audiobook The Making of the Modern Jewish Bible: How Scholars in Germany; Israel; and America Transformed an Ancient Text by Alan T. Levenson in History

Review

3 of 3 people found the following review helpful. More than a textbookBy Eclectic ReaderThough this is listed as a text book; it is extremely readable and comprehensible to the lay person. Of course; you have to have a serious interest in the Hebrew Bible; and enjoy following its travels through translations and interpretations. Every year; it seems; a new Hebrew Bible translation comes out or some group(The Women's Commentary; for example) "tweaks" a word here and there to try; in the editor's opinion; to make it more readable. It's nice to know; before we criticize their "chutzpah" to know that they are following an ancient tradition. Even if you read your Torah mostly in Hebrew; this book is valuable and even exciting.0 of 0 people found the following review helpful. Praise of The Making of the Modern Jewish BibleBy RRThank you; Professor Levenson; for the gift of "the Making of the Modern Jewish Bible." By reclaiming the Bible - or is it by asserting that the Words of Old are the guiding light for the Jewish people - Alan T. Levenson acquaints us with the Jewish thinkers who in more recent years wrote their thoughts about the Bible. I feel transported back to the mind and soul enriching classes I had the privilege of attending at Siegal College in Cleveland; Ohio where Dr. Alan Levenson lectured for a number of years.Angret M. Georgi1 of 1 people found the following review helpful. German; Israeli; and American thinkers comparedBy Michael LewynThis book analyzes commentaries on the Torah (and to a lesser extent; the rest of the Hebrew Bible) by modern thinkers; from Moses Mendelssohn in the 1700s to the present. The book is divided into three parts; addressing German; Israeli; and American commentaries in order.To some extent; the book compares apples and oranges: the German discussion focuses on full-fledged translations of the Five Books of Moses. By contrast; the Israeli discussion focuses on comments on the Torah by a few thinkers who did not write such translations; and the American section covers a wide range of thinkers and books.Nevertheless; I generally found this book to be pretty interesting. The German section I think is the most interesting; it informs readers of the fabulous creativity of German Judaism; which produced twenty translations of various stripes; including some who (despite the liberal reputation of German Jewry) aggressively criticized the Documentary Hypothesis. The major commentators had very different agendas: Mendelssohn sought to teach Jews grammatically appropriate; readable German while at the same time affirming traditional interpretations of the Torah; 19th-c. Samson Raphael Hirsch sought to link the written Torah to the "oral Torah" of rabbinic tradition; and Martin Buber and Franz Rosenszweig sought to create a Torah that could be understood without commentary.In addition to discussing German commentators; Levenson notes that quite a few of the leading Jewish religious intellectuals of the mid-20th century went to universities in Germany on the way to the U.S.; including A.J. Heschel; Joseph Soloveitchik; and Nechama Leibowitz; and suggests that perhaps their exposure to a wide variety of cultures contributed to their creativity.Early Israeli commentators; rather than writing a full-fledged Torah commentary for synagogue use; discussed individual parts of the Torah- often while trying to use the Torah to support a nationalist message.Finally; Levenson discusses the U.S.; focusing on the congregational Chumashes (Torah plus commentary) produced by the leading denominations; as well as independent attempts at creating a Torah translation. Levenson ably discussed the advantages and deficiencies of each. He criticizes Artscroll (the Orthodox market leader) for ignoring the insights of Christian and non-Orthodox Jewish commentators; and (to a lesser extent) modern Orthdodox commentators. The Reform translation does discuss medieval sages; but fails (according to Levenson) to adequately emphasize their disagreements. The Conservative translation is an adequate middle ground in some respects; but should discuss halacha more according to Levenson.