Albert van der Heide and Irene E. Zwiep (eds)

JEWISH STUDIESAND THE EUROPEAN

ACADEMIC WORLDPlenary Lectures read at the

Vllth Congress of the EuropeanAssociation for Jewish Studies (EAJS)

Amsterdam, July 2002

Collection de laRevue des Etudesjuivesdirigee parSimon C. Mimouni et Gerard Nahon

PeetersParis - Louvain - Dudley, MA2005

'JUDAISTIK' BETWEEN'WISSENSCHAFT' AND 'JÜDISCHE STUDIEN'.JEWISH STUDIES IN POST-WWII GERMANY*

Michael BROCKE

While I hope that the following survey of the developments, the presentstate, and the prospects for the future of Jewish Studies in Germany will beof more than only national interest, I should warn the reader that this pre-sentation will be fraught with specific 'national' problems, which may notexist in other countries and which at first sight may appear peculiar andremote.

This begins with the designation of our field. One is tempted to give ourtopic the current English or American name, and call it simply 'JewishStudies'. In German, however, the field enjoys at least two designations:'Judaistik' and 'Jüdische Studien'. So one has to ask whether we have todeal with two distinct and, maybe, competing phenomena which in Englishwould both be called Jewish (or Judaic) Studies, or whether it is, perhaps, aquestion of two appellations for the same object only: an older, establishedone, and one much more recent and fashionable.

In German parlance Jewish Studies thus are split into 'Judaistik' and'Jüdische Studien'. The first is a traditional, i.e., late nineteenth and earlytwentieth Century designation, coined in accordance with other fields of(philological) scholarship (comparable to 'Anglistik', 'Slavistik', 'Oriental-istik', and the like). The second is a modern but, in German, uncommondesignation and loan translation from Anglo-American usage. Whether weprefer a 'nominalist' or a 'realist' reading, we have to admit that the termi-nological conflict has a certain importance, since the names are associatedwith, and are used to express conceptions of an academic field that hasgrown enormously since its hesitant beginnings in the 1960s. The recentstruggles about scope and method of the discipline are witness of a conflictbetween the first-born, 'Judaistik', and the junior 'Jüdische Studien' äs des-ignations of fundamentally differing approaches.

All this has to do with Germany's century-long history of 'Wissenschaftdes Judentums' äs the prehistory of today's 'Judaistik/Jüdische Studien'.

* The author wishes to thank Christiane E. Müller, Düsseldorf University, for her criticalcomments.

78 MICHAEL BROCKE

This is a history of its own, which is, of course, the fundament and found-ing history of the entire field, in itself a glorious and dauntless history, butat the same time a shameful one for the German nation and for the acade-mic elite among which the concept emerged.

Whenever there was a classical monograph or an important article to besummarized for discussion in one of his seminars, Professor EphraimE. Urbach of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem used to gently prod hisstudents to volunteer by telling them, half-jokingly, half in earnest, that theGerman language of the texts under discussion, 'äs a Semitic language', is- or did he say 'was'? - second in importance only to Hebrew. 'Wissen-schaft des Judentums' should thus be read in its original languages, eitherHebrew or German. Yet at the same time there would never, in everydayacademic life, come a word of German from his lips (it took many yearsuntil he once, surprisingly, addressed the one or the other of his formerstudents in colloquial German). Whatever had happened, äs a language ofJewish scholarship German came next to Hebrew. It was a working lan-guage (and even a language of communication) for that generation ofteachers at the Hebrew University, back into the sixties of the past Century.

Forty years have gone by, and things have changed drastically. Fromtime to time classics of the 'Wissenschaft des Judentums' may still be con-sulted and quoted, a few of them having been translated to survive for theHebrew or the English reader. 'Wissenschaft' history has begun to be writ-ten and will be written, but who in fact does read and use 'Wissenschaft'monographs or articles written in German in the nineteenth and early twen-tieth centuries any more? Or, for that matter, 'Judaistik' monographs of thelate twentieth and early 21 st centuries? Many, if not most present-day pub-lications in the field of Jewish Studies that are not written in English, sharethe same fate1.

One should not overstate this point, since it is an obstacle and a chal-lenge for most colleagues working in non-English speaking countries andPublishing in their own language. Nearly every field of supranationalimportance falls victim to the growing urge to publish in the lingua franca.It is the past glory of German-language Jewish scholarship that causes oneto linger for a moment on the decline caused by the actors and perpetratorsof twentieth-century German history on the one hand, and by the domi-neering presence of English on the other; concomitant, thirdly, with the

1 See äs an example The Oxford Handbook of Jewish Studies, ed. by Martin Goodman,associate eds Jeremy Cohen and David Sorkin (Oxford 2002), and see the critical review byRobert Jütte, "Die Welt der Jüdischen Studien — von außen betrachtet", Aschkenas 13 (2003)513-517.

JEWISH STUD1ES IN POST-WWH GERMANY 79

impressive flourishing of Jewish Studies in the USA2. English has attainedthe Status of 'Semitic language Number One' in Jewish Studies äs well äsin Madda'e ha-Yahadut. Some time ago, in an address to the President ofthe State of Israel, the President of the Academy of the Hebrew Languagein Jerusalem complained about the fact that Israeli universities are payingmore and more attention to publication records in English. He called it adangerous development for Hebrew that publications in English are valuedhigher than articles and books published in Hebrew.

While Hebrew (even Hebrew!) and German, together with other lan-guages important for Jewish Studies, will share a common fate, when itcomes to German the deeper reasons have different origins. Jewish Studiesin Germany today perceive the tension of a finely honed linguistic Instru-ment that used to be appreciated by Jewish scholars and scholarly Jews allover Europe, and the steep decline of the importance of the very medium inwhich 'Wissenschaft' once began to blossom. If today's Jewish Studies inGermany wish to hold on to this tradition, they are at least able to do so lin-guistically, notwithstanding the fact that this language is no longer spokennor read by the vast majority of committed Jewish intellectuals, of scholarsand students of Judaica, Jews and non-Jews alike.

