Oct 28, 2013 By: yunews
Revel Lecture Offers Personal Recollections, Academic Analysis of Noted Bible Scholar
The held its inaugural event of the fall semester鈥檚 special lecture series, 鈥淣ehama Leibowitz and Tanakh Study: Yesterday and Today,鈥 at 黑料社 All鈥檚 Wilf Campus on October 22. The event, which was attended by more than 200 people, included personal recollections of Leibowitz by one of her earliest pupils, Esther Manischewitz, as well as an academic lecture about Leibowitz鈥檚 Bible scholarship by Revel Associate Dean and Professor of Bible, Dr. Mordechai Z. Cohen.
鈥淣ehama Leibowitz, the master teacher, has become a larger than life figure, a sort of celebrity,鈥 said Cohen. 鈥淵et Nehama regarded herself as a simple teacher, who sought to guide others in their study of Tanakh 摆叠颈产濒别闭.鈥
In 1930, at the age of 25, Leibowitz (1905-1997) earned a doctorate in Bible from the University of Marburg, Germany, and subsequently immigrated with her husband to Jerusalem. Over the next 67 years, she became one of the world鈥檚 most esteemed Bible scholars, winning the Israel Prize for education in 1956. At the beginning of her career, from 1930 until 1950, Leibowitz taught at Jerusalem鈥檚 Mizrachi Women鈥檚 Teachers Seminary. One of her students there was Esther Manischewitz (n茅e Ostrovsky), also Leibowitz鈥檚 neighbor at the time, who entered the Seminary in 1938.
鈥淚 wasn鈥檛 afraid of her, but a lot of people were,鈥 said Manischewitz in a video presentation about her experiences in 1930s Jerusalem. 鈥淪he was tough鈥攂ut also very kind, and very nice. She was an excellent teacher.鈥 Manischewitz immigrated to the United States in 1951 when she married her American husband, Bill. Together, they helped found Teaneck鈥檚 first Orthodox synagogue, Congregation Bnai Yeshurun.
In the 1980s, while pursing his doctorate in Bible from Revel, Cohen too had the opportunity to learn from Leibowitz. Cohen noted in his lecture, 鈥淣ehama Leibowitz鈥檚 Lasting Impact on Bible Scholarship,鈥 that the traditionally Orthodox Leibowitz rejected the scholarly method of 鈥渟ource criticism鈥 that contested the Bible鈥檚 divine origins (though she had no problem with quoting non-Orthodox Bible scholars). She also rejected the 鈥渉istorical鈥 school鈥檚 assertion that there can only be one legitimate explanation of the biblical text.
Instead, Leibowitz preferred to apply to the Bible the literary method analysis known as 鈥淣ew Criticism,鈥 following the lead of German Jewish scholars such as Franz Rosensweig and Martin Buber, as well as his student Ludwig Strauss. 鈥淣ehama Leibowitz, following the tenets of new criticism, makes a fundamental distinction between literature and history,鈥 said Cohen. 鈥淪he therefore argued that the text alone鈥 and not the history behind it鈥攄etermines what is the correct interpretation. Hence, if the text is open to multiple interpretations, they are all valid.鈥
Cohen provided an example of this interpretive pluralism. In Genesis 32:7, Jacob is told by his messengers, 鈥淲e came to your brother, to Esau.鈥 This description can imply that Esau has true brotherly affection for Jacob, or alternatively indicate that Esau is the same brother Jacob remembers from years past鈥攖he one that wanted, and still wants, to kill him. Both readings, the former belonging to Rashbam (Rabbi Samuel ben Meir, c. 1085-c.1158) and the latter to Rashi (Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki, 1040-1105), are valid.
Additionally, said Cohen, Leibowitz stressed the Talmud鈥檚 observation that the Bible is written in 鈥渢he language of man.鈥 For example, God鈥檚 question to Adam (鈥淲here are you?鈥) in the Garden of Eden does not indicate God鈥檚 lack of knowledge, but rather serves to start a conversation with His human creation.
鈥淚 thought the event was fabulous," said David Moster 鈥07YC,鈥9A, 鈥10BR, a doctoral student of Bible and Ancient Near Eastern History at New York University. 鈥淢rs. Manischewitz's oral history was the perfect complement to Dr. Cohen's fantastic lecture about Nehama Leibowitz's scholarship and its intellectual context.鈥
The event was sponsored by the Dr. Monique and Mordecai D. Katz Endowed Lecture Fund.
