Writing in the college’s student paper, the Commentator, Josh Shteir, a senior at the school and a co-president of the Chabad Club on campus, argued that Berger’s “intolerance” of Chabad is unacceptable at Y.U. The university is affiliated with the Modern Orthodox movement but welcomes Orthodox Jews who practice differently.
Yeshiva U Brings On Critic of Chabad
NEW YORK, NY — Rabbi David Berger, a historian who is a sharp critic of the Chabad-Lubavitch movement, has been appointed head of Jewish studies at Yeshiva University’s undergraduate college in a move that has ruffled some feathers on the campus.
Writing in the college’s student paper, the Commentator, Josh Shteir, a senior at the school and a co-president of the Chabad Club on campus, argued that Berger’s “intolerance” of Chabad is unacceptable at Y.U. The university is affiliated with the Modern Orthodox movement but welcomes Orthodox Jews who practice differently.
“How am I, a student at Y.U., as well as someone with a strong connection to the Lubavitch movement, supposed to understand this appointment and its apparent conflict with the cultural open-mindedness espoused by the University?” he wrote in a missive directed at university administrators.
Y.U. announced last fall that it would hire Berger, who had been a history professor at Brooklyn College for 37 years and had taught part time at Y.U. for almost as long, as a full-time faculty member. He was appointed to the Bernard Revel Graduate School of Jewish Studies and later to the Jewish studies department at Yeshiva College, Y.U.’s undergraduate division. Then, as now, some students publicly objected.
Yosef Levine, alumni president of Y.U.’s Chabad group and a 1999 graduate of its business school, said that he campaigned against Berger’s appointment last year because Berger was inappropriately hostile regarding the subject of Chabad.
According to Levine, the trouble began about two years ago when Berger, who occasionally led Sabbath services at Y.U., “dove into ruthless soliloquizing against Chabad” at a post-service “shmooze,” disturbing even non-Chabad students and leading several to walk out.
The debate is centered on Berger’s well-known critiques of the block of Chabad adherents who believe that Menachem Schneerson, the late Chabad leader, is the messiah. Berger, who is Modern Orthodox himself, claims that this belief is tantamount to heresy. In his 2001 book, “The Rebbe, The Messiah, and the Scandal of Orthodox Indifference,” Berger argued that Judaism rejects the idea that the messiah can be a deceased person. That belief, he wrote, has differentiated Judaism from Christianity for 2,000 years. He censures the Chabad movement and the Orthodox establishment at large for what he sees as their lack of outrage in response to the messianic elements in the Lubavitch community.
Berger responded to Shteir’s article with an opinion piece of his own, in which he claimed that Shteir was taking part in a Chabad campaign to silence critics. “[My position on Chabad] is not closed-minded, unless Mr. Shteir believes that open-mindedness requires the abolition of all theological boundaries defining the Jewish religion,” Berger wrote.
Both articles delve into complex hermeneutics, as do many of the dozens of reader responses posted on the Commentator Web site.
In an interview with the Forward, Berger said he was unconcerned about the controversy, which he called “a tempest in a teapot.” He suggested that Y.U. is big enough for both Chabad students and their critics.
“Yeshiva College [does not ask student applicants] about personal beliefs, and I don’t think Lubavitcher students should be asked either,” he said.
Chabad officials agreed with Berger that the controversy should not be overplayed.
“While we don’t agree with Berger, this is not a Lubavitcher issue — it’s a Y.U. issue,” a spokesman for the group said.
boruch ben tzvi A H Kohaine Hoffinger
B"H
Don’t argue with a fool otherwise you might be considered one.
2 sense
Thats too bad b/c my great-great-uncle Bernard Revel founded Yeshiva University & liked lubavitchers.
Menachem
Actually Berger is right in his response to shteir’s article. If Shteir’s point would be to explain why it’s ok to believe that the Rebbe is Moshiach that would be something different, but he doesn’t go into that, rather his point is that Berger is narrow minded and that has no place in YU! Berger’s response is on the mark when he says that if that’s the approach then we should also be open to Conservatives and Reform!
The proper way to deal with Berger is to totally ignore him, but if one answers to him, it needs to be done like Rabbi Ch. Rappaport did in his book against Berger.