Back to the 'four cubits' of German scholarship, be it 'Judaistik' or 'Jüdis-che Studien'. I shall present my overview of the discipline in today's Ger-many in three steps. Firstly, I will discuss the roots of modern Jewish Stud-ies in post-war Germany; secondly I will elaborate upon their development,including a brief factual overview of their present state, and touching uponthe recent branching out of Jewish Studies into 'Jüdische Studien' versus'Judaistik' äs well äs the tensions brought about by the discussion äs howto best fester the discipline; thirdly, by way of conclusion, I will offer somereflections on what to strive for, where to go and what to attain in the nearfuture.

From the 1960s to the 1980s

How did 'Judaistik', forty years ago, come into being in Western Germany,the Federal Republic of Germany?3 There were three major Stimuli.

2 One should not overlook the fact that American Jewish Studies seem to be aware of theimportance of German; e.g., the interdisciplinary Jewish Studies Programme of ColumbiaUniversity includes, besides Hebrew, German äs a foreign language. See M. Brenner, "Jüdi-sche Studien im internationalen Kontext", in: M. Brenner and S. Rohrbacher, eds, Wissen-schaft vom Judentum. Annäherungen nach dem Holocaust (Göttingen 2000) 42-57, esp. 46.

3 We ignore the GDR where until 1990 'Judaistik/Jüdische Studien' were non-existent(see below).

80 MICHAEL BROCKE

The first was the slowly growing awareness of the genocide and itsimpact, äs expressed by Michael Landmann, a philosopher at the Freie Uni-versität Berlin, in 1962: "It is the task of scholarship, the task of theHumanities, to bear witness of a culture, which those once living it nolonger are able to bear witness of."4

The second source of growth was the strong tradition of Germanresearch into rabbinic literature, based in the faculties of Protestant theol-ogy, especially in their Instituta Judaica (developed either äs an auxiliarydiscipline for New Testament and biblical 'Umwelt' studies, or äs an acad-emic instrument for 'sophisticated missionizing').

And thirdly there was the - sporadic - awareness that Judaism cannot bestudied äs a religion only and must not be seen through Christian eyesexclusively. The adequate context for the study and teaching of Judaismshould be the philosophical faculty, not the theological department. Thisslowly rising urge to have the study of Judaism enter, at long last, the broadsecular realm of the philosophical faculty reminds us of the classical, pre-Nazi, time, when 'Wissenschaft' scholars struggled unsuccessfully againsthaving to work extra muros of the universities, and against being confinedto the rabbinical seminary. Entrance into the philosophical faculty nowseemed to be the belated repair of an unjust Situation. But this reference tothe academic ambitions of the great predecessors is barely tangible and maybe no more than a subjective construct.

Since no serious research has äs yet been dedicated to the rationale and thebeginnings of 'Judaistik' in post-war Germany, we depend upon personalaccounts of individual German students who picked up the thread atJerusalem's Hebrew University. At the outset they were unaware of the factthat they were being taught by great scholars who themselves had been edu-cated by the great personalities of the 'Wissenschaft des Judentums' in theearly twentieth Century. They first learned about this past through the manyanecdotes told and retold by their teachers, about Victor Aptowitzer andIsmar Elbogen, about Wilhelm Bacher and Jacob N. Epstein - rather thanby reading their somewhat forbidding books. Thus the Stimulus to establishchairs in 'Judaistik' did not stem from any direct appreciation of theachievements of 'Wissenschaft des Judentums', and motivation was notstirred up by the esteem for intrinsic Jewish values, nor by the appreciationof Jewish culture and history äs worthy to be studied for their own sake. Itrather came from the growing consciousness of the unfathomable crime

4 M. Landmann, "Lehrstühle für die Wissenschaft vom Judentum", Die Deutsche Uni-versitätszeitung (Frankfurt 1962) 3-7, esp. 7: "Es ist Sache der Wissenschaft, das Verloreneauf ihrer Ebene zu bewahren und von einer Kultur zu zeugen, von der ihre einstigen Trägerselbst nicht mehr zeugen können."

JEWISH STUDIES IN POST-WWII GERMANY 81

committed a few years before, and from the fear that anti-Semitism mightflare up again. One remembers, for example, the Cologne synagogue van-dalized by anti-Jewish graffiti in the early 1960s äs a trigger for establish-ing the 'Martin Buber-Institut für Judaistik' at Cologne University, andsimilar circumstances leading to the establishment of the chair for JewishStudies in Frankfurt am Main in 1970.

It is therefore not surprising that the major task of 'Judaistik' was seenäs aimed at academic Aufklärung. The early hopes were pinned upon thefight against prejudice and unfathomed ignorance. A positive presentationof Judaism and a direct confrontation with anti-Jewish and anti-Semiticprejudice were expected to bring about this 'Enlightenment'. Even todayolder German-Jewish colleagues see these tasks äs the major, the trulynoble and sober duty of 'Judaistik' in Germany. This is an understandableview. The lifespan of those colleagues bridges both eras — the final years ofthe Weimar Republic, the first years of Hitler's regime, äs well äs the firstdecades of the Federal Republic of Germany. This attitude is certainly amatter for further reflection and, one might add, not entirely unique forGermany, where indeed, by historical necessity, the urge is strenger thanelsewhere.

Although evidently not the major task of Jewish Studies (in Germany oranywhere eise), this element should not be utterly rejected. It unmistakablyremains an aspect to be considered in teaching, äs long äs it does not deter-mine or even influence the direction and the subjects of research. Againstthe (ever changing yet always similar) demands of politicians and publicopinion, we must remain free to chose our subjects äs we wish and see fit,to do things l'art pour l'art — or to put it more correctly: le-shem shamayim- and leave the fight against prejudice to other institutions in education anddissemination of knowledge.

Is it possible to assess with some objectivity how much work done by early'Judaistik' was achieved with the needs just mentioned in mind? How strongwas the influence of religio-theological challenges and interests (besides themissionary, of course)? I for one would not be able to answer those questions.There must have been a strong first impact from religio-theological circles, atfirst predominantly Protestant, later catholic (and thus influential). Over theyears, however, 'Judaistik' has managed to shed this influence and establishitself äs a new entity. There is now a clear-cut Separation between the inter-ests of theological faculties in the area of early and rabbinic Judaism äs partof New Testament and 'Umwelt' studies on the one hand, and the study ofJudaism in the broader sense of 'Judaistik' on the other5.

5 However, it took until 2003 to have 'Judaistik' be accepted äs a discipline in its ownright by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, the greatest German Research andEndowment Organization, where some 186 disciplines each have their own referees).

