The Significance of a Tambourine: Betsy Teutsch Speaks at Brandeis with Lori Lefkovitz & Susan Weidman Schneider

On September 27, many of us had the pleasure of watching, on Zoom, a celebration of the Jewish Feminist Alumnae Gifts to Brandeis(University) Archives.  (You can watch the program at that link.)

This program was really a celebration of Jewish feminism’s evolution in the U.S., featuring the contributions made to Jewish feminism, and to the archives, by three Brandeis alumnae: Dr. Lori Lefkovitz, whom many of us know as the wife of former GJC Rabbi Leonard Gordon; Susan Weidman Schneider; and GJC’s (and Dorshei Derekh’s) own Betsy Teutsch.  Betsy, a trailblazer in Jewish feminist art, donated to the archive an assortment of her signature tambourines.  These tambourines are unusual in that many of them are painted with illustrations of Jewish women (think of Miriam and the other women playing their tambourines and dancing to celebrate the crossing of the Red Sea).

On reflection, Betsy reports that she found participating in this program especially meaningful as “an opportunity to reflect on how life choices are often a combination of ‘roads’ available at the time we seek a way, what map we have available to give us access, and what roads just haven’t even been built yet.”

In 1974, when Betsy graduated from Brandeis, there were few Jewish feminist role models.  The U.S.’s first female rabbi ordained by a seminary, Sally Priesand, had just graduated in 1972.  Jewish Studies programs were few and far between, and Women’s Studies programs were even harder to find.

Although Betsy had majored in Near Eastern and Judaic Studies, she didn’t know anything about Jewish artists. The Jewish Catalog, which was then hot off the presses, contained instructions on how to make Jewish objects; but nobody was yet creating tambourines as Jewish ritual objects, much less as Jewish women’s objects.  

During the 70’s and early 80’s, Betsy focused on creating ketubot (marriage certificates), other certificates, announcements, and invitations.  She also illustrated Michael Strassfeld’s “TheJewish Holidays.”  In 1986, she and her husband, Rabbi David Teutsch, moved to Philadelphia, joined GJC, and eventually became founding members of Minyan Dorshei Derekh.  In the late 80’s the Reconstructionist Prayer Commission invited her to create art for the movement’s new prayerbook.

In the early 90’s Betsy heard about an upcoming invitational art show, curated by the Reconstructionist Rabbinical College, called “And the women danced.” She thought of the tambourine as a possible image for Jewish feminism, created one, and submitted it. According to Betsy, although her tambourine wasn’t accepted for the show, some of the students who worked on the show recognized the tambourine’s potential.  Commissions followed, and their numbers increased rapidly. 

At this point she was painting each instrument by hand on parchment.  Because the parchment tended to shrink after it was fitted to the frame and painted, Betsy found a company that could make tambourines with synthetic heads and could also print her images onto them.  She eventually came up with about 12 different designs, most with feminist themes.  Some were sold through Jewish organizations; the GJC Little Shop also sold the tambourines.  They became popular because women had never seen themselves on ritual objects before. Also, as Betsy pointed out, who typically buys all the gifts? 

In the infrequent images of Jewish women in Jewish art over the years, up through the late 20^th century, women had seldom been distinguished from one another by age, attire, and the like. Often they appeared static.  Betsy, on the other hand, likes to represent Jewish women as individuals -- different in attire, facial features, body type, color, and age – and in action and interacting with one another.  One of her tambourine designs features a woman soaring over the Wall in Jerusalem; others show women dancing at the Red Sea.

In all, Betsy sold about 11,000 tambourines.  About 10 years ago, she decided to stop and turned to other pursuits.  However, her tambourines remain ubiquitous, indicating changes in Jewish women’s status as reflected in art.  Yet another GJC member has impacted modern American Judaism far beyond this congregation!

(Betsy notes that GJC members Dr. Kathryn Hellerstein and Penina Berdugo were students at Brandeis at the time that she too was a student there. In fact, in 2016 Hellerstein was a Fellow at the Hadassah Brandeis Institute, which hosted the event.)

