program must first of all be based
on sound academic standards worthy of the university or
college. It is felt by many that a strong academic
program would bring about the desired results of creating
committed Jews and Jewish values by virtue of the program.
In other words, it could become a by-product of the
program without diluting it.
Levine writes further in 1973:
Our Jewish heritage has such intrinsic relevance
in humanistic terms and reflects creative genius
in so many areas of study that, if allowed to
speak for itself to our present day youth,
more lasting commitments and more meaningful
identification will result than would be the case
were we to clothe our programs in the garb of
ethnicity... There has never been a time in
Jewish history when such a large percentage
of Jewish students were so intellectually
promising. An act of faith in our young people
is necessary. We should gamble on the intrinsic
worth of our heritage, and bring an undiluted
academic program to as many young people as possible. *
Summarizing, Neusner has suggested that two approaches
basically exist concerning Jewish studies in higher
education. One approach seeks to integrate Jewish studies
in the university and discourages identity objectives
as being non-academic. The other approach has Jewish
studies in higher education do what it has always done,
i,e.., foster Jewish awareness and identity. Neusner
identifies this dichotomy with the manner in which Jewish
studies are structured at a particular university or
college. That is the autonomous Jewish studies program
will probably have identity goals as part of the educa
tional philosophy. Conversely, the school using an
interdepartmental approach will seek to integrate and
reject identity goals. It has been suggested that this
does not necessarily follow. The primary factor
determining educational policy will be the philosophy
of the program and its professors. Thus even in an
interdepartmental arrangement educational policy could
favor Jewish identity goals as part of the program.
Conversely, the autonomous Jewish studies department
can insist on pure academic goals. Neveretheless,
64
NeusnerTs anatomy of Jewish studies programs in higher
education with the polarities between integralionist and
separationist appears useful and valid for analysis.
Yet, it should be borne in mind that an autonomous Jewish
studies program and department could have more control
over budget and its program.. This control might be
a distinct advantage for the program. In the final
analysis the question is academic for programs are
university controlled and not administered by individuals
or departments.
As Jospe says in 1973:
"However, the discussion is quite ’academic’
at this time as only a few institutions have
the resources and manpower to set up departments
of Jewish studies. While having separate
departments is a desideratum, until it can be
accomplished, interdepartmental arrangements, are
way stations that should not be disparaged."137
65
Curriculum
In the following discussion, some suggested approaches
are formulated for course offerings in Jewish studies based
on several conferences dealing with this issue. There
is consensus that a Jewish studies program must include
a strong Hebrew language component.
Levine writes:
All Jewish studies programs should include a
fairly strong Hebraic component, although
such programs may have begun from other
points of motivation and may have emerged out of
other existing structures. It would be in
congruous to allow for Jewish studies programs
which do not require a basic, systematic study
of the Hebrew language at a time when the dynamic
society of modern Israel is Hebraicly creative.
Levine and Hallo in 1972, in a similar vein write:
...the central importance of proper Hebrew
linguistic training for all types of Jewish
studies programs must be emphasized...A
mastery of Hebrew (and other relevant languages)
is essential for an in-depth study of any aspect
of Judaica.139
Jewish studies majors are generally required to take
Hebrew especially if Hebrew language and literature is
their major. For non-majors Hebrew can satisfy language
requirements. All sources examined who have discussed
Jewish studies feel that the Hebrew language component
66
should definitely be in the curriculum and a structured
string of courses should be available for the student to
develop mastery in the language.
Yiddish language and literature have become an import
ant element in the Jewish studies curriculum. This is
not hard to understand in view of the fact that this
language is still widely spoken by many Jews. It was the
native language of the overwhelming majority of the
Jewish masses that migrated to the United States in the
last hundred years. In some colleges Yiddish fulfills
language requirements and in others it is part of the
humanities.
Herzog, in 1972, writes:
A multileveled program of Yiddish language
instruction forms the core of any undergraduate
program in Yiddish Studies. The extent to
which such a core program can be elaborated
to incorporate the study of Yiddish literature
and folklore, East European Jewish history
and culture, the East European roots of the
American Jewish community, etc., will depend
upon the particular interests and qualifications
of the available faculty.140
A well developed program in Jewish studies, especially
one that is oriented to Hebrew language and literature,
will offer survey courses in all periods of Hebrew
literature. There are generally four periods including
Biblical, Rabbinic, Medieval, and Modern. For those who
67
do not wish to have a Hebrew major but desire humanities
credits in Jewish studies, the various programs have
developed survey courses in Hebrew literature in English
translation. They also offer: Yiddish literature in
English translation, American Jewish literature and at
UCLA, a course called German Jewish literature which is
basically German literature written by Jewish authors
and which has Jewish content as its subject. Naturally
for Hebrew majors, seminars have been developed for
the intensive study of particular periods or authors
or a literary genre.
Jewish studies usually makes available to students
a sequence of survey courses in Jewish Thought and/or
Jewish History. Sometimes the courses are referred to
as Hebrew civilization.
Hyman in 1972 writes that Jewish studies should offer:
...a two year (four semester) sequence of survey
courses, as well as second level courses...
consisting of...a four semester sequence in Jewish
civilization (Biblical, Rabbinic, Medieval, Modern)
or, alternately, a two semester sequence in Jewish
History and a two semester sequence in Jewish
Thought. .
Hyman also says that for a degree program., in addition
to the survey courses mentioned above:
...advanced instruction including some specialization
in a specific field such as Jewish history,
philosophy, Hebrew literature should be taken together
with...training in the general field of specializa
tion, such as general history, philosophy and
literature.
68
Another area in the Jewish studies curriculum has been
recently developed, the Jewish studies sciences particu
larly Contemporary Jewish studies. Verbit writes in 1972:
Jewish social science is relatively new in
both Jewish studies and in the social
sciences. Until recently, the textual and the
classical emphasis in Jewish studies and the
universal ethos of social science made both
fields generally inhopsitable to Jewish social
sciences.
Although this appears to be the weaker side of Jewish
studies, nevertheless, courses are being developed in
many programs in Jewish social sciences. At the University
of California at Los Angeles, a course in Jewish communi
ties both in the United States and abroad has been
developed in the sociology department. In political
science, there is a course in International Relations
in the Middle East which includes the Arab-Israel conflict.
As far as the study of Judaism as religion, this is
handled either in the history of Jewish Thought or in
Jewish philosophy. Courses that are primarily structured
for instruction in the Religion of the Jews also are
offered particularly on the graduate level.
Hyman writes:
It would seem that four or five faculty
members are required for a degree program;
a Biblical scholar, a historian, a philosopher,
a scholar in Hebrew language and literature,
a social scientist (sociologist, anthropologist,
or political s c i e n t i s t s . ) 1^4
69
Other suggestions are that:
a) Courses should be presented in an architech-
tonic way; i.e., have a natural sequence or
logical structure;
b) the courses should be academically sound;
c) the personnel teaching should be trained in
the university and not be merely practioners
of Judaism;
d) courses should be interrelated with the
humanities and social sciences.
70
Jewish Studies and the Jewish Community
The history of the establishment of Jewish studies
programs indicates that the Jewish community through
various agencies and through the benevolence of
individuals has played a very prominent role in th is
matter. In 1925, Lucius Littauer endowed a Chair
of Jewish Literature and Philosophy at Harvard. In
1927 Nathan Miller endowed a Chair of Jewish History,
Literature, and the Institutions at Columbia.
Mansoor in 1973 wrote of the founding of the Hebrew
and Semitics program at the University of Wisconsin at
Madison through the generous donation of seventy-five
thousand dollars by the Tercentenary Committee of the
145
American Committee of Milwaukee.
Jospe in 1973 summed this action up as follows:
The funding of Jewish studies comes at present
from a variety of sources. About two-thirds
of support for full-time staff are provided by
the respective budgets; about twelve chairs
of Jewish studies are fully endowed; others
are supported by Federations, the American
Jewish Committee, the Hebrew Culture Foundation,
The Bnai Brith Hillel FoundaJ^gns, and similar
communal or private sources.
Jospe however suggested that Jewish community funds should
be used as seed money mainly. If Jewish studies belong
in the university, then it is the reponsibility of the
147
university to support the programs.
71
The heavy involvement of the community in Jewish
studies both in funding and in moral support has created
another potential problem according to several writers.
The Jewish community may compromise academic integrity
in its eagerness to nurture Jewish identity and commit
ment .
148
Cohen in 1970 rejected the use of chairs as
’ 'stimuli and aids to Jewish identity and pride on the
149 150
campus.” Band in 1966 and Alter in 1970
argued for increased community support for Jewish studies
but cautioned against interference in academic policy.
151
Perhaps Levine in 1973 summarized it well by
saying that the community will have to take a gamble
on the intrinsic worth of the heritage to foster
Jewish identity as a by-product of the pure academic
learning process.
72
Summary
This chapter outlined the issues and problems that
have resulted from the transference of Jewish learning
from the traditional sectarian setting to the academy
of higher learning. Because of this change, Jewish
learning is seeking an academic "cognitive identity.”
This identity will be achieved by constant ongoing
scholarly conversation. Fortunately, it has already
begun and there seems to be some fruitful results
from this procedure.
The chapter described these issues and some of the
thinking that has crystallized around them. By
continuous critical examination of the field, Jewish
studies should profit and come into its own as a major
intellectual area of study.
73
CHAPTER IV
RESEARCH PROCEDURE
Introduction
The purpose of this chapter was to describe the
various research procedures used in carrying out this
study. This investigation has a three fold structure:
The first part found in Chapter II is a historical
overview of Jewish history for the purposes of describing
why post-biblical Jews were discriminated against and
why Jewish culture was neglected by the world of scholar
ship .
Chapter III reviewed the issues and problems that
have emerged as a result of the transference of Jewish
learning from the Yeshiva to the university.
Chapter IV, this chapter, describes in detail the
research procedures and strategies employed to attain the
results of this study.
Chapter V to follow will describe the findings of
the empirical study made at the University of California
at Los Angeles, the Los Angeles Valley College and
Hebrew Union College j
74
The procedure for organizing and conducting this
research of Jewish studies in selected institutions of
higher learning in California were as follows:
1. A preliminary search took place on a problem
which was carefully analyzed and formulated as a thesis
proposal and statement for investigation.
2. A comprehensive historical review was under
taken as part of understanding the problem in its
historical perspective and a review of literature was
also undertaken to see the issues as they exist at the
present time with reference to the academic study of
Judaica.
3. An in-depth study of three undergraduate programs
of Jewish studies was initiated covering: the University
of California at Los Angeles; the Los Angeles Valley
Community College (a two year junior college) and the
University of Southern California in cooperation with
Hebrew Union College (USC-HUC).
4. Data were collected and analyzed for descriptive
and comparative purposes.
5. The research was summarized, conclusions were
drawn, and recommendations were made.
75
Delineating the Area of the Study
The initial impulse for this study came from very
personal and committed feelings towards Jewish learning.
The writer is a member of the Jewish clergy and has spent
a great part of his adulthood serving the Jewish community
as teacher and Rabbi. The author observed the growth of
Jewish studies programs in higher education in America and
with the advice of various well-known professors in the
field of higher education, decided to undertake a study
of the history, growth, and expansion of these programs
plus a close look at several programs at reputable
schools in the local area that had achieved success in
Jewish studies programs.
The researcher had to delineate an area of study
and formulate a proposal for a thesis and correctly state
the problem. The following three purposes as stated
in Chapter I were formulated as a basic framework for this
study:
1. To survey the position of the Jew in Western
society with special reference to the denial of their
political rights and the general neglect of their
culture and history by the scholarly world. In addition,
to survey the gradual growth and expansion of Jewish
76
studies as an area of critical inquiry in American
higher education.
2. To review the literature which attempts to define;
the field and the issues that have emerged as a result of
the newly acquired university status of Jewish studies.
3. To describe and analyze three Jewish studies
programs found in the local area including the University
of California at Los Angeles, the Los Angeles Valley
College, and the Hebrew Union College, and to compare
and contrast their history, educational philosophy,
students, and faculty.
Historical Overview
Several history books about the Jews were consulted
to get a general knowledge of the sweep of Jewish history.
Research was conducted into the problem of the discrimina
tion against the Jew and the ignoring of Jewish culture
by Western society. A primary source for the literature
was found at the University of California at Los Angeles
which has one of the finest Judaica collections in the
Western United States. Another extremely important
library put to use was the Hebrew Union College Los
Angeles Library which had many of the books needed for
77
this part of the study. Several trips were taken to
the East coast at which time the writer had a chance to
read books which were not available on the West Coast.
The Fifth Avenue Library in New York has one of the
finest Judaica collections in the world. In addition,
because the v writer was confined to the West Coast during
most of the period of time this research was being conducted,
needed books were requested from the Cincinnati Branch
Library of Hebrew Union College— Jewish Institute of
Religion, another one of the finest Judaica collections.
The writer himself possesses a useful Judaica
library which was utilized for this dissertation. In
addition, books were purchased as permanent additions
to this library.
For the third chapter which discusses the issues
and problems of this new area of study in higher
education, the writer conducted a thorough search in
the periodical literature to uncover as many articles as
possible on the thesis topic. The Index to Periodical
Literature and especially the Index to Jewish Periodicals
were very helpful in this regard.
Two major objectives were projected for the historical
overview in Chapter II: (a) to ascertain why post-biblical
78
Jews and Judaism were generally neglected for study
throughout the centuries; (b) to chart the overcoming of
this problem and the growth of Jewish studies in American
higher education. For Chapter III, the objective was
the presentation of the major educational issues facing
the academic study of Judaica particularly with the
152
transference of Jewish learning from the Yeshiva
to the university.
The researcher traveled to Boston in 1976 to attend
the Annual Conference of the Association of Jewish
Studies. There he had the good fortune to become
acquainted with, and to interview, several of the well-
known scholars in the field including Professor Glatzer
and Professor Sklare. In conducting this research, it
appears that this trip was a true turning point, and
that the interview with Professor Sklare was the most
enlightening for this research.
The author also visited Harvard and Brandeis which
have two of the finest Jewish studies programs in the
country, and spoke to Professors, Twersky, Brandwein,
Jick, and most importantly, to Charles Berlin who is in
charge of the Judaica section of the Harvard Library.
79
Empirical Study of The Three Major Programs
At The University of California at Los Angeles,
The Los Angeles Valley College and
The Hebrew Union College
Initial contacts were made with three key admini
strators of the three programs being studied to solicit
their cooperation in the project. They included Professor
Arnold Band of the University of California at Los Angeles,
Provessor Zev Garber of Los Angeles Valley College, and
Professor William Cutter of Hebrew Union College— Jewish
Institute of Religion at Los Angeles. They were gracious
in agreeing to assist the writer in his undertaking in
every way possible and were faithful to their word
throughout. At UCLA, I was given the privilege of looking
at the lists of specific enrollments in various categories
of the department. At the Los Angeles Valley College,
it was arranged so that I could actually use the office
files and at The Hebrew Union College, the Office of
the Registrar made available to me all necessary inform
ation. I cannot adequately enough express my appreciation
for this unique assistance for my project.
Measuring instrument including a structured question
naire for students and an interview for faculty and
administrators were designed. The questionnaire at first
turned out to be a long and bulky form. It was decided
that a good response would not be obtained under these
circumstances. Consequently, it was necessary to reduce
80
the form in order to retain the most important questions
which at the time were deemed to be of greater importance
to the study. Professor Cutter of the Hebrew Union
College and Professor Garber of the Los Angeles Valley
College were consulted and their input was carefully
considered and utilized for the final draft.
The three main objectives of the questionnaire were
to provide data on:
(a) general vital statistics such as: age, sex,
religion, citizenship, and education (both secular and
religious);
(b) general reasons why students take Jewish
studies courses;
(c) how these courses helped the student achieve
personal, career, and identity goals.
The administering of the questionnaire was as follows:
At the University of California at Los Angeles, the
researcher made several visits to the school for this
express purpose. The sample consisted of eighty-eight
students from two language classes (Hebrew), one history
course, and two Hebrew literature courses. In addition,
responses to questionnaires were received from the Bayit, a
Jewish communal fraternity house near campus, many of
whose residents are enrolled in Jewish studies at the
University of California at Los Angeles,
* 81
At the Los Angeles Valley College, Professor Zev
Garber distributed the questionnaires to his faculty
and the results were returned to the researcher by mail.
A total of seventy-eight responses were recorded.
At the Hebrew Union College, the researcher visited
classes in all the schools of the college including the
Rabbinic, Social Work, and Judaic Studies to get a
sampling of sixty-six students.
The responses were tabulated and presented in tables
as recorded in Chapter V.
After much reading in the field to gain insight
into the actual education issues and some early dis
cussion with Dr. Band and Professor Garber, a specific
interview was written for faculty members and admini
strators. The three main objectives of_the interviews
were :
(a) to obtain data on a definition of the field
of Jewish studies: its purpose, issues and problems;
(b) to obtain data on the particular program of
the school where interviewee is either a faculty member
or an administrator, in order to determine the history
of the program, educational philosophy, objectives, and
other pertinent information;
82
(c) to obtain vital statistics about the faculty
including their backgrounds and general credentials for
teaching. (This third objective was also implemented
by having the individual faculty members send their
curriculum vita to the researcher for tabulation and
results. )
In compliance with regulations, it was necessary to
receive permission to obtain an interview from the
individual faculty member with whom a specific date was
set. In view of the busy schedules of the faculty members
and administrators, making appointments was not an easy
matter. Nevertheless, at the University of California at
Los Angeles, interviews were held with practically all
of the faculty that teaches Jewish studies, consisting
of nine interviews covering areas such as Hebrew
literature and language, Bible, Jewish history, Yiddish
language and literature and Jewish sociology. In most
cases, the interviews were taped and preserved.
At the Los Angeles Valley College, fewer interviews
were held because of the fact that most of the staff is
engaged on a part-time basis. However, the author met
with Professor Zev Garber five times for interviews
and spoke to many of the staff members by phone and off
campus.
83
At the Hebrew Union College, the author interviewed
six faculty members and three key administrators of the
program. In addition, he interviewed Dr. John Orr of
the School of Religion at the University of Southern
California with whom the Hebrew Union College conducts its
joint Judaic studies program. The Hillel Director at
University of Southern California was also interviewed
and Rabbi Laura Geller's remarks were very insightful
concerning the program at USC-HUC.
Fortunately, all the schools where Jewish studies
programs were investigated by this research have produced
very good descriptions of their programs. These exist
in the form of pamphlets, brochures, and catalogues.
The review of this literature aided greatly the research
for the objectives, educational philosophy, and history
of the programs of the schools involved.
Professor Herbeit Davidson of the University of
California at Los Angeles wrote a brief description of
the program and a very convincing position paper on the
teaching of Jewish studies at the university. Professor
Zev Garber is an unusually prolific writer who has written
extensively on the unique program at the Los Angeles
Valley College. Many of his publications are available
at the University of California at Los Angeles Library and
154
have been reproduced by ERIC. The Hebrew Union College
84
has produced a great many publicity items and publications
which contain vital information about the programs and
are excellent for gathering data.
In addition, the administrators of Hebrew Union
College were gracious enough to make available to this
research, the 1974 accreditation papers and the 1978
follow-up of the foregoing.
With the accumulation of the data, and separating
it into categories appertaining to the various aspects
of this study, some clear findings were produced which
are revealed in Chapter V.
85
CHAPTER V
FINDINGS OF THE EMPIRICAL STUDY
COMPARING AND CONTRASTING THREE JEWISH STUDIES PROGRAMS
AT THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT LOS ANGELES,
THE LOS ANGELES VALLEY COLLEGE, AND THE HEBREW UNION COLLEGE
Introduction
This study has a three-fold purpose. The first is
to investigate the reasons why post-biblical Jews and
Judaism were largely ignored by Western society. A
historical overview of Jewish history was made to describe
the reasons for this neglect and the findings of this part
are in Chapter II.
The second purpose was to review the educational
issues and problems that have emerged as a result of the
transference of Jewish learning from the sectarian Yeshiva
to the university. The findings are in Chapter III.
The third purpose is an empirical study of three
local Jewish studies programs at University of California
86
at Los Angeles, the Los Angeles Valley College and the
Hebrew Union College.
This is an exploratory study and therefore utilizes
only three programs. The programs: are broadly representa
tive of Jewish studies programs in American higher
education: The University of California at Los Angeles
is a four year college with a graduate department; the
Los Angeles Valley College is a two year college; and the
Hebrew Union College is affiliated with the University of
Southern California
Findings On University Of California At
Los Angeles
History of Jewish Studies at UCLA
As a result of a number of interviews with Professors
Arnold Band and Wolf Leslau at UCLA, the following
chronology of events can be reconstructed in regard to the
development of the Hebrew and Jewish Studies programs at
this university. According to Professor Leslau, who is
now emeritus, in 1954 Dr, Kaware was invited to teach
Arabic at UCLA, The Jewish community of Los Angeles
asked for a scholar of Hebrew to teach that language at
the university. It was granted and Professor Simon Halkin
87
was invited that year. The Jewish community funded the
courses which were offered in Hebrew. In 1955, Professor
Wolf Leslau was invited to teach Hebrew at UCLA. The
funding came from the Jewish community and the course was
part of the Classical Languages department. Dr. Leslau
offered two years of Hebrew language and one year of
Hebrew literature in translation. Leslau came from
Brandeis where he was teaching. Another man was added to
the program by the name of Dr. Jonas Greenfield who
also came from Brandeis. The Jewish community continued
to fund these courses. Greenfield was a specialist in
Biblical Studies. In 1957, Dr. Band joined the staff and
he came from Harvard. His field was Hebrew literature.
In 1959, the university opened its Near Eastern Languages
and Cultures Department and Hebrew, Arabic and Turkish
were taught. This program was part of the development
of the late 1950s and 1960s when there appeared to be
encouragement by the federal government to develop
language programs and area studies which seemed to
be in the interests of the country. As a result the Hebrew
major came about. The major was envisioned as an under
graduate program in Hebrew language and literature as
intensive preparation for graduate work in this area.
88
Alongside with the undergraduate program, a graduate pro
gram of studies in Hebrew was developed leading to the
M.A. and Ph.D. In 1960, Dr. Davidson of Harvard joined the
faculty and now there was a man for Hebrew and Semitic
languages, Dr. Leslau; for Biblical Studies Dr. Greenfield;
for Hebrew Literature Dr. Band; and for Medieval
Literature and Philosophy Dr. Davidson. In the meanwhile,
a program in Jewish History had evolved in the History
Department under the guidance of Amos Funkenstein from the
University of Berlin.
In the 1960s the minorities began to articulate
their demands for Black and Chicano Studies. Jewish
students also felt that Jewish Studies should be placed
on the curriculum. It was generally felt that the
Hebrew program was in essence Jewish studies and it
fulfilled the demands of the Jewish students. However,
the students were not pleased with the curriculum and per
haps wanted a more global and relevant approach to
Jewish studies than the traditional study of language and
literature which was the basic composition of the
program. Dr. Leslau also mentioned that there was a
fear that the creation of a Jewish studies program would
result in a reduction of students in the Hebrew programs
and as Hebrew majors. This prophecy was unfortunately
fulfilled, as the research will show. In 1973, the
Jewish studies program was launched from the Near Eastern
______________________________________________________ _ _ ________________ 8R
--------------------------- TT4---------------------------------------- ; ---
Languages Department. In the next section, the
differences between the programs are described} briefly.
The main difference is that the Hebrew program emphasizes
language and literature whereas the Jewish studies program
emphasizes all aspects of civilization and culture.
The Jewish studies undergraduate program rapidly grew
to be the largest program in the Near Eastern Languages
Department. Before the creation of the Jewish studies
program, there were generally twenty Hebrew majors and
at the time of this study (March of 1978), according to
Dr. Davidson, there were four or five majors in Hebrew.
However, there are between thirty-five and forty majors
in Jewish studies. It by far outstrips in number all
the other majors of the department including Hebrew,
155
Arabic, and ancient Near Eastern Civilizations.
According to the same article, Jewish studies majors out
number the total amount of undergraduate students in
the other fields by four to one. However, according
156
to Shaffer, "...only five professors out of the
department's sixteen work within the Jewish studies
program." • Professor Leslau was retiring and becoming
emeritus and it was strongly suggested that a Jewish
studies professor be brought in with strong background in
Jewish history, culture, and institutions. As of this
research in 1978, Dr. Debra Lipstadt who was visiting
90
professor of Jewish studies in 1978 has been appointed to
the faculty and will assume her position very shortly.
It should also be noted that in 1973, another
related major was created under the direction of Professor
Bolle, a Religion major. This program is an inter
departmental major with courses in anthropology, history,
and philosophy. The student is introduced to several
religious traditions but the major selects a particular
religious tradition to be studied in depth. One of
the traditions is Israel and Judaism. According to
Professor Davidson, there are two majors in Religion with
a specialty in Israel and Judaism. Finally, as part of
the Jewish studies program, mention should be made of
the appointment of Shimeon Brisman as librarian in 1962;
and the acquisition of Theodore Cummings' collection
of Judaica, which is considered to be the very best,
west of Chicago.
In addition, among the organized research units is
the Gustave E. von Grunebaum Center for Near Eastern Studies:
This center was established to promote individual
and collaborative research and training in this
area. The center encourages the research of
individual faculty members and collaborates in the
solution of basic research problems which require
institutional backing. The center also sponsors
lectures, seminars, and conferences on various
topics falling within the scope of Near Eastern
studies, and actively promotes an extensive
publication program.
91
Philosophy of the Program
As was mentioned earlier in the research findings,
the department of Near Eastern Languages offers a two
track program in Jewish studies. One is the undergraduate
Jewish studies program, the other is the undergraduate
Hebrew major, the older and original of the programs.
However, both lead to the B.A. degree. Dr. Davidson who
was the chairperson of the Jewish studies programs at the
time of this research, 1978-1979 (Dr. Band has assumed
the position as of this date of writing) wrote an
informative paper for circulation within the department
which is available in the appendices of this paper, describ
ing the basic differences in philosophy between the
two programs, namely, the Hebrew and Jewish studies
programs. According to Davidson, th e Jewish studies
major is comparable to other humanities majors. It
158
Mis not direct preparation for any profession or career.”
It is also not the best preparation for graduate studies.
Rather, Jewish studies stresses MbreadthM and affirms
’ ’ the ideal of the liberal arts university and also an old
Jewish ideal, namely, that knowledge is a valuable end
159
in itself.” The program offers general background
courses in Jewish civilization and institutions, under
graduate seminars and modern Jewish history.
92
The program is interdepartmental. Other departments
collaborate with Near Eastern Languages to offer courses
in their disciplines in which the Jewish component is
developed. For example, the Germanic Languages department
undertook a full-time position in Yiddish language and
literature. The history has developed even prior to the
establishment of Jewish studies upper division and
graduate courses leading to M.A. and Ph.D. degress in
History with a Jewish Specialty. The department of
Sociology offers a course on the American Jewish Community
with Professor Gene Levine. The department of Political
Science has been offering a course in International
Relations of the Middle East taught by Dr. Steven Spiegel.
Thus, it can be seen that the Jewish studies program
is an interdepartmental program utilizing the expertise
of the different departments and disciplines of the
university to furnish a well-rounded program in Jewish
studies. According to Davidson, Jewish studies majors
are in the humanities tradition. They are not preparing
for specific careers. But, the fact remains that this
kind of education can be a springboard towards a career
in the Jewish community. With this background, a student
may elect to go on to j professional training such as
teaching or social work which together with the in-depth
93
exposure to Jewish studies well qualifies him for a
career in the field. Indeed, this may also be preparation
for a career in the reform Rabbinate.
Davidson stressed in his paper that Jewish studies
must assume a purely academic stance. Aware of the
fact that students were highly, motivated to achieve
Jewish identity goals through the Jewish studies program,
he emphasized that this emphasis was not appropriate for
the university. He states: "Our program, we decided
should be purely academic and should not be concerned
either with Jewish identity and consciousness or
community action. , f Of course, if Jewish studies resulted
in the raising of Jewish consciousness or identity as
a by-product, no one would quarrel with that. However,
academic objectives were primary. The university’s goal,
according to Davidson, is the development and dissemina
tion of knowledge. Jewish studies should adhere to the
same ideal.
The other track of the program is the Hebrew program
which was the original program of Jewish studies at UCLA.
It was basically designed to provide the student with
expertise in Hebrew language and literature covering all
periods of time from biblical to the present. It was
undergraduate preparation for graduate work in the
94
advanced degrees of M.A. and Ph.D. in Hebrew language
and literature. The primary philosophy of this program
was the methodology of linguistic analysis, philology
and literary criticism.
Objectives of the Program
The Jewish studies at UCLA on the undergraduate level
has two programs leading to the B.A. degree, a Hebrew
program and a Jewish studies program.
Hebrew Program Objectives
The Hebrew program or major was designed to provide:
1. courses leading to a B.A. degree in Hebrew
language;
2. an architechtonic series of courses in Hebrew
language leading to a mastery of the language
as preparation for upper division courses in
Hebrew literature spanning all periods of
Hebrew language development from biblical
times to the present;
3. upper divison courses in Hebrew literature
covering the significant periods and works
of that literature;
4. courses in Hebrew language and literature for
non-majors interested in taking them for
95
humanities, electives or general education
requirements.
Jewish Studies Program Objectives
The Jewish studies program was designed to provide:
1. courses leading to a B.A. degree in Jewish
studies;
2. an architectonic series of courses in Hebrew
language leading to reasonable facility in
that language.
3. courses in Yiddish language and literature for
students interested in that area of studies;
4. a global approach to the study of Jewish
civilization and culture with courses in the
history, philosophy, religion, literature and
sociology of the Jew, as well as contemporary
Judaism and Jewish life.
5. a series of courses relating Jewish studies to
the humanities and social science disciplines
and traditions of the West.
6. a series of courses for non-majors interested
in taking electives or their humanities or
general education requirements in Jewish studies
96
Curriculum
Hebrew Program
The curriculum is designed to bring the student to
a mastery of the Hebrew language in order to facilitate
study of textual materials in all the literary periods
of Hebrew, some of the student's choice and others required
by the program courses. 1A, IB, 1C, constitutes an
academic year of three quarters of elementary Hebrew.
The series 10A, 10B, and IOC is recommended to students
who have background in Hebrew perhaps through religious
training or high school Hebrew. Hebrew 102A, 102B and
102C are intermediate Hebrew courses with an accent on
grammar and the reading of vocalized texts from modern,
biblical, and medieval/Rabbinic literature. These
courses are upper division. Hebrew 103A, 103B, 103C are
advanced Hebrew with readings of unvocalized texts. Once
the student has mastered Hebrew he also may take courses
in the classical texts of the various periods of Hebrew
literature. Hebrew 120 is Biblical texts; Hebrew 130 is
Medieval texts; Hebrew 140 is Modern Hebrew Poetry and
Prose; and Hebrew 160 is the Hebrew Essay.
All of these courses may be repeated for the texts
change continually for each quarter. Hebrew 190A and 190B
are a survey of Hebrew grammar or a descriptive study of
97
Hebrew phonology and morphology. The curriculum also
consists of History 137A, 137B, Jewish Intellectual History
and 138A, 138B Jewish History. The actual requirements
for the major will appear in the appendix at the end of
this paper.
Jewish Studies
Jewish studies majors must also have a strong back
ground in Hebrew language. The prerequisite is:
Hebrew 1A, IB, and 1C. The student must also take Hebrew
102A, 102B, 102C, and 103A, 103B, 103C. Another
prerequisite is History 138A, 138B Jewish History. The
additional upper division courses consist of Jewish studies
110 Social, Cultural and Religious Institutions of the
Jews; Jewish Studies 150A, 150B. Hebrew literature in
English where 150A is Biblical and 150B is Rabbinic
and Medieval literature; 151A, 151B Modern Jewish Litera
ture in English; and Jewish Studies 190 Undergraduate
Seminar in Jewish studies where a single topic is
examined in depth in the area of Jewish Studies.
Faculty
The research shows that UCLA has both a Hebrew
language and literature and Jewish studies program. Both
98
programs are in the Near Eastern Language and Culture
department. However, the Jewish studies program has a
wider base utilizing other departments to supplement the
program. It is therefore interdepartmental in scope. The
faculty of these programs is drawn from the Near Eastern
languages mostly with five professors, two lecturers and
about eight teaching assistants. The following augment
the Jewish studies program from other departments; a
Yiddish professor in the German department; a professor
in Sociology who offers a course in Jewish Communities
once a year; a full-time history professor who teaches
Jewish history in that department. The Jewish studies
program has an Advisory Committee from different depart
ments composed of A. Band, H. Davidson, W. Leslau, Y. Sabar,
all from the Department of Near Eastern Languages, A.
Funkenstein, History; J. Hadda, Yiddish-German; and G.
Levine, Sociology.
Arnold Band is the senior member of the UCLA Hebrew
program in the Near Eastern Language department. He
received his B.A. in Classics from Harvard, his M.A. and
Ph.D. in Comparative Literature at Harvard, and Masters
of Hebrew Letters from Boston Hebrew College in Modern
Hebrew Literature. Dr. Band is a prolific writer and has j
i
I
published continuously from 1957 on. In addition, he has j
given many guest lectures on a variety of topics all over
the world. He was one of the founders of the American
Association of Jewish Studies (AJS) and served as its
president. He is the editor of the AJS Newsletter which
appears quarterly. He has directed and supervised
thirteen Doctoral Candidates at UCLA. He is presently in
charge of the Hebrew Language and Jewish Studies programs
at UCLA. He teaches:
Hebrew 241 Studies in Specific Problems and Trends
in Hebrew Poetry of the Last Two
Centuries (Graduate Course)
Jewish Studies 150A and 150B - Hebrew Literature
in English.
150A - Biblical and Apocryphal Literature
150B - Rabbinic and Medieval Literature
Jewish Studies in 151A and 151B - Hebrew Literature
in English.
151A - Eighteenth and Nineteenth
Century Modern Jewish Literature
151B - Twentieth Century Modern
Jewish Literature
Herbert A. Davidson is full Professor of Hebrew
at UCLA. He received his Ph.D. from Harvard University
in Medieval Hebrew literature. He has written many articles
for professional journals in his field, translated several
100
important medieval works and written many reviews of books.
He is in the Department of Near Eastern Languages. He
teaches;
Hebrew 130 - Medieval Hebrew Texts
Hebrew 135 - Advanced Medieval Texts
Hebrew 230 - Seminar in Medieval Hebrew Literature
Hebrew 231 - Texts in Judaeo-Arabic
Jewish Studies 150 and 150B
150A Biblical and Apocryphal
Literature
150B Rabbinic and Medieval Literature
Yona Sabar is an Assistant Professor of Hebrew at
UCLA in the Department of Near Eastern Languages. He
received his Ph.D.,from Yale University. He has published
articles on Hebrew linguistics and other exotic Jewish
languages of the Near East. He has also published on
exotic Jewish communities such as the Kurdistan Jews.
He teaches:
Hebrew 102A and 102B - Intermediate Hebrew
Hebrew 103A, 103B, 103C - Advanced Hebrew
Hebrew 190A and 19OB - Survey of Hebrew Grammar
Hebrew 210 - History of the Hebrew Language
Lev Hakak is Assistant Professor of Hebrew in the
Near Eastern Language Department at UCLA. He is a
creative writer and has books of poetry and individual
101
poems submitted to various newspapers and journals. He
has published a novel in Hebrew and also articles on
Hebrew literature and book reviews. He teaches:
Hebrew 140 - Modern Hebrew Literature
Hebrew 103A, 103B;, 103C - Advanced Hebrew
Hebrew 140 - Modern Hebrew Poetry and Prose
Stanislav Segert/ is professor of Biblical Studies and
North Western Semitics in the Department of Near
Eastern Languages at UCLA. He received his Ph.D. from
the University of Prague. He has taught at the University
of Chicago, John Hopkins and at European universities.
He is a fellow in many scholarly organizations and has
published many articles in professional journals. He
teaches:
Ancient Near East Studies 150A, 150B, 150C - Survey
of Ancient Near East Literature in English
Semitics 130 - Biblical Aramaic
Semitics 210 - Ancient Aramaic
Semitics 215A, 215B - Syriac
Semitics 220A, 220B - Ugaritic
Ancient Near East Studies
170 - Introduction to Biblical Studies
171 - Old Testament: Hebrew and Septuagint
172 - Semitic Background of the New Testament
102
David L. Lieber is a lecturer in Bible in the Depart
ment of Near Eastern Studies at UCLA. He received his
Doctor Hebrew Letters (DHL) from the Jewish Theological
Seminary. He is the current president of the University
of Judaism. He teaches:
Hebrew 120 - Biblical Texts
Shimeon Brisman is listed as Lecturer in Hebrew.
He has the traditional training of the Yeshiva. His
work at the university is librarian and bibliographer of
the great Judaica collection at UCLA.
Deborah Lipstadt is being mentioned although she
will join the faculty next year as Assistant Professor
