Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (27) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (21)
- Part of a Book (3)
- Other (2)
- Monograph/Edited Volume (1)
Language
- English (27) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (27)
Keywords
- dialogue (2)
- American Jewish History (1)
- Christian identity (1)
- East European Jewish History (1)
- German-Jewish History (1)
- God’s image (1)
- Israel (1)
- Jewish philosophy (1)
- Jewish tradition (1)
- Jewish-Christian relations (1)
Institute
- Institut für Jüdische Theologie (27) (remove)
Peace orders of modern times
(2019)
Narratives of Belonging
(2017)
Die Darstellungen genealogischer Netzwerke waren in der Antike Ausdruck der Weltsicht ihrer Erzähler, mit deren Hilfe Nähe und Distanz zwischen verschiedenen Gruppen und Völkern ausgedrückt und hergestellt werden konnte. Auch Paulus bedient sich genealogischer Argumente, um die Beziehung nicht-jüdischer Christus-Gläubiger zu Israel und ihrem Gott zu verdeutlichen. Es handelt sich um eine ethnozentrische Argumentation, deren Fokus aber gleichzeitig eindeutig theozentrisch ist.
William S. Campbell’s research on the apostle Paul has been at the forefront of overcoming anti-Jewish interpretations. His career has been characterised by academic rigour and social and interfaith engagement. His interpretive approach is committed to formulating Christian identity in positive relation to others and thus contributes to provide a vital basis for Jewish-Christian and Interfaith relations in general for the future.
In recent years, “transnationalism” has become a key concept for historians and other scholars in the humanities and social sciences. However, its overuse threatens to dilute what would otherwise be a distinct approach with promising heuristic potential. This danger seems especially pronounced when the notion of transnationalism is applied to Jewish history, which, paradoxically, most scholars would agree, is at its core transnational. Many studies have analyzed how Jewries in different times and places, from the biblical era to the present, have been shaped by people, ideas, texts, and institutions that migrated across state lines and between cultures. So what is new about transnationalism in Jewish Studies? What new insights does it offer?
American Jewry offers an obvious arena to test transnationalism’s significance as an approach to historical research within Jewish studies. As a “nation of nations,” the United States is made up of a distinct and unique society, built on ideas of diversity and pluralism, and transcending old European concepts of nation and state. The transformative incorporation in American life of cultural, political, and social traditions brought from abroad is one feature of this distinctiveness. American Jewish history and culture, in particular, are best understood in the context of interaction with Jews in other places, both because of American Jews’ roots in and continued entanglement with Europe, and because of their differences from other Jews.
These considerations guided the participants in a roundtable that formed a prologue to an international conference held July 20–22, 2016, at the School of Jewish Theology at the University of Potsdam and the Center for Jewish Studies Berlin-Brandenburg, Germany. The conference title, “Re-Framing American Jewish History and Thought: New Transnational Perspectives,” indicated the organizers’ conviction that the transnational approach does have the potential to shed fresh light on the American Jewish experience. The participants were asked to bring their experiences to the table, in an effort to clarify what transnationalism might mean for American Jewish Studies, and where it might yield new approaches and insights.
The conference brought together some thirty scholars of various disciplines from Europe, Israel, and the United States. In addition to exploring a relatively new approach (at least, in the field of American Jewish Studies), the conference also served a second purpose: to further the interest in American Jewry as a subject of scholarly attention in countries outside the U.S., where the topic has been curiously neglected. The assumption underlying the conference was that a transnational perspective on American Jewry would bring to bear the particular interests and skills of scholars working outside the American academy, and thereby complement, rather than replicate, the ways American Jewish Studies have been pursued in North America itself.
“Ich Habe Nicht Geantwortet”
(2020)
The exchange between Martin Buber and Franz Rosenzweig on the status of halakha is a well known, but also frustrating fixture in scholarship. For rather than responding to Rosenzweig’s critique, Buber seems to retreat in silence, claiming to be “unable to speak” about his position on Jewish Law. Scholars have generally tried to explain Buber’s failure to respond on philosophical and biographical grounds. What I propose, by contrast, is to revisit the question of Buber’s silence and secrecy from a hermeneutical standpoint, arguing that Buber engaged in a deliberate strategy of concealment that constituted its own form of response. The hermeneutics of silence discloses a call for religious renewal that follows a state of Dialogvergessenheit, but which cannot be made audible. Neither dialogue nor its remembrance can be commanded. While Buber struggles with his Nichtredenkönnen, he also stands in a tradition of secretive hermeneutics – the Jewish hermeneutics of sod.