82 MICHAEL BROCKE

Historically, it seems that most of the personalities that promoted chairsof 'Judaistik' in philosophical faculties, a fortiori those who advocatedthem in a theological context, were motivated by religiously rooted feel-ings. It was a small elite minority of, at first, mostly Protestant Christiansturning to a few influential Jewish personalities to find ways to somehowengage in what one might call today an attempt at tiqqun6. It would be dif-ficult to distinguish between the (inner-)theological interests of the Christ-ian theologians and their genuine feelings of guilt and responsibilitytowards the Jews and Judaism after the failure to stand up against Nazismand genocide.

Stimuli came from several sides. From the early fifties onwards, individ-ual Jewish and Christian voices uttered - rather feebly at first - the wish tobring back German-Jewish emigrants and refugees and help establishchairs. From about 1952 Adolf Leschnitzer taught German-Jewish historyat the 'Freie Universität' in Berlin. In 1959 Frankfurt University establisheda 'Honorarprofessur' in 'Wissenschaft des Judentums', held, on the adviceof Martin Buber, by Rabbi Dr. Kurt Wilhelm (Jerusalem/Stockholm) until19637. These instances facilitated the establishment of the later permanentchairs8. The first institutes in 'Judaistik' were then established: Berlin in1964 (Jacob Taubes), Cologne in 1966 (Johann Maier), and Frankfurt a.M.1970 (Arnold Goldberg, until then Privatdozent in Freiburg)9.

The majority of that first generation, both the political and academicadministrators and those occupying the newly created positions, were reli-giously committed, had studied denominationally defined fields of theol-ogy, or general religious studies. Yet cautiously they set the agenda for an

6 E.g., Leo Baeck (d. 1956); Martin Buber (d. 1965); Robert Raphael Geis (d. 1972);Gershom Scholem (d. 1982); Ernst A. Simon (d. 1988); and Kurt Wilhelm (d. 1965).

7 See W. Schottroff, "Nur ein Lehrauftrag. Zur Geschichte der jüdischen Religionswis-senschaft an der deutschen Universität", in: idem, Das Reich Gottes und der Menschen. Stu-dien über das Verhältnis der christlichen Theologie zum Judentum. Abhandlungen zumchristlich-jüdischen Dialog 19 (München 1991), 9-30, esp. 28f. Interesting in this context isthe case of Frankfurt a.M., where since 1957 E.L. Ehrlich had lectured. In 1963 he was calledto take the new chair. After his refusal, the chair was occupied only in 1970 after the inci-dents mentioned above (Schottroff, 29f.).

8 Cf., e.g. the illustrative case of Regensburg University, founded in 1967, which planneda chair in 'Judaistik' for its large faculty of Roman Catholic Theology. The faculty could notagree on an appointment, rededicated the chair to a second professorship in systematic theol-ogy, and offered it to a prominent candidate. When after a few years he left, there was noquestion of returning to the original plan. Thus, the only two professorships in Bavaria withits eleven universities remain that in 'Judaistik' of the Semitics department and the chair(founded in 1996) in Jewish history, both at Munich University.

g NB: As early äs 1956 Vienna University established an 'extra-ordinary' professorship,which was extended into an entire 'Institut für Judaistik' in 1966. Comp. the dedication in J.Maier, Geschichte der jüdischen Religion (Freiburg i. Br. 1972,21992): 'Dem Begründer derUniversitätsdisziplin Judaistik [...] Kurt Schubert [...] gewidmet.'

JEWISH STUD1ES IN POST-WWII GERMANY 83

independent, non-Christian, non-theological, 'Judaistik', at least for thosepositions that were not affiliated with, or to be incorporated into, the theo-logical faculties.

Seen from today's perspective it is not surprising that in the 1980s, lessthan two decades later, scholars and students from other areas and disci-plines of study, and especially historians, developed an interest in thingsJewish. It is also understandable that they feit 'Judaistik' to be a rather lop-sided enterprise, which neglected historical research and did not recognizethe Jewish aspects of a growing number of disciplines surfacing over theyears10. Those competing for academic careers in those years found, to theirdismay, philologists, scholars in rabbinics and religious studies, and other'old-fashioned' non-guild-historians occupying the few positions in'Judaistik' available. In their own field there were äs yet no positions wheretheir interest in Judaica was welcomed. That these scholars succeeded inobtaining, creating and also transforming positions, that they were able tofound Institutes and make themselves heard without much härm to 'Judais-tik' proper, is a fine success that Stands in great contrast to the slow build-up over two preceding decades. This was due to a growing interest inJudaism from the side of the secular public, which was decidedly more var-ied than the commitment that dominated the sixties. Taken together, thesedevelopments over just forty years may be called spectacular when com-pared to the Situation during the Weimar Republic, when the newly foundeduniversities of Frankfurt am Main and Hamburg offered a few openings",and even more so in comparison to the fierce resistance of the German uni-versity System during the nineteenth and the early twentieth centuries. Thisrise provoked Gershom Scholem to the remark, in bis 1977 memoirs: 'Zujüdischen Studien wurde man damals [in his youth; MB] an der Universitätfreilich nicht ermuntert. Heute, wo es kaum mehr Juden in Deutschlandgibt, wollen alle deutschen Universitäten ein Ordinariat für Judaistik grün-den.'12 But did all German universities indeed wish to establish a chair in'Judaistik'? Scholem's stark exaggeration serves well to underline the con-trast with the preceding era, but then and today it remains a far cry fromreality.

" The insinuations uttered in that discussion that interdisciplinary studies were necessaryfor fighting anti-Semitism, cannot be taken seriously.

11 See H. Wasserman, False Start. Jewish Studies at German Universities during theWeimar Republic (New York 2003); but comp. W. Schottroff, "Nur ein Lehrauftrag".

12 G. Scholem, Von Berlin nach Jerusalem (Frankfurt a. M. 1977) 147, in the extendedversion (Frankfurt a. M. 1994) 133; the Hebrew (Tel Aviv 1982) 128 has some tellingexpressions: "limmude yahadut... ve-retzach ha-yehudim me'iq 'alehem... qatedra'ot le-Yudaistika[\]".