of Jewish studies and as such will fill a gap in the
program. She has her Ph.D. from Brandeis. She comes
from Washington University where presently she is
Assistant Professor of Jewish Studies.
Amos Fuckenstein in the History Department is a very
well known historian of Jewish civilization. He has his
Ph.D. from the University of Berlin and is a full professor.
According to Professor Band, he publishes a great deal
but at this writing, the researcher has not acquired his
curriculum vita. He teaches:
History 106A, 106D - History of Science (unrelated to
Jewish studies)
103
History 137A, 137B - Jewish Intellectual History
History 138A, 138B - Jewish History from Biblical
times to our period
History 138C, 138D - Focal Themes in Jewish History
Janet Ruth Hadda is an Assistant Professor of Yiddish
in the German Department of UCLA. She received her Ph.D.
from Columbia University and her M.A. from Cornell in
Germanic Languages. She has published many papers on
Yiddish literature and read papers to scholarly societies
on the same subject. She has published a book on a well
known Yiddish poet and has another one in preparation.
She is the best example of cooperation between Departments
to create an interdepartmental program in a field
relatively new in higher education, Yiddish language and
literature. She has devised and teaches the following
courses:
Yiddish 1-3, Elementary Yiddish
Yiddish 104 Intermediate Yiddish
Yiddish 121A Twentieth Century Yiddish Poetry in
English Translation
Yiddish 121B Twentieth Century Yiddish Prose and
Drama in English Translation
Yiddish 131A Modern Yiddish Poetry
Yiddish 131B Modern Yiddish Prose and Drama
104
Yiddish 199 Special Studies
German Modern German Jewish Literature in
Translatnion
Gene N. Levine is Professor of Sociology at UCLA.
He received his Ph.D. from Columbia University and is
a fellow of the University of Judaism and the American
Jewish Committee Western Division. He has published
widely on ethnic communities of America including the
Japanese and Jewish American communities. He teaches
once a year, a course that has an enrollment of approxi
mately one hundred fifty students, many of them non-Jews.
The Course is:
Sociology 137 Comparative Studies of Jewish
Communities in the United States
and Abroad.
Steven Spiegel of the Political Science Department
received his B.A. at the University of Southern California
and his M.A. and Ph.D. from Harvard University. The
course he teaches is not directly Jewish studies; however,
it is a course about International Relations as applied to
the Middle East where he deals with the Arab-Israeli
problem and Zionism among other things. The course also
attracts between one hundred sixty to two hundred students.
The course is:
Political Science 132A - Contemporary Regional Issues
With Particular Attention
to Inter-Arab Politics,
the Arab-Israeli problem,
and the Persian Gulf Area.
As pointed out earlier there is a Religion major
at UCLA which is interdepartmental.. Students take
courses in History, Anthropology and Philosophy. The
student majoring in Religion with a specialty in Israel
and Judaism would simply be taking the courses in Jewish
studies found in the Near Eastern Languages, German,
History, or other departments with the individual faculty
members already mentioned.
Table 1 represents the enrollments in Jewish
studies at UCLA. Although Jewish studies and Hebrew
are two different majors and undergraduate programs,
the enrollments are being listed together since there are
many courses which both majors take and the definition
between Hebrew and Jewish studies for these courses is
blurred. The courses in Yiddish and Jewish history were
included in the total enrollments for the quarters listed.
However, it was decided to leave out the following
enrollments for Sociology 137 because that course is only
offered once a year and Political Science 132A which is
not a Jewish studies type of course although it deals
106
with the Near Eastern Political situation. This course
also is offered once per year. The approximate enroll
ments in Sociology 137 - Comparative Jewish Communities
is one hundred fifty students while in Political Science
132A - Contemporary Regional Issues in Near East has one
hundred eight students.
Wide variations in the following statistics are
due to the fact that certain courses are not offered
consistently or offered once a year. Sabbaticals taken
by faculty also affects the program.
107
TABLE 1
TOTAL STUDENT ENROLLMENT FOR JEWISH STUDIES AT UCLA
1975-1978
Winter of 1975
Undergraduate Hebrew and Jewish Studies 342
Graduate Hebrew 33
Yiddish 18
Jewish History 89
TOTAL
482
Spring of 1975
Undergraduate Hebrew and Jewish Studies 137
Graduate Hebrew 31
Yiddish 69
Jewish History (not offered) 0
TOTAL 237
Fall of 1975
Undergraduate Hebrew and Jewish Studies 296
Graduate Hebrew 19
Yiddish
36
Jewish History
59
TOTAL
410
Winter of 1976
Undergraduate Hebrew and Jewish Studies 225
Graduate Hebrew
28
Yiddish 23
Jewish History
42
TOTAL 318
108
Spring of 1976
Undergraduate Hebrew and Jewish Studies 252
Graduate Hebrew 20
Yiddish 23
Jewish History (not
TOTAL
offered) 0
252
Fall of 1976
Undergraduate Hebrew and Jewish Studies 274
Undergraduate Hebrew 20
Yiddish 40
Jewish History (not offered)
TOTAL
0
334
Winter of 1977
Undergraduate Hebrew and Jewish Studies 311
Graduate Hebrew
28
Yiddish
18
Jewish History
TOTAL
45
402
Spring of 1977
Undergraduate Hebrew and Jewish Studies 131
Graduate Hebrew 11
Yiddish
33
Jewish History
TOTAL
62
237
109
Fall of 1977
Undergraduate Hebrew and Jewish Studies 296
Graduate Hebrew 23
Yiddish 37
Jewish History 6
TOTAL 362
Winter of 1978
Undergraduate Hebrew and Jewish Studies 169
Graduate Hebrew 18
Yiddish 14
Jewish History 97
TOTAL 298
Spring of 1978
Undergraduate Hebrew and Jewish Studies 163
Graduate Hebrew 16
Yiddish 9
Jewish History 77
TOTAL 265
110
Facts Concerning Students Enrolled in Jewish Studies
at University of California at Los Angeles
A questionnaire was administered to a random
sampling of students in Jewish studies undergraduate
programs at UCLA including Hebrew, Jewish Studies and
Jewish History. The following table represents the
findings concerning the students.
As can be seen from Table 2, the overwhelming
majority of students in the undergraduate divisions are
between the ages of seventeen and twenty-three which
is the typical age for college undergraduates. The UCLA
program is obviously in the main directed to the under
graduate student.
TABLE 2
THE AGE GROUPINGS OF THE STUDENT SAMPLE AT UCLA
N=88
Age_________________ Number of Students Percentage
17 - 23 76 86.36
24 - 28 7 7.95
30 - 40 5 5.68
88 99.99
111
In Table 3, it appears that there are slightly more
males than females.
TABLE 3
THE NUMBER OF MALE AND FEMALE IN THE SAMPLE AT UCLA
N=88
Sex Number of Students Percentage
Male 48 54.54
Female 40 45.45
88 99.99
Table 4 shows the vast majority of the students
are of the Jewish faith. However, the results indicate
that some non-Jews take Jewish studies courses. Thus,
as was earlier pointed out, the reason for teaching
Jewish Studies in higher education, i.e., that non-
Jews should be afforded the opportunity to study Jewish
culture and civilization is partly being fulfilled
through the program.. Table 4 will attempt to show the
relationship of Jewish students as compared with non-
Jewish students taking the program.
Please see page 113 for Table 4.
112
TABLE 4
RELIGION OF STUDENTS ENROLLED IN JEWISH STUDIES AT UCLA
N=88
Religion Number of Students Percentage
Jewish 80 90.90
Christian 4 4. 54
Other 2 (Messianic 2.27
Judaism)
None 1 1.13
No Answer 1 1.13
88 99.97
Table 5 indicates citizen status of students.
Approximately 10.0 percent of the students were not born
in the United States
TABLE 5
CITIZEN STATUS OF STUDENTS ENROLLED IN UCLA JEWISH STUDIES
N=88
Citizen Status Number of Students Percentage
Born in U.S.A. 79 89.72
Naturalized 7 7.95
Non-Citizen 2 2.27
88 99.94
The naturalized citizens come from the following countries:
England; Israel (3); Canada; Russia and Rumania.
113
As can be seen from Table 6, population in Jewish
studies at UCLA is very homogeneous.
TABLE 6
STUDENT STATUS AT UCLA JEWISH STUDIES DEPARTMENT
N=88
Type Number of Students
Full Time 88
Part Time None
Continuing Adult None
Other None
No Reply None
Apparently only full time, regular students take these
courses.
In Table 7, the figure of 17.04 percent of the
sample are majors in either Jewish Studies or Hebrew.
Students are taking Jewish Studies for all possible
reasons as reflected in all categories but those taking
the course as an elective seem the most numerous.
Please refer to page 115 for Table 7.
114
TABLE 7
RESPONSE TO: IS JEWISH STUDIES OR HEBREW YOUR MAJOR?
N=88
Classification Number of Students Percentage
Major 15 17.04
Minor 6 6.81
Elective 46 52.27
Humanities or General
Education Requirement 9 10.22
Lanugage Requirement 5 5.68
No Reply 7 7.95
88 99.97
It is interesting to note in Table 8 to follow that
the vast majority of the students responded to high school
only. This of course fits the pattern of undergraduates
who most probably have only a high school diploma. Yet
a few students have other degrees in higher education--
this may indicate a return to college for those seeking
a new direction in their education.
Please refer to page 116 for Table 8
115
TABLE 8
PREVIOUS EDUCATION OF STUDENTS AT UCLA IN JEWISH STUDIES
N=88
Type Number of Students Percentage
High School Diploma 82 93. 18
College Degree 4 4. 54
Graduate Degree 1 1.13
Other 1 1. 13
88 99. 99
TABLE 9
PREVIOUS RELIGIOUS OR HEBREW INSTRUCTION AMONG STUDENTS
ENROLLED IN JEWISH STUDIES AT UCLA
N=88
Type of School Students Average Years
Attendance
of
Percentage
SS 23 6. 95 26. 13
HAS 7 4.83 7.95
SS & HAS 15 SS 5. 92 HAS 4. 28 17. 04
SS & HAS & HHS 10 SS 6.9 HAS
HHS
4.3
2.2 11. 36
HAS & HHS 7 HAS 5.14 HHS 4.0 7. 95
HHS 4 4.66 4. 54
HDS 4 4.5 4. 54
Odd Combinations
None
No Reply
110
4
4
11. 36
4. 54
4. 54
88 99. 95
116
The following question was conceived of in terms of
a problem raised in the professional literature, i.e.,
should Jewish Studies be organized as a separate depart
ment or should it be interdepartmental. At UCLA it is
organized as an interdepartmental program. Please see
Table 10.
TABLE 10
SHOULD JEWISH STUDIES BE ORGANIZED AS A (AN)
N=88
Type Number of Students Percentage
Separate Department 58 65.90
Interdepartmental Program 20 22.72
No Opinion 1 1.13
No Reply 9 10.22
88 99.97
There appears to be several problems with this
question. One, there are more replies than respondents
thereby indicating that quite a few students elected to
reply in a multiple manner to the question perhaps indica
ting several careers they had in mind or that they were
not sure so they answered to more than one. Secondly,
there was not enough clarification in the possible
responses. For example, teaching and research and/or
higher education were given as two possible answers.
117
However, the question did not indicate specifically
Hebrew teaching or research and/or higher education in
Jewish studies. Students who intend to teach but not
Hebrew or students who intend to go into higher education
but not into Jewish studies may have answered in the
affirmative. However, this question was meant to elicit
answers to Hebrew teaching and to a career in higher
education in Jewish Studies. Nevertheless, it is quite
evident that many students are planning a career in
specific Jewish life occupations such as Rabbinate,
Cantorate and Jewish community work.
TABLE 11
RESPONSE OF STUDENTS AT UCLA TO POSSIBLE CAREER GOALS
N=88
Types Number of Students Percentage
\
Rabbinate \ J 9 10.22
Cantorate , ' 2 2.27
vy
Jewish Communal or
Social Work 18 20.45
Teaching 21 23.86
Research and/or Higher Ed. 28 31.81
Other 27 30.68
No Reply________________________ 3_____ 3.40
118
Table 12 indicates that affiliation among the students
in a religious or other type of group is quite strong.
There are multiple answers to this question so that
responses equal more than the respondents.
TABLE 12
RESPONSES TO RELIGIOUS OR OTHER JEWISH AFFILIATION
N=88
Type Number of Students Percentage
Synagogue 34 38.63
Church 3 3.40
Zionist Group 22 25.0
Other (Bnai Brith,Hillel) 33 37.5
None 11 12.5
No Reply 14 15.90
The following question was designed to elicit
responses in regard to objectives in Jewish Studies at
UCLA. In the literature, the problem is raised if Jewish
studies should be concerned with non-academic goals such
as Jewish consciousness raising or Jewish identity.
The results of the question indicate that students want
strong emphasis on Jewish identity objectives.
119
TABLE 13
IN ANSWER TO: SHOULD JEWISH STUDIES DO THE FOLLOWING?
N=88
Type of Answer Number of Students Percentage
Raise Jewish
Consciousness 73 82.95
Stimulate Religious or
National Affiliation 38 43.18
Work for Jewish
Survival 48 54.54
None of the Above 8 9.09
Other 7 7.95
No Reply 2 2.27
Table 14 reveals responses to a question which
was optional: ’ 'Please state your reasons for taking
Jewish Studies.” There were sixty-one respondents out
of eighty-eight. The answers were broken down into
the following categories: Heritage related answers, i.e.,
where the student expresses a desire to learn more about
the culture, history, philosophy and religion of Judaism;
to live in Israel, i.e., certain individuals stated they
were interested in living in Israel and wanted to
prepare themselves through language and cultural exposure;
language acquisition, i.e., to learn a foreign language;
120J
career goals; and conversion— also, a curiosity to learn
about Judaism as well as other religions, too.
TABLE 14
REASONS FOR TAKING JEWISH STUDIES
N=88
Number of Students Percentage Categories
To Learn Jewish
Heritage
To Live in
Israel
Language
Acquisition
To Learn About
Judaism (Christians)
Career Goals
Conversion
Academic Goals
41
0
10
4
2
0
4
The principle findings of Table 14 are that more
students take Jewish studies to learn about their Jewish
Heritage.
121
Findings On Los Angeles Valley College
History of Jewish Studies Program at LAVC
In the fall of 1970, Zev Garber introduced into the
Foreign Language department of Los Angeles Valley College
two sections in basic Hebrew and one course in Hebrew
160
Civilization. These courses were well received and
161
the need for expansion seemed evident. Garber in 1973
cites the fact that M. . . it became clear to the author
that the educational needs of an important element of the
San Fernando Valley could be further enhanced in con
junction with the stated aims, purposes, and philosophy
of the College, by proposing new courses in Judaica."
Garber thus presented a number of faculty and administrators
with a projected program in Jewish Studies which was im
plemented by mid-Fail of 1972. Administrative support,
community need and faculty-student agreement together with
the dynamic guidance of Zev Garber brought about the
162
program.
Courses in Jewish contents and language were offered
as part of the program offering a major in Jewish Studies
and Hebrew and a degree in Associate of Arts in Jewish
Studies, the first of its kind in a Community Junior
College in America.
122
It also provided for students who wish to learn about
Jewish civilization and culture and who are not majors to
take some of their humanities and social science electives
as part of the Jewish Studies program. In addition,
students wishing to fulfill language requirements by taking
Hebrew or Yiddish can also avail themselves of this
program. Furthermore, it offers the opportunity for
further education and intellectual growth to continuing
adult education students.
The Program of Jewish Studies at LAVC
162
According to Garber, the program was
established on the basis of the following factors. Here
we present in abbreviated form these factors:
1. Judaism although a vital, dynamic force in
Western civilization has been largely ignored
by the world and was never studied as a disciplin
aside from ancient biblical texts and background
as pertaining to the genesis of Christianity.
This void is at the root of anti-Semitism and
ignorance of the Jews as a culture and a religion
Therefore, programs of this kind combat an
ancient evil.
123
2. Like other minorities, Jewish life in America
has profited and suffered from an open society
philosophy now prevalent. Thus, courses in
Jewish content as in the case of other minorities
help define American culture as a pluralistic
society and also helps in the identity crisis
of Jewish youth.
3. Jewish civilization should be studied for its
contribution to Western civilization almost in
every human endeavor. Much is to be learned
about the religion, nationality, language,
and other aspects of Hebrew civilization,
particularly as it relates to Western civilization
4. The creation of a University of California at
Los Angeles Jewish Studies major in March of
1972 gave added impetus to having a coordinated
major at a Community College in the local area.
5. As a Community College, Los Angeles Valley College
serves the educational needs of this community.
The Jewish Studies program likewise serves the
many synagogues and Jewish centers and the cult
ural and academic needs of the large Jewish
population of the San Fernando Valley.
124
Philosophy of the Program
164
Garber discusses the philosophy of the program
and points out that it is designed to give Jews a sense of
ethnic identity and assist in the investigation of areas
of culture, language, religion, nationality, history,
and sociology of the Jewish people. Garber in a number
of interviews stated that the strengthening of ethnic
identity through the raising of Jewish consciousness is a
definite aim of the program. However, this project is
achieved without sacrificing the academic quality of
the program. It is designed to attract the following
kinds of students: one, the Jewish Studies major who
is interested in this field and has a variety of courses
to take which will prepare him for transfer to ;a university
where Jewish Studies is offered as a major; two, the
student who wishes to learn about Jewish civilization or
culture and therefore can take some of his humanities or
social science courses for credit; third, this program
also permits the student to fulfill language requirements
by taking courses in Hebrew or Yiddish; also, the program
offers the opportunity to adult students to take courses
in Jewish Studies and thus it satisfies the normal
rationale of a Community College offering courses to
125
transfer students and to students who are interested in
Adult Education. In addition, it allows vocational students
the opportunity to get some of their general educational
credits in Jewish studies if they so desire.
165
Garber suggests that the Jewish Studies Program
is in accord with the aims, purposes and philosophy of
the Community Junior College. According to Thornton in
166
1966 the following are the generally accepted pur
poses of the Community Junior College:
1. Occupational education of post-high school level.
2. General education for all categories of its
students.
3. Transfer of preprofessional education.
4. Part-time education.
5. Community service.
6. The counseling and guidance of students.
A brief definition of each purpose will be related
to the Jewish Studies program at Los Angeles Valley College.
The first purpose does not pertain to the Jewish Studies
program, for occupational education refers to terminal
courses which "...train skilled manpower for varied
167
community jobs not requiring four year college degrees.”
This program is referred to as terminal since the student
126
generally completes his "occupational" education in
the two year period that he spends at the Community Junior
College and is ready for a position in business or
industry. Thus defined, this purpose does not relate
to Jewish studies at all. However, theoretically, students
taking the terminal courses can take some of their general
education courses in Jewish studies.
Thornton in 1966, defined the second purpose of
educat ion:
...as a program of education specifically
designed to afford young people more effective
preparation for the responsibilities they
share in common as citizens in a free society
and for wholesome and creative preparation in
a wider range of life activities.
169
Kelly and Wilbur in 1970 saw the function of education
as enriching the student’s life ”... emotionally, socially,
or culturally...” and the purpose may be simply "...one
of personal development.”
170
Garber in 1973, states: "The Jewish studies
program aids the synagogues and Jewish centers of the
San Fernando valley by serving its academic and cultural
171
needs.” He also emphasizes that this program helps
the Jew who takes these courses to educate himself to
lead a more productive life as a Jew in the spiritual-
cultural categories of life. Thus seen, the Jewish studies
program fulfills this purpose of the Community Junior
College since it enriches the student’s life.
127
As for purpose three, namely, the Transfer program,
the Jewish studies program has achieved an eminent place
at Los Angeles Valley College. It is the first such
program to offer the Associate of Arts degree to a Jewish
Studies major in a two year community college. The
Transfer purpose may be defined as "preparation for further
172
study at the four-year college or university." In
other words, the studentrs program must be in articula-
173
tion "...for entering a higher level}- of education."
University parallel courses are offered at Los Angeles
Valley College in lower division courses in Jewish studies
and articulation is maintained through liason committees
composed of representatives from the community college,
and other advanced colleges which offer Jewish studies
beyond the two year level.
As for the fourth purpose, that of part-time education,
which when defined as Adult Continuing Education includes
both people who work and even housewives, the Jewish
studies program also serves them well. The program,
broad in cultural scope, is directed to enhancement and
growth for the Adult Continuing Education student.
Purpose five of Community Service is well carried
out by the Jewish studies program since many of the faculty
who teach there are known activists in the community.
They speak and write in the local press on their particular
specialt ies.
128
Finally, Purpose six, the counseling and guidance of
students to appropriate courses and to future opportunities
in the field is carried out by the staff and especially
Professor Zev Garber. There appears to be a keen interest
expressed by the faculty in helping the student achieve
his goals in the area of Jewish Studies.
Other aspects of the community junior college philo
sophy are also manifested in the program. The "open
door” policy gives all students a chance to study in the
community college even those who have not excelled in
their previous education. It (the community college)
salvages talents and skills which would be otherwise lost
if the student did not have the opportunity made available
at the community college. This provision applies to
Jewish studies as well. Students who would not have
attended other higher education institutions in the
area because of sundry reasons when enrolling find the
opportunity to take courses in Jewish studies. The
community college prides itself on the quality of its
instruction. Detailed syllabuses made available to the
researcher indicates that a high degree of planning goes
into the individual course. Many innovative ideas are
used including novel approaches to the material, guest
lectures, library, theatre, museum trips, food experiences,
129
174
slides, video tapes, and other audi-visual materials.
In addition, co-curricular activities are sponsored
by the Jewish studies department including four Jewish
studies seminars a semester where papers are read by
faculty and off-campus scholars, a community actions
project, a monthly department newsletter, and the sponsor
ship of three clubs on campus. Eta Beta Rho is an
academic group of Jewish studies majors sponsored by
the National Association of Professors of Hebrew.
Summarizing the philosophy of the Jewish studies
program at Los Angeles Valley College, the research
indicates a program carrying out the widely accepted
mission of the community college including the Transfer
and Continuing Education purpose of the college. It
utilizes the "open door" policy; its program is student
centered. It emphasizes excellence in teaching using
innovative techniques to attain this goal. It highlights
co-curricular activities and considers the raising of
Jewish consciousness as an important goal for the program.
The campus is seen as a "frontier of Jewish life" for
alienated Jewish youth to gain for themselves pride in
their heritage. Yet, the program does not compromise with
high academic standards. For the non-Jewish student
population it is conceived as a program of enlightenment
as to the Jewish contribution to Western civilization and
thus an antidote to anti-Semitism.
_________________________________________ 130
Objectives of the Program
Garber in 1973, in an article lists the objectives
of the program as follows:
(1) to satisfy the cultural and intellectual interests
of the college community and the citizens living
in the area served by the college; (2) to afford
students an opportunity to appreciate the rich
Jewish heritage in all its aspects; (3) to help
students develop an understanding of the unique
Judaic contribution to world civilization in
particular; and (4)'to tell the story often ignored
in studies at most colleges and universities of
one of the oldest continuing cultures in the history
of mankind.
Curriculum
The curriculum developed by the Jewish Studies
department is directed to two main goals. One is the
transfer student and the other the continuing adult
education student. The transfer student is either a
major in Jewish studies or a non-major taking courses to
fulfill humanities, language, or social science require
ments. The general guiding principle is to develop
courses that are parallel to the university lower division
courses. This is obviously necessary so that the major
can go on to do upper division work at the university or
four year college. In the case of Los Angeles Valley
College, the most likely choice in the local area for a
Jewish Studies major is the University of California at
131
Los Angeles (UCLA). Articulation procedures to assure the
parallel quality and standard of the courses at Los
Angeles Valley College and UCLA is maintained through
committees that meet with representatives from the
Community College, University of California and California
State University. Non-majors also enjoy the high
level maintained for their courses in Jewish studies. It
f
is assumed that a ' ’ parallel university” course is of
sufficient high quality to warrant transfer of credit, to
the transfer school of the student's choice.
At Los Angeles Valley College, the Jewish studies
department also provides courses for continuing education
students. These courses are offered in the evening
since the students work during the day. Many professionals
take the courses but there is a preponderance of house
wives. However, Garber in 1973 states:
The evening classes ...maintain the same
standards of attendance and scholarship
and carry the same college credit as
do the day classes, even though many
students do not choose to take the
courses for credit.
In other words, the curriculum both for day and evening
or roughly speaking, for transfer or continuing education
students, is the same.
132
The curriculum consists of courses in Hebrew and
Yiddish language and in Hebrew and Yiddish literature in
translation. Additional humanities courses are: American-
Jewish literature and the Talmud and Mishna as literature
also in translation. Courses in social science include:
Jewish history, Hebrew civilization, the Jew in America,
Israel, the Theory and Practice of Zionism. Courses in
philosophy and religion include: The Jewish Religious
Heritage and a Survey of Jewish Philosophy, Thought, and
Culture. A Jewish studies major must have a solid intro
duction to the Hebrew language including Jewish studies. 11
and 12 equivalent to Elementary Hebrew 1 and 2 at UCLA and
Jewish Studies 13 and 14 equivalent to Intermediate
Hebrew 1 and 2. It should be noted that because
the Jewish studies began as Hebrew and later became
Jewish studies, administratively, some of the courses
still retain Hebrew language nomenclature and are so
recorded in the official records. Hence, at Los
Angeles Valley College, the difference between Hebrew
and Jewish studies majors is of no consequence. Hebrew
courses are a self-contained unit bearing little connection
to the thought courses. Elementary and intermediate
Hebrew stress the fundamentals of the language, the
essentials of grammar, practical vocabulary, useful
phrases, readings in modern Hebrew prose and poetry,
written compositions, and ability to understand and
speak basic Hebrew. History of the Jewish' people attempts
to analyze their outlook and philosophy, their habits
and customs, their values and ideals, as well as their
historical experiences. Hebrew Civilization 1 studies
the development of Jewish self-understanding in relation
to the intellectual climate of the environment, as
expressed in the biblical and talmudic ages. Hebrew
Civilization 2 is a course designed to consider problems
and trends during the European and modern periods.
Israel: The Theory and Practice of Zionism is a general
survey of the historical development of Israel with a
special emphasis on the social and political institutions
combined with a survey of the geographic, economic, ethnic,
and religious compositions of the land of Israel.
Jewish Religious Heritage intends to familiarize the
student with what the Jewish tradition regards as its
essential genius and provides an opportunity for the
development of an appreciation of the similarities and
differences between Judaism and the other major cultures.
Yiddish literature in English translation includes
discussion of the Yiddish language and its dialect
structure as well as poetry, prose and folksongs from 1382
177
to the present.
134
Jewish Philosophy and Thought is a survey of Jewish
philosophical thought from Philo to Post-Auschwitz Age
as reflected in the many cultural centers of Jewish life
both in ancient Israel and the Jewish Diaspora. The
most recent developed course is the Holocaust which is
a three unit class and is decribed as follows: Pre-
World War Europe which emphasizes the nature of Hitler's
Nazi movement in Germany, reviews the war years and
programs of genocide against the Jewish people of Nazi
occupied Europe and considers reasons for the holocaust,
roles of the perpetrators and victims and results.
The following is a recommended program for the AA degree
major in Jewish Studies at Los Angeles Valley College;
First Semester
Jewish Studies
Hebrew Language Course
English 1
Speech 1
Electives
First Year
Units Second Semester
3
Units
3 Jewish Studies 10
5 Hebrew Language Course 5
3 Health 10 2
3 Psychology 1 3
3 Electives 3
135
Second Year
Third Semester
Jewish Studies 1
Jewish Studies 2
Jewish Studies 25
Electives
Sociology 11
Units
3
3
3
3
3
Fourth Semester
Jewish Studies 3
Jewish Studies 4
Philosophy 1
Electives
Units
3
3
3
6
There are additional requirements for the AA degree
found in the college bulletin. In addition, there are
many more recommended courses in Jewish Studies.
136
Findings Concerning the Faculty at LAVC
Jewish Studies at Los Angeles Valley College is
organized as a separate department. In the Spring of
1978, there were eight instructors including Zev Garber,
Sol Model1, and Farrel Broslawsky who were full time
and Mos,he Blechman, Erwin Ruch, Shoshana Gershonzon,
V v ' '
Jerrold Goldstein and Marvin Zuckerman who teach
part time between three and five hours a week. Sol Modell
and Farrel Browslawsky are in the history department but
have approximately one quarter assignments with Jewish
Studies.
Faculty
Zev Garber has a B.A. (Hebrew) from Hunter College,
City University of New York. He also has an M.A. degree
in Religion from the University of Southern California.
He passed his qualifying examinations for the Ph.D. but
did not do the dissertation. He has fifty-eight units
of post B.A. in North-West Semitic Languages and Literature
from UCLA. He is Associate Professor and Chairman of
the Jewish Studies program and also its founder. He is
secretary of the National Association of Professors of
Hebrew, and Chairman of the American Academy of Religion
*137
Studies in Judaica Seminar. Zev Garber is a member of
twelve national academic societies and a recipient of
numerous scholastic awards. He is on the Editorial Board
of Hebrew Abstracts. His publications include fifty-nine
articles for the Encyclopedia Judaica, 1971, seventeen
articles in the professional literature on the topics
of teaching Religion and Judaica and one hundred twenty-
three book reviews for many professional journals. He
teaches the following courses:
Jewish Studies 2 - The Jewish Religious Heritage
Jewish Studies 3 - Contemporary Hebrew Literature
in Translation
Jewish Studies 6 - American-Jewish Literature
Jewish Studies 9 - Hebrew Civilization 1 (Same as
Hebrew 9)
Jewish Studies 10 - Hebrew Civilization 2 (Same as
Hebrew 10)
Jewish Studies 11 - Elementary Hebrew 1 (Same as
Hebrew 1)
Jewish Studies 12 - Elementary Hebrew 2 (Same as
Hebrew 2)
Jewish Studies 13 - Intermediate Hebrew 1 (Same as
Hebrew 3)
Jewish Studies 14 - Intermediate Hebrew 2 (Same as
Hebrew 4)
Jewish Studies 17 - The Talmud: Mishna as Literature
Jewish Studies 26 - Survey of Jewish Philosophy,
Thought, and Culture
138
Garber teaches both in the day and evening sessions.
It is obvious that the program revolves around him and
that he has left his stamp and continues to do so. There
seems to be an exciting dynamic quality at Los Angeles
Valley College and it seems to have been infused by Garber.
Although he does not have the Ph.D., he is a productive
scholar and publishes a great deal. In an interview, he
had pointed out that in his future sabbatical, he is
planning to write a book. Academically, he seems well
prepared for his responsibilities at Los Angeles Valley
College. Zev Garber teaches fourteen hours in the fall
and sixteen hours in the spring semesters. He also
teaches nine extra semester hours. His versatility and
wide ranging knowledge and background is a great asset
to the program.
Farrel R. Broslawsky has a B.A. and M.A. in History
from California State University at Los Angeles. He also
has the J.D. degree from the University of San Fernando
Valley College of Law and is a practicing attorney. He
is professor of History at Los Angeles Valley Colleges
and teaches full time. He is assigned to the Jewish
studies department for one quarter of an assignment which
will usually be a three unit class. His publications are
definitive articles that tend to be left of center in
139
the political spectrum both in reference to political
or Jewish political matters. Courses that he teaches are:
Jewish Studies 1 - The Jew in America
Jewish Studies 2 - Israel: The Theory and Practice of
Zionism
Jewish Studies 25 - The History of the Jewish People
Jewish Studies 27 - The Holocaust
Sol Modell has a B.A. from Brooklyn College, City
University of New York and a M.A. from California State
University at Los Angeles. He is a professor of History
at Los Angeles Valley College. His publications tend to
be definitive articles and correspondence to the general
and Jewish press. His politicalviews are right of center
particularly in regard to Jewish issues. He also teaches:
Jewish Studies 1 - The Jew in America
Jewish Studies 4 - Israel: The Theory and Practice
of Zionism
Jewish Studies 25 - The History of the Jewish People
Jewish Studies 27 - The Holocaust
Shoshana Gershenson received her B.A. from Bernard
College in History and her M.A. in Jewish History from
Columbia. She studied under Salo Baron and Gershon Cohen
who are considered to be two giants in Jewish Studies in
America. She also received a B.H.L. (Bachelor of Hebrew
Letters) from the Jewish Theological Seminary in New York
140
and the equivalent of M.H.L. (Masters of Hebrew Letters).
She is presently working towards completion of the Ph.D.
in Hebrew Letters from the Jewish Theological Seminary.
She is assigned to the language area of Jewish studies,
namely, Hebrew. Her assignment is five hours a week
for a language course. She teaches:
Jewish Studies 11 - Elementary Hebrew 1
(Same as Hebrew 1)
Jewish Studies 12 - Elementary Hebrew 2
(Same as Hebrew 2)
Jewish Studies 13 - Intermediate Hebrew 1
(Same as Hebrew 3)
Jewish Studies 14 - Intermediate Hebrew 2
(Same as Hebrew 4)
Moshe Blechman received his M.A. degree from the
Hebrew University in Jerusalem. He is continuing his
studies at the University of Judaism. His assignment
is a five hour a week language course. He teaches the
intermediate Hebrew courses:
Jewish Studies 11 - Elementary Hebrew 1
(Same as Hebrew 1)
Jewish Studies 12 - Elementary Hebrew 2
(Same as Hebrew 2)
Jewish Studies 13 - Intermediate Hebrew
(Same as Hebrew 3)
Jewish Studies 14 - Intermediate Hebrew
(Same as Hebrew 4)
141
Jerrold Goldstein holds a B.A. degree from UCLA.
He was ordained at the Hebrew Union College in Cincinnati
and holds an M.A. degree from the University of Minnesota.
He is very involved with community activity and works
with the Hillel Council at Los Angeles Valley College.
He teaches one course:
Jewish Studies 1 - The Jew in America
Marvin Zuckerman has an M.A. in English Language
and Literature. He has taught English and Yiddish at
Los Angeles Valley College for the past eleven years. He
has also served as consulting editor of technical
publications for the Northrop Corporation and Systems
Development Corporation for the past fifteen years. He
has published a textbook of college English, articles
and a book with Dr. Weltman of UCLA of Yiddish folk
sayings. He teaches:
Jewish Studies 5 - Yiddish Literature in English
Translation
Jewish Studies 7 - College Yiddish
Erwin Ruch received his B.A. from Yeshiva University.
He was ordained from the Jewish Theological Seminary. He
is part time language instructor. He teaches:
Jewish Studies 11 - Elementary Hebrew (Same as Hebrew
1)
Jewish Studies 12 - Elementary Hebrew (Same as Hebrew
2)
142
Findings Concerning the Student Taking Jewish Studies
at Los Angeles Valley College
The Office of Educational Planning and Development
made available the following data concerning Jewish
Studies and Hebrew Majors at Los Angeles Valley College.
Also the Department of Jewish Studies assisted in this
matter. It is important to note that there is no
difference between the Hebrew or Jewish Studies majors.
Due to the history of the program, this distinction
remained, but it is of no consequence. The program started
as a Hebrew program in the foreign language department
but received autonomous status as a Jewish Studies
department. Administratively, however, courses begun
as Hebrew courses still retain that nomenclature and the
other courses where the Jewish Studies department was
created became Jewish studies. However, there are
cross-listings for Hebrew courses in Jewish Studies. In
other words, it is merely an administrative distinction.
However, why one should choose to be a Hebrew or Jewish
Studies major may be a matter of psychology. It is
of course well known that the only fully developed program
in Jewish Studies and Hebrew in this region is at the
University of California at Los Angeles. This is the
only public college offering the B.A. degree in Jewish.
143
Studies or Hebrew. At UCLA, however, the distinction
between Hebrew and Jewish majors is very marked with
different requirements. It thus may be that the student
who is indicating a Hebrew major has such in mind when he
gets to UCLA and contrawise the Jewish Studies major.
The following table presents the enrollment in Jewish
Studies at Los Angeles Valley College. These facts were
obtained from the Office of Planning and Development at
the college.
TABLE 15
STUDENT ENROLLMENT AT LOS ANGELES VALLEY COLLEGE
IN JEWISH STUDIES
Day-time 145 43.80
Evening 186 56.19
331 99.99
As seen in Table 16, there has been a decline in
Jewish Studies and Hebrew majors from the Fall 1975 to
the present. This statistic was made available by the
Office of Planning and Development at LAVC.
144
Jewish
Studies
Hebrew
TABLE 16
JEWISH STUDIES AND HEBREW MAJORS FROM FALL 1975 TO FALL 1978
AT LAVC
Fall 1975 Spring 1976 Fall 1976 Spring 1977 Fall 1977 Spring 1978 Fall 1978
29 21 20 10 12 14 14
14 17 18 13 11 11 12
43 38 38 23 23 25 26
O i
The following Table represents the figures for the
enrollment in Jewish Studies at Los Angeles Valley
College. For the language courses in Hebrew there are
cross listings with Jewish studies and likewise for
Hebrew civilization
TABLE 17
ENROLLMENT FROM FALL 1976 TO SPRING 1979
LOS ANGELES VALLEY COLLEGE
Fall 1976 Spring 1977
Jewish Studies
(Day) 129
Jewish Studies
(Evening) 174
303 303
Jewish Studies
(Day) 88
Jewish Studies
(Evening) 176
264 264
Hebrew
(Day) 32
Hebrew
(Evening) 46
Hebrew
(Day) 39
Hebrew
(Evening) 28
78 78 67 67
381 Total 331 Total
Fall 1977 Spring 1978
Jewish Studies
(Day) 97
Jewish Studies
(Evening) 178
275 275
Jewish Studies
(Day) 89
Jewish Studies
(Evening) 146
235 235
Hebrew
(Day) 31
Hebrew
(Evening) 51
Hebrew
(Day) 35
Hebrew
(Evening) 67
82 82
375
102
Total
102
337 Total
146
TABLE 17 (contd.)
Fall 1978
Jewish Studies
(Day) 145
Jewish Studies
(Evening) 186
331 331
Hebrew
(Day) 38
Hebrew
(Evening) 57
95 95
426
Spring 1979
Jewish Studies
(Day) 114
Jewish Studies
(Evening) 156
270 270
Hebrew
(Day) 38
Hebrew
(Evening) 61
99 99
369
Kindly refer to next page for Table 18.
147
TABLE 18
THE PERCENTAGES OF DAY TO EVENING SESSION STUDENTS
IN JEWISH STUDIES
Fall 1976 Spring 1977
Total Day 161 42.25% Total Day 127 38.36%
Total Evening 220 57.74% Total Evening 204 61.63%
Fall 1977 Spring 1978
Total Day 128 35.85% Total Day 124 37.79%
Total Evening 229 64.14% Total Evening 213 63.20%
Fall 1978 Spring 1979
Total Day 183 42.95% Total Day 152 41.19%
Total Evening 243 57.04% Total Evening 217 58.80%
148
The following table presents the results which
were obtained from a questionnaire administered to
students who enrolled in Jewish Studies in Spring of 1978.
From Table 19 based on age, we may assume that the first
two age groups represent the transfer student by and
large. The thirty to seventy age group represents the
continuing adult education student. If so, there is
a breakdown of 44.86 percent for the first two age
groups or transfer students and fifty percent for the
continuing adult education student. If we further
assume that the majority of no responses (No Reply)
are also in the older age bracket and the reason they
do not answer for age is because of embarassment, then
we have a total of fifty-four percent for continuing
adult education students. This finding would correlate
with the earlier data listing one hundred forty-five
day-time students or 43.80 percent and one hundred
eighty six evening students or 56.19 percent. What is
clear is that the college is fulfilling both functions
of transfer and continuing education. It also
appears that approximately one half of the students
enrolled in Jewish studies are transfer and the other
half adult education.
149
TABLE 19
THE AGE GROUPING OF STUDENTS ENROLLED AT LAVC
N=78
Age Number of Students Percentage
17 - 19 13 16.66
20 - 29 22 28.20
30 - 70 39 50.00
No Reply 4 5.00
78 99.86
Table Number 20 shows that there are almost twice
as many female students as there are male students.
Whether this is a valid finding is questionable. We
cannot corroborate this with the Office of Planning and
Development. However, Garber states that in the
evening sessions, there is a preponderance of house
wives taking courses in Jewish studies.
TABLE 20
THE NUMBER OF MALE AND FEMALE STUDENTS IN
JEWISH STUDIES AT LAVC
N=78
Sex Number of Students Percentage
Male 28
35.89
Female 50
64.00
78 99.89
150
As would be expected, the vast majority of students
taking Jewish Studies are of the Jewish faith. However,
what is of interest is that there are Christians taking
these courses as well. It was suggested that the
rationale for Jewish Studies was to expose students to
Jewish civilization and culture. Particularly, it was
felt that this exposure,led to respect and tolerance
of fellow Americans in a pluralistic society. The fact
that non-Jews take the courses too seems to vindicate
this rationale for the program. It is interesting to
note that Garber found in a survey of 1971-1973, that
twelve percent of the students were Christians.
TABLE 21
RELIGION OF STUDENTS ENROLLED IN JEWISH STUDIES AT LAVC
N=78
Number of Students Religion
Jewish
Christian
Other
No Reply
67
3
4 (None - 4)
4
78
Percentage
85. 89
3.8
5. 1
5.1
99. 89
151
Table Number 22 represents citizen status of
students. Approximately twenty percent of the students
were not born in the United States
TABLE 22
CITIZEN STATUS OF'THE STUDENT
N=78
Citizen Status Number of Students Percentage
U.S.A. Born 63 80.76
Naturalized 14 17. 94
Non-Citizen 1 1.2
78 99. 90
Naturalized citizens listed their countries of birth
as follows: Canada - 3; Israel - 2; Poland - 3:
Germany - 1: Czechoslovakia - 1; Brazil - 1. The non
citizen comes from Pakistan.