~Ruth Loew

In memory of Rabbi Ellen Bernstein, Centre Call Article by Dr. Ruth Loew 2024

Rabbi Ellen Bernstein z”l (may her memory be for a blessing) is widely credited for having created the Jewish ecology movement.  As part of this work, she popularized the American Tu biShvat seder, which brought new life to the holiday as a celebration of the fruits of the land and, more broadly, of the Jewish connection to nature and our planet. She maintained that Judaism is an earth-based religion and that extending this foundation into modern-day ecology is essential.This year, in late January, she brought her unique energy and spirit to a Tu BiShvat seder/book launch at Germantown Jewish Centre. By the end of February, shortly after a cancer diagnosis, she was gone.

Ellen’s involvement with the Jewish ecology movement--highlighted in her obituaries--was her life’s main mission. She was also deeply interested in facilitating connections between people. Her husband, Steven Tenenbaum, cited this as “indicative of a systems mind.” In whatever she did, she looked for connectedness, from ecological wholeness to interpersonal relationships. She saw us all as part of the fabric of a greater whol

As Rabbi Mordechai Liebling said in his eulogy, she reveled in planning events that brought people together, even making two shidduchim (romantic matches). Friends recall having long, deep intellectual conversations with her, as well as lighthearted, even silly ones. Ellen served for a time, starting in 2013, as Spiritual Life Adviser and rabbi at Hampshire College in Massachusetts, and a former student said that Ellen loved forging connections with students. She was open and nonjudgmental, providing a safe environment in which they could confide and learn. She was an excellent mediator of student issues and disagreements, equally happy to debate the concept of dominion in Genesis and what kind of soup students might make for Shabbat dinner. She was interested in every student, not just the Jewish ones, and was happy to counsel or debate with any of them.

Not surprisingly, Tu BiShvat became the major Jewish holiday of the academic year at Hampshire. Even the college president, who was not Jewish, attended the Tu BiSh’vat seder.

Ellen also loved to travel. She was no superficial tourist checking off the major sights. She liked to get a real sense of a place’s land, topography, and architecture. She was disturbed by the secularism of much of the environmental movement, seeing true environmentalism as arising from a human spiritual relationship with the land. She was attuned to natural beauty, from colorful flowers to majestic scenery. In 2020 she told the Jewish Women’s Archive, “You have to nourish people . . . showing them the beauty in the world and the beauty in nature . . . This is critical to keeping people engaged and motivated. Finding beauty has been central in all my work.”

She lived in Mt. Airy from 1984 until 2004, when she moved to Massachusetts to join Steven. Although they had a beautiful house in Holyoke, she longed for the Mt. Airy community and Germantown Jewish Centre, and she saw her return as a homecoming. She loved the Charry services and those of Dorshei Derekh. She was at home and had close friends in both communities. Her friends spanned all age groups; she looked to people’s essences instead of age or other factors.

Thank you to Rachel Falkove, Rabbi Mordechai Liebling, Max Nemhauser, Steven Tenenbaum, and Rabbi Simkha Weintraub for sharing their memories of Ellen for this column. Additional information came from the New York Times, March 5, 2024.

The Binding of Isaac (Akedah): Abraham’s Equanimity on his Journey to Mount Moriah

Jacob Staub based this piece in Evolve on this 2024 Dorshei Derekh Rosh Hashanah Davar Torah.  Yashar koach!

How can our religious and spiritual resources help us to meet the challenge of the next four years? We are not the first generation to face alarming, unthinkable prospects.

“Now I know,” God says to Abraham, “that you are a trembler before God (yerei Elohim), that you did not withhold your son from Me.” (Genesis 22:12) Following what he thought was a divine command, Abraham has journeyed three days and, binding his son Isaac on an altar, lifts his knife to sacrifice him, only to be stopped by a divine messenger.

I don’t think this is an accurate account of an actual event. And there is nothing in my experience that leads me to believe in a God who utters explicit commands. I follow the Rambam (Rabbi Moses ben Maimon, Maimonides, twelfth-century Egypt), who teaches that though God exists, the human mind and heart cannot fathom anything about God, except the effects of God’s causation. I follow Rabbi Harold Schulweis, who taught Predicate Theology—that we cannot know what God is, only when God is. We can’t know that God loves; we can know, however, that when there is love, God is there.