84 MICHAEL BROCKE

Developments until the present

Let me give here a quick survey of the Situation äs it presents itself today.Approximately seventeen universities (of the ca. 70 universities in Ger-many, not counting applied sciences Colleges etc.) offer 'Judaistik/JüdischeStudien'13 in some form or other:

• Magister Artium curricula (major and minor MA) are offered by (in alpha-betical order): Berlin (2 professorships), Düsseldorf (3), Frankfurt am Main(1), Halle-Wittenberg (1), Köln (2);selfcontained seminaries and Institutes in philosophical faculties are foundin: Freiburg i. Br., in the Oriental Seminar (l professorship), Munich Uni-versity, in the 'Institut für Semitistik' (l, see also below);under the responsibility of the 'Central Council of Jews in Germany' a state-funded yet private College connected with Heidelberg University is the'Hochschule für Jüdische Studien' (seven subdisciplines, not all of themrepresented by a chair; at present the school is undergoing yet anotherreshuffling and will soon function under a new rector);

• interdisciplinary MA-programmes, both äs major and minor: Potsdam Uni-versity (one professorship in Religious Studies with a Judaic Studies spe-cialization, plus quite recently an additional chair in Rabbinics andHalakhah connected to a small new rabbinical College of Reform orienta-tion); of similar approach, but only äs an MA minor: Oldenburg University(without a Jewish Studies professorship or scholar);

• Yiddish äs a minor for MA: Düsseldorf (l professorship), Trier (1);• a Jewish Studies professorship (within a religious studies department, but

with no financial means to teach Hebrew): Erfurt;• Instituta Judaica within long-standing faculties of Protestant theology, with

or without a professorship in Jewish Studies: Göttingen (major for DPhil.),Mainz (no degree), Münster (no degree), Tübingen (minor for MA); andfinally, within a Protestant faculty without an institute but figuring äs 'Jüdis-che Studien': Greifswald University (minor for MA)

• a professorship/department for Jewish History and Civilization establishedin the Historical Seminar of Munich University, without institutional links tothe professorship in the Semitics department;

• an annual 'Martin Buber-Visiting professorship' for Jewish religious philos-ophy ('Religionsphilosophie') at Frankfurt University, sponsored since 1989by the Protestant Church of Hesse-Nassau;

• then there is a number of historically oriented research institutions, eitherindependent or affiliated with universities (in chronological order): the'Institut für die Geschichte der deutschen Juden', Hamburg 1966; the'Salomon Ludwig Steinheim-Institut für deutsch-jüdische Geschichte',Duisburg 1986; the 'Moses Mendelssohn Zentrum für europäisch-jüdischeStudien', Potsdam 1992; the 'Simon Dubnow-Institut für jüdische Geschichte

13 Not included here are incidental courses in Judaica offered by scholars working inother disciplines, such äs biblical and post-biblical literature, social history, anti-Semitismand Holocaust, Jewish law, modern philosophy, German-Jewish history, German or Ameri-can-Jewish literature, etc.

JEWISH STUDIES IN POST-WWII GERMANY 85

und Kultur' (with an emphasis on Central and Eastern Europe), Leipzig1995/96; the 'Arye-Maimon-Institut für Geschichte der Juden' (medievalhistory), Trier 1996/97; and the 'Zentrum für Antisemitismusforschung' atthe 'Technische Universität' in Berlin.

Finally, special mention should be made of the fact that, after the reuni-fication of the two Germanies, in a climate of new beginnings a blossomingof newly founded institutions broke out. For ideological reasons there hadbeen no Jewish Studies in the German Democratic Republic. Next to sometheological ('dissident') interest, there was a chair of Hebraic linguisticstudies plus a politically committed 'Israelwissenschaft', open to very fewpolitically selected students only. Not accidentally, the positions, chairs,and Institutes that were created during the nineties (in Potsdam, Erfurt,Halle, Leipzig, and Greifswald) are all situated in the federal states of east-ern Germany.

All in all, Germany now counts nearly thirty professorships, of which atleast one third was established during the last decade. It is much more dif-ficult, however, to estimate how many students are registered in JewishStudies today. The German System of free university education allowsenrolment without compulsory study and class attendance. According to thenumbers proudly boasted by some of the larger institutes, one easily countsmore than l .200 students, about half of whom could be said to be activelystudying for the MA-degree14.

There are state grants for "one year of 'Judaistik' in Jerusalem" (TheHebrew University) and for summer courses in Hebrew ulpanim, äs well äsgrants for projects in other fields, to be spent in Israel. Unfortunately, thereis no significant Student exchange in Jewish Studies with American univer-sities. Quite recently an 'export' into the USA of young German scholars,post-doctoral fellows and assistant professors has begun, next to an ongoing'brain drain' of young scholars who, äs converts to Judaism, left Germanyto work in Israeli academic institutions. This somewhat surprising develop-ment is characteristic of the wide spectrum of active interest and attractionto be observed within the younger generation.

Major research projects

Since it is impossible to do justice to all, the following enumeration ofresearch projects cannot be more than a - mildly subjective - selection. Asa general tendency, the traditional German penchant for 'Grundlagen-

14 Soon 'internationally compatible' BA and MA curricula will replace the Magister Artiumdegree of the past, a revolution which will reduce the number of MA students significantly andwhich will certainly stimulate the interdisciplinary part-time 'Jüdische Studien' approach,possibly at the expense of 'Judaistik'.

86 MICHAEL BROCKE

forschung' is still largely untapped in comparison to other disciplines, andwill be truly important for the development of Jewish Studies for years tocome. There are critical editions and commentaries, for example of parts ofMidrash Pesiqta Rabbati, 'synoptic' editions of the Hekhalot-literature, ofthe Palestinian Talmud (and its translation into German), translations ofQumran and rabbinic literature, editions of medieval Hebrew translations ofGreek and Arabic medical treatises, translations of selected responsa, andHebrew epigraphy (Germany being rieh in sepulchral inscriptions from theeleventh Century onwards). The largest project in German-Jewish history isstill the Germania Judaica handbook (pari IV: Early modern time). Thereappear numerous editions of German-Jewish literature, handbooks, dictio-naries, local or regional histories, and a number of introductions toJudaism15.

Hardly surprising, much research is published in Journals, of which weshould mention the following: Frankfurter Judaistische Beiträge (annual,has been published for thirty years); Ashkenaz (semi-annual, in its thir-teenth year); Jewish Studies Quarterly, founded in Berlin in 1993; andrecently in Dutch-German co-operation the all-English annual Zutot. Per-spectives on Jewish Culture (three vols.), Jiddistik-Mitteilungen (Trier,irregulär, 30 issues), and a small quarterly of haute vulgarisation with alarge readership: Kalonymos (in its seventh year).