Table 23 relates clearly to Table 19. If we take
one half of the part-time student and add it to full
time students,on the theory that these are also transfer
students and also add one half of this figure to the
continuing adult student, on the opposite theory, then
we will have for transfer students 44.22 percent and for
continuing adult students 51.91 percent. In Table 19
the age groups most likely to be transfer students are
17 to 19 and 20-29, and add up to 44.86 percent almost
identical with 44.22 percent; on the other hand the
152
30 to 70 age group which is 50.00 percent— almost identical
with 51.91 percent.
TABLE 23
THE STUDENT STATUS IN JEWISH STUDIES
OF THE ENROLLMENT
N=78
Number of Students Percentage
Full Time 28 35.89
Part Time 13 16.66
Continuing (Adult) 34 43.58
Other 0 0
No Reply 3 3.8
78 99.93
As can be seen in Table 24, there are ten percent
of the enrollment as majors. By combining Tables 15
and 16, the total enrollment which is 331 with the
Spring majors of 25, there is a percentage of 7.55.
Allowing for some margin of error in the questionnaire
plus a more accurate figure for total enrollment of
Spring of 1978, the facts are fairly consistent.
153
TABLE 24
RESPONSE TO: IS JEWISH STUDIES OR HEBREW
YOUR MAJOR OR ETC.?
N=78
Major
Minor
Elective
Humanities or
General Education
Requirements:
Language Requirement
No Reply
Number of Students
8
6
53
6
1
4
Percentage
10. 2
7. 69
67. 94
7.69
1.2
5. 12
78 99. 84
Table 25 seems to substantiate other data in
regard to adult continuing education. Assuming that
the continuing adult education student comprises ap
proximately fifty percent of the students who take
Jewish Studies (see Table 19) and also assuming that
the average continuing student is well educated since
Jewish Studies is a demanding discipline, then by
adding students with college, graduate and professional
degrees, we get 39.6 percent of the adult education
have higher degress. This finding would support an
earlier survey by Garber where he indicates that many
professionals take the courses in the evening.
TABLE 25
PREVIOUS SECULAR EDUCATION
OF JEWISH STUDIES STUDENTS
N=78
Number of Students Percentage
High School
Diploma 45 57.6
College Degree 16 20.5
Graduate Degree 6 7.6
Professional Degree 9 11.5
No Reply 2 2.5
78 99.7
In Table 26, the initials stand for the following:
SS = Sunday School
HAS = Hebrew Afternoon School
HAHS = Hebrew Afternoon High School
Sunday school is usually a two hour a week session
in religious instruction meeting on Sundays, Hebrew
Afternoon School refers to a program of Religious and
Hebrew Studies for six hours a week. Usually the student
has two periods of two hours, two days per week, e.g.,
Monday and Wednesday, or Tuesday and Thursday, and then
two hours on Sunday morning. When Sunday school and
Hebrew Afternoon School are combined, it refers to a
program of Sunday School until the age of eight or nine
and then the student continues in the Hebrew Afternoon
________________________________________________ 15-5
School until the age of thirteen. If the student is
further motivated in the Sunday School he works towards
confirmation occurring at sixteen; : also he may attend
a Hebrew Afternoon High School which has a six hour a
week schedule of Religious and Hebrew Studies. No reply
of 29.48 percent combined with 5.12 for none most likely
indicates no education. If so, a high percentage have not
received any exposure to Judaism before taking a Jewish
Studies course. However, the majority do have some
Jewish education.
TABLE 26
PREVIOUS RELIGIOUS OR HEBREW EDUCATION
AMONG STUDENTS ENROLLED IN THE
JEWISH STUDIES PROGRAM
N=78
Type of School
SS
HAS
SS & HAS
SS & HAS HAHS
HAS & HAHS
Odd Combinations
None
No Reply
Students
23
8
10
1
Average Years
Attendance Percentage
29.48
6
4
23
3. 94
4.0
SS-5.42 HAS-2.65
SS-10.0 HAS-6.0
HAHS-4.0
HAS-5.33
HAHS-3.33
5.5
0
0
10. 25
12. 82
1.28
3. 84
7. 69
5. 12
29.48
99. 96
156
The following question of students was conceived
in terms of a problem discussed in the professional
literature, i.e., should Jewish Studies be organized as
a separate department or should it be interdisciplinary.
Whether the students understood the full implications of
the question is questionable. However, that they answered
strongly in favor of a separate Jewish Studies department
is indicative of strong positive feelings for the program
and that it could be better carried out as an autonomous
department or discipline.
TABLE 27
SHOULD JEWISH STUDIES BE ORGANIZED AS A (AN)
N=78
Percentage
Separate Department 53 67.94
Interdepartment Program 8 10.25
Other 2 2.56
No Reply 15 19.23
78 99.98
This question is somewhat unclear. Unfortunately,
probably, the career goals were not sufficiently classi
fied. For example, teaching and research and/or higher
education were given as two possible answers. However,
it was not indicated that the researcher meant Hebrew
teaching and research and/or higher education in Jewish
157
Studies. Students who do not intend a career specifically
in Hebrew teaching or in research and/or higher education
in Jewish Studies might have responded to these options.
However, the finding does show that Jewish Studies in
higher education in a secular setting is a new avenue to
careers in Jewish life whether the Rabbinate or other
functionaries in the Jewish community. Apparently
some students stated more than one choice for careers;
hence, the overlapping.
TABLE 28
RESPONSE OF STUDENTS IN JEWISH STUDIES
TO POSSIBLE CAREER GOALS
N=78
Rabbinate 2
Cantorate 0
Other Clergy 1
Jewish Communal or
Social Work 8
Teaching 7
Research and/or
Higher Education 20
Other 26
No Reply ____17
81
158
The following question indicates a high percentage
of students who affiliate with a synagogue. In view
of the fact that Los Angeles Valley College has a very
high percentage of continuing adult students, this finding
is not surprising since older people tend to affiliate
with synagogues more than younger people. Also there
are many students who belong to campus groups such as
Hillel and non-campus groups such as Bnai Brith and
Zionist groups. Here again there were multiple answers
per respondent because of belonging to more than one
group. What is interesting is that there is a high
percentage of students who affiliate with groups that
are activist in Jewish matters.
TABLE 29
RESPONSE OF STUDENTS IN JEWISH STUDIES TO
RELIGIOUS OR NATIONAL AFFILIATION
00
I I
Synagogue 34
Church 3
Zionist Group 14
Other 15
None 6
No Reply 19
159
The following question was designed to elicit opinions
in regard to aims of the programs in Jewish Studies at
Los Angeles Valley College. In the literature, the
problem is raised as to whether Jewish Studies should be
concerned with non-academic goals such as raising Jewish
consciousness or Jewish survival. The faculty at Los
Angeles Valley College following the lead of Zev Garber
feels that this is not contrary to academic principles
such as objectivity or dispassionate learning. They
encourage it. As can be seen from Table 30, the students
are definitely in favor of what might strictly be
considered non-academic goals.
TABLE 30
RESPONDENTS WERE ASKED: SHOULD JEWISH STUDIES
DO THE FOLLOWING:
N=78
Raise Jewish Consciousness 65
Stimulate Religious or National
Affiliation 41
Work for Jewish Survival 51
None of the Above 1
Other 3
No Reply 3
160
Table 31 represent responses to a question which
was optional: "Please state your reasons for taking
Jewish Studies.” There were only fifty-seven respondents.
The reason is that the question was optional and required
a briefly written answer which in other questions was not
asked for. The answers were broken down into the
following categories: Heritage related answers, i.e.,
where the student expresses a desire to learn more about
the culture, history, philosophy, and religion of Judaism;
to live in Israel, i.e., certain individuals stated that
they were interested in living in Israel and wanted to
learn Hebrew and Jewish culture for that purpose;
language acquisition, i.e., to learn a foreign language;
Christians who wish to learn about Judaism; career
goals and one who was studying Judaism for the purpose
of conversion.
TABLE 31
REASONS FOR TAKING JEWISH STUDIES
N=78
To Learn Jewish Heritage 43
To Live in Israel 5
Language Acquisition 3
To Learn About Judaism (Christians) 2
Career Goals 3
Conversion Goals 1
57
161
Findings - Jewish Studies Programs At
Hebrew Union College — Jewish Institute of Religion
It was necessary to treat the data concerning
Hebrew Union College in a different manner than that of
University of California at Los Angeles and Los Angeles
Valley College. This approach was because HUC-JIR is
a multi-purpose institution. In order to get a true picture
f the nature and character of the institution, data should
not be limited to merely the undergraduate Jewish Studies
program which is a cooperative effort and joint
program with the University of Southern California.
Therefore, the research findings cover all the particular
schools in the Hebrew Union College listing their general
philosophy and objectives. An overall statement is made
of the philosophy of the college as well. In addition,
at the time of the research (1978), the total enrollment
in the Jewish Studies undergraduate program between
Hebrew Union College and the University of Southern
California was very limited. This would hardly yield
valid data because of the minuteness of the sample.
Consequently, the questionnaire was administered to
students in all the schools of the college in order to
obtain an adequate sample for data analysis.
162
History of the College
In 1875, Rabbi Isaac Mayer Wise was instrumental
in founding in Cincinnati, the Hebrew Union College,
178
the first Rabbinic school in America. Another
institution was founded in 1922 in New York called Jewish
Institute of Religion by Rabbi Stephen S. Wise. In
1950, the two institutions merged with a branch in New
York and in Cincinnati since they had similar ideologies
and educational philosophies and produced most of the
rabbis of the reform congregations and synagogues.
In 1954, a new center was formed and chartered in
Los Angeles, the California School of the College
Institute. In 1963, the Jerusalem School of Hebrew
Union College - Jewish Institute of Religion was opened
in Israel. In 1971, the California school moved from
a remote site in the Hollywood Hills to its permanent
campus in the urban center of Los Angeles. The proximity
of the new campus to the University of Southern California
has enabled students to enroll simultaneously in
both institutions with reciprocity of course credits.
Joint use of facilities and faculty are aspects of this
163
furitful interaction of two institutions of higher learn
ing, Courses and Programs of Jewish content at the
University of Southern California are a result of the
joint efforts of the two schools.
Philisophy of Hebrew Union College
Jewish Institute of Religion
In the report of the Western Association of Schools
and Colleges dated June 12, 1974, the following educational
purposes were stated and concurred with those of Dr.
179
William Cutter who was Director of the Jewish Studies
program at the time:
The philosophy at the Hebrew Union College-Jewish
Institute of religion includes the following components:
1. To explore and transmit the classic values of
Judaism,
2. To train religious, educational, and communal
leaders primarily to serve the needs of Reform
Judaism; secondarily, those of the larger
Jewish community, and teritally those of the
non-Jewish community.
3. To foster and main the style and traditions
of liberal, free, humanistic inquiry.
4. To help build a world in which , f justice and
truth prevail.”
164
In order to accomplish these broad missions of
philosophy, the Hebrew Union College - Jewish Institute
of Religion in Los Angeles created the following schools
with a distinct program and special objectives: School of
Rabbinic Studies; Edgar F. Magnin School of Graduate
Studies; Jerome H‘ . Louchheim School of Judaic Studies;
Rhea Hirsch School of Education; School of Jewish
Communal Service; and the Department of Sacred Music.
School of Rabbinic Studies
The School of Rabbinic Studies offers a full-time
program leading to the Master of Arts degree. Candidates
holding a Bachelors degree from an accredited college
or university or its equivalent may apply. All
candidates for the Masters of Arts must spend their
first year in the Jerusalem campus doing their academic
work. This work is required in order to assure that the
students are linguistically prepared to handle classical
Hebrew texts when they return to do their work at HUC.
After completing the Masters of Hebrew Letters degree, the
student goest either to Cincinnati or to New York to
complete two more years of work and to be ordained.
Thus the philosophy of the program is to train Rabbis and
to prepare them to understand the Hebrew language well.
165
enough to master and study classical Hebrew texts. More
specifically, the objectives are as follows:
1. To train the student in the methods, languages,
and subject areas essential to the development
of competence in classical textual materials;
2. to familiarize the student with liturgy of
the reform Jewish worship services;
3. to help familiarize the student with Jewish
history;
4 to give the student exposure to modern in
stitutions in human services.
In order to enhance the Rabbinic program and better
equip the student for eventual career opportunities, the
students meet at the beginning of the semester year
in September in a High Holiday practicum which includes
seminars on all aspects of the High Holidays. Meetings
and discussions of this kind are held during various
periods during the calendar year. In addition, the
student placement program provides student Rabbis with
opportunities for field work in small congregations or
large metropolitan congregations as Rabbinic interns.
V
V
Furthermore, during the course of the year homiletic
workshops are held each month for the second and third
year students. Students sace required to rrjeet wJLth
ft
speech instructor during the month preceding their chapel
responsibilities. The School is staffed by a core of
four full-time Rabbinic scholars in addition to a larger
number of part-time faculty •
Program
Second Rabbinic Year of Studies (Post Israeli
Fall Semester Units Spring Semester Units
400A History I 3 40OB History IT 3
410 Hebrew Grammar 3 401 Education 3
501A Bible I 3 500 Aramaic 3
502A Mishna 502B MidrashI 3
504 Modern Hebrew
Literature 3 505A Liturgy ' ' 4
15 15
Third Rabbinic Year of Studies
Fall Semester Units Spring Semester Units
400C History III 3 430 Human Relations 2
466 Theology 2 465 Philosophy 3
501B Bible II 3 501C Bible III 3
502C Midrash II 3 503 Bible Comment
ary 3
510A Talmud I 4 510B Talmud II 4
15 15
167
Edgar F. Magnin School of Graduate Studies
The School of Graduate Studies bears the responsibilit
for the graduate level of performance not only in the
doctoral programs, but also in all other departments of
the California College where the Masters degree is offered.
Qualified students may pursue programs leading to graduate
degrees ranging from Masters of Arts to Doctor of Hebrew
Letters, Doctor of Hebrew Studies, and Doctor of Philosophy
The Graduate School is in charge of all graduate study
in Judaica as it pertains to the Rabbinic School, the
School of Education, the School of Communal Service, and
the School of Judaic Studies. In addition, the School
of Graduate Studies functions cooperatively with the Uni
versity of Southern California in joint programs with the
department of Religion, the School of Social Work and
the School of Education. The primary rationale and focus
of the Graduate School is the study of classical Jewish
texts and languages for in-depth knowledge of the primary
sources of Judaism. More specifically, the Graduate
School has the following objectives:
1. To provide the second two years of Rabbinic
training in graduate Judaica together with the
Rabbinic School;
168
y
2. to provide the graduate Judaic component for
the School of Education and the School of
Communal Service;
3. to provide the graduate component of the
Judaic Studies program for the Masters at
the University of Southern California's
department of Religion;
4. to provide the joint Ph.D. program for the
University of Southern California and the
Hebrew College in Social Ethics.
The graduate programs offered under the auspices of
the Edgar F. Magnin School of Graduate Studies are a
logical extension of the Rabbinic program with its emphasis
upon textual competence and classical Jewish learning and
involves extensive use of Hebrew sources. This basic
philosophy of the Hebrew Union College is somewhat of
a problem since emphasis is placed on textual readings
and the department of Religion at University of Southern
California is more oriented to philosophical readings
in Social Ethics.
169
The Rhea Hirsch School of Education
The Rhea Hirsch School of Education offers graduate
and undergraduate programs in Jewish education to satisfy
the needs of the Jewish community especially the reform
congregations for religious educators, principals,
supervisors, teachers, program staff and specialists in
library sicence, art, music, drama and dance. The
School also undertook to extend the program and is now
offering graduate courses leading to the masters degree
for the purpose of producing knowledgeable personnel with
a generalist background in Jewish sources and educational
theory. More specifically, the objectives of the School
are:
1. To train the student to become fluent in
Hebrew, biblical as well as modern;
2. to help familiarize the student with the ancient
source texts of the Jewish tradition including:
the Bible, Talmud, and Midrash in the original
if possible or in translation otherwise;
3. to help familiarize the student with Jewish
history;
4 . to enable the student to become acquainted with
the reform liturgy;
i r 7ri
5. to help the student become acquainted with
Jewish thought;
6. to give the student exposure to educational
theory and method;
7. to expose the student to confluent education
and other innovative concepts in education.
To achieve these objectives, the School of Education
has developed:
1. The year in Israel program;
2. the availability of the Masters in Education
program at the University of Southern California;
3. a double degree program in conjunction with
the School of Communal Service;
4. improved professional supervision and personal
training;
5. innovative programs e.g., confluent education;
6. formal relationships with leading educators
and educational institutions throughout the
Los Angeles community;
7. Specialized training in areas of particular
interest to the student, e.g., University of
California at Santa Barbara where students
have access to the Confluent Education training
staff.
171
8. special relationships with Los Angeles School
systems, both public and private and the Bureau
of Jewish Education and its staff of curriculum
experts.
The Program Offers the Following Degrees:
Master of Arts in Hebrew Education
Master of Arts in Jewish Education
The first years of these programs is spent in Israel
where the student achieves mastery of Hebrew in an
intensive Hebrew language program at the Hebrew Union
College in Jerusalem called an Ulpan. The program
for years II and III call for intensive core programs
of Judaica/Hebraica including the following:
I. Academic Study
A. Judaica:
400A Ancient History)
ArinT> t i i t tt* x two of these history
Medieval History) courses out of the
400C Modern History
501A Bible
three are required
510A Talmud
502B Midrash
505A Liturgy
Hebrew/Jewish Literature
172
Jewish Thought
Jewish Studies Elective
B. Educationoal Theory and Method
Educational Psychology (USC)
Social and Philosophical Foundations
in Education (USC)
Confluent Education (HUC)
Education Seminar (4 semesters) (HUC)
II. Professional Training:
A. Professional Supervision
B. Professional Experience
C. Confluent Education
D. Education Research and Development
E. Museum Utilization for Student Education
F. Additional Training opportunities at UC,
Santa Barbara; USC School of Education;
the Los Angeles School System; the Los
Angeles Bureau of Jewish Education; the
Learning Center; CEDARC: the Center for
Development and Research in Confluent
Education.
173
For the Master of Arts in Hebrew Education, the follow
ing is added to the core:
500 Aramaic
503A Bible Commentaries
Advanced Hebrew Texts
Jewish Studies Text
Elective - two courses
Also the following degrees are offered with variations
of the core:
Joint Master of Arts in Jewish Communal Service
and Jewish/Hebrew Education
Double Master of Arts in Hebrew/Jewish
Education (HUC) and
Secular Master of Arts in Education (USC)
174
School of Jewish Communal Service
The School of Jewish Communal Service was created to
help meet the needs of American Jewish community agencies
for professional personnel. This school is dedicated to
the enrichment of American Jewish life in all of its
ages and stages. It seeks to awaken its students to their
Jewish heritage and values, and to prepare them for service
in the Jewish community. The school concentrates on the
values, knowledge, and skills most likely to enhance
commitment to careers in Jewish community service. More
specifically, the following are the objectives of the
School as can be found in their brochures:
1. Knowledge and appreciation of Jewish values,
culture, practices, and beliefs.
2. Knowledge and understanding of the internal
and external forces contributing to the survival
of the Jew through history..
3. Knowledge and understanding of the American Jew,
his growth and development, his social insti
tutions, and their historical antecedents.
4. Awareness of and familiarity with contemporary
Jewish communal services in the United States
and Canada, and their developmental history.
175
5. Understanding of external contemporary ideo
logical, racial, and socio-economic issues
and conflicts affecting Jewish life here and
abroad.
6. Understanding of issues, conflicts, and ideologies
within Jewish life here and abroad.
7. Proficiency in synthesizing the application of
these objectives with the values, knowledge, and
skills acquired in schools of social work or re
lated fields, and bringing them to bear in
professional practice.
8. A positive attitude towards the goals of
Jewish communal life.
The program offers the following certificate program.
For social workers in all Jewish settings, Jewish educa
tors, administrators of central Jewish agencies, synagogue
and temple administrators, community relations workers
HUC-JIR School of Jewish Communal Service offers resident
graduate programs over two summers consisting of:
A typical first summer course of study Units
Individual and Jewish Family 2
The Modern Jew, His Community & Institutions 2
Contemporary Jewish Issues 2
Field Observation 2
Practicum (application of course work to field) 1
176
A Typical Second Summer Of Course Study Units
Holocaust Literature 2
Organizational Theory in Jewish Communal
Settings 2
Modern Jewish History 2
Contemporary Jewish Thought 2
Administration and Supervision 2
Practicum (application of course work to .
field) 1
The Master of Arts Degree In Jewish Communal Service
Has A Typical Course Of Studies
Individual and the Jewish Family
The Modern Jew, His Community & Institutions
Contemporary Jewish Issues
Field Observation
Field Work
Survey of Jewish History
Contemporary Jewish Thought
Administration and Supervision
Funding and Fund-Raising
Organizational Theory
Human Growth and Development
Seminar in Contemporary Jewish Issues
Israel and Diaspora Relations
Practicum Seminars
Modern Jewish History
Units
2
2
2
6
3
2
2
2
2
2
4
2
2
2
2
177
Units
Holocaust Literature 2
Thesis and Research Methods 4
The School of Communal Service also offers a
Double Masters in Communal Studies (HUC) and Social Work
(USC); also, a Joint Masters in Jewish Education and
Jewish Communal Studies.
Core programs for these degrees simply combine the
program of Studies of the School of Communal Services with
the other School from which the program is derived.
Department of Sacred Music
In addition, there is a department of Sacred Music
which offers training for the position of cantor. Special
courses are also offered to organists and choir directors
dealing with the various literatures and background of
synagogue music. This program is supplemented by courses
in education and Judaic Studies plus in-service training,
all of which may lead to Cantorial Certification.
178
Jerome H. Louchheim School for Judaic Studies
of the Hebrew Union College
The founding of the Louchheim School of Judaic Studies
took place in 1971. The administration of the Hebrew
Union College was of the opinion that the academic programs
in Judaic Studies should be separated from programs that
have as their objective the improvement of Jewish educa
tion in the traditional sense and from continuing adult
education. The theory was that Jewish Studies for under
graduate and graduate students would ultimately develop an
elan of its own and higher academic standards if they
were distinguished from the typical concerns of Jewish
education and from the more relaxed atmosphere of adult
continuing education. Therefore, the focus of the Louchhei
School became the development of formal and undergraduate
programs, relations with other universities, and the
creation of Judaic Studies courses in English for the
180
graduate program.
Philosophy
The Louchheim School of Judaic Studies operates
primarily as the undergraduate and master’s level Judaic
Studies program (department) of the University of Southern
California. The purpose of the School is to offer courses
m
179
in Jewish civilization, culture and religion so that
students taking these courses could become acquainted with
the Jewish heritage and be stimulated to learn more about
it. Also, to relate Judaism to the humanistic history
of the West and to inspire some students to major and/or
181
to do graduate work in Jewish Studies. The program
itself is broadly cultural particularly on the under
graduate level and especially in a social science course
of Jewish content, e.g., American Jew-Changing Patterns
of Identity. On the graduate level, there is a heavy
emphasis on language and textual analysis of traditional
classical Jewish texts. This philosophy runs into some
difficulties with the university (USC) since the emphasis
is somewhat different. The university social science
courses tend to be behavioristic or empirical as opposed
to the broad cultural leanings of the HUC courses. The
Religion Department of the University of Southern California
tends to emphasize Social Ethics as opposed to the HUC
program of heavy reliance on language courses and textual
analysis in the study of Judaism.
Structurally, the link between USC and its adjunct
Jewish Studies program at HUC is maintained through the
School of Religion of the University of Southern California.
180
Dr. John Orr is the chief representative of the university
and Dean Lewis M. Barth of the Hebrew Union College.
Frieda Furman, newly appointed acting Director of the
School of Judaic Studies has now become an important
representative of the HUC. Courses of Jewish content
are proposed through a Jewish Faculty committee at the
HUC, sent through the academic cabinet for approval, and
then to the School of Religion at USC. There it is
reviewed by a Judaic sub-committee under the direction
of Dr. John Orr.
Objectives of The Jerome H. Louchheim School
The objectives as listed in the Accreditation Report
of 1974 are as follows:
1) to allow undergraduates enrolled in Judaic Studies
to fulfill part of their elective or general education
requirements; 2) to allow undergraduates to satisfy
their language requirement by enrolling in the Hebrew
language courses of the Louchheim School; 3) to allow
undergraduates who are undertaking a Judaic Studies
specialty as religion majors at the university;
4) to allow social work students at the university
to take Judaic Studies electives, both within and
without the context of their programs with the
School for Communal Studies; 5) to allow students of
the University’s School of Education to fulfill
some of their general academic requirements with
HUC.
181
Curriculum of The Jerome H. Louchheim School
The Louchheim School of Judaic Studies offers
courses covering the following areas: Hebrew language and
literature; Yiddish language and literature; Jewish history
and thought; Contemporary Jewish Studies; Fine Arts, Jewish
Music and Jewish Art; Bible Studies and Religion.
The School patterns itself on USC so that one hundred
and two hundred series are lower division courses and
the three hundred and four hundred series are upper
division. The lower division courses are introductory
in nature whereas the upper division courses are more
demanding and specialized. The Hebrew language courses
are architechtonic in structure moving from elementary
to the more advanced Hebrew courses which are designed
to bring the student to a competence and mastery of the
language in order to develop reading comprehension of
Hebrew of all periods, including classical and modern.
The history and thought courses are designed to cover
basic themes in Jewish history and thinking. There is
a structure to these courses. On the other hand, the
literature courses given mostly in English to attract
the student for electives are of a more eclectic nature.
The college is seeking to find those courses in literature
that will appeal to the University of Southern California
undergraduate students.
182
It must be borne in mind that at USC, there has not
been a tremendous response to Jewish Studies. Many
reasons are givoi but this research does not deal with those
specific aspects. There are few majors in Jewish Studies;
consequently, the courses that are taken by the students
are for the most part in the lower division. Upper
division courses and the graduate courses have limited
appeal to students who do not specialize. These courses
are most likely taken by students in the other schools of
the college such as the Rabbinic, Communal Service, and
Education Schools. However, it should be noted that the
literature courses given are in translation and can be
easily appreciated by those without background in Hebrew
or Yiddish.
183 |
Faculty of HUC-JIR
The research shows that Hebrew Union College-Jewish
Institute of Religion has engaged a large staff for
the instructional needs of the various schools comprising
the college. Many of the instructors are from the
Jewish community where they occupy positions such as
Rabbis, teachers, cantors and social workers. Therefore,
they do not teach full-time but only part-time. The
Accreditation Report of 1974 criticized the college for
not having enough full-time faculty. In the interim,
the Accreditation Report of 1978 commended the college
for engaging additional full-time instructors in response
183
to the 1974 report and recommendations. Some notable
men have been engaged by Hebrew Union College such as
Gevirtz in Bible, Signer in History, Mirsky in Jewish
Sociology, and Frieda Furman as acting director of the
School of Judaic Studies. The last appointment which
is very recent has already borne some fruit with an
increase in enrollment from USC in the Judaic Studies
program. The research indicates that there are twelve
full-time instructors and fifteen part-time instructors.
Since this research was directed towards Jewish Studies
mainly and not to professional programs which are the major
184
thrust of HUC, the following are the instructors in
the School of Judaic Studies,
Members of the Faculty at HUC-JIR
Michael Signer is Assistant Professor of Jewish
History at the Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of
Religion since 1974. He received his Ph.D. from the
University of Toronto in 1978. He received his ordina
tion from HUC-JIR in Cincinnati in 1970. His B.A. was
from UCLA in Hebrew literature. He has received many
awards prior to his Ph.D. His publications are a few
book reviews.
He teaches:
Jewish Studies 100 - Introduction to Jewish History
Jewish Studies 311 - Jewish Christian Relations
Jewish Studies 328 - Judaism and Christian Beginnings
Stanley F. Chyet is Professor of American Jewish
History and Director of the Edgar F. Magnin School of
Graduate Studies at HUC-JIR. He received his B.A. degree
from Brandeis University in 1952. He received his
ordination and MAHL from HUC-JIR in Cincinnati in 1957
and his Ph.D. from the same institution in 1960. He has
a formidable list of publications in American Jewish
history consisting of articles in journals encyclopedias
185
and various magazines. He is also a poet. He is active
in many organizations such as the Anti-Defamation League
and the Jewish Chautauqua Society and Rabbinic organiza
tions. He teaches:
Jewish Studies 278 - Judaism and Psychology
Jewish Studies 200 - The American Jewish Experience
Abraham Zygielbaum was born in Poland and was
educated as a youth in the traditional school of the
Yeshiva in Warsaw. He survived the holocaust and came
to the United States in 1950. His areas of interest are:
Holocaust Literature, drama, Talmudic Lore, Chassidism,
Jewish Folklore, Modern European Studies, Hebrew and
Yiddish Literature. He has a Bachelors of Religious
Education from the University of Judaism, Jewish Theo
logical Seminary, a Masters of Hebrew Studies from
Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion and
a Doctorate of Hebrew Studies also from HUC-JIR, at Los
Angeles. He has not published but has a noteworthy
list of courses and guest lectures in many synagogues in
the area indicating that he is in demand. He teaches:
Jewish Studies 211 - The Holocaust Literature
Jewish Studies 244 - Hassidic Literature
Jewish Studies 243 - Yiddish Language and Literature
in Translation
Jewish Studies 231 ab - Jewish Mystical Literature
i
_________________________________________________1 - 8 6 J
Stanely Gevirtz received his B.A. from Brooklyn
College and his Ph.D. from the University of Chicago.
His field is the Bible and he has published extensively on
biblical topics and has written a book on the poetry of
the Bible. His field extends to Ugaritic and Phoenician
literatures and languages. He teaches mostly in the
Rabbinic School but an assignment in the Judaic School
is being planned in the near future.
Stephen Passamaneck is a Ph.D. who teaches Talmud.
No curriculum vita is available on him. He teaches:
Jewish Studies 445 - Foundations of Jewish Law
Jewish Studies 459 - Jewish Law and Contemporary
Ethics.
Rivka Dori has a M.A. degree and is a lecturer in
Hebrew. She teaches:
Jewish Studies 120 - Hebrew I
Jewish Studies 150 - Hebrew II
Jewish Studies 220 - Hebrew III
Jewish Studies 315 - Hebrew IV
Frieda Kerner Furman received her B.A. from USC, her
M.A. from USC in Religion and is expected to receive her
Ph.D. from USC in Religion in 1980. She has become the
new acting Director of the School of Judaic Studies.
Whereas hitherto this position was given to an administra
tor with other responsibilities; for example, Dr. Cutter
187
who was the Director of the School of Education; now it
is an entity of its own. This has already resulted in
increased enrollment in the School of Judaic Studies.
A new position of Professor of Jewish Thought will
probably be engaged soon. This is in response to
the fact that the program needs a person who can combine
knowledge of Jewish sources and background in Social
Ethics. This may fill a gap between the School of Religion
at the University of Southern California and Hebrew Union
College
Findings Concerning the Student Taking Jewish
Studies at Hebrew Union College
Jewish Institute of Religion
The following data was obtained from a questionnaire
given to the students at the Hebrew Union College-Jewish
Institute of Religion. The data in Tables 32 and 33
were made available by the Office of the Registrar at
Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion. The
questionnaire was administered in the Spring of 1978 but
the data in Tables 32 and 33 reveals information as of
Fall, 1978.
For the Fall of 1978, Frieda Kerner Furman was engaged
as the new acting Director of the Louchheim School of
Judaic Studies. As a result, the school has had a very
substantial increase in enrollment. From forty students
in Jewish Studies, there are now seventy-one.
188
TABLE 32
ENROLLMENT FIGURES - FALL SEMESTER OF 1978
HEBREW UNION COLLEGE-JEWISH INSTITUTE OF RELIGION
Male
18
6
9
8
Female Classification
4 Rabbinic School
5 School of Education
17 Communal School
2 Graduate School
41 28 = 69 Full-Time Students
University of Southern California Students:
Male Female
= 71 Students Total 42 29
Units for University of Southern California Students
Male Female
156 Units 110 Units
Part-Time Students:
Male Female
11 36 = 47 Total of Part-Time Students
(Not USC)
189
TABLE 32 (continued)
Units for Part-Time Students:
Male Female
27 99
USC and Part-Time Students:
Male Female
53 65 = 118 Total
/ >
Total Units Takaiby USC and Part-Time Students:
Male Female
183 209
Total Student Population: Full-Time Students 69 36.89%
USC Students 71 37.96%
Part-Time
Students
(non-USC) 47 25.13%
187
190
Table 33 represents the enrollment statistics of
Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion. We
present each school within the Hebrew Union College-
Jewish Institute of Religion. These statistics are for
the year 1978. (Fall) to 1979 (Spring). It should be
pointed out that the first year of the Rabbinic Studies
program and the first year of the Master of Arts program
in the Rhea Hirsch School of Education requires the
student to study in Israel. Therefore, the student is
considered enrolled although they are studying in Israel.
Furthermore, this reflects the difference between enroll
ment figures given in Table 33 and these figures here.
Also, in Table 33, the figure for Department of Music
and for the Museum Docent program is omitted.
TABLE 33
ENROLLMENT STATISTICS BY SCHOOL
AT HEBREW UNION COLLEGE-JEWISH INSTITUTE OF
RELIGION FOR 1978
1. School of Rabbinic Studies
Year I (In Israel) 12
Year II 13
Year III 9
TOTAL 33
191
2. Rhea Hirsch School of Education
Year I
Master of Arts in Hebrew
Education (In Israel)
12
< S
1
Master of Arts in Jewish
Education (In Israel) 7
Joint Master of Arts in Jewish
Education and Jewish Communal
Life 4
Year II 7
Master if Arts in Hebrew
Education 3
Master of Arts in Jewish
Education 1
Joint Master of Arts in Jewish
Education and Jewish Communal
Life 3
Year III 1
Joint Master of Arts in Jewish
Education and Jewish Communal
Life
1
Year IV
3
Master of Hebrew Education 3
Full-Time TOTAL 23
Part-Time TOTAL
2
Leave of Absence
1
, Bachelor of Science Degree 1
192
3. School of Jewish Communal Service (Joint Masters
are not included)
Master of Arts in Jewish Communal
Service 3
Double Master of Arts in Jewish Communal
Studies and Social Work 17
Double Master of Arts in Social Work
at George Warren Brown School,
University of Washington 6
TOTAL 26
4 . Edgar‘ F. Magnin School of Graduate
Studies
Master of Arts in Jewish Studies 3
Doctor of Hebrew Studies „ 2
^Doctor of Hebrew Letters 5
Non-registered Doctor of Hebrew
Letters 12
TOTAL 22
5. Department of Sacred Music
TOTAL 11
6. Jerome H. Louchheim School of
Judaic Studies
USC primary institution students 71
7. Museum Docent Program
TOTAL * ‘30
8. Part-Time Registration (not including
Sacred Music Courses)
TOTAL 36
TOTAL Full-Time Enrollment 106
TOTAL Part-Time Enrollment 150
TOTAL Enrollment 256
193
Table 34 reveals that fifty percent of the sample
were of college age so that represents in actuality
the USC.primary students who are taking Judaica courses.
The twenty-five percent of the sample represents students
going for a professional degree and the twenty-one
percent represents probably a combination of professional
people taking advanced degrees (e.g., Rabbis who wish
to earn the Doctorate of Hebrew Letters, etc), continuing
adult education students and students who need more
professional training in their fields.
TABLE 34
THE AGE GROUPINGS OF THE STUDENT SAMPLE AT
HEBREW UNION COLLEGE-JEWISH INSTITUTE OF RELIGION
N=66
Age Number of Students Percentage
18-23 33 50.0
24-29 16 25.0
32-60 14 21.0
No Reply 3 4.5
66 99.5
Table 35 represents the breakdown on male-female
students. The higher figure for males is not surprising
since Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion
is to a great extent a seminary and the professions
for which a seminary trains are largely male-dominated.
TABLE 35
NUMBER OF MALES AND FEMALES IN THE SAMPLE AT
HEBREW UNION COLLEGE-JEWISH INSTITUTE OF RELIGION
N=66
Sex Number of Students Percentage
Male 41 62.9
Female 25 37.8
66 99.8
As would be expected, the results shown in Table
36 reveal the vast majority of students are of the Jewish
faith— especially in view of the fact that Hebrew Union
College- Jewish Institute of Religion is a school
primarily for the training of ■ students to take positions
in the Jewish community. However, there is also the
Louchheim School of Judaic Studies available to the
University of Southern California students. Among
these are non-Jewish students, also. Thus, as earlier
pointed out, the reason for teaching Jewish Studies in
i
!
195
higher education, i.e., that non-Jews should also be
afforded the opportunity to study Jewish culture and
civilization is being fulfilled through the program
to some extent, although the enrollment is primarily
Jewish.
TABLE 36
RELIGION OF STUDENTS ENROLLED IN
HEBREW UNION COLLEGE-JEWISH INSTITUTE OF RELIGION
PROGRAMS
N=66
Religion Number of Students Percentage
Jewish 57 86.4
Christian 4 6.1
Other 2
(None-1,
Buddhist-1) 3.0
No Reply 3 4.5
66 100.0
Table 37 shows the citizen status of students.
Approximately 6.0 percent of the students were not
born in the United States.
Please see Page 197 for Table 37
196
___ i
TABLE 37
CITIZEN STATUS
OF THE STUDENTS ENROLLED IN
HEBREW UNION COLLEGE-JEWISH INSTITUTE OF RELIGION
N=66
Citizen Status Number of Students Percentage
U.S.A. Born 62 94.0
Naturalized 1 1.5
Non-Citizen 3 4.5
66 100.0
The non-citizens listed their native countries as
follows: Israel - 2; Canada - 1.
As can be seen from Table 38, 68.02 percent of the
sampling are full-time students. This high percentage
is due to the fact that USC primary students will respond
that they are full-time although averaging one course
at Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion
or 3.7 units per student;.'' The point is that they are
truly full-time but at the University of Southern
California. If we take the combination of part-time and
continuing adult education we get 27.2 percentage which
correlates with the figures arrived.at.
i
197
TABLE 38
STUDENT STATUS AT
HEBREW UNION COLLEGE-JEWISH INSTITUTE OF RELIGION
FOR SAMPLING OF ENROLLMENT
N=66
Type Number of Students Percentage
Full-Time 45 68.2
Part-Time 8 12.1
Continuing Adult 10 15.1
Other 1 1.5
No Reply_____________________ ______ 3.0 __
66 99.84
Table 39, the category of Major, would mostly
reflect for Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of
Religion, students who are majoring in Rabbinics,
preparing for a career in teaching Hebrew, and even
students in the Jewish Communal Service program. The
reason being that these students consider themselves
to be a major in Jewish Studies or Hebrew since their
curriculum stresses very heavily the Jewish component.
In other word£.?the major reflects all those studying
for a career in Jewish life. The other categories reflect
the primary USC student taking courses in Judaica.
198
! )
TABLE 39
RESPONSE TO: IS JEWISH STUDIES OR HEBREW
YOUR MAJOR OR ETC?
N=66
Classification Number of Students Percentage
Major 20 30.3
Minor 2 3.0
Elective 20 30.3
Humanities or General
Education Requirement 3 4.54
Language Requirement 6 9.0
No Reply 15 22.7
66 99.84
In Table 40, many students did not respond to
High School in the questionnaire and this reflects the
fact that many thought it unnecessary since the ac
quisition of higher degrees in higher education implies
that there is a High School diploma. What is interesting,
however, to note is that there is a high percentage of
those who have higher degrees in higher education, and
this is understandable in view of the fact that to
enter a professional program at Hebrew Union College-
Jewish Institute of Religion requires usually a B.A.
degree or a B.S. degree.
199
TABLE 40
PREVIOUS EDUCATION OF STUDENTS AT
HEBREW UNION COLLEGE-JEWISH INSTITUTE OF RELIGION
N=66
Type Number of Students
High School 27
College Degree 38
Graduate Degree 13
Professional Degree 8
TABLE 41
PREVIOUS RELIGIOUS OR HEBREW INSTRUCTION
AMONG STUDENTS ENROLLED IN
HEBREW UNION COLLEGE-JEWISH INSTITUTE OF RELIGION
N=66
Average Years
Type of School Students of Attendance Percentage
SS 17 8.64 25.45
HAS 7 3.57 10.6
SS & HAS 19 SS-9.94 HAS-4.44 28.8
SS & HAS & HAHAS 5 SS-5.0 HAS-4.44
HAHS-2.8 7.6
HAS & HAHS 1 HAS-8.0 HAHS-2 1.5
Odd Combinations 4 10.0 6.0
None 0 0
No Reply 13 19.7
66 99.95
Percentage
57 .5
19.6
12.1
200
The following question about students was
conceived in terms of a problem disccused in the
professional literature, i.e., "Should Jewish Studies
be organized as a separate department or should it
be interdepartmental?" Whether the students understood
the implcations of the question is questionable.