I do think, however, that there is much we can learn from over 2000 years of interpretations of biblical texts made by Jewish students of Torah. Believing that the Torah was divinely revealed and therefore the fount of all truth and wisdom, they read into the text their deepest understandings and intuitions of what the text reveals to us. Their interpretations are treasures of our traditions that we inherit and on which we can plumb the meanings and imperatives of our own lives.

The Ralbag (Rabbi Levi ben Gershom, Gersonides, fourteenth-century Provence) was one of the leading disciples of Maimonides. He believed that God and God’s will cannot be known with any clarity or certainty. (He would say, except the revealed Torah, but that, too, is subject to interpretation.) Instead, he spoke of an immaterial divine overflow (shefa) that sustains this material world. The human enterprise, he taught, is to discern it—to distinguish between accurate and faulty perceptions of what God wants. The more we learn about this world, the more we can perceive the divine shefa and live accordingly.

It is not sufficient, however, to achieve knowledge about this world. In order to think clearly, to know what to do, he believed that we must cultivate equanimity, so that the conclusions we reach with our imaginations are not affected by our inclinations or emotions—that they do not just mirror our biases and fears.

Approaching our text with this perspective, Rabbi Levi engages in an extensive explorations of yir’ah, the Hebrew word that generally is translated in Genesis 22 as “fear”—“that you are a God-fearer,” and that I translate above, “that you are a trembler before God.” Yir’ah can mean “fear”, but it also has a semantic range that includes what you feel when you behold the stars in the sky or when you hike in the Rockies, and what you feel in the presence of God. Sometimes we translate it as “awe.”

So as he empathizes with the Abraham of the Akedah, here is what the Rabbi Levi sees: Abraham dreams that God commands him to take his son up the mountain for a burnt offering (le’olah). When he awakens, he knows that the most common understanding of what he has heard in his dream is that Isaac will himself be the burnt offering, and so he packs up and sets out with Isaac towards the mountains, because if that is the divine will, he will obey. We can only imagine how terrified he feels, but he remains sufficiently calm to remain aware that there is another, more benign understanding of what he dreamed: that at 100 years old, it is imperative that he take his son up the mountain for a burnt offering (le’olah), that is, to teach him how to offer a sacrifice. God also would want that, that he transmit the tradition to the next generation.

Remaining calm, he spends the three-day journey to Mount Moriah keeping an open mind about how to accurately interpret the imperative in his dream. He ascends the mountain, builds the altar, and binds Isaac, but just before it is too late, he sees the ram caught in the thicket and realizes that it is the ram that he needs to sacrifice in order to instruct Isaac. If he hadn’t been unambivalently willing and calm about offering up Isaac, he would not have been able to think clearly and to make the proper inference when he sees the ram.

According to Rabbi Levi, Abraham passes the test not because of his unquestioning willingness to kill Isaac, but because even in the face of a horrendous possibility, he is sufficiently calm and clear-thinking to avert a misinterpretation that would have ended the Jewish people before it had begun. That is what it means to be a yerei Elohim—one who trembles in awe before the abyss but does not succumb to hysteria or despair or passive resignation. A God-trembler is someone who does not look away from that which is most terrifying, but who is able to maintain control of their faculties and respond constructively to it.

Rabbi Levi was not speculating hypothetically. He lived in a place and at a time when the Inquisition was on the move, copies of Talmud manuscripts were being seized and burned, and the world was not a safe place for Jews to live. He was familiar with what it was like to face a terrifying political abyss. Jewish communities operated under duress and their days were numbered. His reading of Abraham’s test reflected his strategy for coping with his circumstances.

His strategy may remind us of Active Hope by Joanna Macy and Chris Johnstone, an attitude and practice that, among other things, refuses to give up in the face of the obvious consequences of the climate crisis. Many who seek to mitigate the ever-worsening effects of carbon emissions do not do so because they are confident about the outcome, but rather because they are calmly and mindfully working to create a world that is habitable. They do not surrender to passive despair in the face of alarming projections by scientists. They are not disabled by despair.

Rabbi Levi wants us to cultivate equanimity, but how? How can I not be angered and frightened by the prospect that the numerous promises that President-elect Trump made during the campaign will be implemented? There are a plethora of Jewish contemplative practices that we inherit, but for the moment, I find myself turning to lessons I have learned from Sylvia Boorstein, my teacher of Buddhist-inflected mindfulness practice.