In this article, I deal with the concept of truth and lie in Jewish traditional literature, examining its development in the Hebrew Bible and rabbinic literature. An essential aspect in understanding this concept is the dualism of ‘good’ and ‘evil’ impulses and the free will of human beings, who were created in the image of God and have the choice to decide between right and wrong.
Buber vs. Weber
(2020)
The narrative in BT Kiddushin 81b about R. Hiyya bar Ashi tells of a sage who waged a battle with his Urge after he refrained from engaging in sexual relations with his wife. He, however, did not reveal to her the battle being waged within him, but rather pretended to be an ‘angel’. When his wife incidentally found it, she disguised herself as a harlot and set out to seduce him. After they had engaged in sexual relations, the rabbi wanted to commit suicide. The traditional readings view R. Hiyya as the hero of the tale. This article claims that the aim of the narrative is to present the rabbi as being carried away by dualistic-Christian conceptions. The article further argues that the topic of the narrative is not sexual relations, but dialogue.
Tanakh, Mishnah and Talmud
(2022)
So Many Things are Yours
(2023)
The poet and Talmud scholar examines Jewish texts, sexuality, and human vulnerability in poems that brim with wonder, sadness, sensuality, and humor.
Kosman’s second volume in English explores Jewish texts ―Bible, Talmud, midrash ― alongside bodies, physical desires, military experiences, even a refrigerator. Demons and fantasy enter these poems; so do politics, so does God. These are not religious poems in a conventionally liturgical, “inspirational” sense; yet they point to the big questions that religion asks: about love, hate, desire, violence, transgression, disappointment.
This paper is founded on two philosophical assumptions. The first is that there is a difference between two patterns of recognition: the dialectical and the dialogical. The second assumption is that the origins of the dialogical pattern may be found in the relationship between human beings and God, a relationship in which prayer has a major role. The second assumption leads to the supposition that the emphasis of the dialogic approach on moral responsibility is theologically grounded. In other words, the relationship between humanity and God serves as a paradigm for human relationships. By focusing on Hermann Cohen and Franz Rosenzweig, in the context of prayer and dialectic, this paper highlights the complexity of these themes in modern Jewish thought. These two important philosophers utilize dialectical reasoning while also criticizing it and offering an alternative. The conclusions of their thought, in general, and their position on prayer, in particular, demonstrate a preference for a relational way of thinking over a dialectical one, but without renouncing the latter.
This paper discusses Franz Rosenzweig’s use of the term “the unconscious” (das Unbewußte) and possible influences on his understanding of it. I claim that for Rosenzweig, it is through the unconscious that the individual becomes aware of himself and becomes capable of fulfilling his longing to achieve self-fulfillment and eventually to take part in a collective redemption. The unconscious is often perceived as the mental sphere related to trauma and repression in which defense mechanisms and fantasies are evolved. Fantasies are psychological tools that allow the individual to cope with trauma, but they are also “layers of enclosedness,” illusions that should be dissolved. Hence, in the unconscious, we find a possibility of liberation.
In 1939 Sigmund Freud published his latest book, Moses and Monotheism, which is his most unusual and problematic work. In Moses Freud offers four groundbreaking claims in regard to the biblical story: [a] Moses was an Egyptian [b] The origin of monotheism is not Judaism [c] Moses was murdered by the Jews [d] The murder sparked a constant sense of unconscious guilt, which eventually contributed to the rational and ethical development of Jewish monotheism. As is well known, Freud’s Moses received extremely negative reviews from Jewish thinkers. The social psychoanalyst, Erich Fromm, who wrote extensively on Freud as well as on Judaism and the biblical narrative, did not explicitly express his position on Freud’s latest work. This paper offers explanations for Fromm’s roaring silence on Freud’s Moses.
The Jews' Indian
(2021)
Green Spiritual Technologies
(2020)