One might well end this brief survey here, were it not for those areas which,if we yield to the specific German penchant towards clear-cut Separationbetween diverse areas of life, might not be considered äs belonging to theacademic levels of Jewish Studies, but which in other countries are countedäs relevant, even important, parts of it. The canvas of this survey would beincomplete without this richly diversified landscape of 'related agencies'.There is a special German-Jewish public library called 'Germania Judaica.Kölner Bibliothek zur Geschichte des deutschen Judentums'; its bulletinArbeitsinformationen is an information Service listing projects on German-Jewish topics. There are learned societies such äs the recently foundedinternational Zürich-based 'Hermann Cohen-Gesellschaft', or the brandnew international Kassel-based 'Franz Rosenzweig-Gesellschaft'. There areof course quite a number of theological academic activities. The 'InstitutKirche und Judentum', for example, is a Berlin-based academic theologicalinstitute related to the Protestant church and the Von Humboldt University,with a small Publishing house and a 'summer university' that offers anambitious program. The Journal Kirche und Israel is an independent semi-

15 The developments in the fields of rabbinic literature, philosophy, history, art, literature,Yiddish, have been described in the well-informed volume by Brenner and Rohrbacher, eds,Wissenschaft vom Judentum (2000).

JEWISH STUDIES IN POST-WWI1 GERMANY 87

annual on Jewish-Christian dialogue on an academic level. A further quar-terly on dialogue funded by the Catholic Church, the Freiburger Rundbrief.Neue Folge, operates in the margin for a religiously interested wider audi-ence. Individual biblical scholars and systematic theologians, both Protes-tant and Catholic, may venture into Judaica in a wider sense, while histori-ans and scholars of literature enter the field in fast growing numbers, ingroups and Workshops of all shades and colours.

One simply cannot list all publications pertaining to things Jewish. Suf-fice it to say that in most realms of culture and music it is de bon ton todayto include Jewish interests, origins, fate, questions etcetera. Quite a numberof regulär publications feature contributions on Judaism, thus showing that,without being spelled out in detail and depth, the relevance of Judaica inGerman civilization and culture today is of the highest order. Similarly,Jewish museums are competing to offer not only educational exhibits butalso sophisticatedly conceived shows. A few museums, such äs those inFrankfurt am Main and Berlin, can even stimulate research, although thisresearch remains limited to specific, mostly modern, topics in Jewish Stud-ies. In Berlin too, a branch of the Leo Baeck Institute (archives) is now tobe found.

Many publishers can boast of Judaica and translations of scholarly clas-sics from English, French and even Hebrew, such äs the works on German-Jewish life by Jacob Katz, Mordechai Eliav and Azriel Shohet. Much ofthese laudable efforts, however, are undertaken without competent counselor professional assistance16. Even in the realm of rabbinics we encounterthis alarming indifference towards competence. Several 'naked' reprints(i.e., without any introductory or interpretative efforts) of Lazarus Gold-schmidt's (1878-1950) 12-volume German translation of the BabylonianTalmud have been a surprising commercial success. No need was feit for akey volume, for an introduction to that 'Sea of the Talmud', or an index ina companion volume like that of the English Soncino translation. In thepresence of such successful ventures the representatives of academic JewishStudies feel almost superfluous and incapable to earn the public's acknowl-edgement of the fact that scholarship is at least helpful, if not necessary.

Besides these scholarly relevant projects there is an ever-growing publi-cations industry of the populär kind, of introductions to Judaism on nearlyall levels, from children's books upwards, translated äs well äs written inGerman by all kinds of experts. This industry, too, not only lacks compe-tent assessment and counsel, but also an informed audience, able to discemkitsch and swindle.

16 The recent German translation of A. Shohet's classic 'Im chillufe tequfot (Jerusalem1960) äs Der Ursprung der jüdischen Aufklärung in Deutschland (Frankfurt a.M. 2000) is aremarkable example of good intentions mixed with Judaic and Hebraic incompetence.

MICHAEL BROCKE

In passing we should also mention the countless local and regionalmemorializing initiatives, which centre around incisive historical dates. In1978 and 1988 the so-called 'Kristallnacht'-pogrom of November '38 wascommemorated. Local interests exploit such dates for 'history-workshops',for tracing the tracks of the past, and writing micro-history. Socio-culturalevents such as the Hollywood series 'Holocaust' in 1978, or the movies ofLanzmann ('Shoah') and Spielberg ('Schindler's List') also form a strongundercurrent. While they remain outside the scope of the present survey,we should not belittle the impact of such external influences. In earlieryears the memory of the Shoah and local anti-Semitic incidents had beenco-instrumental in getting 'Judaistik' established in the post-WWII univer-sity, and these effects have not yet worn off.

It is impossible to do justice to all these efforts at remembering, telling,reconstructing, accounting, measuring, cataloguing, and evaluating; atrecapturing names and faces from cemeteries and synagogues, at writingannals of scholarly or liberal professions and identifying Jewish colleagues- from philologists and pediatricians to pharmacists - and at reviewing thelists of elite society personalities from the past centuries. It is a belatedpost-mortem representation of German-Jewish life, which only a cynicmight call a post-mortem realization of the so-called German-Jewish sym-biosis. Modern scholarship often fails to appreciate these popular initia-tives, dismissing them as being of limited scholarly value. Yet they haveboth positive and negative effects upon the field of Jewish Studies. Youngstudents become motivated to take up the study of Judaism. And a largeraudience is imbued with an appreciation of Jewish history and culture intheir own right (and not just in the depressing light of destruction, bad con-science, and guilt). Thus the relevance and interest of Jewish life past andpresent, a relevance beyond the Shoah, is being acknowledged.

Simultaneously, however, there are negative side-effects. Projects likethose mentioned above draw away large resources and are often realized inways that reduce their validity and reliability. For example, there remainsome two thousand Jewish burial places to be documented, which is anenterprise of more than local or regional interest. Many fine academics areworking on this with the best intentions, yet without feeling the need toreflect on the soundness of their methods or quality of their efforts. One isinclined to think that so much good will must need produce good work.However, inadequate renderings from Hebrew, French, or English remainincorrect, even when good will and common sense abound.