1. What is true in this moment? 

Two other Evolve essays this month, by Jon Argaman and Jennifer Paget, discuss our collective inheritance of intergenerational Jewish trauma. We are easily triggered and prone to catastrophize. At this moment, however, we who are trans still have access to our medical care. We who are seniors still receive our Social Security checks. We who live in sanctuary cities are still able to thwart mass deportations of undocumented people. There are frightening assaults in the street on people who are identifiably Jewish, but at this moment, the assailants are not sponsored or protected by law enforcement. Remaining clear-headed, we have agency. We can resist in the courts, in Congress and state legislatures, in the streets. It is not true that on January 20, we will find ourselves in a totalitarian state.

2. It is essential that we distinguish between what I’ll call “pain” and “suffering”. 

This is a painful world. Those Americans who hold white-skin privilege may have been acculturated otherwise, but things do not always turn out happily. Pain—being hurt—is inevitable. Suffering—centering the pain and dwelling primarily in it—is optional. It is natural to suffer, lick our wounds, anticipate the worst, but we can choose not to do so. Imagine if Rabbi Levi’s Abraham had descended into anticipatory grief over the death of Isaac. The appearance of the ram would not have brought him to realize the actual imperative. The Jewish people’s survival on Mount Moriah, in Babylonian exile, in Rabbi Levi’s Provence and in 2024 U.S. and Israel has depended and continues to depend on our ability to endure the painful blows and to remain calmly clear-headed in our response.

3. Ultimately, we cannot control what is going to happen. 

Western culture instills a sense that if we eat healthily, we will remain healthy. If we achieve competence and earn the right credentials, we will succeed. If we just negotiate the right wording, we can reach a peace agreement. It is up to us to do our best, to act in furtherance of our values, but though we can hope that we can protect ourselves from disaster, it is not helpful to depend on the assurance of successful outcomes to motivate us, because we are not in control, and we will endure setbacks and defeats. There is an equanimity that arises out of our devotion to our values, no matter what the outcome.

4. Experiencing the light of the divine countenance. 

This one derives from the practices of Mussar. Practitioners are supposed to exhibit ha’arat panim (a bright and friendly gaze) to everyone they encounter, making them feel seen. The priestly blessing, ya’er Adonai panav eilekha (may God’s face shed light upon you), suggests that it is a blessing to be bathed in divine light. This feeling is a practice that can be cultivated—walking through our lives with the faith that, as we work to bring justice and compassion and generosity into the world, we are literally enlightened by an imperceptible brightness, that we are supported and accompanied by divine light. Look at Rabbi Vivie Mayer’s Evolve essay, The Light That Has the Capacity to Hold Us All.

Rabbi Levi’s Abraham passes the test because, in his language, he ultimately has faith in a God who supports and accompanies him as he seeks what is right. How might we articulate that in our own terms? His faith obviously included the possibility that he would not have living offspring. Perhaps our strength can emerge from a faith that we can and will endure if we calmly remain steadfast as we act to further our principles, manifesting the universe’s benevolence with no assurance of the outcome.

Parshat V'yetsei - Population Explosion, Population Contraction - Betsy Teutsch

Parshat V’yeitsei - Population Growth, Population Contraction Dec 7, 2024

This is a parshah of fertility and population explosion. God promised Avraham that his progeny would be like the stars of the sky and the sands of the seashore. In today’s Parshah, God similarly promises Jacob that

וְהָיָ֤ה זַרְעֲךָ֙ כַּעֲפַ֣ר הָאָ֔רֶץ וּפָרַצְתָּ֛ יָ֥מָּה וָקֵ֖דְמָה וְצָפֹ֣נָה וָנֶ֑גְבָּה וְנִבְרְכ֥וּ בְךָ֛ כׇּל־מִשְׁפְּחֹ֥ת הָאֲדָמָ֖ה וּבְזַרְעֶֽךָ׃

“Your descendants shall be as the dust of the earth; you shall spread out to the west and to the east, to the north and to the south.” 