Furthermore, for Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute
of Religion the question is academic since the Jewish
Studies are all in HUC-JIR. Howeyer, the responses
indicate strong feelings about seeing Jewish Studies
as an independent discipline.
TABLE 42
SHOULD JEWISH STUDIES BE
ORGANIZED AS A (AN)
N=66
Number of Students Percentage
Separate Department 25 37,8
Interdepartmental Structure 20 30.3
No Opinion 6 9,0
No Reply 15 22.7
66 99.8
This question is somewhat unclear. Unfortunately,
the researcher did not clarify career goals sufficiently.
For example, teaching and research and/or higher
i
i
i
i
___________________________________________2cnj
education in Jewish Studies. Students who do not
intend a career specifically in Hebrew teaching or in
research and/or higher education in Jewish Studies
might have responded to these options. However, unlike
the Los Angeles Valley College, the probability is
greater that these students have a career in Jewish
life,
TABLE 43
RESPONSE OF STUDENTS AT
HEBREW UNION COLLEGE-JEWISH INSTITUTE OF RELIGION
TO POSSIBLE CAREER GOALS
N=66
Careers Number of Students Percentage
Rabbinate 11 16.6
Jewish Communal Service 14 21.2
Teaching 13 19.6
Research and/or Higher
Education 11 16.6
Religious Education 1 1.5
Other 16 24.2
66 99.7
202
i
Table 44 indicates that affiliation with either
a synagogue, ethnic or fraternal activist group is
strong among the students. This seems consistent with
their professional choice and/or interest in Jewish
Studies
TABLE 44
RESPONSES TO RELIGIOUS
OR OTHER JEWISH AFFILIATIONS
Type
Synagogue
Zionist Group
Other (Bnai Brith,
Hillel)
None
No Reply
Number of Students Percentage
30 45.4
10 15.1
13
9
11
19.69
13.6
16.66
The following question was designed to elicit
opinions in regard to objectives in Jewish Studies at
the Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion.
In the literature, the problem is raised as to whether
Jewish Studies should be concerned with non-academic
goals such as raising Jewish Consciousness or Jewish
survival. Being that HUC-JIR is a professional school
203
training students for the Jewish professions, it is
not surprising to see the results. This response
indicates that a high percentage feel that the courses
should be concerned with Jewish consciousness.
TABLE 45
RESPONDENTS WERE ASKED: SHOULD JEWISH STUDIES
DO THE FOLLOWING:
N=66
Type Number of Students Percentage
Raise Jewish Consciousness 52 78.7
Stimulate Religious Affiliations 30 45.4
Work for Jewish Survival 36 54.5
None of The Above 3 4.5
Other 1 1.5
No Reply 9 13.6
Table 46 represents responses to a question
which was optional: "Please state your reasons for
taking Jewish Studies." There were thirty-nine responses
out of sixty-six.sent questionnaires. The reason may
have been because it required the composing of a few
sentences which many did not want to answer. The
i
i
i
i
204
answers were broken down into the following categories:
heritage-related answers, i.e., where the student
expresses a desire to learn more about the culture,
history, philosophy and religion of Judaism; to live
in Israel, i.e., certain individuals stated they were
interested in living in Israel and wanted to prepare
themselves through language and cultural exposure;
language acquisition, i.e., to learn a foreign language;
career goals. Conversion was not a response at Hebrew
Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion.
TABLE 46
RESPONDENTS WERE ASKED TO STATE REASONS FOR
TAKING JEWISH STUDIES
N=66
Categories Number of Students Percentage
To Learn Jewish Heritage 20
To Live In Israel 1
Language Acquisition 3
To Learn About Judaism
(Christians, Buddhists) 3
Career Goals 12
Conversion 0
205
___i
CHAPTER VI
DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS
IN HIGHER EDUCATION AND JEWISH STUDIES
Introduction
In the following chapter, there is a discussion of
the relationship between Higher Education and Jewish
Studies.
A distinction is drawn between Hebraic concepts
that influenced Western man, mainly through the Old
Testament, and also Jewish post-biblical culture that
has developed in the last two thousand years. It
is suggested that the culture and civilization of post-
biblical Jewry is worthy of study and should become part
the humanities curriculum.
An analysis of the history of Western civilization
for the past two thousand years is greatly enriched in
meaning through an understanding of the Hebraic com
ponents and contributions to its evolution. Of course,
the chief link between Western civilization and the
Hebraic culture comes through the Bible which was
influential in changing the course of history of
Western man. Christianity which was born in ancient
Palestine adopted the Hebraic approach to life and
inculcated into its adherents reverence for many Hebraic
concepts.
Vergilius Ferm writes:
It is no surprise to be reminded of how great
was this influence [Hebraic-Judaistic culture]
since, for the most part, Christians have
acknowledged their commitment to the ancient
Jewish Scriptures; but it is surprisingly strange
how much of it that came to be called Christian
was, in fact, the lengthening shadow of Hebraic
ideas and influences.
The ancient Jew was rich in philosophy and religion.
His philosophy consisted of looking at the universe as
being ,the creation of God with an underlying unity
between reality and the higher reality. The philosophy
translated itself into religion by insisting that God
the Creator, was a God of Justice who demanded of man,
a high quality of life characterized by compassion for
the weak, love for one’s fellowman, and a code of
righteousness in the affairs of society. It would
be in order to quote Micah on this matter:
207 j
It hath been told thee, 0 man, what is good
And what the Lord doth require of thee:
Only to do justly, and to love mjggy,
And to walk humbly with thy God.
Jews believed that religion and morals were one.
There were concrete rules and virtues of life that had
to be observed and not left to man to decide upon
including: "honesty, truthfulness, justice, mercy, purity,
honor of parents, solicitidue for the weak, reverence,
obedience, love of fellowmen [brotherhood], kindness to
animals, sexual purity, and regard for family
186
relations."
Centuries later in the medieval Catholic church,
these same virtues were listed in the form of cardinal
sins when not observed by Christians. The Jews through
the voices of their prophets taught Western man "a
sturdy morality" and a strong sense of obligation to
the moral order of the world. They indeed left an
indelible impression on Western man that will not
disappear in the conceivable future.
Mathew, Arnold said:
To the Bible men will return; and why? Because
they cannot do without it. Because happiness
is our being's end and aim, and happiness belongs
to the righteous, and righteousness is revealed
in the Bible.
The relationship between the ancient Hebrews and
the new American civilization was even more profound
than that of the ancient Hebrews and European civilization.
208
This was true because of the nature of the history of
the early colonies. The Puritans came here largely to
escape persecution and they identified their plight
with that of ancient Israel. If Israel had its Pharoah
to flee from, the Puritans had King James I to escape
from. The Atlantic Ocean was their Red Sea and America
became their new Canaan; their leaders were their Moses'
and Joshuas. Their enemies were called Philistines
and Amalekites— the enemies of the ancient Israelites.
The Old Testament became their chief guide in life,
the source of their religion and laws. The church,
they felt, was a continuation of the covenant between
the Hebrew and God.
John Stevens says:
The Christian Church so called is only a
continuation and extension of the Jewish Church.
The first book printed in the colonies was
the Bay Psalm Book whose title page read:
'The Whole Book of Psalms Faithfully Translated
into English Metre.' The morality of the Bible
was totally accepted and the observance of the
Sabbath was strictly enforced. Names of cities
and settlements were likewise chosen from Hebraic
scriptures such ajggalem ];peace] and Bethlehem
[house of bread].
Cotton Mather, one of the earlier American writers
was a Hebrew scholar. In his writings there are to be
found many Hebrew expressions and words. In the First
Book of Antiquities, the Introduction begins with
the Hebrew words "Im Yirzeh ha-Shem; which translates:
"With the Will of God" and Beahava Veyir'ah
meaning with love and reverence as the proper conduct
189
of magistrates in their execution of justice.
In summary, it can be stated that the Hebraic
Judaic civilization has. had a profound influence on
Western civilization through the religion of Christianity
which adopted many Hebraic principles and concepts and
in turn became the principal religion of the West.
This effect was even heightened in the Colonies of
America for here the earlier settlers saw themselves
as an extension of Biblical history and narrative.
The Higher Learning
Haskins in 1923 says:
In Northern Europe the origin of universities must
be sought at Paris, in the cathedral school of
Notre Dame. During the Middle Ages, the monastery
schools transmitted whatever knowledge was known.
These schools were superseded by the cathedral
schools that grew up around the great churches.
During the revival of learning of the Twelfth
Century, the schools became universities so that
it is clear that the beginnings of the higher
learning Y§5e connec'ted with the Church o^'with
religion.
American higher education had its genesis in the
colonial period of our history. In 1636 with the estab-;
lishment of Harvard, America created its first institu
tion of higher learning. The aim of the European
Puritan settlers who founded Harvard was "the transfer
of the higher learning from its ancient seats.in the
191
Old World to the wilderness of America.”
According to Brubacher and Rudy in 1969:
The religious denominations wanted to create
a literate college-trained clergy,” but were
not limited to this one objective. Indeed,
the founders of Harvard and the other colonial
colleges had in mind also ”to educate professional
men in fields other than the ministry...” They
intended to train and produce cultured rej^gious
orthodox laymen to lead the civil polity.
To assure the outcome of their objectives, namely,
the transmission of European Christian culture and to
develop both clerical and lay leadership for their
communities, they adopted totally, the classically
prescribed curriculum that had been hallowed for
193
centuries in Europe, the Trivium and Quadrivium.
The central core was the classical languages
and literatures as well as such subjects as
Aramaic, Syriac, Hebrew, ethics, politics,
physics, mathematics, botany, and divinity.
It was felt that these liberal arts were "immutable
truths” to be learned by every student.
With the strong religious convictions which were
a part of the colonial spirit, the study of the language
of and the Bible itself formed an important part of the
college curriculum. Classical Hebrew was taught at
Harvard on a par with Greek and Latin. It was held,
for example, that Hebrew was important to know not only
because it was the language of the Bible, but also
because of the theory established in the Renaissance
which was that Hebrew was the archetype of all
195
Western tongues. Freshmen at Harvard began with
Hebrew, using Wilhelm Schickard's Horologium Hebraeum
(Hebrew Sun-Dial) as the first textbook. Yale, estab-
lished in 1701, followed the same tradition and even
had certain classical Hebrew words as a seal for the
college, the "Urim Vetumim," which when translated into
Latin means "Lux et Veritas," which in English means
196
law and truth.
Ezra Stiles, who was elected president of Yale
and Professor of Ecclesiastical History, took it upon
himself to teach Semitics, particularly Hebrew. He
drilled his students in one of the Psalms saying, "He
would have been ashamed if any graduate of Yale should
be entirely ignorant of the holy language when he
197.
got to heaven."
In addition to Harvard and Yale, Hebrew was a part
of the curriculum of all the ColoniaLColleges, including:
Philadelphia Academy (known now as the University of
Pennsylvania), Dartmouth, William and Mary, Rutgers,
Princeton and Brown. All taught Classical Hebrew and
198
Bible as a major subject of study.^ '/
212 j
Perhaps, the most interesting example of the
Hebraic spirit found in American higher education was
embodied in the life's work of a particular individual,
that of William Rainey Harper. Harper delivered an
address entitled, "The University and Democracy" in
which his philosophy of higher education was organized
around an analogy from biblical society. For him...
"The university was the prophet, priest, and sage of
199
democracy,"
Harper's view of the scholar cqmes from the journal
entitled, - The Old and .New. Testament Student published
under his guidance and constituting a commentary on
academic issues. For Harper, the search for truth
s‘ w.as"the' search for His truth," or God1 s truth. There
was diyine truth to be discovered in the universe
through, scholarship and research, but this was put
there by the Divinity, True, the search would upset
old established truths but need not lead to a loss of
faith. Through doubt, the student or the scholar was
led to a higher form of God's knowledge. Intellectual
progress proceeds from doubt and goes beyond that point
to a higher understanding of reality. Of course, the
Bible had a special place in the study of truth,
and its specialized..study would lead humanity to the
__________ 213 j
greatest heights. In The University and Democracy,
he stressed the need for universal scholarship calling
for :
1) the university to serve the full-time student;
2) the extension division to serve the part-time
student; and 3) the university publishing to
reach out to all mankind through the c^ggulation
of research and learning to the world.
Harper, the Hebrew scholar derived his model of the
university from the Hebraic spirit of the Bible which
basically stressed teaching and learning as acts of
201
worship.
With the passage of time, of course, these studies
as in the case of the classics, gave way to the new
utilitarian curriculum. The rapid growth of the
natural sciences and the demand for professional,
technical and scientific courses lead to the general
decline of the prescribed classical curriculum and
this included Hebrew as well.
However, it should be noted that several colleges
and universities have taught Hebrew without interruption,
including: Harvard, Yale, Columbia, University of
Pennsylvania, Brown, Princeton and Johns Hopkins, since
202
their inception. .
In addition to the language of Hebrew and Bible
that were taught; there was a literature written in
i
I
I
t
_________ 2ii:
English that was thoroughly imbued with Hebraic content.
A true reading of English or American literature was
almost impossible without a knowledge of the Bible to
explain the wealth of allusions and expressions. Thus
it can be seen that Hebraic culture has influenced
Western man and particularly the American civilization
at every turn. Whether it was literature, politics,
the arts, or the legal structure, the pure ethical
idealism of the prophets and the Mosaic code had an
203
enormous effect on life in American civilization.
This essay has attempted to trace the impact of
Hebraism on Western man and on American civilization.
While these historical developments had been taking
place, Jews,although enduring severe hardships,
r
continued to develop -their own civilization, using the
very same roots from the Bible and from this, evolving
a culture of their own. It is generally acknowledged
that there were, besides the Biblical era, three other
major periods in Jewish History including: the Rabbinic
period, the Middle Ages and the Modern Period. The
Rabbinic period gave birth to the great literary
creations of the Mishna and the Talmud in two forms:
one a Babylonian and the other the Jersualem Talmud.
215
The Talmud was much more than literature. It was the
embodiment of the totality of Jewish life and included
all the laws which Jewish communities used to govern
themselves in every sphere of living from the economic-
political, civil sector to the ritualistic religious
life. It also included the philosophical teachings of
the Jewish sages and the folklore of the people.
The Middle Ages were a rich period for Judaism,
particularly in Spain. To think of the Middle Ages
is to bring to mind the Golden Age of Spain under
the Moors; there was a flowering of Jewish culture
which has not been reproduced to this day. Poets,
philosophers, thinkers and statesmen all appeared on the
scene of history during the three hundred years of
majestic cultural development. Their works became
classics and some even found their way into the main
stream of Western civilization. Maimonides was quoted
by St. Thomas Aquinas and many Christian Hebraists
referred to such commentators of the Bible as Ibn Ezra,
Abarbanal, and Nachmanides. It also saw the development
of Jewish Mysticism and the Kabbalah.
Until the modern period, Jewish life, beginning
with the French Revolution, with the exception of the
Spanish Jewish Culture of the Middle Ages, was insulated
216
from the general mainstream of Western civilization.
Although there was cultural interaction generally Jews
lived in self-contained and self-governed communities.
This Modern Period brought forth new attitudes and
new approaches to Judaism as a result of emancipation.
From the outer world came the offer of freedom, a
gesture made by Napoleon to the Jewish masses. Within
the Jewish ghetto this offer was well-received and
caused a ferment of activity resulting in the breakdown
of the walls of separation that had existed for centuries.
Jews took advantage of this opportunity to enter the
mainstream of society. There was, of course, a price
to be paid in the loss and assimilation of many Jews
to the dominant culture. However, it should be stated
that not all Jews who sought to escape into the outer
community were successful. Anti-Semitism still was quite
strong and prejudice kept many from achieving their
aims and goals for upward mobility and complete accept
ance in German society.
In Germany, a remarkable movement arose called
Wissenschaft des Judenthums founded by Leopold Zunz,
thought to be by many scholars the historical ante
cedent of Jewish Studies in American Higher Education.
Katz^^ noted in April of 1974 that this movement
of scholarly Jewish research was linked strongly with
the political drive for the emancipation of the Jew.
Leopold Zunz wrote:
The neglect of Jewish scholarship goes hand in
hand with civil discrimination against the Jews.
Through a higher intellectual level and more
thorough knowledge of their own affairs the Jews
could have achieved a greater degree of reception
and thus more justice*.
Zunz is unknown by the world of scholarship aside
from those in Jewish Stuides; however, his arguments in
favor of Jewish Studies for the university in Germany
are classical and have application to the American
higher education scene. Essentially, there were two
reasons for Jewish Studies. One, was the claim that
more knowledge of Judaism would eliminate ignorance about
Jews which was the basic cause of anti-Semitism.
Secondly, the argument was made that a good self image
was necessary for the members of a minority culture,
in this case— the Jew. By studying his own heritage
on a high academic level, the intellectual as well as
the non-intellectual Jew would appreciate his own
heritage more by understanding it. This would aid in
making him a better member of his group and of the
general cultural community. It is sad that Zunz and the
galaxy of scholars who so desperately sought to bring
Jewish Studies (Wissenschaft des Judenthums) to the
German university were rebuffed at a time when the
curriculum was expanding and a general interest in
cultures and intercultural relations was on the rise
in the German intellectual and academic world. As can
be seen, the arguments of Zunz anticipated the revolution
that occurred in American higher education in the 1960s
and 1970s concerning the expansion of the curriculum
so that other cultures could be allowed on the campus.
The Wissenschaft movement in Germany during the
latter part of the Nineteenth Century suffered a decline
not in quality but in popularity. The forces of
assimilation and integration into German society were
strong and these eroded interest in the Science of
Judaism. Steinschneider, a great scholar of the
Wissenschaft, was reputed to have said that all that
remained for Jewish studies was to give it a decent
burial. He was pessimistic of the future and hoped
that classical Hebrew and the study of Jewish history
and literature would have at least as much dignity and
position as the ancient classical Greek and Latin
civilizations were accorded in higher education.
The Wissenschaft, although never admitted to the
_______________________________________________________________
German university, remarkably brought about a change
that was quite significant for Jewish learning. "The
movement applied the spirit and the methods of modern,
objectives, critical research to Jewish history and litera-
206
ture." Hitherto, Jewish learning was the province
of the religious scholar. Although the religious
scholar was highly honored and respected for the higher
learning, a new approach was necessary. The
field of Jewish learning had to develop a new "cognitive
identity." This was the achievement of the
Wissenschaft des Judenthums, at least a beginning was
made in the right direction.
When Steinschneider made his observations, it was
before the advent of Zionism and the movement to
207
rebuild Israel as a Jewish homeland . Theodore Herzl,
an assimilated Vieneese Jewish jouranlist, had covered
the Dreyfus case in France and was convinced that the
only way to solve the Jewish problem was for the Jews
to have their own homeland. As a result, the Zionist
movement was born and idealistic Jews began to migrate
to Palestine to build their homeland. This brought
about the rebirth of the Hebrew language as a spoken
tongue used in everyday life and with this came also a
renewal in Jewish culture and history.
220
In the newly established Hebrew university in
Jerusalem, the study of the Jews gained momentum and in
Jewish communities in the diaspora, likewise, there
occurred a new interest in the study of Jewish post-
biblical history and culture. Programs in Jewish studies
began to emerge in American institutions of higher
learning. With the ending of World War II, and possibly
as a result of the war, the Jewish Studies movement on
campus grew. In the 1960s and 1970s on the wave of
ethnic identity and pressure for programs in higher
education, Jews likewise demanded an expansion of the
curriculum and Jewish Studies in many campuses was the
result. Due to the fact that the Wissenschaft had
created an academic approach to Jewish learning rooted
in the basic attitudes of research and critical analysis,
the new discipline of Jewish Studies had a tradition to
fall back on and to develop. In addition, the profusion
of historical documents and literature of Jewish
learning were so numerous due to the past traditions
of learning, that all that was needed to further
the development of these studies was to place them on
the curriculums of universities of higher learning as
an area for further critical inquiry.
221 ;
Cultural Pluralism
American civilization is the creation of various
immigrant groups that came to these hores to found a
new society based on justice and tolerance. The
nationalities that came were from different cultural
environments bringing their many languages and
cultural patterns of behavior. The dominant feeling
particularly in the Nineteenth and early Twentieth
Centuries was that the new immigrant societies should
fuse into one American type. This was understandable
at the time for the nation’s leaders were fearful that
too much diversity in our culture and society would be
harmful.
With the adoption of this policy of benign neglect
of the immigrant’s former culture, there were many
languages and cultures that were understood by various
communities in America that were lost by the first two
generations of these immigrants. Apart from the
political loss which we have suffered because of this
neglect of a cultural resource which the government had
to rectify through various language and cultural
programs, there is the sense of not fulfilling our
best instincts as Americans by following this general
208
policy of the melting pot.
222
Recent research conducted by such men as Greeley
and Novak indicates that basic national or religious
characteristics are not easily eliminated from one’s
psyche. Jung also spoke of the ’ ’collective unconscious,”
a reservoir of feelings, thoughts, and emotions that
209
human beings have of a distant past.
The inference is tha^one’s history and ancestral
antecedents are part of one's existential being whether
or not known to that person. If this research is valid,
then the conclusion must be that to recall and regain
one’s previous history is psychologically very sound.
Thus cultural pluralism is based on not only a
’ ’fairness doctrine of democracy” which allows for
diversity, but also a necessary condition for the good
health of our society which is rooted in so many
traditions.
There are other factors that support this position.
Our world is a shrinking globe. Through the modern
communications media, distances are slowly being reduced.
There is more cultural exchange. In addition, nations
for a variety of political, economic, and historical
reasons are being drawn together to advance man's quest
for progress.
2 2 ~ 3 |
Hocking’s world civilization.^, rapidly taking
210
shape. However, what is clear is that nations and
cultural entities are not sacrificing themselves but
perpetuating their individualities at the same time
that they are seeking closer relationships and mutual
understanding. All this implies that higher education
in America has a vital role to play in the coming
world civilization in terms of creating a liberal
policy for the university to undertake the study of
many cultures wherever feasible.
Fragmentation of the Higher Learning
The American higher learning at one time had a
unity of purpose which was embodied in its classical
curriculum. This system of education remained largely
intact with minor changes until the Nineteenth Century
with the advent of modernity, technology, and seculari
zation. With the passage of time and the new changes
wrought in our society, America began to search for
a new higher learning suited to the needs of the country.
Basically, three changes took place: the unified curri
culum was abandoned and gave way to a utilitarian and
varied one; American higher learning moved from an elite
to an equalitarian spirit especially as pertaining to
the student population; and American higher education
moved toward secularization and away from its former
religious moorings. More specifically, with the growth
of the land grant colleges, the state universities,
graduate and professional schools, the American higher
education seemed to have lost its unity of purpose;
the principle that kept it together and in its place
was an amalgam of diverse and sometimes conflicting
institutions both from within and without.
Hutchins said in 1936:
The most striking fact about the higher
learning in America is the confusion that
besets it. American higher education ‘ i w
is held together by a central heating system.
Kerr bitingly suggested that ' . ’ the common grievance
212
over parking was what unified higher education."
It is clear from this analysis that these men of
attainment in the field were citing the fact that higher
education was indecisive, uncertain, and divided.
Would the university be able to build once again a
community of genuine scholars? Could there emerge from
all of this bewildering confusion some theory or concept
that would and could unite the university?
A number of educational philosophers or
theoreticians arose to try and define a purpose that
could serve to unify the higher learning. Among them was
Ortega who spoke of the primary function of the
university being the development of culture. He
too criticized the university for having abandoned its
main function and suggested that it get back to its
main purpose, i.e., the development of culture. In
1944, he made the following statement:
Hence it is imperative to set up once more
in the university, the teaching of the
culture, the system of ideas, which the age has
attained... The university must become the place
where the transmission of culture is so paramount
so that the man can develop his life in accordance
with the vital ideag-^hich will influence and
harmonize his life.
Pusey of Harvard was also agitated by this con
fusion in the university. He fell upon the idea that
the central concept of the university is ’’ devotion to
learning."
He said in 1968:
Is there a central dominating ideal enlivening
the American university today? The answer is,
most certainly, yes. For such an idea is formed
in the devotion to learning which permeates
the whole community and in the recognition of 244
learning's, importance for a full manner of life.
Goheen in 1969 also stressed the centrality of
mind or intelligence at the university as a unifying
principle:
The activity of the mind is essential to
education...it is careful, dispassionate,
ref lective thought... the university is essentially
a center for this thought. Expanding this concept
in the liberal arts, we must be aware that the
informed and enlightened mind has heightened
capacities and not only tg-^now but also to work
toward this goal is good.
For Goheen, there is the extreme optimistic view that
cultivating the mind in any cerebral activity or any
discipline would result in a better human being and a
better society. This was the function of the university
and its unifying principles.
Professor Earl V. Pullias was intrigued with the
learning process as being a journey of growth and
development. According to Professor Pullias, if man
could take the time to seriously educate himself there
was great potentiality to be tapped for the betterment
of society. This really was the only hope for modern
man. He wrote:
The essence [of the higher education]. is
the search for truth and its relation to all
of life; a search conducted through the
study of the experience and achievement of
man— especially the best he has achieved— and
through the ’imaginative consideration’ of the
implication of achievement for the present
and the future.
227
Cultural Pluralism Restated
Pussey, Goheen, Ortega and Pullias have stressed
the centrality of learning and culture as being the
heart of the university. For American higher education
another dimension can be added. That is, the centrality
of the American experience which is rooted in cultural
pluralism. American civilization can be true to its
very nature if in the search for knowledge and in the
very center of its being, there exists an expansion of
the curriculum that allows other than normative
217
cultural experiences in the study of the humanities.
A new axiom for higher education might be that all re
ligions, literatures, and cultures are intrinsically
important for man to know and examine at least in
some place in the university. The decision as to the
extent that the individual university can allow itself
to expand in that direction depends on the interest
of the students and finances. However, the philosophy
if adopted by American higher education in general will
certainly find expression in these institutions where
it is feasible and in courses where it may be applied.
The humanities are an expression of all mankind
and it is for the university which represents universal-
ism to make room for diversity of cultural expression.
228
This theory can serve to unite the university in which
the claim would be made that the study of all the
heritages of mankind although diverse have underlying
humanistic and liberalizing unities. In this way,
America, through its civilization and higher education,
becomes the microcosm of the macrocosm. The American
quest to study man in all of his shapes and forms
becomes a message to the world of the value of all men
and societies. The message of love and brotherhood
of diverse cultures and civilizations is thus
manifested in our society and civilization through our
higher learning.
A new unity for the university is thus created
and is forged for mankind as well. A wiser and more
multi-culturally differentiated university policy
might result in the improvement of minority status in
America and an international multi-cultural competence
among our population might result in sensitivities to
foreigners both in and out of America, generally for
218
the good of our society.
229
Jewish Studies and Higher Education
It would have to follow from what has been said that
the introduction of a new liberal attitude towards
various cultures includes that of the Jews. On these
grounds alone, Jewish Stuides are legitimized in
American higher education. The study of Jewish history
and literature is an expansion of the humanities which
manifests the best of American experience. The
Hebraic culture which is an old partner of the classical
and liberal arts tradition, now rejoins the university
in a new garb, that of Jewish studies, and gives
momentum to the new unity of the university for the
question of man's essential unity within his diversity
as it is found in the new expanded studies in the
humanities; thus, Jewish studies in its old and new
expression, the Hebraic and the Judaic acts as a
bridge in the expansion of the curriculum and the quest
for a higher unity of higher education.
In addition, there are other compelling reasons
for Jewish Studies in American higher education. There
are vital insights that the field of Jewish studies can
yield both to the Jewish civilization and to the Western
scholar. Jews have been part of the surrounding society
as well as apart from it. The Jew can view Western man
i
____________________________________________ 230 |
through his own experience. The opposite is also true
and the university is the community of scholars where
these observations can be made. The Jewish experience
has intertwined with Western man. As a result, there
are documents, literature, and common historical ex
perience that can aid each group in understanding the
nature of their history and background. The scholar
in Jewish Studies who has the specialized training
to understand the Jewish experience can make an
invaluable contribution to the search for knowledge.
It is worthwhile in this context to quote Hallo once more:
The vast spread of the Jewish experience, in
both time and space, and its ample documentation
are unique phenomena. They provide available
pradigms for countless areas of research:
historical, linguistic, religious, and many others.
There is every reason for non-Jewish scholars
and scholarship to participate in Jewish studies
for the light these can shed on Jljgir disciplines,
and to benefit from the results.
Hallo cites several examples:
The Genizah materials, documents found in the
archives of medieval Jewish communities, have
seriously altered scholarly perspective on the
religious, economic, social and political life
of all the peoples of the Mediterranean region,
not only of the Jewish communities.
Talmudic sources now being utilized in the study
of early Christianity together with archeological
findings, especially the Dead Sea literature,
have brought new data to bear on the elusive
origins of Christianity, and2^|je nature of the
early Christian communities.
231
There were untold encounters between Jewish and
non-Jewish communities throughout the centuries. How
did the cultures relate to each other and influence
each other? An example might be cited: It is interest
ing to note that Jewish communities in Europe outlawed
polygamy; Jewish communities in Arab countries did not.
Here was a difference that can be directly attributed
to cultrual influence. That is, the fact that the
Jews in Europe accepted the concept of monogamy and
there was ample precedent for it in Jewish civilization,
because it was the law of the land. In Arab countries,
the reverse is true--Jewish communities retained poly
gamy from a legal standpoint although it was not widely
practiced. Examples can be multiplied, however, what
is of utmost importance is that much is to be gained by
study and research in the field of Jewish Studies and
these analyses and comaprisons can be utilized on an
anthropological basis.
Certainly, the indestructible will of the Jewish
people to exist and to create culture is a phenomena
that many minorities may wish to emulate. Jewish Studies
may reveal insights into the study of man that endures
despite severe obstacles. The inordinate contribution
by Jews to civilization and to society deserves
232
scholarly attention on behalf of all civilization.
The contribution of the Jews to civilization did
not cease with the Biblical Jew, but continued after
wards as well. For this reason, and other cited earlier
in this dissertation, Jewish Studies deserves its place
among the minority cultures in American higher education.
The next chapter will summarize the findings of
this study, draw conclusions based on the research
and data, and finally, make some recommendations based
on the overall issues.
233|
CHAPTER VII
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON
THE RESEARCH OF JEWISH STUDIES PROGRAMS AT
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT LOS ANGELES,
LOS ANGELES VALLEY COLLEGE, AND HEBREW UNION COLLEGE
Summary
This study was concerned with the status of the Jew
especially from the time of the beginning of the Common
Era. Primary emphasis was placed on the historical
factors which resulted in the discrimination of the Jew
both politically and theologically. Along with this
came the concommitant neglect of the study of the culture
and civilization of the Jew throughout the ages. A
historical survey was made of this aspect of Jewish
history and also of the slow but steady evolution of
the development of Jewish studies both in Europe and
America.
234 I
____ i
The purpose of this chapter was:
1. To summarize the findings of which historical
factors lead to the political and social
stigma and discrimination of the Jew.
2. To summarize the reasons why Jewish culture
and civilization were generally ignored by
academia.
3. To summarize the development of various move
ment which began to investigate seriously and
scientifically, Jewish life and literature as
an academic concern.
4. To summarize the findings concerning the
educational issues which have arisen as a result
of the transference of Jewish Learning from the
Yeshiva to the university.
5. To analyze the findings concerning the three
types of Jewish Studies programs as found at
the University of California at Los Angeles,
Los Angeles Valley College, and Hebrew Union
College-Jewish Institute of Religion, in terms
of descriptive comparisons and contrasts.
235
The Procedure
A survey was undertaken of Jewish history and
general historiography to determine why Jews were dis
criminated against and how this resulted in a neglect of
the study of Jewish culture and civilization from the
beginnings of the Common Era, i.e., from the time of the
beginning of Christianity to fairly recent times. This
purpose was mainly carried out through reviewing the
historical literature and critical historiography.
In addition, the literature was reviewed with the
purpose of tracing the growth of Jewish studies both
in Europe and the United States. At this point, a
survey was made of educational issues that have emerged
from the entrance of Jewish studies into higher education
i
from the traditional setting of the Yeshiva to the new
university environment. This part of the study was
achieved through a survey of a growing literature in this
area.
Finally, an exploratory empirical study was under
taken to describe three different types of Jewish Studies
programs located in the vicinity of Los Angeles including:
University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles ;
• I
i
Valley College, and Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute |
i
of Religion.
i
i
________________________________ _______________236j
Questionnaires were used to gather data concerning
the students, interviews were held with the faculty and
administration and bulletins, departmental publications
and an accreditation report (Hebrew Union College-Jewish
Institute of Religion), were perused to describe philo
sophy, objectives, and programs of the individual schools.
The Findings-A General Historical Study
A brief look at Jewish history revealed an incredible
amount of persecution that has taken place from ancient
times to the present. The Jew has been exiled from his
ancient homeland and has wandered over the face of the
earth for two thousand years. He has been a hated figure,
looked upon with utter contempt especially by the
Western Christian world since the creation of Christianity
The crucifixion split Jewish history into two radical
different parts. There was the biblical Jew worthy of
historical interest for he was God's chosen people and
for whom the savior of the Christians was born. The
source, of Jewish civilization, the Bible, was an important
book for it revealed supposedly according to the fathers
of the church the coming of the Messiah. Post-biblical
Jews were removed from the scene of history. In other
237
words, they became a pariah people for they rejected
Christ. Christian triumphalism determined the course
of history for by rejecting Christ, Jews became a people
of no history and a dark night of ignorance concealed
their activities from historical consciousness of
Western society among whom they generally lived.
This attitude could be traced in the following: the
Gospels where it was adumbrated; in the Church Fathers
where it was expressed in their early writing; the
Middle Ages, the Renaissance, the Reformation, the
French rationalist historians, in the nationalist period
and finally to our modern period. If there was any
interest in Jewish literature, it was of an apologetic
or polemic nature, not historical. Writers throughout
periods of history have attempted to prove New Testament
contentions to be true by studying Jewish sources such as
the Bible or later, Jewish works, particularly the
Kabbala. This study constituted the apologetic litera
ture. In the Middle Ages this turned to bitter polemics
where Jewish literature was used to forcibly find ways
to missionize Jews to Christianity.
The development of Christian Hebraism of the
Renaissance and Reformation is of interest for it led to
a notable improvement of knowledge of Jewish sources and
literature. Yet to a great degree the same attitude of
apologetics prevailed. Jews were somehow divorced from
the literature which they created, and were still basically
the object of conversion and polemics.
With the advent of the Enlightenment of the Eighteenth
.Century, the lack of genuine objective interest in Jews
remained although historians such as Gibbon, Hume, Voltaire,
and Michelet did not generally work from a Christian
framework of history.
Even in the Nineteenth Century when history came
into its own as a discipline and where historians claimed
all of man's experience as being worthy of study, the
major histories produced had little to say about Jews
or Judaism. In the words of Langmuir, "majority
history" carried the day and Jews were ignored or degraded
221
but never fairly presented.
The review of the literature also revealed that
Jewish history was very rich and complex with many periods
each having .its :own characteristics. It was not a mono
lithic chronicle of woe or suffering and persecution.
Rather, there were many periods of great creativity and
productivity. Judaism as a religion was worthy of study
on its own merits. The development of its religious
literature, e.g., the Mishna, the Talmud, and a tremendous
body of commentaries and exegesis was hardly known by
the world. A variety of Jewish languages and dialects
which arose in the diaspora was unexplored. Jewish
cultural phenomena and social institutions, its laws and
government, its artifacts, art, and music were largely
neglected by the world of scholarship. Cultural exchange
throughout the period in all geographical locations
between various non-Jewish and Jewish communities were
never pursued by the world of scholarship. In other
words, the Jewish experience which has been and is inter
twined with the development of Western civilization, which
was both a part of and apart from Western civilization
was not deemed worthy of scholarly attention because it
was felt that Judaism as a religion had been supplanted
by Christianity and hence these cultural accomplishments
were of no significance to the world of scholarship. On
the contrary, to speak of Jewish cultural achievement was
to argue that Judaism was not an anarchronism or a relic
of the past.but a vibrant creative organic culture and
civilization. Apparently the world was not ready to