A recent e-mail, received from a student of theology and German litera-ture, may help to further illustrate this beatific ignorance. While preparinga doctoral dissertation on 'Walter Benjamin und das Judentum' (no moreand no less!) and becoming aware of his ignorance of Haggadah, Kabbalah,

JEWISH STUDIES IN POST-WWII GERMANY 89

and Hassidism, the question arose "which us university to choose for asemester or two to learn about all this?" Fundamental insights such as theidea of 'alterity', or the possibility that Judaism might be 'different', appar-ently do not enter the naive, good-willing mind when it is not exposed topersonal encounter and learning. The possibility of deeper-reaching,unknown, differences, cultural, religious, and historically grown, is not con-sidered. No need is felt to learn something beyond 'the facts', no need toask for counsel, assistance or criticism. No wonder then that, while wethink that more qualified Jewish Studies departments in the main universi-ties should strengthen the field, most of the proponents and sponsors of theactivities described here do not miss us at all. Similarly, our own colleaguesnext door may not even think of asking Jewish Studies for co-operation or'permission' in their attempt to incorporate their freshly awakened Jewishinterests into their teaching and writing. Are such the fruits of 'our' Judeo-Christian tradition?

The ambivalence of many of these activities strongly reminds us, be itvia negationis only, of the fact that Jewish life, religion, culture, and his-tory, were once richly and deeply rooted in German language culture andhistory. Their bearers were intensely intertwined in life and letters, life andlore. It will take much time to come to grips with this history, its unfath-omable richness and its abysmal destruction in adequate, competent, anddignified ways. Jewish Studies is only one partner in this effort.

Again: 'Judaistik' or 'Judische Studien'

Having strayed off far into the larger context, I must come back to ourinternal situation. From the beginnings in the 1960s there was no otherword for the field but 'Judaistik', a term whose origins lay in the Germanuniversity. When the term 'Wissenschaft des Judentums' was coined (in thesecond decade of the nineteenth century), it did not fare well at all. This'Wissenschaft' was not academically accepted and was cultivated in themargin of society. On the occasion of the fiftieth anniversary of the Berlin'Hochschule fur die Wissenschaft des Judentums' in 1922, Ismar Elbogendiscussed the pros and cons of the terms 'Wissenschaft des Judentums','Wissenschaft vom Judentum' and 'Judaistik', which were then used inJewish as well as non-Jewish academic circles. Elbogen came to the con-clusion that, on the one hand, 'Wissenschaft des Judentums' was a clumsyexpression that fitted badly within the usual range of academic disciplines;on the other, the term 'Judaistik' had its own limitations, the word pattern(compare Semitistik or Finno-Ugristik) being linked too narrowly to lan-guage study only17.

17 I. Elbogen, Ein Jahrhundert Wissenschaft des Judentums (Berlin 1922) 41. See also the

90 MICHAEL BROCKE

In the 1960s, however, 'Judaistik' was the obvious choice, for it wouldhave been utterly impossible to call these new beginnings 'Wissenschaftdes Judentums'. Such 'Wissenschaft' was completely unknown within thefaculty, and for the scholars of the time it would have been a sign of arro-gance to appropriate the name. (The neologism 'Judaeologie', proposed inMunich in the early 1970s, was never given further consideration.) It wasthe Heidelberg 'Hochschule fur Judische Studien', established by the Cen-tral Council of Jews in Germany in 1979, that first introduced the term'Jiidische Studien' as a translation from American English, in analogy to'Semitic Studies', 'Slavonic Studies', and many more. For academic disci-plines, however, this pattern did not exist in German, since we are not usedto 'Franzosische Studien', 'Kulturstudien', or something similar for Reli-gious Studies. 'Studien' is a word that conveys a tinge of the preliminary,of amateurish, non-systematic, work. It only works well as a title for jour-nals presenting 'studies' in the form of articles. So the term is not withoutits dangers. It may give the impression of an 'as-you-please' mentality,where every beginner is welcome. Occasionally such an atmosphere isindeed noticeable. A curriculum composed by staff members who just 'hap-pen to be interested' in teaching Judaica or Jewish Studies, indeed makesone feel uneasy. Of course, every initiative of putting together a program of'Jiidische Studien' should be welcomed. But why do these 'get-togethers',laudable as they are, receive 'accreditation' more or less immediately,without an academic figure with a decent measure of competence in JewishStudies being involved - apart perhaps from a theologian with knowledgeof biblical Hebrew?18 It is difficult to imagine that this would be toleratedin any other discipline. No wonder then that the so-called established'Judaistik' (established, after three or four decades only!) is not pleased andwould like to be consulted. So it voices its criticism but sees itself forcedinto the defense against counter-attacks for failing to meet its claim toencompass all areas of Jewish life and lore, and for the gap between itsideals and its limitations in praxi.

These limitations are real. They partly stem from intentional self-restric-tion (e.g. to rabbinics), but in greater part they are due to the small numberof positions and the need of a discipline in statu nascendi to gradually findits areas of preference and its place in the international interplay of forces -

terminological survey and discussion in M. SchlUter, "Judaistik an deutschen Universitatenheute", in: Brenner and Rohrbacher, Wissenschaft vom Judentum, 85-96, esp. 87f.

18 Germany counts two academic societies: the thirty-years old 'Verband der Judaisten inder Bundesrepublik Deutschland e.V.', with membership open only to those holding a JewishStudies position or a Jewish Studies degree (MA, Dr. phil.), and the recent, less strict 'Ver-einigung fur Judische Studien e.V.'; the names of the two organizations exemplify the splitdiscussed here.

JEWISH STUDIES IN POST-WWII GERMANY 91

not to mention the competition with long-established chairs in the neigh-bouring departments of history or theology.