Laban famously agrees to give Rachel to Jacob in marriage, but substitutes Leah. While second fiddle to beloved Rachel, Leah bears Jacob six sons and a daughter. Plus Bilhah and Zilpah bear Jacob sons, and ultimately Rachel bears two. Jacob’s tribe is off to the races.

Through ingenious breeding, Jacob also expands his flocks and wealth.

The explosive growth of this generation is clearly seen as positive, a great blessing.

But, the Rabbis did not consider Jacob’s 13 children a norm. Jacob’s family is mythic, not a paradigm. Infant mortality was too high for most of human history for people to rear Jacob-size families.

Jewish tradition considers children not only a blessing, but also an obligation. The Torah tells us that God blessed Adam and Eve and commanded them to Peru U’rvu: “Be fertile and increase, פְּר֥וּ וּרְב֛וּ”. 

The Talmud determines that Jews fulfill this commandment when they replicate themselves, bearing a son and daughter. Two girls or two boys also suffice, because when they grow up and partner, it will average out. Of course, infertility is beyond the control of couples, so this is not a commandment all can fill. Interestingly, the rabbis must have realized that some families did not want more children, or they wouldn’t have bothered to set a minimum. 

When David and I were married by Rabbi David Feldman, he presented us with a copy of his then new book, Birth Control and Jewish Law, which he assured us was descriptive, not prescriptive. It is a deep dive into ancient contraceptive practices.

For most of Jewish history, population growth was fairly flat, given violence, assimilation, high infant mortality, and short life spans. Jewish population started growing faster about 200 years ago and increased rapidly until WWII. Think of your own families: my great-grandmother bore 12 children, six of whom lived. My grandmother birthed six, all of whom survived.

Post-Holocaust, with the murder of two-thirds of European Jewry, survival of the Jewish people became a paramount concern. But, even before The Pill, non-Orthodox Jewish families were small. 

A Conservative movement leader, Rabbi Kassel Abelson z”l (who died last year at 99) long promoted the idea that Jewish couples should have a 3rd “mitzvah child”, to replace souls lost in WWII; this was part of his standard pre-marital interviews.  I read that as time passed, many couples enjoyed introducing their Mitzvah Children to Rabbi Abelson.

The idea was also encouraged in the 80s by UJA Young Leadership. I remember it as a community campaign, and via FB others have corroborated my recollection.

In 2007, Rabbi Abelson and Rabbi Elliot Dorff (mechutanim with our own Rabbi Avruhm Addison) successfully introduced a Rabbinical Assembly Responsum entitled Mitzvah Children. https://www.rabbinicalassembly.org/sites/default/files/public/halakhah/teshuvot/20052010/mitzvah_children.pdf  . 

The Responsum expresses great compassion for couples challenged with infertility, not infrequently a result of delayed childbearing. The Committee takes pains not to guilt people for whom a third pregnancy is far-fetched, while encouraging third children for whom it is possible. They also call on the Jewish community to assist with matchmaking, subsidize the expenses of raising and educating Jewish children, and to make Jewish spaces more kid-friendly. 

So, what happened? It’s impossible to count the number of Mitzvah children, but we know that in general, global birth rates have been declining at jaw-dropping rates, and the Jewish community has been no exception. Even in Israel, which has a high birth rate for a high income country, the average number of births continues to drop even with ultra-Orthodox families placing no limits on their childbearing.

In contrast to the campaign for more Jewish babies, there have also been aggressive campaigns to lower birth rates. In some low income countries, these took the form of draconian sterilizations, and the notorious Chinese one-child policy with forced abortions and surveillance of couples of childbearing age.

Paul Ehrlich’s best selling book, The Population Bomb, published in 1968 with graphic descriptions of the disasters of over-population, predicts mass starvation and global collapse. He popularized the concept of ZPG, zero population growth, which became a rallying cry. 

Birth rates were already declining rapidly, and Ehrlich’s predictions have not proven accurate, but his framing of the environmental cost of overpopulation really took off. In my circles, people with more than 2 children were looked at with some suspicion and eco-judgement. It’s impossible to quantify the impact of Ehrlich’s ideas; his cry for controlling explosive population growth may have simply reinforced trends already taking place, since it coincided with the kick-off of the modern environmental movement, 2nd wave feminism, and The Pill.