accept this premise.
The Wissenschaft des Judenthums or "Science of 1
i
Judaism" movement born in Germary was the most noteworthy j
and significant intellectual movement for the modern !
!
t
j
!
240
. _ j
period of Jewish history. It was dedicated to the
scientific study of Judaism and Jewish civilization,
including its history, culture, religion, philosophy,
art, and literature. The model of the German University
was applied to Jewish learning. Hitherto, Jewish learning
was religion centered and directed; however, the new
approach subjected Jewish sources and learning to
critical methodology marked by scholarly objectivity in
the search for truth. Historicism played a major role
in this movement to trace the antiquity and evolution
of Jewish culture and its literature.
Leopold Zunz is generally given credit for being the
father of this new movement with his pamphlet Etwas
ueber die rabbinische Literature (1818) and with his
journal launched in 1822 called Zeitschrift fuer die
222
Judenthums. Essentially, the new movement was a
secularization of Jewish learning with a critical
methodology and scholarly objectivity.whereas prior to
this Jewish learning was religion centered and directed.
Along with Zunz were other outstanding men in the
Nineteenth Century who contributed to this movement.
Some of them include: S.J. Rapoport, Leopold Zunz, S.D.
Luzzatto, and N. Korchmal followed by the next generation
I
of greats including: Z. Frankel, Geiger, Munk, and !
223 j
Steinschneider. i
I
i
________________________________ 241 j
This intellectual circle created a new approach to
Jewish scholarship through their journals, epistles and
letters. However, they could not manage to bring their
work to the German university. As much as they tried to
break the barriers and enter, there was stiff resistance.
Hebrew learning was brought to America by a number
of Christian scholars including Governor William Bradford
and Elder William Brewster. The aim of the study of
Hebrew was to seek in the Hebrew scriptures support for
Christian doctrines. As a matter of fact, one of the
reasons stated for the creation of the colonial college
was to train men for the clergy. Thus Harvard introduced
the study of classical Hebrew to facilitate the training
of students in the scriptures as part of their clerical
education.
However, what made America unique and thus different
from Europe in this regard was the fact that the Puritans
conceived of themselves as the new Israelites and read
into their contemporary history parallels with the biblical
Jews. Thus, America became the promised land of Canaan.
The trip across the sea was compared to the years of
wandering in the desert. They chose Hebrew names for
t
their children and even for towns which they had built !
and thought of adopting Hebrew as a national language at !
one time. The Bible provided inspiration for their \
I
i
political philosophy too. This tradition of the study of
I
i
__ _ 242
Hebrew although diminishing with the general secularization
of society and higher education has come down to us in
the form of Hebrew instruction still given in denominational
schools where the interest in educating for the ministry
still exists. It is still biblical orientated and with a
Christian religious aim in mind.
Another development in American higher education
which embraces Hebrew as part of the program is the
creation of Semitics and Oriental departments. Also,
in some cases the Classical studies department included
Hebrew as part of its curriculum. The study of ancient
languages was an expression of the growth of the disciplines
of History and Archaeology which began to study man's
past and parallel with that was the need to understand
the ancient languages in which they communicated so that
one could decipher old inscriptions and documents that
had survived the centuries. However, it is clear that in
all this teaching of Hebrew whether as part of Protestant
ministry training or as part of a growing interest in the
science of the history of the past, there was little
interest in post-biblical Judaism or Jews as such and
certainly within the contemporary Jewish situation. j
In the 1917 Jewish Year Book, fifty-six colleges |
and universities were listed as teaching Hebrew. Most i
Most taught Hebrew as part of Christian ministry education
program Or Semi tics. . There was no higher education
program or Semitics. There was no higher education
progranj of Jewish culture or civilization, Interstingly,
it was Harvard the mother of American higher education
that began a program in Jewish literature and philosophy.
In 1925 ? the Lucius Littauer Chair of Jewish Literature
and Philosophy was established and was occupied by one
of the greats of American higher education, Professor
Harry A. Wolfson. This was followed with the establish
ment of the Nathan Miller Chair of Jewish Literature and
Institutions at Columbia University in 1927 whose first
incumbent was Dr. Stephen S. Wise. Dr. Salo Baron was
his successor. His genius and productive scholarly career
224
is universally acknowledged,
The real breakthrough in Jewish studies was with the
acceptance of Hebrew as a language of instruction in New
York City High Schools as fulfilling foreign language
study requirements. It was predicated on the argument
that modern Hebrew was being used in Palestine in the
newly established Jewish community. New York University
began to offer modern Hebrew and then Brooklyn and Hunter
Colleges in New York did so as well.
In 1944, a Chair of Hebrew Culture and Education was
244
established in the School of Education at New York
University. In 1940, one hundred twenty-four institutions
of higher learning offered Hebrew of which ten offered
modern Hebrew. Increasingly more colleges began to accept
Hebrew as fulfilling language requirements for entrance
into college. After World War II, there was continued
interest and growth in Jewish studies and Hebrew. The
holocaust and the creation of the state of Israel were
seen as two decisive factors for this growth. In
addition, the greater Jewish student population on campus
gave impetus to these programs. In a survey of the
Modern Language Assocation of foreign language instruc
tion begun in 1958 under contract with the United
States Office of Education, there were three thousand,
eight hundred forty-three students of modern Hebrew
reported in 1960. In 1972, one hundred thirty-six col
legiate institutions taught modern Hebrew to sixteen
thousand, four hundred sixty students, an increase of
225
twenty-five percent in two years from 1970.
In 1974, a Catalogue of Jewish Studies listed three
hundred and twenty-four colleges offering at least one
course in Hebrew language and literature. Professor Band
found that from 1945 to 1965, there was an increase of
full-time positions in higher education in Jewish studies
from twelve to sixty-five. Ritterband and Rudavsky came
up with startling figures concerning the growth of
Jewish Studies. Ritterband in 1973, listed ;between
forty-five to fifty thousand students taking some form
of Jewish studies or Hebrew and Rudavsky in 1974 listed
between fifty-five thousand to sixty thousand students in
such courses. Another indication of the growth of
Jewish Studies was the founding of the National Association
of Professors of Hebrew in American institutions of
higher learning (NAPH) which began to publish Hebrew
Abstracts and Igereth and a newsletter. NAPH organized
regional and national conferences and became a forum
226
for scholarship in Hebrew and related subjects.
One of the great moments in the growth of Jewish
studies was the article in the American Jewish Year Book
of 1966 where Professor Band chartered the growth of
Jewish studies in American higher edducation. Band
presented impressive statistics as to the growth and
expansion of Jewish studies and enunciated for the first
time the general philosophy of the movement. He laid
claim to the term Jewish Studies over other terminology
!
because it reflected the true aims of this new branch of j
I
higher education, namely, the study of Jews or Jewish !
i
i
civilization. Using the older and more familiar terms j
such as Judaica or Hebraica only served to disguise the ^
f
I
246
true nature and objectives of this new group. They were
unabashedly insisting on the study of Jews in all their
cultural manifestations. Band essentially claimed
descendancy from the Wissenschaft des Judenthums movement
which was interested in the scientific study of Jews and
Jewish culture and considered this also an extension of
the political movement for emancipation.
The next important landmark was the Colloquium
held at Bran dels- in 1968. It was conceived as a form
where all teachers of Judaica in higher education could
meet to share their insights and to discuss their work.
From this auspicious occasion came the birth of the
American Association of Jewish Studies, an organization
with over nine hundred members and a list of publications
and national and regional meetings held regularly around
the country.
Konvitz listed the reasons for the growth of Jewish
studies as follows:
(1) greater receptivity on the part of colleges and
universities to offer non-traditional courses and
the general breakdown of rigid academic orthodoxy.
(2) increased Jewish consciousness stimulated by
the holocaust and the creation of the State of
Israel. (3) Jewish interest created by nationalism
and Zionism. (4) the great increase in Jewish
enrollment at institutions of higher learning.
247 ;
____j
(5) recognition of Judaism as an essential
component of higher learning. (6) the greater
acceptance of Jew and Judaism by society generally.
(7) the recent development of area studies leading
naturally to Near East as a proper area subject for
research and teaching. (8) the development of
departments of religious studies from which Judaism
cannot be justifiably excluded. (9) the introduction
of ethnic studies influenced by Jewish students to
think of the propriety of Jewish studies as an
academic field. Also the availability of seed money
from the Jewish community2^ich is interested in
developing such programs.
Findings From The Review of Literature
On Current Issues
Definition of the Field
It is generally accepted that Jewish Studies is the
analysis and study of the Jewish experience through various
time periods of the past and also in the contemporary world.
This experience comprises a body of data that should be
studied at the university. It is as important as other
areas of studies and perhaps even more so due to the fact
that Judaism has pre-existed and co-existed with Western
civilization, Christianity, and Islam, and have seemed to
have greatly influenced them.
There is a body of data and knowledge that may be
referred to as Jewish Studies or Judaica which is worthy
of further study and inquiry. That knowledge comprises
the Jewish experience or heritage and consists of
religious, social, historical, literary and anthropological
data. Such studies should have the right to be placed
on the curriculum of universities needing no further
justriciation other than it is a subject to be studied
and explored. It is of equal importance as that of,
for example, Chinese studies and it may have greater
signficance than ordinarily given credit for because of its
interrelationship with Western civilization, Christianity,
and Islam,
249
The New Setting
Jewish learning hitherto has been solely found in
traditional settings. The primary environment has been
the Yeshiva. The new university setting for Jewish learn
ing requires that it assume a new "cognate identity." The
difference between the two learning environment is as
follows: Yeshiva study is sectarian and pietistic, also
committed to a point of view; study at the Yeshiva is
pursued as a religious exercise or experience being
exegetical and ahistorical. The university setting for
Jewish studies follows the univer ity model of being
value-free, and is an inquiry into and a search for truth.
It is taught in a non-sectarian manner with detachment
and objectivity.
Rationale for Jewish Studies
In the literature of Jewish Studies, the following is
accepted as a rationale for Jewish studies:
(a) The theory of cultural pluralism is now widely
accepted. Therefore minority and other sub
cultures feel that they should be included in
the undergraduate program.
(b) Jewish Studies are part of the humanities
tradition of Western man.
(c) Knwoledge of Judaism and Jewish history can be
an antidote to anti-Semitism.
250
(d) Knowledge and research available to the Judaic
scholar can shed light on other areas of study
and on contemporaneous civilizations and their
history.
Department Placing of Jewish Studies
In the professional literature a discussion ensues
on the issue of whether to integrate Jewish Studies in
the existing structure of the university, namely, the
various disciplines and departments so that for example
Jewish history could be taught in the History department;
Hebrew language and literature in the Foreign language
department or Near Eastern Languages and Yiddish in German
languages. The other point of view is that Jewish
Studies should be treated like a discipline all to itself
achieving a gestalt as an area studies.
Funding-The American Jewish Community
The research indicates that many programs were
initiated through the American Jewish Community that
funded these courses and chairs. All writers agree that
the Jewish community plays a role in the establishment
of Jewish Studies programs but that there must not be any
strings attached to the giving of money. The integrity
of the university must be upheld at all costs.
251
Contemporary Studies of Jews
A reading of the literature suggests that Jewish
Studies or learning has been oriented towards the past.
That is, that the emphasis has been placed on past
history or classical Hebrew sources. The study of
contemporary Judaism or Jews has not been readily accepted
and even been frowned upon. Various reasons are given
for this fact. However, Contemporary Studies of Judaism
and Jews appear to be slowly assuming a respectable place
in the academic study of Judaica.
252
Summary of Findings At
University of California at Los Angeles
Research done on the Jewish Studies program at the
University of California at Los Angeles has revealed the
following:
The program was begun in 1954 in the Classics
Departments and was funded at first by the Jewish Community
A number of outstanding men were brought in who were
experts in the field of Judaica; Dr. Wolf Leslau from
Brandeis University, Dr. Arnold Band from Harvard and Dr.
Jonas Greenfield from Brandeis; the latter left later
to teach at the University of California at Berkeley.
In 1959 the university opened its Near Eastern
Language and Culture Department. Hebrew, Arabic, and
Turkish were taught and Bachelors of Art Degrees were
offered to those language majors. Dr. Herbert Davidson,
a Harvard graduate joined the faculty.
In 1973, due to the initiative of Jewish students,
a separate Jewish Studies program was started. It was
mainly based in the Near Eastern Language Department.
However, it also utilized the expertise of other depart
ments such as: the History, Political Science, Sociology,
German and Humanities Departments. Obviously, the Jewish
Studies program is interdepartment at UCLA.
253
In 1973, a Religion Major was begun under the
direction of Professor Bolle of the History Department
with specialty in Israel and Udaism. In 1962, Shimeon
Brisman was appointed librarian and bibliographer of
Judaica. Presently, there are 120,000 volumes on
this subject in the Research Library at the University
of California at Los Angeles and it is considered the best
Judaica and Hebraica collection West of Chicago.
In 1966, Professor Amos Funkenstein came from the
University of Berlin to the History Department to begin
a graduate program in Jewish History. The History
Department offered upper division courses in the under
graduate program as well.
Presently, UCLA is offering a Bachelor Degree in
Jewish Studies, a Bachelor, Masters or Doctoral Degree
in Hebrew Language and Literature from the Near Eastern
Language Department, and a Masters or Doctoral Degree in
History with Jewish History Specialty from the History
Department.
Educational Philosophy and Curriculum
In view of the fact that UCLA is a university and
a university’s function is primarily for scholarship,
research, and critical inquiry and objectivity, the
254
Hebrew and Jewish Studies programs at UCLA embraces the
philosophy of this university. The programs are in^-
tensively academic with the spirit of free critical
inquiry and objectivity.
Faculty
All the professors are Ph.D.’s who have received
their degrees from leading universities such as:
Harvard, Yale, Brandeis, Columbia, UCLA, the University
of Berlin and the University of Prague. Key members
of the staff are highly regarded in their field and
publidi prolifically in professional journals.
Student Body
In the Spring of 1978, there were one hundred sixty-
three enrollments in the Hebrew and Jewish Studies programs,
seventy-seven in Jewish History and nine enrollments in
Yiddish. Of these, there are five undergraduate majors
in Hebrew and about thirty-five undergraduate majors in
Jewish Studies. There are four graduate majors in Hebrew
Language and Literature.
The following are findings from our survey with the
sample number of eighty-eight students: The vast majority J
255
___j
are between the ages of seventeen to twenty-three; most
are Jewish with a few Christians. All are native
Americans and are full-time students. Most have had some
form of previous religious education and many are
affiliated with a religious or Zionist institution.
Seventeen percent of the sample are majors; most students
take these courses as electives and the rest take them
to fulfill a language, general education, or humanities
requirement.
The research shows that the vast majority of students
believe that Jewish consciousness-raising and Jewish
identity should be part of the Jewish Studies program.
This is in direct conflict with the position taken by
the faculty who believe that the university courses should
be purely academic and objective.
The most frequent reasons given by students for
taking Jewish Studies courses is, Mto learn about the
Jewish heritage.” Christians taking Jewish Studies
courses also voiced their interest in learning about
Judaism.
256
Summary of Findings At
Los Angeles Valley College
The Jewish Studies programs at Valley College
was started in 1970 by Professor Zey Garber, The college
introduced three courses; two in the Hebrew language and
one in Hebrew Civilization. These courses were offered
in the Foreign Language Department,
In 1972, the Jewish Studies Department was created.
Courses in Jewish content and languages were offered as
part of the program, Jewish Studies majors were offered
an Associate of Arts Degree, the only two-year college to
have such a major. Courses were also offered to fulfill
language, humanities, and general education requirements.
There is also a sizable adult education program offering
various courses in Hebrew and Jewish content. The adult
education program has proven to be one of the most
successful aspects of the Jewish Studies program at
Los Angeles Valley College,
Educational Philosophy and Curriculum
LAVC is a two-year college and as a Junior College
its purposes are; for transfer students? for continuing
education programs, community services and other similar
needs. The Jewish Studies program and others fit into
this format in the following ways;
25J
Transfer Purposes - First, students acquiring an
Associate of Arts Degree as Jewish Studies majors are pre
pared to continue this major in four year colleges and
universities. Secondly, students in other majors can still,
take Jweish Studies courses to fulfill language, humanities
or general education requirements, and these courses will
also be given credit in four year colleges and universities
Continuing Adult Education - Various courses in
Hebrew and Jewish content are offered to the public in
the community. About fifty percent of the students
enrolled in Jewish Studies courses are in adult education.
Community Services - Various courses of Jewish
content are offered as outreach programs to the immediate
local vicinity and satellite locations.
The educational philosophy of the Jewish Studies
program incorporates the general philosophy of the Com
munity College;however, it adds its own special goals
to this philosophy. The Jewish Studies Department
encourages Jewish identity, Jewish consciousness-raising
and participation in the social action programs of the
Jewish community. This department also is continually
i
i
searching for and employs innovative teaching method- |
i
I
ology, educational technology and creative programs.
i
i
258 '
____ j
Faculty
Since their goal is to have creative and innovative
classes, they choose their instructors who can facilitate,
this aim. The stress is placed on teaching ability
rather than choosing men of distinction in research and
publishing. No one on the faculty has a Ph.D. On
the other hand, Professor Zev Garber is a productive
scholar and some other faculty members write in the
popular Jewish press.
Student Body
Our sample survey number is seventy-eight. The
findings are: the total enrollment for Fall 1978 was
four hundred and twenty-six students taking Jewish
Studies courses; one hundred eighty-three day students and
two hundred forty-three evening students. Fourteen are
Jewish Studies majors and twelve are Hebrew Majors.
Fifty percent of the students are between the ages
of thirty and seventy and fourty-four percent are between
seventeen and twenty-nine. Thirty-five percent are part-
time students and forty-three percent of the sample were
in adult education. Sixty-four percent are female.
Religion is overwhelmingly Jewish with a few Christians
and eighteen percent are naturalized or non-citizens.
259
Thirty-eight percent of the student have either a
college, professional or graduate degree and thirty-
seven percent take Jewish Studies courses as electives..
About thirty-five percent of our sample have had no
form of previous Jewish or Hebrew religious education.
Thirty=four percent belong to a synagogue or church and
twenty-nine percent belong to a Zionist organization.
Ten percent of the students plan to go into Jewish
communal work.
The display of Jewish consciousness-raising is very
high for both students taking courses and the instructors
teaching Jewish Studies. Responses as to why most students
take Jewish Studies courses are, ”To learn about the
Jewish heritage.” This response is given not only by
Jewish students but also by Christian students.
260
Summary of Findings At
Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion
The research indicates that the Hebrew Union College
was founded in 1875 in Cincinnati, Ohio for the training
of Rabbis. The Los Angeles branch was first established
in Hollywood Hills in 1954. It later moved to a newly
constructed campus adj accent to the University of Southern
California in 1971.
The major thrust of the college was the professional
schools to train Rabbis and other professionals such as
educators, cantors, and social workers to serve the Jewish
community. There was also established the Edgar F. Magnin
School of Graduate Studies in Judaica offering a Masters
Degree and a Doctorate of Hebrew Studies plus a Doctorate
of Hebrew Letters. A candidate may also pursue a Ph.D.
degree at the University of Southern California School
of Religion in cooperation with the Edgar F. Magnin
Graduate School at Hebrew Union College.
The Hebrew Union College also established the Jerome
H. Louchheim School for Judaic Studies which serves the
following purposes:
1. To offer Jewish Studies courses to USC under
graduate students to fulfill needs for electives,
humanities, language, general education, religion
and philosophy requirements.
261
2. To encourage both undergraduate and graduate
students majoring in religion at USC to take
Judaic Studies as a specialty.
3. To offer graduate students majoring in education
and social work at USC courses in Judaica to
fulfill some of their requirements.
The Hebrew Union College is first a religious college.
Initially, it undertook to train Rabbis for the Jewish
Reform movement. Later, other professional schools were
added to serve the Jewish community: the School of Social
Work, the School of Education, and a Department of Sacred
Music.
The Graduate School was founded to provide further
development for advanced Jewish studies, particularly
for Rabbis.and other professionals interested in Jewish
scholarship.
The Jerome H. Louchheim School was created to provide
Judaic studies courses for outside university students,
especially USC. Courses for other university students
are also available. This school offers college level
programs leading to Masters, Bachelors and Associate Arts
Degrees in Judaica.
262
Educational Philosophy and Curriculum
The Jerome H. Louccheim School's philosophy is to
make available Jewish studies and facts about Jewish
history and literature to students of the Hebrew Union
College, the University of Southern California and other
universit ies.
The curriculum offers courses in Jewish content which
are broadly cultural. Advanced courses in Hebrew Litera
ture use textual analysis primarily as methodology.
Faculty
In the accreditation report by the Western Association
of Schools and Colleges, in 1974, the college was criti
cized for not maintaining enough full-time faculty in
all the schools of HUC. The Jerome H. Lochheim School
was criticized the worst in this matter. The programs
relied heavily on qualified part-time faculty.
Subsequently, a more qualified full-time faculty was
added, but apparently a greater number of faculty members
is still presently needed.
Because it is a Jewish, religious college, the full
time appointments seemed generally to go to former
religious professionals such as Rabbis, educators and
263
other such graduates of the Hebrew Union College of
Cincinnati, some of whom also have degrees from other
major universities.
Student Body
The total full-time enrollment for the Fall of 1978
in the professional and graduate schools, including the
branch in Israel was one hundred and six students and
total part-time enrollment was one hundred fifty students;
Seventy-one undergraduate students from the University of
Southern California were enrolled in Jewish Studies at the
Jerome H. Lochheim School. The following are findings
from a sample of sixty-six students.
The age groups were as follows: fifty percent were
between the ages of eighteen and twenty-three; twenty-
five percent were between the ages of twenty-four to
twenty-nine and twenty-one percent were between the ages
of thirty-two and sixty. Eighty-six percent were males
and thirty-eight percent were females. The vast majority
of students were Jewish; however, six percent were
Christians and three percent were either of other religions
or refused to state which. Ninety-four percent were
native Americans, thirty percent majored in Jewish Studies
and three percent were minoring in that field. Forty-five
264
percent were taking these courses as electives or to
fulfill language, humanities, or general education
requirements. Fifty-seven percent had college degrees;
nineteen and six tenths percent had graduate degrees and
twelve percent had professional degrees. Eighty percent
had some form of previous Jewish religious education.
With regard to career goals, about seventy-five percent
wanted some career with involvement in the Jewish
community, either as Rabbi, educator, or social worker.
Forty-four percent had synagogue participation and
thirty-five percent were involved in either the Zionist
movement or some other form of community involvement.
An overwhelming number believed that Jewish Studies
courses should also function to raise Jewish consciousness
and to foster Jewish identity. Jewish students stated
that their reasons for taking Jewish Studies courses were
either as career goals or for interest in their Jewish
heritage, or both. Christian students, Buddhists and others
also expressed their interest in the Jewish heritage.
265
Conclusions
On the basis of this study, some interesting con
clusions may be drawn as to the future of Jewish Studies
programs in higher education.
The type of programs vary according to the type and
purpose of the institution. This was obvious as I
studied three different types of institutions: University
of California at Los Angeles which is a four year college;
Los Angeles Valley College which is a two year Community
College offering an Associate of Arts degree in Jewish
Studies, and the Hebrew Union College which is affiliated
with the University of Southern California.
All programs share certain elements such as Language,
History and Jewish Social Sciences. This is necessary
to serve the basic objectives of general education in
order to contribute to all civilization.
An attempt is being made to show the relationship
between the Hebraic tradition which has filtered through
Western civilization and the Judaic tradition which
has unfolded in the post-biblical history of the Jewish
people.
Post-biblical civilization and culture was largely
ignored by the Western world and kept out of institutions
of higher learning apparently because of prejudice.
266
The beginning of scientific study of Judaism which
included the post-biblical history and culture of the
Jews began as the Wissenschaft des Judenthums in Germany
in the beginning of the Nineteenth Century under the
auspices of Jewish scholars but never attained university
status.
Biblical or Classical Hebrew and the Old Testament
were studied in the Colonial Colleges as part of the
Protestant training for the ministry.
Hebrew was also part of the curriculum of higher
education in America during the Eighteenth and Nineteenth
Centuries with the founding of the departments of
Semitics. After World War I, renewed interest in the
Hebrew language occurred especially in Modern Hebrew
due to the development and the growth of Zionism, and
the development of the Modern Hebrew Language in Israel.
After World War II, programs in Jewish Studies
expanded and proliferated in American higher education
influenced by the Holocaust, the ^tablishment of the
State of Israel, the growth of the Jewish student popu
lation in the colleges, and the growth of cultural
pluralism and respect for ethnicity.
The transference of Jewish learning from the tradit
ional setting of the Yeshiva to the University necessitated
a new ' ’ cognate identity" for Jewish learning.
267
On the basis of an empirical study made of three
types of Jewish Studies programs at UCLA, LAVC and HUC
utilizing catalogues, brochures, pamphlets, school bulletins!
and departmental reports; curriculum vita of faculty;
interviews with administrators, faculty and students;
and questionnaires administered to students; the following
conclusions may be drawn:
1. Each of the above mentioned three institutions
are different: UCLA is a university, LAVC is a
two-year community college, and HUC is a Jewish
Religious, Professional College.
2. Due to the fact that each of the above insti
tutions are basically different from each other,
the Jewish Studies programs housed there are
also different and there is little overlap in
the functions that they each serve.
3. The key similarity in all the programs is that
they each revolve around offering a core of
several courses in the Hebrew Language and some
courses in Hebrew Literature and Jewish History.
4. The following are similarities found in the
student population taking Jewish Studies courses
in each of the three mentioned schools: most of
the students taking Jewish Studies were Jewish,
268
with some previous Jewish edueation and parti
cipation in a synagogue or Zionist affiliation,
Most of these students felt that Jewish identity
and consciousness-raising should definitely be
part of the Jewish Studies programs , and the
majority of students, including Christians,
stated that their reason for taking Jewish Studies
courses was to learn about the Jewish heritage,
5. One of the salient differences in each of the
three programs was the age groups of the students
and the time that they spent on the campus; the
age group of UCLA students was predominantly
late teens and early twenties who were full-time
students. On the other hand, the students at
LAVC were about fifty percent between the ages
of thirty to seventy' who were largely adult
education evening students. HUC which primarily
offers professional degrees or undergraduate
courses to fulfill requirements for USC students
has seventy-four percent students in the eighteen
to twenty-nine age group and twenty-one percent
were between thirty-two and sixty years old.
6. Another major difference between the schools,
involved the type of faculty that were employed
for each of the programs.
269
UGLA, being a major research university, chose pro
fessors who were known to be scholars in their field,
who were researchers and published in professional journals,
All have Ph.D.’s which were acquired from major universities.
LAVC has only one full-time lecturer and the rest
are part-time in this department; there are two history
instructors who have only a part-time assignment in
Jewish Studies, but belong mainly to the History Depart
ment. There are no Ph.D.’s teaching in Jewish Studies.
The instructors are teaching oriented, community oriented.
They are imbued with a sense of mission to foster strong
Jewish identity, raise Jewish consciousness, encourage
social action, religious identity and participation as an
expression of the Jewish experience.
HUC’s greater portion of the full-time faculty are
graduates of the Hebrew Union College of Cincinnati (the
Mother College of HUC of Los Angeles), and many also have
received Rabbinical ordination from that college. Some
of these same professors also acquired degrees from major
universities. Many of the courses are taught by part-time
faculty, including Dr. Arnold Band and Dr. Amos
Fuckenstein of UCLA. Courses are also taught by several
Rabbis from the Los Angeles vicinity.
270
General Conclusions
About The Three
Jewish Studies Programs
The University of California at Los Angeles is a
highly academic research oriented university program.
Los Angeles Valley College is a two-year community
college program, stressing strong Jewish ethnic components
and a highly developed adult education program.
The Hebrew Union College is predominantly a religious,
professional college with Jewish Studies courses providing
for the University of Southern California students, an
undergraduate and graduate Jewish Studies program.
271
Recommendations
In light of the findings and conclusions presented,
the following recommendations are made:
1. The research has shown that the empirical study
is the first of its kind; consequently, it is
recommended that more studies be made to identify
the underlying philosophies and emphases of
Jewish Studies to see if they are serving the
objectives they were created for— to contribute
to the well-being of all civilization by way of
American higher education.
2. It is further recommended that Jewish Studies
programs be implemented on the high school level
in an effort to prepare the future college
student who may wish to enroll in Jewish Studies
courses for whatever reason he so chooses.
3. It is recommended that efforts be made to
better articulate the lower division courses at
Los Angeles Valley College or other community
colleges who offer Jewish Studies programs, with
the upper division courses of UCLA and other four
year programs— for their mutual benefit.
4. The .research has shown that at UCLA, the faculty
views the Jewish Studies program as purely
academic. Conversely, the research shows that
272
the students feel strongly that the program should
offer Jewish identity goals. It is therefore
recommended that this matter be resolved through
faculty-student discussion and dialogue.
5. It is recommended that the curriculum of the
Louchheim of HUC be streamlined and reduced to
a manageable program. An underlying philosophy
should be used to determine curriculum goals
and courses.
6. It is recommended that the objectives and philo
sophy of the Louchheim School of Judaic Studies
which is the adjunct program of USC, be brought
into better alignment with the University's
Religion program and goals.
7. In order to stimulate interest in the various
Jewish Studies programs in higher education,
information should be made available to admini
strators, teachers, and students in secondary
education about the availability of such courses
in the various colleges and universities.
8. It is recommended that some central organ of
the Jewish community print out a description of
the various Jewish Studies programs, so that
Jewish youth may make choices in regard to taking
courses in Jewish Studies.
273
9. Because it has been proven by this dissertation
that Jewish Studies can be and are of interest
to non-Jewish students, the availability of these
courses should be made known to such students
who may want to enroll in a Jewish Studies course
or courses.
10. My final recommendation is that a broader study
be made on this same topic using a wider geo
graphical area encompassing more institutions
of higher learning who offer Jewish Studies
programs.
274
FOOTNOTES
1
Arnold J. Band, "Jewish Studies in American Liberal
Arts Colleges and Universities," American Jewish Yearbook,
Volume 67, 1966. pages 3-30.
2
Leon Jick, Editor, The Teaching of Judaica in
American Universities: The Proceedings of a Colloquium,
(New York: Ktav Publishing House, 1970).
3
See Jacob Neusner, "Modes of Jewish Studies in
the University," in The Study of Religion in Colleges
and Universities, Paul Ramsey and John F. Wilson,
Editors, (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1970),
pages 159-189. Also see Jacob Neusner, The Academic
Study of Judaism: Essays and Reflections, pages 93-121.
4
Solomon Grayzel, A History of the Jews: From the
Babylonian Exile to the Present, 5728-1968.(New York:
A Mentor Book from New American Library, 1968), page 17.
5
Leo W. Schwarz, Editor, Great Ages and Ideas
of the Jewish People, (New York: Random House, 1956),
page xxi of Introduction.
6
Ibid, pages xxiii to xxiv of Introduction.
7
Ibid., page xxiv of Introduction,
8
Martin Cohen, "A Word on the Field of Jewish
History," Consultation for Jewish Studies Papers,
Unpublished, presented at New York City on October 9th
to 10th, 1972, see page 38 of Appendix B.
9
Grayzel, page 24
10
Baruch Levine and William Hallo, "Ancient Jewish
Studies," Consultation for Jewish Studies Papers,
Unpublished, presented at New York City on October 9th
to 10th, 1972, see page 4 of Appendix B.
275
11
Ibid.
12
Gavin Langmuir, ' ’ Majority History and Post-Biblical
Jews," Journal of the History of Ideas, 1966, page 347.
13
Joseph Yerushalmi, Bibliographical Essays in
Medieval Jewish Studies, the Study of Judaism,
Volume II, by the Anti-Defamation League of Bnai Brith,
(New York: Ktav Publishing House, Inc., 1976), page 1.
14
Ibid.
15
Langmuir, page 343.
16
Ibid.
17
Yerushalmi, page 2.
18
Langmuir, page 343.
19
Yerushalmi, page 2
20
George Foot Moore, "Christian Writers on Judaism,"
Harvard Theological Review, 1921, page 197.
21
Abraham L. Sachar, A History of the Jews,
New York: Knofp, 1973), page 194.
22
Ibid., pages 166-167.
23
Yerushalmi, page 3.
24
David Rudavsky, "Hebraic Studies in American
Colleges and Universities with Special Reference to
New York University," Doron: Hebraic Studies,
(New York: The National Association of Professors in Hebrew
in American Institutions of Higher Learning,1965).
__________________________________________ : _ 276
25
Yerushalmi, page 3.
26
Ibid., page 4.
27
Basnage as found in Yerushalmi, page 4.
28
Yerushalmi, page 4.
29
David Hume, The History of England, New Edition,
Two Volumes,, (New York: Publisher Unknown, 1879),
Volume I, pages 607-608.
30
See David Hume in Langmuir, page 348.
31
Edward Gibbon, The History of The Decline and
Fall of the Roman Empire, J.B. Bury, Editor, (London:
J.D. Bury Publishing Company, 1909-1912), Volume II of
Seven Volumes, page 3.
32
Jules Michelet, Histoire de France, New Edition,
Nineteen Volumes, in Ten, (Paris: Publisher Unknown,
1870), Vol. I, page 201.
33
Yerushalmi, page 5.
34
Yerushalmi, page 4.
35
Langmuir, page 362.
36
Yerushalmi, page 6.
37
Ibid.
277
38
J.S. Brubaker, and W. Rudy, Higher Education in
Transition, (New York: Harper and Row, 1968), pages 178-179
39
Nahum Glatzer in Alexander Altman, Studies in
19th Century Jewish Intellectual History, (Cambridge:
Harvard Press, 1964), page 27.
40
Joseph Katz, "Emancipation and Jewish Studies,"
Commentary, Volume 57, April 1974, pages 60-65.
41
Encyclopaedia Judaica, Volume 16 (Jerusalem:
Keter Publishing House, Jerusalem, Israel, 1972), page 570.
42
Ibid., pages 572-573.
43
Ibid.
44
Ibid.
45
See Jacob Neusner in P. Ramsey and J. Wilson,
Editors, in The Study of Religion in Colleges and
Universities, (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University
Press, 1970), pages 159-189.
46
See Glatzer in Altman, page 30.
47
Yerushalmi, page 6.
48
See Glatzer in Altman, page 32.
49
Ibid., page 34
50
Yerushalmi, page 7.
51
Ibid.
278
52
Encyclopaedia Judaica, Volume 16, page 576.
(See Footnote Number 41).
53
Gershom Scholem, The Messianic Idea in Judaism
and Other Essays on Jewish Spirituality, (New York:
Shocken Books, Inc., 1971), page 305.
54
David Rudavsky, Editor, in Doron: Hebraic Studies,
(New York: The National Association of Professors in
Hebrew in American Institutions of Higher Learning, 1965),
page 3.
55
Ibid.
56
R.S. Storrs, The Puritan Spirit, in Abraham I.
Katsh, The Hebrew Impact on Western Civilization,
Dagobert D. Runes, Editor, page 10.
57
Cotton Mather, Magnalia Christi Americana,
Volume I, in Katsh, Runes, Editor, page 17.
58
John Davis, New England’s Memorial. See Abraham
I. Katsh in Runes, Editor, page 17.
59
C.E. Whiting, ’ ’Studies in English Puritanism
from the Restoration to the Revalation, 1660-1688,”
See Abraham I. Katsh in Runes, Editor, page 18.
60
Abraham I. Katsh, Hebraic Language, Literature
and Culture in American Institutions of Higher Learning,
(New York: Payne Educational Sociology Foundation, 1950),
page 33.
61
J.S. Brubaker and W. Rudy, Higher Education in
Transition, (New York: Harper and Row, 1958), page 6.
62
Abraham I. Katsh, in Runes, Editor, Hebrew
Impact on Western Civilization,, page 22.
279
63
David Rudavsky, ''Hebraic Studies and Judaic Studies
in American Higher Education," Congress Bi-Weekly,
October 25, 1974, page 7.
64
Abraham I. Katsh, Hebraic Language, Literature
and Culture in American Institutions of Higher Learning,
(New York: Payne Educational Sociology Foundation, 1950),
page 5.
65
See Rudavsky, Footnote Number 63, page 7.
66
Ibid.
67
Abraham I. Katsh, See Footnote Number 64, page 12.
J.S. Brubaker and W. Rudy, Higher Education in
Transit ion, (New York: Harper and Row, 1958), page 115.
69
Abraham I. Katsh, See Footnote Number64, page 12.
70
Ibid.
71
Ibid., page 13
72
American Jewish Year Book of 1917.
73
David Rudavsky, Editor, in Doron: Hebraic Studies,
See Footnote Number 54, page 9.
74
Ibid.
75
See Abraham I. Katsh, Hebraic Language, Literature
and Culture in American Institutions of Higher Learning,
(New York: The National Association of Professors in
Hebrew in American Institutions of Higher Learning, 1965),
page 3.
76
Ibid.
280
77
Ibid.
78
David Rudavsky, See Footnote Number 54, page 3.
79
Abraham I. Katsh, See Footnote Number 60, page 46.
80
Abraham I. Katsh, ’ ’ Hebraic Studies in American
Higher Education: An Evaluation of Current Trends,"
Jewish Social Studies, January 1959, pages 15-21.
81
Abraham I. Katsh, Modern Hebrew In Our Higher
Higher Institutions of Learning, (New York: New York
University, 1940), pages 25-31.
82
Abraham I. Katsh. Hebrew in American Higher
Education,(New York: New York University Bookstore,
1941), page 182.
83
David Rudavsky, "Hebraic Studies and Judaic Studies
in American Higher Education," Congress Bi-Weekly,
October 25, 1974, pages 7-10.
84
Ibid.
85
See Abrahah I. Katsh, Footnote Number 81, pages
25-31.
86
Judith Saypol, "Jewish Scope; Jewish Studies; Old
Discipline; New Disciple" National Jewish Monthly,
December 1972, Volume 87, page 28.
87
Arnold J. Band, "Jewish Studies in American Liberal
Arts Colleges and Universities," American Jewish Yearbook,
Volume 67, 1966, pages 3-30.
281
88
Paul Ritterband, T , The Pattern of Growth of Jewish
Learning in American Universities," in "A Symposium on
Jewish Studies in the University," in Conservative
Judaism, Volume XXVII, Number 12, Winter 1973, pages 14—20.
89
See David Rudavsky, Footnote Number 63.
90
Arnold Band, Footnote Number 87, pages 3-30.
91
Ibid.
92
Jacob Katz, "Emancipation and Jewish Studies,"
Commentary , Volume 57, No. 4, April 1974, pages 60-65.
93
David Rudavsky, Editor, Doron: Hebraic Studies,
See Footnote Number 63, page 8.
94 .
Ibid.
95
Milton R. Konvitz, "The Emergence of Jewish
Studies," Congress Monthly, January 24, 1975, Volume
42, pages 10-14.
96
Leon Jick, Editor, The Teaching of Judaica in
American Universities: The Proceedings of a Colloquium,
(New York: Ktav Publishing Company, 1970), Introduction.