Protagonists of 'Jiidische Studien' like to point out that their 'all-inter-disciplinary' approach is modeled on 'the' American prototype19. Accord-ingly, individual scholars in various fields channel their Jewish interests -and thus their Jewish Studies interests - into a multi-disciplinary curricu-lum in Jewish Studies. German protagonists of this model, however, tend tooverlook two basic facts. Firstly, co-operative build-ups need years ofpreparation, they must conform to basic curricular standards, and should berun successfully for some time in order to be accredited for a BA in JewishStudies. Secondly, elsewhere in the world the overwhelming majority ofteachers participating in such interdisciplinary programs are Jewish, and ingeneral quite consciously and self-assertively so. Therefore many points ofcontact between scholarship and the various realizations of Jewish life aregenerated. The Jewish contributors to this model, who are specialists intheir own field, do possess Jewish information and willy-nilly draw theiroften widely differing Jewish affiliations into the curriculum. This is a farcry from the average German situation, where a group of colleagues inter-ested in, but fairly ignorant of, Judaism may venture into that new segmentof easily shared interest without much ado, and with local success (i.e., withstudent interest and state support) guaranteed. The combination of abysmalignorance and genuine thirst for knowledge of things Jewish is indeedwidespread among the younger generation, who thus provide an eager audi-ence for such endeavors.

However, the delineations and frontiers seem to be fading. The polemi-cal split expressed in the terminology is no longer wholly valid. Newlyestablished departments, structured according to the 'old Judaistik pattern'with emphasis on Hebrew in its major historical phases, or built on the tra-ditional tripartite scheme of religion/culture - literature - history, now havebeen named 'Jiidische Studien'20. Time will tell whether these are the firstsigns of the wish to bury the hatchet.

Prospects

While competition can be productive, enmity is not. It would be wise,therefore, to opt for co-operation between the representatives of the twomajor approaches, yet without in any way trying to unify them (whichwould be a waste of time and energy). Both 'Judaistik' (as a self-contained

19 It would be correct to say: a prototype, since us universities also host full-fledged Jew-ish Studies departments.

:0 The Heinrich-Heine-Universitat of Diisseldorf houses an 'Institut fur Jiidische Studien'with four professorships. Halle-Wittenberg boasts a 'Seminar fiir Judaistik/Jiidische Studien'with one professor.

92 MICHAEL BROCKE

specialism) and 'Jiidische Studien' (multi-, interdisciplinary from the out-set) are imperfect designations for the expression of their respective histor-ical raisons d'etre and ideals. For reasons described above these names areneither better nor worse than the other historical or international designa-tions, but there are differences of approach connected to them, which bearreal danger if allowed to develop freely without keeping close touch witheach other.

Jewish Studies in Germany, its 'established' 'Judaistik' and the ambi-tious 'Jiidische Studien' should have the courage to stop any further uncon-trolled growth that lacks firm and proven competence in the classicalHebrew sources. Professional associations should act as consultants andreferees for the structure and quality of research and teaching programs,and both approaches should work together in order to define criteria for abasic 'canon' of needs and conditions. If this common ground will not befound, the new modularized curricula for BA/MA degrees will be likely tohamper the established possibility to freely switch universities during one'sstudies. Compatibility between curricula is a vital prerequisite for nationaland international co-operation.

Thus the 'Judaistik' departments with two or more professorships willhave to become more open to interdisciplinary co-operation. But the newBA/MA curricula will lead the smaller institutes, with only one professor-ship, into interdisciplinary curricula too, as they will have to furnish mod-ules for, to name but an example, 'cultural studies'. This will change theacademic landscape to a remarkable extent.

'Jiidische Studien' departments with one professorship or none inJudaism itself, which had their origin in interdisciplinary co-operation fromthe very beginning, will have to become more professional in content andlanguage requirements - if only in order to withstand the growing competi-tion from other disciplines discovering, ad hoc, their own 'Jewish aspectsand interests'. With all due respect, there is too much well-intended dilet-tantism around that lacks self-criticism and reflection on its scholarly legit-imacy. Jewish Studies will have to fight valiantly for Jewish Studies toremain recognizable as a discipline in its own right.

A number of factors are needed for this endeavor. May I consider one here,which has been alluded to earlier: the place given to the Hebrew languageand its highlights should remain the ultimate touchstone, in combinationwith the value we attach to making this need understood by our public andthe funding authorities. The language and its acquisition has been held inthe highest possible esteem by early and later 'Judaistik', and we will con-tinue to demand of our students the labor of acquiring a thorough commandof Hebrew in several - if not all - of its historical strata, besides a due mea-

JEWISH STUDIES IN POST-WWII GERMANY 93

sure of fluency in contemporary written and spoken Hebrew. For the studyof Judaism this is a basic requirement, preparatory to all later individualpreferences. There is no alternative to reading the canonical, and many non-canonical, 'classical' texts in the original. One must go as far, mutatismutandis, as Gerhard Scholem when he noted in his student years' journalin 1917: "Solange wir nicht Hebraisch konnen, haben wir keinen MaBstabfur das Jiidische, sind Opfer fiir jeden Schwindel."21

At a certain point there has been irritation between the proponents of'Judaistik' and those of 'Jiidische Studien'. The latter asserted that the for-mer put too strong an emphasis on Hebrew, and thus neglected otheravenues through which Jewish creativity had realized itself over the cen-turies - as if stressing the need for Hebrew necessarily entailed a neglect ofother 'media'. Eventually, however, this debate was recognized as pointlesspolemics and put ad acta. Yet for all those toiling the vast fields of Jewishstudies Hebrew continues to serve as a shibbolet. Whether positively wel-comed or grudgingly accepted, this seems to be the best visible mark ofprofessional distinction. It may not be the only one, but all others dependon it. For serious study of Judaism Hebrew is an absolute must, an indis-pensable tool for delving into all its phenomena and tapping its riches - asthe young Scholem discovered in 1917.

There is no need to add here that there are areas where other (Jewish)languages are of the utmost importance. But the question remains whetherthere is any Jewish intertextuality that can do without the Hebrew - andincidentally Aramaic - fundaments. Even if we strove for a Judaism oftranslation and a translation of Judaism into German (as did the German-Jewish nineteenth century in an intense, internally Jewish, symbiosis), andeven if we were as successful in these translating efforts as AmericanJudaism seems to be today — there can be no doubt: eyn anachnu maspiqin\

Hebrew is not only a shibbolet - an academic krisis - it may, on the otherhand, also bridge a gap and ease the tension caused by the growing non-Jewish demand for 'authenticity', i.e., for the Jewish voices of teachers andscholars, an 'authenticity' to be guaranteed by the overlapping of scholar-ship and private identity defined by religion or 'ethnicity'. Academic objec-tivity does not distinguish 'insiders' form 'outsiders', but applies scholarlycriteria only. Still, it will be difficult to ignore the voices from the outsideand, though thinly veiled, also from inside the ivory tower, that do not wishto distinguish between scholarship and private, religious or ethnic, affilia-tion and identity. I may be mistaken, but I have the impression that Hebrew