The Zionist movement took up the idea, turned it on its head, calling it ZPG, Zionist Population Growth. 

Fast forward - we are living through an extraordinary time in world population history: the era of depopulation. This summary is from Our World in Data, headed by Max Roser, an Oxford economist.

Human population grew very slowly until 200 years ago. We reached one billion in 1800 and doubled that in 123 years, by the 1920s.  The biggest increase has been in the last 50 years, a quadrupling of the world’s population, to at present 8+ billion. It’s a hockey stick curve.

But! Population growth rates peaked in 1963 when the average birth rate per woman was 5+. (Birth rate is the number of offspring women produce. The growth rate is the numbers for total population.)

Birth rates are now about half of that, 2.418. The world population IS still increasing, due to people’s expanding life spans. At present life expectancy in the USA is 79. It’s up to 85 in Hong Kong. Societies around the world will be comprised of an ever higher percentage of elders.

The total global population is predicted to peak at 10+ billion later in the 21st century, when the birthrate drops to ZPG or below. Total population will then, if predictions are accurate, start contracting. This is an massive demographic shift. 

What’s happened? We have lived through it!

In the pre-modern era, fertility rates were 4.5 to 7 children per woman. The very high levels of infant and child mortality mortality kept population growth low.

There are three major reasons cited for the rapid decline in the global fertility rate, in both high income (this happened first) and but then also low income countries:

• the empowerment of women — increased access to education and labor market participation

• declining rates of child mortality and improved healthcare. When people expect their kids to survive, they have fewer.

• rising costs of bringing up children, due to increased expectations and higher status of kids, along with the decline of child labor (related to urbanization) - kids are now perceived as economic liabilities, not assets.

Some additional factors:

• Availability of effective contraception and the decoupling of sex and reproduction, resulting in far fewer unintended pregnancies.

• The contraction of extended families who typically helped with child rearing.

• The decline of marriage and a corresponding increase in single-person households. This suppresses childbearing, sometimes beyond when it is achievable.

These factors are intensified in the Jewish community, as Jewish women are among the best-educated of any American ethnic group, performing demanding jobs that leave less time for child rearing.

 

Jews reflect others in their socio-economic bracket, and higher incomes correlate with lower fertility. They are also more mobile, often moving far from their families of origin.

Many governments consider low birthrates and depopulation a crisis. It will cause many problems, as our societies become older and older. Pension systems based on young people paying in while elders withdraw funds will obviously need to be redesigned.

Migration and immigration of young labor (African populations are growing much faster than other continents) will be essential for elderly countries. 

Efforts to encourage more births, as many countries try, seem to be wholly ineffective. In Scandinavia, despite generous benefits, long parental leave, and free day care, birth rates are in the 1.5 range. But they’re doing great compared to prosperous South Korea, with a birth rate of .75.

But, there are also likely to be many creative responses. Seniors will have long retirements [we already do!]; societies will need to deploy them better as resources, not just perceive them as service/resource recipients. My Aunt Ruth was retired for 42 years. When she was in her 90s, she reflected that had she realized she would live so long, she would have done something more meaningful than playing cards and mah jongg.

Jewish communities will look very different. Jewish continuity has always been based in family life. At present, about a third of Jewish households are comprised of one person; how will that work? As people outlive partners, that number will only grow.

There are already more people in our community without children than previous generations (20% versus 10%). And that means many people without extended families - no nieces, nephews, or grandkids. Many children will be without uncles, aunts, and cousins.

One mini counter-trend is women having babies independently, and their families pitching in, with grandparents doing a lot of childcare. Three of my friends - though this is what we call “anecdata”! Grandparents are healthier and more active, more inclined to age in place, and increasing their commitment to help out with grandkids, at least here in our community. Also, younger generations are less inclined to move far away, preferring to live closer to grandparents, or moving near their parents with the intention of their helping with child rearing. Likewise some grandparents are moving to be near their kids. This was unheard of among our crowd a generation ago. 

Questions:

Q) How do we shift paradigms and embrace contraction, as opposed to assuming the Torah’s growth mindset? 

Q) How might the Jewish community respond to these changes?

Q) How do these trends impact you, your family, or your community/ies?