97
Ibid.
98
Encyclopaedia Judaica, Volume 16, page 570.
99
Marshall Sklare, "The Problem of Contemporary
Jewish Studies in the Teaching of Judaica," Leon
Jick, Editor, See Footnote Number 96.
100
Konvitz, page 11.
282
101
Robert Alter, "What Jewish Studies Can Do,"
Commentary, October 1974, Volume 58, No. 4., pages 71-76.
102
Band, pages 3-30
103
Gerson Cohen, "An Embarassment of Riches:
Reflections on the Condition of American Jewish Scholar
ship," in The Teaching of Judaica in American Universities
The Proceedings of a Colloquium, (New York: Ktav
Publishing Company, 1970), Leon Jick, Editor.
104
Jacob Neusner, The Academic Study of Judaism:
Essays and Reflections. (New York: Ktav Publishing
House, Inc., 1975), First Series was published in 1975;
A second series was published in 1977; both series were
utilized in this study.
105
Arthur Hyman, "Jewish Philosophy," Consultat ion
for Jewish Studies Papers, Unpublished, presented at
New York City on October 9th to 10th, 1972, see page
15 of Appendix B.
106
Baruch A. Levine, "Defining Jewish Studies," in
"A Symposium on Newish Studies in the University,"
Conservative Judaism, Volume XXVII, Number 2, Winter 1973,
page 3.
107
Band, page 5.
108
Jacob Neusner, See Footnote Number 104, page 96.
(Series one published in 1975).
109
Joseph T. Durham. "Significant Themes in American
Negro History," The Role and Contributions of American
Negroes in the History of the United States and of
Illinois. (Springfield, Illinois: Office of the Super
intendent of Public Instruction, September of 1970),
Found in James Newton A Curriculum Evaluation of Black
Studies in Relationship to Student Knowledge of Afro-
American History and Culture, (San Francisco, 1976),page 8,
283
110
Cecil Roth, The Jewish Contribution to Civilization
(New York and London; Harper and Brothers , 1940,)page ix,
111
Edmund Wilson , "The Need for Judaic Studies,p
in A Piece of My Mind: Reflections at Sixty, (Garden
City , New York; Doubleday and Company, Inc., 19581, page IS
112
Dagobe'rt Runes, Editor, The Hebrew Impact
on Western Civilization, (Secaucus, New Jersey; The
Citadel Press, 1965)
113
Oscar Handlin, Immigration as a Factor in
American History, (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey;
Prentice-Hall, Inc,, 1959 page 153,
114
Ibid, , page 153 .
115
Michael Novak, The Rise of the Unmeltable Ethics;
Politics and Culture in the Seventi.es, (New York;
Macmillan and Company, 1972),
116
Andrew M. Greeley, Ethnicity in the United States:
A Preliminary Reconnaissance, (New York; John Wiley
And Sons, 1974), page 12.
117
Shils in Greeley, page 12.
118
Horace M. Kallen, "Democracy Versus the Melting
Pot,n The Nation, 1915, pages 219-220,
119
Micahel Novak, Further Reflections on Ethnicity:
Collected Essays, (Middletown, Pennsylvania: Jednoth .
Press, 1977), page 39.
284
120
Jacob Neusner, The Academic Study of Judaism,
Second Series, page 1. (See Footnote Number 104).
121
Arthur C. McGill, "Christian Theology in the
Study of Religion in Colleges and Universities," in
The Study of Religion in Colleges and Universities,
P. Ramsey and J. Wilson, Editors, (Princeton, New Jersey:
Princeton University Press, 1970), page 7.
122
Brubacher and Rudy, page 307.
123
Jacob Neusner, The Academic Study of Judaism,
Second Series of 1977, page 21.
124
Ibid., page 23
125
Ibid., page 23
126
Hyman, page 15 of Appendix B,
127
David R. Blumenthal, "Where Do Jewish Studies
Belong?" Journal of the American Academy of Religion,
40:3, 1967, pages 535-546.
128
Jacob Neusner, First Series of 1975, page 97,
129
David R. Blumenthal, See Footnote Number 127,
pages 535-546.
130
Arnold Band, pages 3-30.
131
Jacob Neusner, Second Series of 1977, pages 38-39.
132
Lou H. Silberman in The Teaching of Judaism in
American Universities, Leon Jick, Editor, pages 9-15.
133
Ibid.
285
134
Jacob Neusner, Second Series of 1977, page 38.
135
Baruch A. Levine, , T Defining Jewish Studies,"
page 4.
136
Ibid., page 45.
137
Alfred Jospe, "Objectivity Versus Advocacy in
Jewish Studies," in the Symposium: Conservating Judaism,
page 24.
138
Baruch A. Levine, page 3.
139
Baruch A. Levine and William W. Hallo, "Ancient
Jewish Studies," Consultation for Jewish Studies Papers,
Unpublished, presented at New York City on October 9th
to 10th , see page 5 of Appendix B.
140
Marvin Herzog, "Yiddish Studies," Consultation for
Jewish Studies Papers, Unpublished, presented at
New York City on October 9th to 10th, 1972, see page
18 of Appendix B.
141
Arthur Hyman, See Introduction to Consultation,
Appendix B.
142
Ibid.
143
Mervin Verbit, "Jewish Social Science," from
Consultation for Jewish Studies Papers, page 27 of
Appendix B.
144
Arthur Hyman, see page 15 of Appendix B.
286
145
Menahem Mansoor, nThe Wisconsin Experience,” in
" A Symposium on Jewish Studies in the University,"
in Conservative Judaism, page 11.
146
Alfred Jospe, page 24.
147
Ibid.
148
Gerson Cohen, See Footnote Number 103.
149
Arnold Band, pages 3-30.
150
Robert Alter, pages 71-76.
151
Baruch A. Levine, page 3.
152
Jacob Neusner, Second Series of 1977, pages 35-48.
153
ERIC is defined as Educational Resources Informati
center.
154
David Shaffer, Ha1 Am, Volume 7, No. 4., February
28, 1978, page 11. (This is a UCLA Jewish Student -
Newspaper).
155
Ibid.
156
Ibid.
157
Please See UCLA Catalogue of 1978, page 3.
158
Herbert Davidson, Unpublished Papers, see Appendix
A of this dissertation.
159
Ibid.
on
287
160
Zev Garber, "Jewish Studies At A Two-Year
Public College," (A); Lower Division Judaica, (B);
(Los Angeles Valley College: An Eric Document Reproduction,
1973), page 3.
161
Zev Garber, Section B, page 3.
162
Zev Garber, Section B, page 3.
163
Zev Garber, Section A, pages 3-8
164
Ibid., pages 3-4.
165
Section B, page 3.
166
James W. Thornton, The Community Junior College,
(New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1966), page 59.
167
William Kelley and Lislie Wilbur, Teaching In
The Community College, (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts,
Meredith Corporation, 1970), page 15.
168
Thornton, page 62
169
Kelley and Wilbur, page 15.
170
Zev Garber, Section A, page 5.
171
Ibid., page 5 .
172
Thornton, page 63.
173
Kelley and Wilbur, page 17.
288
174
Zev Garber, "Alternative Teaching Methods in the
Teaching Introduction to Judaism," A Monograph,Annual
Meeting of the American Academy of Religion, October
24-27, 1974, at Washington, D.C., pages 1-2.
175
Zev Garber, Lower Division Judaica (B), pages 3-4.
176
Ibid., page 18.
177
Zev Garber, Unpublished Monograph.
178
Bernhard N. Cohn, "A Brief History of Hebrew
Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion," Monograph,
1975.
179
Interview with Dr. William Cutter, Director of
School of Education at Hebrew Union College-Jewish
Institute of Religion on May 8, 1978.
180
Accreditation Report, Hebrew Union College-Jewish
Institute of Religion, 1974.
181
Interview with Dr. William Cutter, May of 1978.
182
Interview with Dr. John Orr, Chairman of the
School of Religion at University of Southern California,
May, 1978.
183
Accreditation Report, Hebrew Union College-Jewish
Institute of Religion, 1978.
184
Vergilius Ferm, "The Fountainhead of Western
Religion," in The Hebrew Impact on Western Civilization,
Dagobert D. Runes, Editor, (New York: The Citadel Press,
1965), page 314.
289
185
The Holy Scriptures, Micah 6:8, (Chicago
The Menoral Press, 1957-1960), page 493.
186
Virgilius Fern, page 318.
187
Mathew Arnold, Literature and Dogma, page 308.
Also cited by Abraham I. Katsh in Runes, Editor, page 5.
188
Sermons on Important Subjects, Collected from
a number of ministers in northern states of America,
See Abraham I. Katsh in Runes, Editor, page 18..
189
Cotton Mather, Magnolia Christi Americana,
Volume I, page 130. Also in Abraham I. Katsh in Runes,
Editor, page 19.
190
Charles Homer Haskins, The Rise of the Universities,
(Cornell: Cornell University Press, 1923, Editions
1957-1959, 60, 61, 62, 63, 65, 66, 67, 69, 70), page 12.
191
J.S. Brubacker and W. Rudy, page 6.
192
Ibid.
193
Ibid., page 13
194
Ibid.
195
See Katsh in Runes, Editor, page 22.
196
Ibid., page 24
197
Ibid., page 25
198
Ibid., page 27
290
199
Richard J. Storr, Harper's University: The
Beginnings, (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press,
1966), page 58.
200
Ibid., page 60.
201
Holy Scriptures, Deuteronomy, 6:7, The Concept
of Teaching and Learning as a Major Commandment of the
Mosaic Code.
202
Katsh in Runes, Editor, page 27.
203
Ibid., pages 1-62.
204
Jacob Katz, "Emancipation and Jewish Studies,"
Commentary, 57, April, 1974, pages 60-65.
205
Leopold Zunz, "Scholarship and Emancipation,"
in Modern Jewish Thought: A Source Reader, Nahum N.
Glatzer, Ed. (New York: Schocken Books, 1977),,page 13.
206
Nahum N. Glatzer in above citation, page 12.
207
Solomon Grayzel, A History of the Jews from the
Babylonia Exie to the Present, 5728-1968. (New York:
A Mentor Book, from New American Library, Copyright
by Jewish Publication Society of America, 1968), pages
576-588.
208
Jacob Neusner, "Universty Studies in Minority
Cultures in The Journal of Higher Education, Volume XXXV,
No. 4, April 1964, pages 202-206 . Also found in
Jacob Neusner, The Academic Study of Judaism: Essays and
Reflections, The First Series, 1975, pages 9-15.
291
209
C.G. Jung, Modern Man in Search of a Soul,
(New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, Inc., 1933).
210
William Hocking, "Coming World Civilization,
New York: Harper and Row, 1956.
211
Robert Hutchins, The Higher Learning in America,
(New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1936),
First Edition. See in general entire work.
212
Clark Kerr, The Uses of the University, (New York:
Harper and Row, 1977), pages 99-402.
213
Jose Ortega Gasset, Mission of the University,
Edited and Translated by Howard Lee Nostrand, The
Norton Library, (New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 1944).
214
Nathan M. Pusey, The Age of the Scholar,
(New York, Evanston and London: Harper and Row, Publishers,
1964), See entire works.
215
Robert F. Goheen, The Human Nature of a University,
(Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1969).
216
Earl V. Pullias, A Search for Understanding:
Thoughts on Education and Personality in a Time of
Transit ion. (New York: William C. Brown Company,
1965, 1969), pages 13 and 18.
217
See Jacob Neusner, The Academic Study of Judaism,
Series one of 1975, pages 9-15. See also, Michael
Novak, Further Reflections on Ethnicity, page 84.
218
Ibid.
292
219
William W. Hallo, Consultation Papers, See Appendix
B.
220
Ibid.
221
See Langmuir, page 343.
222
Encyclopaedia Judaica, see Footnote Number 98,
page 570.
223
Ibid.
224
Abraham I. Katsh, "Hebraic Studies in American
Higher Education: An Evaluation of Current Trends,"
Jewish Social Studies, 1959. See page 18.
225
David Rudavsky, "Hebraic and Judaic Studies in
American Higher Education," Congress Bi-Weekly, October
25, 1974, pages 7-10.
226
David Rudavsky, Doron. pages 1-22.
227
Milton R. Konvitz, pages 10-14.
293
APPENDIX A
MATERIALS RELATING TO JEWISH STUDIES AND HEBREW
UNDERGRADUATE MAJORS AT UCLA
Page 296 is a copy of a memorandum describing
the undergraduate Jewish Studies and Hebrew programs
at UCLA.
295
UCLA-FINDINGS
Hebrew and Jewish studies are organized at UCLA under
several headings. The Department of Near Eastern Languages
offers an undergraduate program in Hebrew language and
literature, an undergraduate program in Jewish Studies,
and a graduate program in Hebrew language and literature.
In addition, the Department of History offers a graduate
program in Jewish history. The programs are directed to
students with varying interests. Undergraduates special
izing in Hebrew seek competence in the Hebrew language
and in Hebrew literary texts. The majority of these stu
dents go on to teach Hebrew in community schools or in
the public schools. Undergraduates specializing in Jewish
Studies are also required to attain a basic competence in
Hebrew. But their program has the primary object of
providing a mature and objective understanding of Jewish
history, Jewish social and religious institutions, and
Jewish literature in all languages. Many students com
pleting the program go into teaching and social work, but
at least as many have no professional plans and merely
wish to develop their knowledge of the areas offered.
Approximately 15 undergraduates major in Hebrew, and ap
proximately 35 in Jewish Studies. Considerably more take
courses in the two programs although majoring in other
subj ects.
The graduate programs in Hebrew and in Jewish history
provide students with the expertise necessary for careers
in university teaching. Over 20 graduate students are
enrolled.
Instruction and research are supported by a library
collection in Hebrew and Judaica totaling 90,000 volumes;
this is the largest such collection west of Chicago.
296
Page 298 represents the undergraduate requirements
for a B.A. degree with a Hebrew or Jewish Studies major.
297
UNDERGRADUATE REQUIREMENTS
Bachelor of Arts Degree
Hebrew Major
For a major in Hebrew the prerequisites are Hebrew 1A,1B
1C, 102A,,1Q2B, 102C, Jewish 150A,150B or their
equivalents. The student is required to take 16 quarter
hours distributed as follows: Hebrew 103A, 103B, 103C;
three quarters of Hebrew 120; two courses from Hebrew
130A,130B,130C and 130D; two courses from Hebrew 140,
160, both Hebrew 190A and 190B, two additional courses
in Hebrew or Aramic to be approved by the adviser; and
two quarter courses from History 137A, 137B, 138A, 138B
Jewish Studies Major
For a major in Jewish Studies the prerequisites are
Hebrew 1A, IB, 1C, History 138A,138B, or their equivalents.
The student is required to take 16 quarter courses including
Hebrew 102A, 102B, 10?C; 103A, 103B, 103C. Jewish
Studies 151A, 151B. 199 (undergraduate thesis) and five
other upper division courses. At least 2 of the 5 must
be courses in the areas of Hebrew, Jewish History or Yiddish
The remaining three may be chosen either from those areas
or from courses with Jewish content given in other depart
ments and approved by the Jewish Studies adviser.
298
Pages 300 through 304 is an Unpublished Paper
by Professor Herbert Davidson of UCLA describing the
place of Jewish Studies within the undergraduate curriculum
299
AN UNPUBLISHED PAPER
by
PROFESSOR HERBERT DAVIDSON
Of
UCLA
The place of Jewish Studies within the organization.
In order to understand what can and cannot be ac
complished in Jewish Studies, it is necessary to
understand how our program firts into the organizational
framework of the university. Jewish Studies is one
of several undergraduate majors in the Department of
Near Eastern Languages. (It quickly became the most
popular undergraduate major in the department). The
program is supervised by an advisory committee, presently
comprising seven members: A. Band, H. Davidson, W.
Leslau, Y. Sabar, all from the Department of Near Eastern
Languages; A. Funkenstein, History; J. Hadda, Yiddish-
German; G. Levine, Sociology. The undergraduate advisor
for Jewish Studies serves as the chairman of the advisory
committee. Mr. Band had the job two years ago. I had
it last year and this year. In the Spring quarter, I
shall be on leave, and Mr. Band has agreed to accept
it again.
300
The orientation of the program. When we originally
planned the Jewish Studies major we made a decision
that we are not likely to reconsider. Our program, we
decided, should be purely academic and should not be
concerned either with Jewish identity and consciousness
or with community action. That does not mean that we
regard Jewish consciousness or community action as un
important . The modern secular university simply has
a different goal— which we may define as the development
and dissemination of knowledge. And if the university
attempts to do what it is not designed to do, it will
fail to do even the things it can well. An analogous
situation obtains in other programs. Courses in ethics
in the Department of Philosophy, for example, are not
intended to encourage moral behavior in students, nor
are courses in American government intended to induce
loyalty to the government of the United States. The
chance always taken is that a student may do well
academically and yet turn out to be less moral, less
loyal to the United States or, in our instance, a less
committed Jew. Those who believe in the value of the
university consider any such risk eminently worthwhile.
Professional and Graduate Opportunities. Honesty
requires us to inform prospective students that a major
in Jewish Studies, like other humanities majors, is not
direct preparation for any profession or career. We
301
even have to inform students that our major is not the
best preparation for graduate studies, since the Jewish
Studies major stresses breadth, whereas graduate studies
stress expertise. We suggest the Hebrew major to
students who wish to go on in Hebrew language and
literature, and either a.Hebrew major or a history major
to students who wish to go on in Jewish history. A
considerable number of students majoring in Jewish
Studies contemplate careers in social work and the
rabbinate. Basically, though, our students are affirming
the ideal of the liberal arts university and also an
old Jewish ideal, namely that knowledge is a valuable
end in itself.
Our future plans. The key word here is priority.
Our committee has to decide which areas we consider
most important to develop. Then our proposals go to the
entire faculty of the Department of Near Eastern
Languages to be placed within the Department’s list of
priorities. And then that list goes on to the univer
sity administration where it competes with the requests
of other departments. The process seems cumbersome,
but it is the only rational method of marrying limited
resources to unlimited requests. At the present time our
committee considers the following to be our most pressing
needs: general background courses in Jewish civilization
and institutions; undergraduate seminars; and modern
Jewish. We are now working towards an appointment of a ,
- ______________________________________________________ 3 - 0 - 2 .
person to cover those areas. When an area to be covered
happens to be one that does not involve competence in
Near Eastern Languages our situation becomes more com
plicated. To take an imaginary example, suppose we felt
a need for courses in Belgian Jewish literature. The
proper place for those courses would be the Department of
Belgian. But the Department of Belgian might not have
anyone to teach the courses, and might not be willing
to include them in its own priorities. Pressure from
us could prove counterproductive; since the university
departments, like sovereign states, take umbrage at
interference in their internal affairs. The problem
is not, of course, insuperable. The German Department
undertook to obtain a full time position in Yiddish.
The Department of Sociology and Mr. Levine have been
offering courses on the American Jewish community.
There probably will, however, always remain subjects
that we should like to have but which cannot be taught
on a regular basis anywhere in the university. The
most desirable solution for those subjects would be
a visiting professorship which could be used in different
ways each year. The money for such a professorship
will almost certainly have to come from an extramural
source.
Our responsiveness to students. In the fall of
1973, we invited all students majoring in Jewish Studies
to a meeting with the advisory committee. About _
ten or twelve came, and the faculty members who were there
felt that they learned something about the students'
concerns. Last spring I wrote to all majors asking
whether they would like another such meeting. Only two
students replied. This fall we again called a meeting.
Six members of the faculty committee were present, but
only six or seven of the 35 students came. Not un
surprisingly, the faculty members were somewhat discouraged
Still, I here repeat an invitation that I have made to
many students in the past: I am always willing to meet
students on an individual basis regarding anything
having to do with the program. I am sure that the other
faculty members extend a similar invitation.
304
APPENDIX B
UNPUBLISHED PAPERS ON CONSULTATION OF JEWISH STUDIES
New York City, October 9-10, 1972
305
A Consultation on Jewish Studies in Institutions
of Higher Learning was held in New York City on October 9th
and 10th in 1972 sponsored by the Association for Jewish
Studies in cooperation with the American Jewish Committee.
The following papers were delivered at the conference
and have not been published hitherto.
In addition, there were other papers presented.
However, in the opinion of this writer, the selected
papers presented in the following pages are the best
of the conference and contain the substance of the
consultation presentations.
3061
Abridged Version
A PORTION OF THE PAPERS ON
CONSULTATION ON JEWISH STUDIES
IN INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING
sponsored by
The Association for Jewish Studies
in cooperation with
The American Jewish Committee
New York City
October 9-10, 1972
307
Prepared Papers
Introduct ion
Ancient Jewish Studies
Jewish Religious Thought
Jewish Philosophy
Yiddish Studies
Jewish History
Modern Hebrew Literature
Jewish Social Science
Jewish Social Studies
308
Arthur Hyman
William Hallo &
Baruch Levine
Eric Meyers & David Winstoh
Arthur Hyman and Alfred Ivy
Marvin I. Herzog
Martin Cohen
Robert Alter &
Arnold Band
Mervin Verbit
Daniel Elazar
X n't r o duet ion
Arthur Hyman
Jewish Studies may be described as the analysis and
study of the cultural experience (or civilization) of
the Jews throughout the ages and in the contemporary world.
They font a distinct , yet integral part of the heritage of
Western civilization? both in past and present times,
Christianity and Islam are not fully intelligible without
a knowledge of Judaism, and the Jewish, experience has
played a Significant part in the rise and development of
Europe and America,,
Since Jewish Studies embrace the total experience of
Jews, they must deal with; social? economic, linguistic,
literary and philosophical factors, no less than with
religious ones, A program of Jewish Studies should strike
a balance between historical and literary studies and an
analysis of the contemporary Jewish experience in the
United States and in Israel, The model for Jewish Studies
should be provided by interdisciplinary programs in
American, French, and similar studies,
Jewish Studies must be taught in a manner appropriate
to the University rather than the theological seminary.
It follows that the subject matter of Jewish Studies must
be in the public domain; that Jewish. Studies must be
taught without specail pleading (religious or secular);
and that standards appropriate, to any academic discipline
309
must apply. There is no special methodology for Jewish
Studies.and the methods used are those of the humanities
and the social sciences. Since Jews were in contact
with other civilizations and culture during the major
portion of their history, the materials must be studied
comparat ively.
While the audience for Jewish Studies will consist
largely of Jewish Students, this is by no means exclusively
the case. Courses currently offered in Jewish Studies
have non-Jewish students; and courses in Jewish Studies
should be of interest to students of general history,
philosophy, literature, social sciences, religion and
so forth.
The professor of Jewish Studies should be University-
trained. While in many instances he will probably have
studied in a theological seminary (where intensive textual
study is pursued), a theological degree alone is not
considered adequate for teaching of Judaica on the under
graduate College level, which is the focus of this con
sultation. The professor of Jewish Studies will possess
competence in his general field, that is, the Jewish
historian will be a historian, whose specialty is Jewish
history, and this general competence should be reflected
in the title of his appointment. Since the only criterion
for employment is competence^ it should be envisaged that
the professor of Jewish Studies may be a non-Jew.
310
Programs
Two types of programs are envisaged: (a) a non-degree
program staffed by one or two persons; (b) a degree
program, staffed by four or five persons.
Non-degree program: Such a program should consist of
a two-year (four semester) sequence of survey courses, as
well as second level courses, preferably in the specialty
of the instructor. The survey courses may consist of
a four’ semester sequence in Jewish Civilization (Biblical,
Rabbinic, Medieval, Modern), or alternately, a two semester
sequence in Jewish History and a two semester sequence
in Jewish Thought. Instruction in Modern Hebrew should
probably also form a part of a non-degree program.
Degree Program: A degree program should consist of
four parts (a) general familiarity with the field of
Jewish Studies as attained by the survey courses described
above; (b) advanced instruction including some speciali
zation in a specific field, such as Jewish history,
philosophy, Hebrew literature; (c) training in the general
field of specialization, such as general history,
philosophy, literature; (d) knowledge of Modern Hebrew
or, possibly, Yiddish (third level).
It would seem that four or five faculty members are
required for a degree program: a Biblical scholar, a
historian, a philosopher, a scholar in Hebrew language
and literature, a social scientist (sociologist ,
anthropologist, or political scientist, ) '
The program could be offered in a separate department
of Jewish Studies or it could be an interdisciplinary
program drawing on faculty members from various departments.
Ancient Jewish Studies
William W. Hallo Baruch A. Levine
In planning curricula for biblical and ancient Near
Eastern studies within the context of Jewish studies program,
we are factually project a three dimensional field.' We
are speaking of (a) the horizontal dimension- the inter
relatedness of biblical experience and its Near Eastern
Matrix; (b) the vertical dimension - the interrelatedness
of ancient Jewish studies to all that followed in the
Jewish experience, down to the present day; and (c) the
significance, in any given period, of the special materials
available .to the Judaic scholar for the overall study
of that period of discipline in world civilization. This
is the third dimension, the dimension of depth and
perspective.
This third dimension of that period or discipline was
aptly summarized by William W. Hallo in a statement he
prepared for a recent issue of the AJS Newsletter:
The vast spread of the Jewish experience, in both
time and space, and its ample documentation are
unique phenomena. They provide available paradigms
for countless areas of research: historical, ling
uistic, religious, and many others. There is every
reason for non-Jewish scholars and scholarship to
participate in Jewish studies for the light these
can shed on their disciplines, and to benefit from
the results.
312
Several notable examples may be cited here to illus
trate this important assertion:
1. The Genizah materials, documents found in the
archives of medieval Jewish communities have ■ _
seriously altered scholarly perspective on the
religious, economic, social and political life
of all the peoples of the Mediterranean region
not only of the Jewish communities themselves.
2. Talmudic sources now being utilized in the study
of early Christianity together with archaeological
finds, especially the Dead Sea literature, have
brought new data to bear on the elusive origins
of Christianity, and the nature of the early
Christian communities.
So much for the third dimension. The horizontal
dimension is becoming more and more accepted, and com
parative study is normal in present day curricula. However
the vertical dimension, the interrelatedness of the
biblical period with the subsequent Jewish experience,
is still not fully realized, and there is a strong
tendency to view ancient biblical studies, insofar as
they include Semitics, archaeology, etc., as a separate
area, distinct from Jewish studies. It was the Israeli
academy which led the way toward the integration of
biblical and ancient Near Eastern studies into the overall
Judaic curriculum, and many faculties in North American
and Europe are following suit, as new instructional and
reference materials become available.
We shall attempt to apply the above scholarly approaches
to the problems of curriculuar planning on the under
graduate level for the ancient period which is our
particular interest.
313
The intersection of Jewish studies with ancient Near
Eastern studies should not be pictured as the intersection
of two lines at a single point on a plane. It is generally
more like the convergence of several different solids,
representing the different disciplinary approaches pursued
in both fields. At least four of these will be considered
here:
1. Bible and Semitics, the linguistic or philological
approach.
2. The history of the biblical period, including
the study of archaeology.
3. Biblical religion.
4. Biblical literature.
1. Bible and Semitics
The Hebrew Bible is the basic source of study for
ancient Judaism. Its proper mastery requires a thorough
knowledge of classical Hebrew and Aramaic, and, in
addition, some knowledge of those ancient Near Eastern
languages, cognate but distinct, that are related to the
content of the Bible, and to the form of its writings.
Furthermore, the teaching of Hebrew itself, should be
aimed at placing Hebrew in its proper perspective as an
ancient Near Eastern language, engendering an awareness
of its relationship with other languages. Practically
speaking, the study.of other: languages; by undergraduates
who already have a solid knowledge of Hebrew should be
encouraged, so that the entire, ponderous task is not
delayed until the graduate level.
Specifically, a major concentration in ancient Hebrew
studies would include the following subject areas:
a) Biblical Hebrew, including ancient Hebrew
epigraphy.
b) Aramaic, both biblical and non-biblical, with
reference to contemporary and relevant materials
in Aramaic, and some introduction to the
dialectology.
c) Ugaritic and Phoenician-Punic
d) Akkadian
e) If possible, study of other relevant languages:
Persian, Sumerian, Egyptian, Greek and its
Aegean forerunners, and Arabic.
f) An introduction to post-biblical Hebrew.
A breakdown into four study units might be:
1) Biblical Hebrew
2) Aramaic
3) Comparative Semitics
4) Akkadian
2. Biblical History
The study of the biblical period in Jewish history
must, of course, utilize the Bible as a principal source,
but it must also reach out to the findings of archaeology,
and to comparative extra-biblical sources for a fuller
picture of the biblical world. Some awareness of the
techniques employed by archaeologists is essential, as
well as an acquaintance with the actual findings-
documentary, artifactual, geographical.
315
The text of the Bible, together with extra-biblical
evidence, must be studied with the purpose of understanding
the institutions operative in biblical society-social,
political, religious and economic. These materials also
shed light on the growth of certain biblical traditions
that have had a significant role in the subsequent history
of Judaism and world civilization. This is historio
graphy , more precisely, not history, as such . In this
vein, we may speak of covenant, Torah, the divinely
chosen, annointed monarch, etc. The Bible thus emerges
as the expression of dominant ideas within the ancient
Israelite society. Finally, biblical history should en
gender an appreciation of the world surrounding the
ancient Israelites; of the neighbouring peoples and the
great empires whose destinies affected the land and the
people of Israel.
A breakdown into four study units is as follows:
a) Biblical archaeology
b) Biblical institutions
c) Biblical traditions, and
d) The biblical world.
3. Biblical Religion
The study of biblical religion should emphasize the
historical approach rather than being content with a
theological and/or abstract consideration of the beliefs,
doctrines, or even practices evidenced in biblical
literature. Consequently, attention should be
given to the functioning of religious institutions, the
personnel involved in administering the cult, and ritual
praxis, as expressing the relationship between the
worshipper and the deity. Comparative materials become
essential for constructing a model for the study of
religious life in ancient Israel.
Biblical law is, inter alia, the embodiment of
religious notions and their application in everyday life.
The dicta of the prophets, believed to be the transmitters
of God's word and will, contributed fundamentally to the
development of biblical religion, thus influencing sub
sequent Judaism. Finally, the Bible provides valuable
ethical and moral insights which, if understood in proper
historical context, can contribute to a fuller appreciation
of Judaism as a way of life.
A breakdown into four study units is as follows:
a) The Israelite cult,
b) Prophecy
c) Biblical law, and
d) Biblical ethics.
4. Biblical Literature
Quite aside from its importance in historical,
religious, and linguistic-philological terms, the Bible
is a monument of world literature, and is often studied
by those whose interest is primarily literary.
317
A proper understanding of biblical literature is
possible only through a study of the original, although
it is recognized that in any undergraduate curriculum
there is room for courses in translation that may attract
larger audiences, and would be of benefit to students of
literature, generally. From the point of view of the
Judaic program, however, such courses should also serve
to interest students in the study of the Hebrew Bible in
the original, by introducing them to the general character
of the Bible, as literature. -
The literary study of the Bible, in the original,
focuses on the various genres of biblical literature, and
analyzes the distinctive forms. The integral relation
ship between form and matter often reveals that the several
major genres-wisdom, poetry, narrative, and legal codes,
reflect different outlooks, not merely different modes
of expression. In addition, literary expression is
instructive for an understanding of biblical traditions,
history, religious institutions, etc. Indeed all
classical biblical scholars have been concerned with
literary problems in biblical interpretations, whatever
else may have been their primary scholarly thrust.
Clearly, the literary study of the Hebrew Bible is integral
to the three other approaches discussed above.
318
A breakdown into four study units as follows:
a) Wisdom literature
b) Poetry
c) Narrative, and
d) Legal Codes.
The breakdown into four study units provided for
each of the four approaches outlined and discussed above
is a first step toward curricular application. Depending
on faculty resources available, and on the particular
development of Jewish studies at a given institution,
one or another of the above four approaches may serve as
the starting point for a fuller curriculum which should
eventually include all four approaches to some degree.
Thus, a Jewish studies program in a department of
religion would begin from the third approach (number 3),
but should, as soon as possible, reach out to Hebraic
studies, to courses in biblical history, etc. A major
concentration should include some ingredients from each
of the four areas, whereas a more limited program might
have to be more limited.
Viewing the area of Jewish studies as a whole, the
ancient period in its entirety is only one of many aspects,
since it encompasses just one chronological segment of
the total Jewish experience. It thus becomes necessary
to select one or more approaches for inclusion in the
larger Judaic curriculum, and this selection will be
determined, once again, by the orientation of the academic
faculty responsible for the overall Judaic program. Thus,
Jewish studies in the context of a history program will
first include biblical history, and subsequently reach
out to other disciplines.
Finally, the central importance of proper Hebrew
linguistic training for all types of Jewish studies
programs must be emphasized. A master of Hebrew (and
other relevant languages) is essential for an in-depth
study of any aspect of Judaica. The fact that many
interested students seem not to be initially committed
to such study should not lead us to compromise the
integrity of the fields.
Jewish Religious Thought
Eric Meyers David Winston
1. Jewish Studies as an Academic Discipline:
The recent growth of Jewish Studies at American
universities took place at a time when there was an almost
exclusive emphasis on technical scholarship. The
attempt to assimilate Jewish studies to this ambience
surroundings produced a preference for Jewish scholars
with a predominantly philological bent. The serious
study of the history of Jewish ideas was either relegated
to an occasional appointment in the area of modern Hebrew
literature, or in medieval Jewish philosophy, where the
emphasis was textual-philological. Modern Jewish history
and medieval Jewish thought were, with one or two
320
exceptions virtually ignored, and Jewish mysticism or
rabbinic thought were simply non-existent. It is essential
that a proper balance be restored in the new programs of
Judaica that are now in the planning stage. An integrated
picture of Jewish civilization in all its meanderings
and all the richness of its interplay with near eastern
and western intellectual history must be enabled to emerge.
•The academic context for the pursuit of these studies
should be an interdisciplinary one. Departments of
Religious Studies, for example, employing the approaches
of such disciplines as history, philology.
Jewish Religious Thought
The History of Jewish Thought spans the entire
history of the Jewish people from the biblical period to
our own day. Its study is closely allied to such
disciplines as philology, history, philosophy, history
of ideas, anthropology, sociology, religion phenomenology
and comparative literature. My own speciality, (Winston)
Jewish-Hellenistic thought, involves more particularly
the disciplines of classical philology, ancient history
and archeology, philosophy, and biblical literature.
A major in the History of Jewish Thought would be
expected to be familiar with the entire spectrum of
Jewish religious thought and have a specialized knowledge
of one particular period.
321
The following courses are offered in our own program:
1) A two year sequence covering the entire range of Jewish
religious thought: Biblical,Hellenistic, Rabbinic, Medieval
Jewish Philosophy, Jewish Mysticism, Modern Jewish Thought,
Contemporary Jewish Thought
2) Jewish apocalyptic and Wisdom Literature
3) The Dead Sea Scrolls
4) Jewish-Hellen&stib Historiography
5) Rabbinic Thought
6) Seminar: Philo of Alexandria
7) Seminar: Jewish Gnosticism
8) The Beginnings of Modern Judaism: Moses Mendelssohn
and the Jewish Enlightenment.
9) Seminar: Baruch Spinoza and Modern Bible Criticsm
Related Courses:
1) Biblical Texts
2) Biblical History and Archaeology
3) History of the Ancient Near East
4) Semitic Languages
5) Rabbinic Texts
6) New Testament
7) Patristics
8) Islamic Civilization
9) Hebrew Literature - Medieval and Modern
10) Jewish History - Modern
11) History of Philosophy - Ancient, Medieval, and Modern
12) Logic and Linguistic Analysis
13) Eastern Religions
14) Religious Phenomenology
15) Mysticism Eastern and Western
III. Undergraduate Degree Program in Judaica
The undergraduate should be exposed to all the major
facets of Jewish civilization and should be made familiar
with the major classics of Jewish literature (in the
original whenever possible).
a) Biblical Texts
b) Biblical History and Archaeology
c) Rabbinic Thought
d) Medieval Jewish Philosophy and Mysticism
e) Jewish History - Medieval and Modern
f) Modern Hebrew Literature
322
Jewish Philosophy
Arthur Hyman Alfred Ivry
Jewish philosophy may be seen as commencing with the
Bible, if only because medieval and modern Jewish philoso
phers often look to the Bible for verification of their
theories. The philosophy (or philosophies) of the
Biblical period, as that of the Talmudic period which
followed it (to the 6th Centuy of the common era), is
actually a legitimate point of departure for Jewish
philosophy, understanding "philosophy" in the sense of
a world-view. This world-view while profound in itself,
is of crucial importance in detemrining the later develop
ment of Jewish philosophy, much of which attempted to
reconcile Biblical and Rabbinical beliefs with Greek
standards of philosophy.
This process of cultural synthesis may be discerned
already in Philo Judaeus (1st century C.E.), who did
philosophy in the late Greek Platonic-Stoic tradition.
A proper study of Philo requires thorough familiarity
with Green and Hellenistic thought, and is important for
the study of the thought of the early Church as well.
The mainstream of Jewish philosophy, understood as
a rigorous and well-endowed discipline, is found in the
medieval period, beginning with the tenth century,
Neoplatonist Isaac Israeli, reaching its high-point with
Moses Maimonides in the twelfth century and lingering
323
into the Renaissance with Leone Ebreo. This period has
been critically studied for over a century now, yet much
remains to be done in the editing and translating of
texts and their analysis. As most of the original
writings of this period are in an Arabic dialect known as
Judaeo-Arabic, a knowledge of Arabic is essential for the
scholar and advanced student alike, while Greek and Latin
are also necessary tools for comparative philological and
conceptual remarks. The student of this period should be
familiar with Greek, Islamic and Scholastic thought, and
appreciate the similarities and differences of the
respective cultures.
The study of modern Jewish philosophy usually begins
with Moses Mendelssohn in the 18th century. The scholar
here must be familiar with the medieval Jewish philo
sophical tradition, as well as with the various currents
of European philosophy from the Enlightenment to our day.
Other representative figures of modem Jewish philosophy
are Nachman Korchmal, Hermann Cohen, Franz Rosenzweig and
Martin Buber, not to mention important thinkers who are
more theologically or politically inclined and thus not,
strictly speaking, to be included in courses of a philo
sophical nature. The teacher of Jewish Philosophy ought,
however, to indicate the points of contact between Jewish
philosophy and other branches of Judaism, even as he
must show the relationship between European and Jewish
philosophy. Thus Hegel, as well as Maimonides, must be
____________ 32'4
known to appreciate Krochmal,and Kierkegaard as well as
Hassidic authors must be read to understand Buber ,
Examples of courses within Jewish philosophy are
as follows;
Jewish, Aristotelianism, as seen in one or more
authors
Neoplatonic Elements in Jewish Philosophy
Theories of Creation in Medieval Jewish Thought
The Influence of Alfarabi upon Maimondes’ Political
Philosophy
Maimonides' Guide of the Perplexed: An Analysis
Mendelssohn's Esthetic and His View of Judaism
Essence and Accident in Medieval and Modern
Jewish Philosophy
The Ethics of Bahya ibn Paquda and Martin Buber
The Idea of Nature in Jewish Philosophy
Yiddish Studies
Marvin I, Herzog
The subject of a Yiddish Studies program is, in its
broadest sense, the language literature, culture, and
history of Ashkenazic Jewry, More narrowly defined, it
focuses on the Jewish experience in Eastern Europe, and
on its American aftermath, if can serve as the subject of
a variety of disciplines and of varied interdisciplinary
approaches as well, Basic to every approach, however,
it is a thorough study of the Yiddish language itself; for
its own sake, f a* the light which its unique history
sheds upon the history and culture of its speakers, and for
the access which it provides to the sources requisite to
linguistic,-literary, historical, sociological, and other
research.
325
A multileveled program of Yiddish language instruction
forms the core of any undergraduate program in Yiddish
Studies. The extent to which such a core program can be
elaborated to incorporate the study of Yiddish literature
and folklore, East European Jewish history and culture,
the East European roots of the American Jewish community,
etc., will depend upon the particular interests and
qualifications of the available faculty.
The only model which I can provide is Columbia’s
existing graduate program in Yiddish Studies. Language
instruction is part of the undergraduate curriculum and
many of the graduate courses (largely those in the 4000
series) are open to qualified undergraduates as well.
A word about the structure of the graduate program.
Yiddish Studies is one of a large number of areas of
specialization available in this Department of Linguistics.
However, it permits specialization in areas outside the
discipline of linguistics as well and, in addition, it
permits students to participate in various inter
departmental programs: the interdepartment program in
Jewish Studies, in cooperation with the Departments of
History, Middle East Languages and Cultures, and others;
and the interdepartmental program in Comparative Litera