YU expierienced
Shteir shouldnt have to justify the Rebbe being moshiach—especially if that may not what he beleives. Rather, the point is that Berger make blanket statements about ALL lubavitchers (being apikorsim etc)therefore it affects ALL lubavitchers, includint ones who go to YU. defending the Rebbe as moshiach view would just cause outrage at YU against chabad, therefore adding more support to berger.
concerned educator
Berger, left alone, will not go away. In an atmosphere today of unacceptable intolerence, Dr. Berger is preaching that lubavitchers can not be included in a minyan! He groups together all lubavitchers not just those that say "yechi". To read his writings and recent quotes is a prime lesson in sinas chinum. An appropriate response from the top administration of YU is in order.
Sam
he hated chabad way before Gimmel Tammuz
thanks for posting the picture, so we now know we are dealing with a total geek
Der Shygetz
Berger looks like he should get a job in a circus wrestling his fellow flyweight Moshe Aryeh Friedman, the miniature yukel who likes to visit Iran to get hugs from his dear leader Amadjihadi.
Berger is the same type as Freaky Friedman (just that he is more intellectual and has more of an audience). He is but a pipsqueak with a well deserved inferiority complex, who tries to get attention by shocking people with extreme views that he himself does not believe, as he makes an impotent attempt at bashing something that is so much bigger and more successful than he will ever be.
I wish Berger langer yor’n at YU – preferably as a study subject in the advanced abnormal psychology lab.
open-minded LITFAK.
The problem for Y.U. with hiring Berger is rather simple, any careful examination of his arguments will expose a fundamental "intellectual Dishonesty" in his approach!
(Hiring someone who is increasingly being exposed as “Academically Narrow” and Arrogant can only hurt YUs faculty’s PR!)
1) Berger endeavors to pontificate on a subject which is strictly the Domain of "HALACHA" and RABBINICAL-Authority! (TORAH SOURCES!!!) and not the domain of popular opinion or (mis) conception,
we jews always understood this distinction,
(namely that on matters pertaining to HALACHA the sole protocol is and will always be "DAAS TORAH" as defined by a Ruv Moreh Horaah" Regardless of wether its percieved as normal or "crazy")
While I personally, had a strong discomfort with the suggestion that the Chabad Rebbe is THE MOSHIACH (Let alone after his passing)
Non the less I was "INTELLECTUALLY HONEST" enough to ask my self this Q:
Since amongst these "Believers" there are many Scholars, Rabbis etc. lets not write them off w/o first hearing them out!!
For those open-minded enough to ask for "sources" and look-them-up personally, it’s quite surprising how different the common-perception is on the subject of the “jewish-messia”, from the actual "Torah" sources on this matter!!
Though the sources they presented were impressive My research was still incomplete… Since I didn’t interview the “Bergers”
In the interest of “intellectual-honesty” I sought out the most vocal/learned opponents, (which included Rabbis such as Schochet, Miller(T.O.), Friedman, DR.Twersky etc…) and asked them
A) for “Torah Sources” which support their objections to “that” belief, and
B) for Their explanation/clarification of the “Torah-Sources” said to be backing the “believers” view…
To characterize their responses as disappointing, is an under statement!! It ranged from stumped silence, to angery personal attacks! With two exceptions admitting that they lacked familiarity with the sources I presented, and promised to get back to me on them …they both never did! And were since unavailable!
Moral of the story
Rabbis are human and it’s OK if they did not master every subject!!
What’s not OK is for Rabbis/Anyone to Pontificate on a subject they are unqualified to! Enough Said!
2) J was rejected by the Rabbis even before his death! …Dr “Historian”!!!
re Openminded Litfak
re Litfak, while i cannot disprove his points, he clearly has an agenda to promulgate the assertion that the "belief" is allowed by Torah-Framework, that’s hard to imagine, and when i asked/cornered the local-Chabad-Rabbi
(who is apologetic re subject, and plays it down)
if he agreed?
…he Stammered and Equivocated, but never gave a coherant/dirct answer, I busted him! i blew his cover!
it seems that all the Chabadnix "believe" its just a matter of expediency whether to come out of the closet or not, (they need to fundraise)
Elisheva
By the way, his first name is Joel – or Shmuel – not Josh!
Josh Shteir