21 G. Scholem, Tagebiicher nebst Aufsatzen und Entwurfen bis 1923, 2. Halbband1917-1923 (Frankfurt a.M. 2000) 43.

94 MICHAEL BROCKE

language competence does serve to bridge the gap of the commoninside/outside perception, not only in Germany itself, but also for Israeliand American Jews when they encounter German scholars in Jewish Stud-ies, who may still be objects of uneasy surprise outside the small word ofscholarship. Knowledge of Hebrew implies the ability and willingness toparticipate in some kind or other of Jewish life. It shows that we strive fora vital discipline with vibrant exchange - with the international scholarlycommunity as well as with Jewish communities and individuals - and shunthe shallow satisfaction of 'Schwindel' and 'Kitsch'. Do we want to be'needed' by Jews and Jewish communities in Germany, in German and inother languages? Don't we need the questioning and stimulant of an alertand critical public?22

Thus our work should prove the need for the study of Hebrew and cog-nate languages as the major instrument for reaching the profundity neces-sary for innovative scholarship and international recognition. There is nointerpretation of Judaism, no keeping it alive and open to understanding -both of the well known and of the yet untapped - without that language.

The Hebrew sources, then, should play their manifold roles in the cur-ricula offered in the different federal states and nationwide. One shouldseriously discuss the question whether Jewish Studies should offer curricu-lum without any Hebrew requirements. Everyone will agree that there areno serious Japanese or Chinese studies without knowledge of the respectivelanguages. That there are, however, fields in Jewish Studies that can becared for without Hebrew, follows from the permanent involvement of Jew-ish life in other cultures and nations (other than was the case with China orJapan). Yet all understanding of the Jewish people in history, and of the fullspectrum of its creativity, is impossible without unfolding Hebrew sourcesand documents, their language's longue duree measuring continuity anddiscontinuity in Judaism.

To conclude. The tasks lying ahead of Jewish Studies are arduous. Theymust flourish first and foremost for their own sake - amidst other disci-

12 It might be tempting to compare the two-tiered tension in the USA : either strict acade-mic neutrality or a strong feeling of responsibility for Jewish (educational) causes, the com-munity, and Jewish values. The growth of Jewish Studies cannot be separated from the needfor Jewish knowledge on the part of non-observant Jews. Jewish life in Germany, growingagain and growing fast, will ask Jewish Studies in a not too distant future to find a balancebetween community-concerns and academic neutrality and distance. This is only normal. Didnot 'Wissenschaft des Judentums' have to find this balance with most of its representatives,many of them rabbinically educated, and did not most of them try to attain it quite willinglytoo? As yet there is no such tension in Germany; the Jewish communities do not yet expectmuch from academia, burdened as they are with social problems. There are a few contacts,but the 'scholarly' is of little concern to the much more basic educational needs of the vari-ous communities.

JEWISH STUDIES IN POST-WWII GERMANY 95

plines fighting for their existence in a world ever more dominated by stri-dent economic efficiency. Secondly, Jewish Studies in Germany should notcontent itself with being a friendly-but-indifferently accepted, historicallyinevitable, fashionable addition to the Humanities. Rather, it should strivetowards the creation of a more authentic, i.e., different, view of Occidentand Orient, of the possibilities, limits and chances of civilization — intro-ducing another set of questions and tentative answers. It should question thewestern canon, dominated as it is by Christianity and posing as 'the Judeo-Christian tradition', and thus labor against the truly 'established' disciplinesand the authority they assume to dictate the definitions. Given the self-understood rootedness of western culture in Christianity and its tenets -especially in its less recommendable ones - the task of instilling knowledgeof Judaism and introducing Jewish values into the discussion is an unend-ing endeavor. In this sense a request uttered forty years ago is still relevant:'Judaistik' in Germany should see itself as 'Interventionswissenschaft'23.

In the long run one of the more important tasks of Jewish Studies (underwhatever German name) is the one pertaining to Humanities or culturalstudies in general, namely 'to translate Hebrew into Greek' (and also to'translate' Greek into Hebrew?) as Emanuel Levinas demanded from theHebrew University of Jerusalem, at a time when 'Jerusalem' was stillunmistakably set on separating Judaism from outside influences and fromthe history of its humiliations24. Judaism, then, should both be researchedfor its own sake and be made known and understood to the Jewish, the non-Jewish, the Christian, the post- and the non-Christian world, the so-calledwestern world. The knowledge of 'Jerusalem' should be instilled at longlast into the dwindling - or newly-reconstructed — canon of 'Athens' and'Rome', but a 'Jerusalem' of many definitions: the 'Jerusalems' andmetropoles ('arim we-immahot be-Yisra'el) of the diaspora, flourishing inand suffering under 'Athens', in and under 'Rome' — and under 'Mekka',too.

This 'Hebrew' and 'Greek', the original and its translation - with all theintimations of originality, influence, of the transformation and hybridizationinvolved - still lie ahead of us. The effort to contribute in research to boththe 'original' and its 'translation' will hopefully make Jewish Studies in theGerman language again and anew an important and esteemed partner in the'Wissenschaft des Judentums'. This term itself has remained unblemished.

23 As formulated by the Berlin philosopher of religion Klaus Heinrich, one of the found-ing fathers of the 'Institut fur Judaistik' at the 'Freie Universitat' of Berlin (founded togetherwith two chairs of 'Weltanschauung' in catholic and protestant theology.

24 Em. Levinas, "Assimilation et culture nouvelle", L'au-deld du verset. Lectures et dis-cours talmudiques (Paris 1982) 229-234; "La traduction de 1'Ecriture. Lecon talmudique auXXIIe Colloque d'Intellectuels Juifs de langue fran§aise", in J. Halperin and G. Levitte, eds,Israel, le judaisme et VEurope (Paris 1984) 329-362, 363-369.

96 MICHAEL BROCKE

Nowadays it can be heard most naturally in the circles of American JewishStudies — shortened to 'Wissenschaft' tout court. So let this noble 'Wis-senschaft' again be our rallying call, nationally and internationally - abelated victory of greatness past - and all the rest, then, is 'commentary':zil, gemor!