ture .
326
The program in Yiddish Studies lists as special
requirements:
Skill in reading, writing and speaking Yiddish and a
general knowledge of Yiddish literature and of East
European Jewish culture are required for admission to the
program. Students whose undergraduate preparation is
insufficient may be required to take courses without
credit to improve their language skills.
Students admitted to the program in Yiddish studies
may specialize (1) in linguistics or (2) in a program in
language, literature, culture, and history, to be defined
in accordance with the needs of the individual student.
Students in either field may participate in the interde
partmental program in Jewish studies in conjunction with
study in the Department of Linguistics.
For Yiddish linguistics the language requirements
include:
A reading knowledge of German and either classical or
modern Hebrew to be tested in written examination; a
reading knowledge of a Slavic language is recommended.
For Yiddish language, literature, culture and history,
the language requirements are:
A reading knowledge of modern Hebrew and either
German or a Slavic language, to be tested in written
examination.
________________________________________ 327
In addition to the Yiddish language, course offer
ings include:
Introduction to Yiddish Studies
Anthropological Study of Ashkenzic Jewry
Introduction to Yiddish Linguistics
Introduction to the History of Yiddish
The Grammatical and Lexical Structure of Yiddish
A Word On The Field of Jewish History
Martin A. Cohen
A serious academic study of the field of Jewish
history today involves a consideration of four important
foci.
First, of course, are the facts of Jewish experience
themselves. The field of Jewish history is vast, embracing
not only the all-important intellectual development of
Judaism, but the social, political and economic aspects
as well. Research in almost every area of Jewish history
has proliferated to the point where no historian can hope
to achieve expertise in more than a fragment of the field.
Expansion of knowledge has understandably been greatest
in the modern area, particuarly in relationship to the
Holocaust and the State of Israel, but at the same time our
knowledge of other periods has also experienced a steady
growth.
Second, is the broader setting within which Jewish
history has always taken place. This indispensable
ambience is frequently overlooked or insufficiently treated
328
by scholars. If it is difficult to present an adequate
picture of the history of other peoples in a vacuum, in
the case of the Jews it is impossible. Even in times of
periods of Jewish independence in the Holy Land, Jewish
history has always been one of involvement with the
history of the surrounding populations, and has always
revealed reciprocal contacts and influences in the
political, social, economic and intellectual spheres. A
recognition.of the broader context of Jewish history
delineates not only the participation but the distinctive
contribution of Jews in the development of world culture.
Third, and more frequently overlooked, are the canons
of the contemporary social sciences. Included here
are the modern philosophical approaches to history,
sociology, and related disciplines, their attitude toward
the acceptance of documents, their concern with the cate
gories of class and caste, authority and power, their
interest in movements of dissidence and rebellion and their
various approaches to the reconstruction of the living
past from the fragments of the historical heritage.
These approaches may at times differ sharply from one
another, but they are united in their implicit opposition
to the deus ex machina views of Jewish history still
commonly taught in seminaries where the events of the
biblical period (and for Jews, the Talmudic period as
well) are regarded as belonging to a qualitatively
329
different category of human experience and hence in
susceptible to the kind of analysis that one would use in
dealing with the history of ancient Rome or Greece.
Fourth, and most important, is the fact that Jewish
history represents a continuum of experience from biblical
times on, and does not stop at the end of the biblical,
or the middle of the rabbinic period, as it • . d . o ' e s in many
textbooks dealing with the Jews. To attempt to asses Jews
on the basis of a study of Jewish history ending with
the first century is to misunderstand not only contemporary
Jewish thought and experience but the mainsprings of the
survival of the ideas and values that gave life to biblical
and rabbinic Judaism.
Jewish histoy may best be periodized as follows:
I. Biblical History
II. Rabbinic History
III. Jewish History under Islam
IV. Jewish History in Christian Feudal Europe
V. Jewish History from the Western European Renaissance
through the Eighteenth Century.
VI. Jewish History in Eastern Europe
VII. Jewish History in Western Europe from the Nine
teenth Century through the Holocaust.
VIII American Jewish History to 1948
IX. Israel and Contemporary World Jewish History
A full program
in Jewish, history may be attnnged to
include the following categories pf courses^ such as
those presently in use as: part of the' new cutFieuluiri >
inaugurated in 1969, in the New York School of the Hebrew
Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion.
HISTORY COURSES
History 100
The Preparatory Course
History 200 The Graduate Survey
The 300 Level
301-310 Courses in Biblical History
311-320 Courses in Rabbihdc History
321-330 Courses in Jewish History
in Moslem Lands 6th-14th
centuries
331-340 Courses in Jewish History
in Medieval Christian Europe
4th-14th Centuries
341-350 Courses in Jewish History
During the Renaissance
351-360 Courses in Jewish History
in Eastern Europe
15th to 19th Centuries
371-374 Courses in American Jewish
History
375-380 Courses in the History of
Zionism and Israel
331
381-390 Courses in Twentieth
Century Jewish History and
Sociology
391-399 Courses in the Philosophy
and Methodology of Jewish
History
Modern Hebrew Literature and Jewish Studies
Robert Alter Arnold Band
The parameters of "Modern Hebrew Literature1' have
become in the last twenty years less clearly defined than
they had previously been. While most scholars would still
agree that the period under study being in the 18th
century and its loci are Eastern Europe, Palestine/Israel,
and America, the genres included are subject to debate.
Traditionally, only secular belles-lettres, essays, and
reportage reflecting the Enlightenment and the rise
and crystallization of nationalism were included. More
recently, however, the classics of Hassidic literature
and even standard rabbinic works have been suggested for
inclusion. The debate naturally reflects the logical
divergences of opinion regarding the definition of modern
ity, of literature, of Judaism, and thus attests to the
intimate relationship between Modern Hebrew Literature
and the central problems of Jewish life in the past two
centures. The establishment of Israel as a sovereign
state where Hebrew is the national literature and is
•332
taught in seye^al academic institutions has obviously
normalized the status of the literature in the society
which, both creates and reads it, Before the creation
of the state, for instance, Hebrew literature was closely
allied with the Zionist struggle for national statehood
and the national ''renaissance"; in the established state,
literature must find its place among the other facets
of a state culture, Histories of Hebrew Literature
written from the point of view of political Zionism must
obviously be revised in the light of new realities. The
Jewish or Judaic quotient of modern Hebrew literature,
its relationship to other areas of Jewish studies, are
readily summed up in the almost unanswerable question;
Is Modern Hebrew Literature a Continuation of or a Revolt
against previous norms of Hebrew literature?
Since this body of literature, however widely
or narrowly defined, tried to assimilate both the
linguistic elements of all previous periods of Hebrew
literature, and the literary features of a variety of
contemporary literatures (Yiddish, French, German,
Russian, English) it is a source of endless fascination
and difficulty, Normally, a student cannot read a modern
Hebrew literary text (the prose texts are always un
vocalized) until his third or fourth year of college Hebrew
Usually, undergraduates in these courses have had some
Hebrew training before their college career or have spent
_________________________________________________________333
a year at an Israeli institution. In modern literature
courses the language of instruction is almost always
Hebrew and the works read are mostly selected, for their
intrinsic aesthetic value, from the past 80 years.
On the graduate level the requirements are formidable
and the qualified instructors few. The students must be
familiar with Hebrew texts of all periods, Biblical,
Rabbinic, and Modern. He should be able to read Yiddish,
since many Hebrew writers spoke and wrote in Yiddish,
living, as it were, in a bi-lingual or diglossic environ
ment. He must study the main currents and works of
European and American literature inasmuch as the Hebrew
writers he reads were well acquainted with these litera
tures. The number of students able and willing to under
take such a graduate program are not numerous and there
are indeed few places in the country where they can
pursue this discipline, just as there are few institutions
with adequate library resources for this discipline. These
deficiencies, nevertheless, can be overcome by a period
of study at one of the Israeli universities.
JEWISH SOCIAL SCIENCE
Me.rvi n Verb i t
Three names are used for the field of study under
consideration here: contemporary Jewish studies, a social
science of the Jews, and Jewish social science, Because
of the existence of a distinguished institute that goes
by the name ’ 'Contemporary Jewish Studies,” that title
has acquired some acceptance. While it is, of course,
appropriate for a center devoted to all aspects of contemp
orary Jewish life, it is quite inappropriate as the name
of an academic discipline or an area of specialty handled
as a discipline. In defining criterion in some historical
data after which all is to be considered ’ ’contemporary,”
What is thus brought together under one rubric includes
history, literature, language, religious thought, and
behavioral analysis. If the division of these materials
and the methods for analyzing them into several separate
(though, obviously related) disciplinary approaches is
valid for the time period before some arbitrary date,
it is equally valid for the ’ ’contemporary period,”
’ ’ Social science of the Jews” and ’’ Jewish social
science” are two ways of arranging essentially the same
words. ("Sociology” is sometimes used in place of
’’social science,” but the- latter designation is preferable
because it implies greater breadth, at least to non
sociologists) , "Jewish social science,” though simpler,
is often rejected on the grounds that it seems to suggest
______________________________________________________________335
that Jews have a special brand of social science dif
ferent from general, or non-Jewish, social science.
That argument is spurious for two reasons. First, "social
;science of the Jews" can be similarly misinterpreted if
"of the Jews" is seen as the subject rather than the
object of the scientific study. Second, if there is no
such confusion generated by the conventional use of
terms like "rural sociology" or "urban sociology" there
need be no confusion here. The best name, therefore, is
simply "Jewish social science." Where there may be
hesitation about using that name, however, the issue is
not worth contending and "social science of the Jews" can
do just as well.
A word should be said on the relationship of Jewish
social science to contemporary Jewish studies. It is
true that most social scientists tend to emphasize con
temporary life because the data are more readily available
and the techniques for handling them are more fully
developed. Theoretically, of course, social science can
deal with past periods as well and should do so as
carefully as possible with the methods at its disposal.
Character and History
Jewish social science is relatively new in both
Jewish studies and in the social sciences. Until recently,
the textual and classical emphases in Jewish studies and
the universalisticnfethods of social science made both
________________________________________________________3-36
fields general inhospitable to Jewish social science.
Happily, changes are taking place in the two fields so
that behavioral studies are gaining acceptance in Jewish
scholarship and research on sub-groups has legitimacy
among social scientists.
The earliest work in Jewish social science dealt
with demography and intergroup relations and constituted
a response to the situation of the Jews at the end of
the last century, when migration patterns and transition
from a relatively incapsulated community to participation
in the general social structure provided the major
issues confronting Jewry. More recently, the study of
identity patterns and community structure has gained
prominence, again as a response to felt needs and
concerns.
Personnel
Competence " in Jewish social science requires a
double background. Unless a person is familiar with the
theory of his social scientific discipline and able to
use its methods of research and analysis, he cannot do
social science. Unless he knows something about the
content of Jewish life and thought, he cannot understand
the substantive, concrete community on which he wishes
to turn his science, and his interpretations of behavior
and its sources will be superficial at best. In selecting
people for teaching and/or research on the Jewish community,
___________________________________________________________________________________337j
it is often assumed that everyone with a Yiddish-speaking
grandparent is an expert on Jewish life, especially if
he happens to be a social scientist. However, just as
students come to us out of various motivations, professors,
too, have various motivations for talking about the Jewish
community, and to judge from their oral statements and
published work, many are getting more off their chests
than out of their heads. If the only people available
are those whose expertise is autobiographical, idio
syncratic, or psychologically biased, it is better not to
introduce the field at all. Only people with disciplinary
competence and substantive background should be allowed
to teach Jewish social science.
With respect to the person’s location in the academy,
it is probably better to have him in his social science
department, where he is more likely to stay up-to-date
on theoretical and methodological developments. His
assignment to the "Jewish" courses will amost inevitably
keep him in sufficient contact with colleagues in other
departments teaching similar courses and/or with the
Jewish Studies Department where there is one.
Curriculum
Very few universities will be able to offer full
programs in Jewish social science. (Those that can do so
will appoint people whose major responsibility is the
development of such programs, and there is no need here
338
to offer advice to competent specialists in the field).
In most cases, schools will offer only a few courses, and
the determination of those offerings should reflect a
few important principles.
The most important principles are that "exotica" should
be avoided and that the highly specialized courses that are
appropriate as initial (and, usually terminal) under
graduate courses, it is tempting to respond to the current
concern over the place of Jews in American life with a
course on anti-Semitism. The first of these, while
acceptable in a full program or perhaps in an Israeli
university, is more properly only an ''extended footnote"
in a course in most American universities, and the
second (except insofar as it deals with Jewish reactions
to anti-Semitism) is really not a course in Jewish
studies at all. Frequently, an instructor gives a course
in the "Jewish angle" of his field, but courses like "The
Jews in American Politics," "Economic Behavior of American
Jews," or "The Jewish Family" would seem to be too
specialized for most undergraduate curricula.
The best way to initiate offerings in Jewish social
science is with a course in the American Jewish community,
in Jewish political., ideas and institutions, in Israeli
social structure, or in Eastern European Jewry. Such
courses should include both historical and current empir
ical materials.
_________________________________________________________ 339
To sum it up, Jewish social science is both Jewish
studies and social science, and the standards and criteria
applied to other instructors and courses in these fields
should be applied with equal rigor here.
THE TEACHING OF JEWISH SOCIAL STUDIES
A discussion of the place of the social scientific
study of Jewish phenomena in the Jewish studies curriculum
can begin with the simple premise that there is a Jewish
studies dimension to every one of the social sciences
in the same way that there is a similar dimension for the
study of any other civilization or area. At the same
time, in some, the Jewish component can be handled by
focusing on it in separate courses while in others it is
less separable. Thus it is eminently clear to anyone
familiar with the subject matter in question, that Jewish
history is a separable field of study while the teaching
of social psychological phenomena as they relate to Jews
(which is clearly a matter of research interest) may not
be so clearly definable excep,t in connection with the
study of the social psychology of other groups as well.
Still, in the last analysis, there is a teaching dimension
to the study of Jewish phenomena in every one of the
social sciences.
Let us examine the disciplines more specifically.
We will review the situation in connection with history,
sociology, political science, anthropology (including
folklore), geography, psychology, and economics.
(1) Jewish History. Since the Jews are not simply
a religious group but have traditionally and continually
embodied national, ethnic, and civilizational elements,
their history can be studied as discreet phenomenon in
any given period or across its entire 3500-4000 year range.
The contents of such a program would range from a survey
course of Jewish history to special period courses
(e.g., ancient, talmudic, medieval, modern) to area courses
(e.g., as American Jewish history or the history of
European Jewry) to special topics (e.g., Jewish
intellectual history, social history of the Jews). The
very range of the subject matter of Jewish history properly
requires at least four faculty members to do the subject
justice: one to deal with the ancient period; one with
the talmudic; one with the medieval; and one with the
modern.
A full program in an American university would have
a person to deal with American Jewish history as well.
An institution can expect a Jewish history to be prepared
to teach survey courses in Jewish history plus seminars
in his own area of specialization. It would be rare good
luck for an institution to find a person who can deal
in graduate level depth with more than a relatively small
segment of the subject.
______ 341
(2) Jewish Sociology. Jewish Sociology, or the
sociology of the Jews and the Jewish community is clearly
among the "contemporary” disciplines, although the histori
cal sociology of the Jews and the Jewish People has
received extensive treatment by such "greats" as Max
Weber. The study of Jewish sociology could encompass
everything from the behavior of Jews as individuals and
as a group within the larger societies in which they
find themselves, to the study of those behavior patterns
internal to their own lives as Jews or as members of the
Jewish community. Among the best developed fields of
Jewish sociology are demography, social organization, and
sociology of religion.
No Jewish studies program can properly be considered
complete without at least one person who specializes in
the teaching of Jewish sociology and is trained to do
research in the field. Courses in the field can follow
traditional sociological lines or be oriented toward
specific Jewish communities (such as the Sociology of
American Jewry or the Sociology of Israel).
(3) Jewish Political Studies. The field of Jewish
political studies, like political science in general,
concerns itself both with Jewish political thought and
with the institutions and behavior of Jewish communities
and polities. Since Jewish religious tradition places
a high emphasis on the development of the holy community
on earth, Jewish political studies should be of high
salience in the constellation of Jewish studies. The
study of Jewish, political thought deals with materials from
the Bible to the present day, many of which are (or
should be) part of the mainstreat of the study of political
thought in general (e,g,? the political thought of
Maimonides). There has also been a revival of active
political theorizing from a Jewish base in the nineteenth
and twentieth centures as part of the Jewish national
renaissance,
The study of Jewish political institutions and be
havior has both a historical and contemporary dimension.
The fact that even when the Jews did not have political
independence the^ maintained their communities with a
great deal of internal autonomy until the modern era
means that the historical study of Jewish political life
offers many rewarding opportunitiest More recently, the
problems of maintaining voluntary communal organizations
under the conditions of modern nationalism and individual
ism coupled with the re-establishment of the State of
Israel have opened new vistas for Jewish political study.
Finally, the study of the political behavior of Jews as
a group within other polities has attracted considerable
attention in recent years,
A well-rounded Jewish studies program should include
at least one person in the field of Jewish political
studies. Courses in the field of Jewish political
,34 c
studies could well include the following: Jewish political
thought (in general or specific figures), Jewish political
institutions and behavior (in general or for specific
communities or periods) and the politics of Israel. A
Jewish dimension should also be included in courses on
ethnic politics and religion and politics.
(4) Anthropology.. Studies of Jewish custom, kin
ship patterns, family structures, and folklore have already
attained an important place in the overall field of
Jewish social research, not to speak of the broader
concerns of contemporary anthropology, many of which
overlap with work done in the other social sciences.
Courses can be offered covering any or all of these
subject matter areas although, barring special research
interests on the part of particular faculty members, it
is not likely that an anthropology department will be
in a position to hire a person solely for Jewish studies,
given the general size of that discipline and of most
anthropology departments. Rather, the goal should be
to foster courses of a comparative character that would
include Jewish studies material within them taught by
people competent in the various areas mentioned above.
The exceptions might be in connection with the study of
Israeli society, and most particularly, the problems of
integration of Jews from diverse cultural areas within
Israel, a matter which has attracted considerable attention
____________________________ 344 J
from anthropologists over the past 25 years or in the
case of a social anthropologist who could offer courses
in Jewish sociology as well. At the same time, insti
tutions should be open to hiring specialists in Jewish
Studies areas at least as much as they are to specialists
in literate societies.
(5) Geography. Except in the cases of the geography
of Israel, the geographic study of the Jews is intertwined
with the general study of geography. Jewish migrations and
the geographic phenomena that result from the movements
of a population better oriented towards continuity in
time than in space may well be the most separable area
of Jewish interest in this field. While it is unlikely
that a geography department would hire a specialist
in the field (nor are such specialists available, to the
best of our knowledge, outside in Israel), the study
of geographic phenomena as they relate to the Jews is
a matter of no little comparative interest for their
very uniqueness.
(6) Psychology. Aside from comparative work, the
study of Jewish identity, which is properly social
psychology, is probably the most important single facet
of direct Jewish studies concern in this discipline. It
is likely to be accomodated within comparative courses
rather than separately, except when taught in connection
with courses in Jewish sociology. At the same time,
345
a proper faculty should include a person with research
interests in the field who is capable of offering an
occasional seminar in related matters,
(7) Economics.. As in the case of the previous three,
the field has not developed separately, At the same
time, serious research has been done into the economic
situation of the Jews and the economic structure of
Jewish communities by important economists including Nobel
Laureate Simon Kuznets, Moreover, it could in the future
potentially sustain someone in full time employment.
For the moment, however, it is also a matter of integrating
the subject into other courses dealing with microeconomics,
political economy, and the public finance of voluntary
groups.
346
APPENDIX C
FACULTY AND STUDENT QUESTIONNAIRES
34Y
Survey Materials
348
Dear Student:
We are completing a doctoral dissertation on Jewish
Studies programs in the following institutions of higher
learning in Los Angeles: UCLA; USC-HUC and Valley College
By filling out this questionnaire you will make available
to us much needed student input into the program. This
will help in the clarification of purpose and of object
ives. Please fill out the questionnaire and mail it
in the enclosed envelope. We would appreciate your im
mediate attention to this matter as we are attempting to
finish this dissertation in a few months. Thank you for
your kindness.
Gratefully yours,
Rubin Huttler
Doctoral Candidate
use
349
JEWISH STUDIES STUDENT QUESTIONNAIRE
Name(optional)_________________
1. Age__________ Sex_________ Religion_____ ________________
2. Citizen Status: (a) USA (born)___________ Country______
3. Student Status: (a) full time_______(b) part time______
(c) continuing adult education_________________________
4. Is Jewish studies___________ or Hebrew____(a) major___
(b) minor________ (c) elective_ (d)humanities or
general educa
tion requirement (e) language requirement
5. Previous education: (a) high school_____ (b)college
degree_________(c) professional______ (d) other________
(e) graduate degree_____________________________________
6. Religious education:
(a) Sunday school_____years_____ (b) Hebrew afternoon
school_____years_____ (c) Hebrew high school_____ years
(d) religious day school______ years____
(e) religious day high school years _other______
7. Do you feel that Jewish Studies or Hebrew should be
organized as (a) separate department_________________
(b) interdepartmental________ other_____________ _______
8. Career goals: (a) Rabbinate______(b) Cantorate (c)
Other clergy____ (d) Jewish communai or social work
(e) teaching_____(f)research and/or higher education
_____(g) other__________ ________________________________
9. Are you involved in the following: (a) synagogue_____
(b) church_____ (c) Zionist group_____ (d)_other_______
10. Do you feel that besides having an academic program
Jewish Studies should also do the following:
(a) raise Jewish consciousness __(k) stimulate
religious or national affiliation _(c) work for
Jewish survival_____(d) none of the above___________
(e) other___________________________ ____________________
11. (Optional)Please state your reasons for taking Jewish
Studies
350
FACULTY QUESTIONNAIRE
1.
2 .
3.
4.
5.
6 .
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
Define the field of Jewish Studies in higher education
What is the rationale for teaching Jewish studies?
How does Jewish studies differ from Yeshiva studies?
Is Jewish studies the same as Ethnic studies?(Black
or Chicano)
Should Jewish studies be academic mainly?
Should Jewish studies have vocational goals such as
training Jewish leaders.
It is said that the definition of academic freedom is
"the right of the professor to follow an argument
withersoever it may lead either in his research or
teaching." The concept of lernfreiheit (freedom of
learning) and lehrfreiheit (freedom of teaching) is
another way lof looking at academic freedom. Does
this apply to Jewish studies? On all campuses?
Should professors express their frank and candid
opinions on sensitive and controversial issues. In
this sense are there differences between professors
of Economics, Political Science and those of Religion?
Should the study of Judaica be concerned with values?
There seems to be several traditions connected with
Jewish studies: one, I will call Katsh-Rudavsky which
identifies with Hebrew taught as far back as the
colonial college in America and two: the Wissenschaft
des Judenthum. Which is more relevant to Jewish
studies?
Do you feel that the following are valid objectives
of Jewish studies: consciousness raising, Jewish
survival, Jewish pride instilling, etc. If these
are not main objectives, might they not be by
products of a Jewish studies program? Do you find
this totall irrelevant to Jewish studies?
It is said that Jewish studies on campus gives
respectability to Judaism; that it helps Jewish
identity among non-committed Jewish professors and
students since they see Judaism being studied in the
university setting. Do you think this is true and
significant for the Jewish community?
What are some of the motivations for students taking
Jewish studies? What are some of the reasons?
Does your school have an educational philosophy
underlying its program?
Do you feel that the curricular offerings express
the philosophy?
351
16. Are the courses architechtonic in structure? Do they
have to be?
17. Do you have students who take courses for electives,
language requirements, or liberal arts or general
education requirements.
18. Do your majors come to the school with language
skills?
19. Can one acquire language skills in Jewish studies
fast enough to be able to handle difficult texts?
20. How is language taught? Which? Classical Hebrew,
medieval, or modern Hebrew?
21. Describe the courses you teach.
22. Describe the program in general. Broad areas
covered, etc.
23. Is the two year college in articulation with UCLA?
(For LAVC)
24. Are the objectives of the Religion department at
USC in agreement with HUC? (For HUC&USC).
25. Do students tend to change under the impact of
the program?
26. How do Jewish studies majors compare with other
humanities majors?
352
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Ackerman, James Stokes; Hawley, Jane Stouder. On Teaching
The Bible As Literature. A Guide to Selected
Biblical Narrative for Secondary Schools.
Bloomington,: University of Indiana Press, 1967.
Alter, Robert. MWhat Jewish Studies Can Do." Commentary
Volume 58, No. 4.
Altman, Alexander, Editor. Studies in 19th Century Jewish
Intellectual History. Cambridge: Harvard University
Press, 1964.
American Jewish Year Book, 1917.
American Jewish Year Book, 1966.
Astin H. The Women Doctorate in America: Origin, Career
and Family. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1969
Band, Arnold J. "Jewish Studies in American Liberal
Arts Colleges and Universities," American Jewish
Yearbook 67, 1966.
Band, Arnold J. "Jewish Studies in American Liberal
Arts Colleges and Universities." In Oscar I.
Janowsky, Ed. The Education of American Jewish
Teachers. Boston: The Beacon Press, 1967. [Revised]
Benson, R.C. "Women's Studies: Theory and Practice,"
AAUP Bulletin, 58.
Blumenthal, David R. "Where Does Jewish Studies Belong?"
Journal of the American Academy of Religion, . 3^.
Brubaker J.S. and Rudy W. Higher Education in Transition.
New York: Harper and Row, Inc., 1958.
Cohen, Gerson D. "An Embarrassment of Riches: Reflections
on the Condition of the American Jewish Scholarship
in 1969," in The Teaching of Judaica in American
Universities.. Leon Jick, Editor. New York: Ktav
Publishing Company, 1970.
353
Cohen, Martin. "A Word on the Field of Jewish History."
Consultation for Jewish Studies Papers, Unpublished.
Presented at New York City on October 9th to 10th,
1972.
Cohn, Bernhard N. A Brief History of Hebrew Union College-
Jewlsh Institute of Religion 1875-1975. Los Angeles:
Jewish Institute of Religion, 1975.
Cortada, Rafael L. Black Studies: An Urban and Comparative
Curriculum. Lexington: Xerox College Publishing,
1974.
Cottle, Eastwood Ronald. Religious Studies in California
Public Higher Education with Special Reference to
Community Colleges. Los Angeles: University of
Southern California, Unpublished dissertation, 1974.
Cutter, Allan. "An Agenda for American Jewish Scholarship.
The Jewish Spectator, June 19, 1967.
Davidson, Herbert A. The Place of Jewish Studies Within
the University Organization. Los Angeles: University
of California, Unpublished paper for the Department
of Near Eastern Languages and Culture, 1975.
Dragin, Bert Ray. The Ethnic Publication on the Californi
Community College Campus. Los Angeles: University
of Southern California, Masters Thesis, 1971.
Durham, Joseph T. The Role and Contributions of American
Negroes in the History of the U.S. and Illinois.
Springfield, Illinois: Office of the Superintendent
of Public Instruction, 1976.
Ehle, Carl F. J.r Doron:Hebrew Studies. New York:
The National Association of Professors in Hebrew
in American Institutions of Higher Learning, 1965.
Elazar, J.D. Colloquium on the Teaching of Contemporary
Jewish Civilization. New York: A New Jewish History
Quarterly, June 1974.
Encyclopaedia Judaica. Jerusalem: Keter Publishing House,
1972.
Ferm, Vergilius. "The Fountainhead of Western Religion."
in The Hebrew Impact on Western Civilization,
Dagobert D. Runes, Editor. New York: The Citadel
Press, 1965.
a
354
Foster, Craig C. , Editor. Black Studies in the University,
A Symposium. New Haven and London: Yale University
Press, 1969.
Friedman, Lee. Pilgrims In A New Land. Philadelphia:
Jewish Publication Society, 1948.
Furniss, W. Todd, Editor. Women in Higher Education.
Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education,
1974.
Garber, Z. Jewish Studies at a Two-Year Public College
and Lower Division Judaica: Problems and Solutions.
Los Angeles: ERIC Document Reproduction Service,
1973.
Gauss, Christian, Editor. The Teaching of Religion in
Higher Education. New York: The Ronald Press
Company, 1951.
Giles, Raymond H. Jr. Black Studies Programs in Public
Schools. New York: Praeger Publishers, Inc., 1974.
Glanz, Rudolf. Studies in Judaica Americana. New York:
Ktav Publishing House, 1970.
Glatzer, Nahum N. The Judaic Tradition. Boston: The
Beacon Press, 1969.
Glatzer, Nahum N., Editor. Modern Jewish Thought.
New York: Schocken Books, 1977.
Glazer, Nathan. Beyond the Melting Pot. Cambridge:
MIT Press, 1963.
Goheen, Robert F. The Human Nature of a University.
Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1967.
Goldman, Israel M. Lifelong Learning Among Jews.
New York: Ktav Publishing House, 1975.
Graham, Patricia A. and Furniss, Todd W. Women in
Higher Education. Washington, D.C.: American
Council on Education, 1974.
355
Grayzel, Solomon. A History of the Jews from the Babylon
ian Exile to the Present, 5728-1968. New York:
The American Library, 1968.
Greeley, Ander M. Ethnicity in the United States: A
Preliminary Reconnaissance. New York: John Wiley
and Sons, 1974.
Greenberg, Irving. "Jewish Survival and the College
Campus.” Judaism, Volume 17, 1978.
Hallo, William W. "Ancient Jewish Studies," Consultation
for Jewish Studies Papers. Unpublished, presented
at New York City on October 9th to October 10th, 1972.
Handlin, Oscar. Immigration as a Factor in American
History. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-
Hall, Inc., 1959.
Haskins, Charles Homer. The Rise of Universities.
Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1970.
Himmelfarb, Milton, Editor. The American Jewish Year Book
Volume 75. Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication
Society, 1974-1975.
Hofstadter, Richard, and Metzger, Walter P. The
Development of Academic Freedom in the U.S.
New York: Columbia University Press, 1969.
Howe, Florence, Editor. Women and the Power to Change.
New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1975.
Hutchins, Robert M. The Higher Learning in America.
New Haven: Yale University Press, 1972.
Hyman, Arthur. Presentations at Consultations on Jewish
Studies in Institutions of Higher Learning.
New York: The Association for Jewish Studies in
Cooperation with the American Jewish Committee,
1972.
Isaacs, Harold Robert. Ideas of the Tribe: Group
Identity and Political Change. New York: Harper
and Row, 1975.
356,
__i
Itzkoff, Seymour W. Cultural Pluralism and American
Higher Education. Scranton: International Textbook
Company, 1969.
Janowsky, Oscar I., Editor. The Education of American
Jewish Teachers. Published for the Philip W. Lown
Center for Contemporary Jewish Studies. Boston:
The Beacon Press, 1967.
Jospe, Alfred, Editor. Jewish Studies in American Colleges
and Universities. New York: Bnai Brith Hillel
Foundations, 1972.
Kallen, Horace M. "Democracy Versus the Melting Pot."
The Nation, 1915.
Kaplan, L.L. "Judaic Studies on Campus New Horizons."
Jewish Heritage, Volume 12, 1969.
Kaplan, Mordecai M. Judaism as a Civilization. New York:
The Reconstructionist Press, 1975.
Katsh, Abraham I, "Hebraic Studies in American Higher
Education: An Evaluation of Current Trends,"
Jewish Social Studies, January 1959.
Katsh, Abraham X. Hebrew in American Higher Education.
New York: N.Y.U. Bookstore, 1941.
Katsh, Abraham, I. Hebrew Language, Literature, and
Culture in American Institutions of Higher Learning.
New York: Payne Educational Sociology Foundation,
1950.
Katsh, Abraham I. Modern Hebrew in Our Higher Institutions
of Learning. New York: Jewish Publications, 1940.
Katz, J. "Emancipation and Jewish Studies." Commentary.
Volume 57, April 1974.
Kelley, William Wilbur, Leslie. Teaching in the
Community Junior College. New York: Meredith
Corporation, 1970.
r357 i
Kerr, Clark. The Uses of the University. New York:
Harper and Row, Publishers, 1963.
Konvitz, M.R. "The Emergence of Jewish Studies.”
(Address) Congress Monthly, Volume 42, January 24,
1975.
Landis, J.C. "Yiddish Alive and Well.” Keeping Posted,
Volume 20^, December, 1974.
Langmuir, Gavin. "Major History and Post-Biblical Jews."
Journal of the History of Ideas, 1966.
Lapson, Judah. "Hebrew For College Entrance." New York:
Hebrew Culture Service Committee for American
History, 1953.
Lapson, Judah, Editor. Hebrew in Colleges and Universities
A Guide to Course Offerings in Undergraduate, Graduate,
and Professional School's' in the U.S. New York:
Hebrew Culture Service Committee for American
High Schools and Colleges, 1958.
Levenson, E.R. "Women and Jewish Studies," Jewish
Spectator, Volume G9, Summer of 1974.
Levi, Albert W. The Humanities Today. Bloomington:
Indiana University Press, 1970.
Levine, Baruch A. "Defining Jewish Studies," Conservative
Judaism, Volume XXVII, Number 2, Winter, 1973.
Loewe Raphael. "Defining Judaism." Jewish Journal of
Sociology, Volumes 11-12, 1965.
McGill, Arthur C. "Christian Theology in the Study of
Religion in Colleges and Universities." The Study
of Religion in Colleges and Universities.
P. Ramsey and J. Wilson, Editors. Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1970.
Metzger, Walter P. The Development of Academic Freedom
in the United States. New York: Columbia
University Press, 1969.
Meyer, Michael A. The Origins of the Modern Jew.
Detroit: Wayne State Press, 1967.
358
Monsoor, Menachem. ’ ’ Jewish Studies in the University,”
Jewish Spectator, Volume 39, Slimmer, 1974.
Monsoor, Menachem. "The Wisconsin Experience"
Conservative Judaism, Vol XXVII, November 2,
Winter, 1973.
Moore, G.F. "Christian Writers on Judaism." Harvard
Theological Review, XLV, 1921.
Neusner, Jacob. The Academic Study of Judaism: Essays
and Reflections. First Series, 1975; Second Series,
1977; New York: Ktav Publishing House, Inc.,
1975 and 1977 respectively.
Neusner, Jacob. History and Torah. New York: Schocken
Books, 1965.
Neusner, Jacob. "The New Setting for Jewish Learning:
Towards a Theory of University Studies in Judaism."
New York: University of Rochester, 1975 (Address).
Neusner, J. "Two Settings for Judaism." Conservative-
Judaism. Volume 27, Fall 1972,
Neusner, Jacob. The Way of Torah: An Introduction
To Judaism. Belmont, California: Dickinson Publish
ing Company, 1970,
Newman, John H. The Idea of a University. Garden City,
New York; Image Books, 1959,
Novak, Michael. Further Reflections on Ethnicity.
Middletown, Pennsylvania; Jednota Press, 1977,
Novak, Michael, The Rise of the Unmeltable Ethnics;
Politics and Culture in the Scvcnticc. Now York:
MacMillan, 1978,
Ortega, Y,, Gasset, Jose, Mission of the University.
New York: W,W, Norton and Company, 1966.
Pullias, Earl V., A Search for Understanding: Thoughts
on Education and Personality in a Time of Transition.
New York: William C. Brown Company, 1965 and 1969.
Pusey, Nathan M. The Age Of The Scholar. New York:
Harper and Row Publishers, Inc., 1964.
Ramsey, P. Wilson, J., Editors. "Christian Theology in
The Study of Religion in Colleges and Universities."
Religion in Colleges and Universities Today.
Rashdall, Hastings. The Universities of Europe in the
Middle Ages. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1895.
Richards, Henry J. Topics In Afro-American Studies.
New York: Black Academy Press, Inc., 1977.
Ritterband, Paul. "The Pattern of Growth of Jewish
Learning in American Universities." in "A Symposium
on Jewish Studies in the University," Conservative-
Judaism, XXXII, Number 12, Winter, 1973.
Roback, A.A. Jewish Influence in Modern Thought.
Cambridge: Sci-Art Publishers, 1929.
Rose, A. "Afro-American Studies in Higher Education."
Monographs in Afro-American Studies. Coral
Gables: Center for Afro-American Studies, University
of Miami, 1975.
Rosenthal, E. "The Current Status of Jewish Social
Research." Midstream. April 1971.
Rosmarin-Weiss T., Editor, "Affirmative Action." Jewish
Spectator, Volume B9, Summer 1974.
Roth, Cecil. The Jewish Contribution To Civilization.
New York: Harper and Brothers, 1940.
Rubinstein, Richard L. The Religious Imagination.
New York: Bobbs-Merrill Company, 1968.
-3601
Rudavsky, David. "Current Trends in Hebraic Studies in
American Colleges and Universities." Bulletin
of the Association of Departments of Foreign
Languages., March 1972.
Rudavsky, David. Doron: Hebraic Studies. New York:
The National Association of Professors in Hebrew
in American Institutions of Higher Learning, 1965.
Rudavsky, David. "Hebraic Studies in Colleges and
Universities," Religious Education. July-August,
1964.
Runes, Dagobert D . The Hebrew Impact on Western Civiliza-
tion. Secaucus, New Jersey: The Citadel Press,
1965.
Sachar, Abram Leon. A History of the Jews. New York:
Alfred A. Knopf, 1973.
Saypol, Judith. "Jewish Scope; Jewish Studies: Old
Discipline, New Disciples." National Jewish Monthly,
Volume 87, December 1972.
Schechter, Solomon. Studies in Judaism: A Selection.
New York: Meridian Books, 1960.
Scholem, Gershom. The Messianic Idea in Judaism and
Other Essays on Spirituality. New York: Schocken
Books, Inc., 1971.
Schwarz, Leo W., Editor. Great Ages and Ideas.
New York: Random House, Inc., 1956.
Shaffer, D. Ha'Am, Volume 7, No. 4, February 28, 1978.
Sklare, Marshall. "The Problem of Contemporary Jewish
Studies" Midstream. April 1970.-
Spiegler, S. "Expanding Jewish Studies Programs."
Journal of Jewish Communal Service, Volume 51.
361
Storr, Richard J. Harper1s University: The Beginnings.
Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1966.
Strain, S.M. An Exploratory Investigation of Women1s
Studies in Selected Institutions of Higher Education
With Emphasis Upon the Historical Background of
The Status of Women and the Special Needs of
Women in Higher Education. Unpublished Doctoral
Thesis, University of Southern California, 1977.
Thornton, James W. The Community Junior College.
New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1966.
Trecker, J.L. "Women’s Place in the Curriculum”
Saturday Review. October 16, 1971.
Welch, C. Religion in the Undergraduate Curriculum:
An Analysis and Interpretation. Washington, D.C.:
Association of American Colleges, 1972.
Whitehead, Alfred N. The Aim of Education and Other
Essays. New York: The Free Press, 1967.
Wilson, Edmund. A Piece of My Mind, Reflections at Sixty
Garden City, New York: Doubleday and Company, 1958.
Wolfson, H.A. "The Needs of Jewish Scholarship in
America." Menorah Journal, Number 7. 1921.
Yerushalmi Joseph. Bibliographical Essays in Medieval
Jewish Studies, The Study of Judaism. Volume II.
New York: Ktav Publishing House, Inc., 1976.
Zunz, Leopold. Gessamelte Schriften. Berlin: L.
Gerschel, 1875-76.
362

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Change in Jewish education: The development of a comprehensive theory

PDF

Characteristics of leadership of selected historical leaders in higher education in the United States with an exploratory study of the applicability of these characteristics to modern educational...

PDF

An experimental model of organizational development for institutions of higher education

PDF

Development of a model for an open learning system in Venezuelan higher education

PDF

Higher education and development in Indonesia: The viability of the multi-purpose function of the community college at the undergraduate level of the university system

PDF

An exploratory investigation of women's studies in selected institutions of higher education with emphasis upon the historical background of the status of women and the special needs of women in ...

PDF

Higher education in Israel

PDF

Adult development characteristics and motivational antecedents to participating in higher education

PDF

The doctoral program in education for the Department of Defense Dependents Schools personnel in Europe

PDF

Influence of different cultural backgrounds on teacher pupil interaction and teacher attitudes of Israeli and American teachers in Jewish education

PDF

Planning of higher education in Nepal: An analysis of resource allocation at Tribhuvan University

PDF

A five-year study of Chicano educational opportunity program students at a California state university

PDF

A philosophical analysis of early childhood education in the State of California

PDF

An analysis of the position of dean of students in selected institutions of higher education

PDF

An experiment in thrift education with special reference to the junior high school

PDF

The emerging structures of mass higher education and the community college concept: Their implications for Brazilian higher education

PDF

Relationship of student attitudes on ROTC with attitudes toward purposes and functions of the university

PDF

The unfinished agenda: A study of university affiliated programs

PDF

Print materials in higher education: Selected issues, resulting changes, "fair use" in the 1976 Copyright Act

PDF

An analysis of critical current issues and problems of higher education in Iran

Asset Metadata

Creator Huttler, Rubin Aaron (author)

Core Title An exploratory study of the development of Jewish studies in American higher education with special emphasis on three contemporary programs

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Education

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag education, higher,Jewish Studies,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c26-480920

Unique identifier UC11246645

Identifier usctheses-c26-480920 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier DP24645.pdf

Dmrecord 480920

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Huttler, Rubin Aaron

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA