Behavior Unbecoming A Communist - Religious Practice in Soviet Minsk

Behavior Unbecoming a Communist: Jewish Religious Practice in Soviet Minsk Author(s): Elissa Bemporad Source: Jewish Social Studies,
New Series, Vol. 14, No. 2 (Winter, 2008), pp. 1-31 Published by: Indiana University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40207014 . Accessed: 05/05/2013 02:49
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Indiana University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Jewish Social Studies.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 129.98.211.27 on Sun, 5 May 2013 02:49:30 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Behavior Unbecoming a Communist: Jewish Religious Practice in Soviet Minsk

ElissaBemporad
Abstract
By focusing on Minsk, a historicJewish demographic, religious, and political center in pre-revolutionary Russia and capital of the Belorussian Soviet Socialist Republic after 1919, this article examines two aspects ofJewish religious practice in the interwar period: the production of kosher meat, and the practice of circumcision. As the persistence of kosher butchering and circumcision during the 1920s and mid-1950s reveals, Jewish life did not change radically in the immediate aftermath of the Bolshevik Revolution; even some of the most devoted Communists maintained an allegience to specificfeatures ofJewish self-identification. A study of religious practice in this Soviet city provides a window into thefragmented lives of post-1917 Russian Jews, illuminating the complexity of their acculturation into Soviet society and showing that religious identification was common and multifaceted. Key words: Minsk, kosher butchering, circumcision
between the Low Market and Cathedral Square, and home to numerous pre-Revolutionary Jewish religious and communal institutions, the Jewish quarter of Minsk, also Situated known as Nemiga, was the arena of a violent clash in the spring of 1922. The conflict broke out between two factions of the local Jewish population. On one side were the students and faculty of the Jewish Pedagogical Training College, or Evpedtekhnikum, a Soviet institution intended for the creation of a cadre of communist teachers who would serve as instructors in the newly established network of Yiddish ElissaBemporad,"Behavior Unbecoming a Communist:ReligiousPractice
in Soviet Minsk,*1Jewish Social Studies: History, Culture, Society n.s. 14, no. 2
(Winter 2008): 1-31
[2]
Jewish Social Studies Vol. 14 No. 2
schools in the city and district of Minsk. The founders of the Evpedtekhnikumset up the new SovietJewish institution in a twostory brick building located at the intersection between Rakovskaia and Zamkovaia Streets,or, as the Jewsused to call it in Yiddish,Shlos the tradigas.This had been the building of the city'sTalmud-Torah, tionalJewishschool built by the localJewishcommunityfor the eduBecause of its location in a cation of the poorest children in Minsk.1 wasthe idealvenue denselypopulatedJewisharea, the Talmud-Torah for spreadingcommunismon theJewishstreet. The other participantsin the strife were ordinaryresidentsof the artisans,and small peddlers,most of Jewishquarter:mainlyworkers, whomwere committed to someJewish religiouspracticesand probably angry at Communistofficials for confiscating their synagogues Whether they and transformingthem into clubs and warehouses.2 werestrictlyobservantor lenient in their adherencetoJudaism,these as "petitbourgeois"residents of Nemiga viewed the Talmud-Torah their own collective property,which they and their ancestors had used since its establishmentin the earlynineteenth century.They exby enpressedtheir resentmentoverthe seizure of the Talmud-Torah tering the building'scourtyardand disruptingclasses.3 On May7, 1922,the studentsof the new PedagogicalTrainingCollege tried to chase out of the Communist institution a number of youngjewswho had steppedinto the building uninvited.When asked - as they were referredto in the offito leave, the young "criminals" cial report of the clash began to throw stones at the students and 's building.As soon as the "redstuthe windowsof the Talmud-Torah and came to blowswith him, a dents"caught one of the "criminals" Streetin heated largegroupof local residentsgatheredon Rakovskaia protest.Accordingto one witness,a hundred people surroundedthe echoed are thrashingchildren" building,and shoutsof "Communists throughoutthe street.The uproarceased only when YudlFrankfurt, the Training College's director, instructed the students to end the fighting and return to the courtyard.The "rededucator"shut the gate, and the restlesscrowdslowlydisbursed.4 The Nemigastrifecan be seen as a microcosmof the civilwar that eruptedin the midstof theJewishurbanpopulation,followingthe Boland opponentsof the newSoviet betweensupporters shevikRevolution, to it wouldbe inaccurate As intenseas thisconflictwas,however, system. irrethe viewits outcomeas the suddendemiseof religious Judaismand versibleruptureof Russian Jewishsocietyinto two entirelyseparateenthe newCommunist Jewishelite,on the one hand,and the campments: on the other.Althoughthe clashbetween "ancien observant regime"Jew,
communism and thosewho resentedthe new thoseJewswho supported influencedthe Sovietization processof the Jewish systemsignificantly andfamily-related) cameinto [3] otherfactors(social,cultural, population, life in the 1920sand playand shapedthe dynamicsof Jewisheveryday JewishReligious in the areasof the formerPaleof Settlement. mid-1930s, especially Practicein By using the case study of Minsk,a historicJewish demographic, SovietMinsk Russiaand capital religious,and political center in pre-revolutionary this Elissa of the BelorussianSoviet SocialistRepublicafterJanuary1919,5 article will focus on two aspects of Jewish religious practice.First,it Bemporad in a Soviet will look at the persistenceof kosherbutchering (shehitah) capital and show how a number of traditionalJewish institutions, which made the production of kosher meat possible, continued to function in the interwarperiod, albeit in a customized Soviet fashion. Second, it will examine the practice of circumcision, mainly amongJewish CommunistPartymembers,and argue that the relationship between party allegiance and family loyaltywas a complex dialecticof struggleand compromise. At its inception, the Bolshevikrevolutionary regime offered those or sociallytaintedas bourgeoisor nationJewswhowerenot politically into a universal, classless alistfull-fledgedmembership societyin which in the distantfuture, wither away national identitywould eventually, and yield to the MarxistUtopianvision of the "mergingof nations." With regardto the Jewishquestion,Lenin'sgovernmentextended to of civilrights,ending theirdecades-long mostRussian Jewsa widearray fromsocialintegration. Butwhileopening itsdoors,the new preclusion outsidethe ComBolshevik statebannedJewishpoliticalorganizations munistParty,prevented Jewishreligiousinstitutionsfrom functioning Jewishculturaland sofreelyand thriving,and destroyedautonomous cial organizations.Confrontedwith their sudden inclusion into the As YuriSlezstate, manyJews eagerlyembracedthe new possibilities. kine hasnoted,theyrushedintogovernment positionsand stateinstitutionsof higherlearning,for the firsttime open to themwithoutquotas from anyvestige and readilydissociatedthemselves or discrimination, of theirJewishidentity.Sons and daughtersrebelled against their fathers'and mothers'cultural,political,and- aboveall- religiousbackgrounds,integratedinto Sovietsociety,and came to formthe backbone For thoseJewswho partookin "the of "thenew Sovietintelligentsia." Jewish social rise, Jewish patricide, and Jewish conversion to nonintegrationmeant escaping religious as well as cultural Jewishness," and political Jewishparticularity.6 in the Sovietsystem,ascribedby SlezButthis path to acculturation kine to an entire generationof SovietJews,was taken byjust one seg-
[4]
mentof theJewishpopulation,whichresidedmainlyin the twoRussian Moscow and Leningrad,and in the newSovietindustrial metropolises, In manyof hubsthatemergedoutsideof the formerPaleof Settlement. the medium-to-large urbancenters,whichhad a considerable proportion of Jews and were located on the pre-1917 territoryof designated Jewishresidence,the responseto the Bolshevikemancipationproject as antiin the 1920sand 1930swasnot circumscribed by "communism In otherwords,while as anti-communism." and "Jewishness Jewishness" adaptingto the new system,manyJews,whetherformerBundists,Yiddish activists,politicalZionists,religiouspracticing Jews,or Russified liberals,remainedcommittedto some expressionsof Jewishness,and they attemptedto walkthe fine line betweenacceptedSovietbehavior ofJewishparticularity. and socialnormsand expressions In his discussionon the intricaterelationshipbetween micro-and CarloGinzburghas noted that "aclose-uplook allows macro-histories, A glimpse into the us to graspwhateludes us from the overallview."7 Judaismin a SovietcityrevealsthatJewishlife did practiceof religious in the immediateaftermathof the Revnot changeradically overnight, maintainedan alolution;even some of the mostdevotedCommunists Geography legiance to specific features of Jewish self-identification. withwhich curbedthe Sovietization process,impingedon the intensity and facilitated the Communistprojecttook hold of the Jewishstreet, with lines of the preservation of lessevidentand moresubtle continuity core of of the Jewish Jewishlife. The transformation pre-revolutionary life- of which dietary laws and circumcisionwere crucial aspects occurred at a slowerpace in Minskthan in Moscowalso because of preexisting social networksand family ties that were not suddenly Wemayassume,in fact, thata numberof wipedout by the Revolution. actorsin the Nemiga strife knew each other,were neighbors,or were even relatives.Becausestaunchsupportersof the new regime and its antagonistshappened to live togetherunder the same roof or on the same streetand had to deal with the conflictingpressuresof these soaffectedeach other'slives,promptingnot cial settings,they inevitably withbut also deviancefromSovietsocialnorms. onlyconformity The Soviet Korobkaand the UndergroundEducationalSystem Foundedin February1921,the Union of Congregantsof Synagogues and Houses of Prayerin Minsk(Soiuzprikhozhanevreiskikhsinagog i molitvennykhdomov v Minske)became the official body responsible for supportingJewish religious practice in the Belorussiancapi-
tal. Under the direct authority of the Minsk Executive Committee, the union counted 155 members (most of them Jewish religious leaders) at the time of its establishment.8 Besides safeguarding the city's synagogues and mikvah (ritual bath house) and obtaining matzah flour for the Passover holiday, the union served another key function. Point two of its statute asserted the importance of fulfilling "the needs of those who observe the laws of kashrut."9 Consuming kosher meat and fowl during the 1920s was relativelyuncomplicated in Minsk. The Union of Congregants relied on the same traditional taxation system that, for many decades, Jewish communities throughout Russia had imposed on their members as an indirect levy on kosher meat. Known as korobka (or "little box"), this tax had been the source of constant friction between the Jewish community's leadership, which administered the levy, and the less well-to-do Jews who had to deal with the financial burden. Yet the tax enabled the community to meet its debts to the state and to private creditors as well as to set aside enough funds to renovate synagogue buildings, look after cemeteries, and finance communal institutions and welfare associations.10 The korobka system was fundamentally unaffected by the Revolution and retained the same modus operandi of its pre-1917equivalent. The shohtim,or ritual slaughterers, worked under the supervision of the city's rabbi; a mashgiah,or ritual supervisor, made sure that the slaughtering process strictly abided byJewish dietary laws and collected a tax on each animal slaughtered according to the ritual. The proceeds of ritual slaughtering were then divided between the ritual slaughterers and the rabbi, and the meat was sold to the local Soviet food cooperatives at a higher cost than nonkosher meat.11 No longer designed to pay for state tax arrears, as it was in the nineteenth century, the new Soviet korobka was intended for internal Jewish activities only. It served two main functions. First, it represented the primary (and typically only) source of income for rabbis. Together with members of the pre-revolutionary political elite, former officers, and high-ranking bureaucrats in the tsarist state service, religious functionaries were included in the notorious lishchentsy or disenfranchised persons lists and were officially deprived of Soviet electoral rights. As lishchentsy, they became social outcasts and had restricted access to employment, housing, higher education, and medicine.12Such limitations affected entire families, even if only one member had been disenfranchised.13 A second function of what might be called the "red korobka"was to support the network of underground religious educational institutions. These sprung up in Minsk following the Soviet ban of June 27, 1922,
[5]
JewishReligious Practicein SovietMinsk Elissa Bemporad
[6]
when the Council of People's Commissariats of Belorussia sanctioned "the closing down of all existing heders, yeshivahs, and TalmudTorahs."14 Although this decree represented a blow to Jewish religious education, it did not put an end to it. Under the leadership of Rabbi Yehoshua Tsimbalist, also known as Rabbi Horodner (a native of Grodno who moved to Minsk during World War I),15 Jewish religious education underwent a substantial resurgence, albeit underground. In 1924, Tsimbalist established an underground yeshivah in the women's section of the Shoavei Mayim synagogue, located on ZamkoWith 70 vaia Street, near the building of the former Talmud-Torah.16 students, the Minsk yeshivah was the largest one in the Soviet Union.17 It attracted students from throughout the Soviet territory as well as from neighboring Poland. Born in Lodz in 1913, the young MosheZvi Neriyah (who would later become a prominent rabbinic figure in the Yishuv and the State of Israel) left his native Poland in 1926 to study Torah in the Minsk yeshivah at a time when Jewish religious education was considered obsolete in other Soviet cities. There were 400 pupils studying in the Minsk underground heders in 1926. By 1929 the number was still significant, amounting to 324.18 A yeshivah ketanah (lower-level yeshivah) was set up on Staro-Vilenskaia Street, with 20 pupils whose ages ranged between 12 and 15. Ten students came from outside Minsk. Not only was tuition free but the students were also provided meals. One of them recalled that Minsk families would invite them over for the Sabbath and serve herring and challah.19As Neriyah observed: wouldcome to Minskand be surprised Rabbisfromother citiesin Russia of this naturein a time like this?Howis that what saw. they by Something They neverimaginedthat therewasstill such a place.Afterall, possible? is connectedto the dangersof arrestand deportation.From such activity wheredoes one find the courageand strengthto do such things?20 Yeshivahs and heders enjoyed clandestine financial support from the American Joint Distribution Committee (JDC), but the amount provided from the outside was not adequate to sustain a similar enterprise. According to the 1926-27 reports of the Vaad Rabane SSR, or Council of Rabbis of the USSR, the financial need to support the educational institutions amounted to more than 2,200 rubles a month. Minsk received from the JDC only 826 rubles a month. As for the heders, the 1929 report of the Vaad Rabane SSR confirms that JDC relief amounted to just 30 percent of the budget for religious education; the rest was raised within the city.21
In additionto the supportfromtheJDCand the cooperationof local Jews (whoperpetuatedthe EastEuropean Jewishcustomof providing meals,clothing,and shelterto yeshivahstudents,especiallythose who came fromother citiesand could not count on theirfamilies),the continuedexistenceof these institutions dependedlargelyon the korobka During the 1920sand early1930s,profitsfrom kosherbutchsystem.22 whichfew ering coveredtuitionexpensesand teachers'compensation, parentscould paygiven the duressof the economic situationand the outlawingof a largechunkof privatetradeand business.The korobka systemand the undergroundeducationalnetworkwere so deeply entrenchedin the dailylife of the citythatthe dividebetweenpermissible wassometimespuzzlingand blurryfor cityresidents and impermissible At a Minskconferenceof non-party themselves. Jewishworkers, during in writingto the whichthe practicewasto submitqueriesanonymously twoquestionswereasked:"Dothe Minskhedersoperatelepresidium, and "Arethe authoritiesawareof the existence of gally or illegally?" with large numbersof students. . . who are being supported yeshivahs Both questionswereaskedin all seriousness. with room and board?"23 It was 1927,fiveyearsafter the officialclosing down of allJewishreliin the city.24 gious educationalinstitutions The ShohtimTrial - or at least showlittle Althoughthe Sovietsystemseemed to tolerate interestin the kosherbutcheringbusiness, the leaders of the local Evsektsiia (theJewishSection of the CommunistParty)attemptedto bring the shohtim'sactivitiesto an end throughintimidation.In their struggleagainst clericalism,they viewed the performanceof this ritual as ideologicallyrepulsive,primarilybecause it createda source of income for the rabbis.25 Takingadvantageof whatseems to havebeen organnothing more than a skirmishbetweenshohtim,the Evsektsiia ized a show-trialagainst the so-called "Gluskin trust,"a group of 25 Minskritual slaughtererswho workedunder the supervisionof the main rabbiof the city,MenachemMendlGluskin(1887-1943). In early March 1925, in the locale of the former Chorale Synain front of 3,000 House of Culture,26 gogue, now the JewishWorkers' Rapoport,was people, the head of the shohtim-trust,Yankev-Tevye accusedof the attemptedmurderof anothershohet, Droykin,who had the newmovedto the BelorussiancapitalfromVitebsk.27 Apparently, comer'sslaughteringmethod did not meet the religiousstandardsset by Rabbi Gluskin. Not allowed to be part of the official butchers'
[7]
[8]
trust, Droykin joined another group of shohtim who operated independently from the rabbi's supervision and sold their product to the same cooperatives that purchased kosher meat from the shohtim working for Gluskin.28 In addition, by charging less (only 5-10 kopecks for one chicken instead of the 15-20 kopecks charged by Rapoport), the Droykin group became a threatening competitor for the "Gluskin trust." Although Rabbi Gluskin and strictly Orthodox Jews could not accept as kosher the cattle and fowl slaughtered by Droykin (who almost certainly did not make use of the rabbi's ritual supervisor, and who possibly did not comply with the strict rules pertaining to the knife used and the postmortem examination of the animal), many consumers did.29Whether they purchased the meat because of its lower price or because of their poor knowledge of the laws and customs of kosher butchering, their action represented the first stage in the breakdown of the historic monopoly of rabbis over the consumption of meat among Jews. Together with the initial collapse of kosher meat production, the Minsk shohtim trial also reveals, perhaps more interestingly, its persistence. As a journalist from Warsaw remarked, "the shohtim trial disclosed aspects of Jewish life that we thought had already disappeared."30 The trial, which began at six o'clock in the evening on Saturdayafter the end of the Sabbath- received extensive coverage in the local and foreign press. Possibly the first show-trial in the Soviet Union against Jewish ritual slaughter, it also became the subject of a musical satire in Yiddish by the worker and aspiring playwright M. Shimshelievitsh. Performed on the stage of a number of workers' clubs in and around Minsk, with Yiddish folk songs and traditional religious melodies, the play depicted Rabbi Gluskin as the wealthy city villain who monopolized the production of kosher meat throughout the Belorussian capital.31 The language of the trial was Yiddish. The shohtim were represented by the best lawyers in the city, Fridman, Tseytlin and Gurevitch.32Rabbis, dayanim (scholars of Talmud law), shohtim, sha~ mashim(sextons), shopkeepers, luftmenschen, underworld Jews, artisans, and workers were cross-examined as witnesses. Recounting the trial for the WarsawYiddish newspaper Moment,one reporter pointed out that the rabbinic terminology used to describe the ritual slaughtering process and the talmudic intonation of both the prosecutors and the defendants could have easily deceived the audience: "If you close your eyes you might feel like you are somewhere in a shtetl, in the beys-medresh, twenty years before the Revolution."33 defined The Jews of Nemiga, or, as the MoscowYiddish daily Derernes them, "the foundation of the black market . . . , bourgeois society . . . ,
contraband,. . . Zionism,. . . [and] the Jewishcounter-Revolution,"34 - Shmuel talked about a new "Beilistrial."The public prosecutors and a thirdman namedVolobrinskii, all of [9] Agursky, LeymeRoznhoyz, - repeatedlydisclaimed whomwere membersof the MinskEvsektsiia that the trialwasan attackon theJewishreligion,as the foreign press JewishReligious in declared.Rather,they emphasizedthe criminalnatureof the accusa- Practice SovietMinsk tions. Drawingparallelswith Mendele MoykherSforim'sTakse (The writerseverely criticizedthe korobka institu- Elissa Tax),in whichthe Yiddish tion, Agurskystated that all the blame should fall on RabbiGluskin, Bemporad who oppressedpoorJews,forcing them to pay extra for koshermeat, in the slaughterhouse." workers and not on the shohtim,whowere"just "Thefact that religious Jewswish to eat koshermeat does not trouble do not wantto use and he assertedthat "[w]e us,"continuedRoznhoyz, the trialto compromisetheJewishstreet.Weare not maskilimwho believe their main goal is to struggleagainstreligion.... In our system, In the final verdict, religionwill die out, withoutviolent measures."35 thejudge emphasizedthe criminalnatureof the case, ridiculedthe insinuationsof religiouspersecutionin the USSRconjuredup abroad, to prison.36 and sentencedRapoportand his accomplices The Red ArmyEats KosherMeat hadindeedintended whichthe Evsektsiia In spiteof the 1925show-trial, as an instrumentto attackor at least to discourageritualslaughtering in the city,the productionof koshermeatin Minskcontinuedto thrive. accordingto Byearly1928,mostbeef cattlein the citywereslaughtered in the mainfood coopThe meatdistributed the rituallawsof kashrut. - CentralWorkers' BelorussianMeat erativesof the city Cooperative, acUnion- had been slaughtered Trade,and Belorussian Agricultural cording to the Jewishmethod. Indeed, when a housewifeplanned to purchasenonkoshermeat,she had to go to one of the city'sfood cooperatives,approachthe shop's counter, and specificallyask the store The numberof cattlekilledthrough clerkfor fre)/("forbidden" meat).37 exceeded the demandfor koshermeat because shehitahtraditionally of the specific dietary restrictionsconnected to kosher butchering. a portionof animalsslaughtered Moreprecisely, throughshehitahusuallywoundup on the generalmarketbecauseof the prohibitionto consume "thesciaticnerve or the fattyportionsof the animal carcassas wellas animalsthat,on furtherinspection,arefound to haveblemishes of the city,the numitwasthe historic or lesions."38 However, Jewishness ber of shohtimoperatingthere,and the viabilityof kosherbutchering
[10]
under the Sovietsin the 1920sthat accountedfor the large numberof cattleslaughtered accordingto theJewishritual. A correspondent for the YiddishdailyOktiaber expressedhis outrage afterdiscoveringthat "[t]hewholepopulationof Minskis forcedto eat The BelorussianAgricultural kosher meat. Even the Red Army."39 Union, the cooperativethat suppliedfoodstuffsto the Red Army,exThe authorof sold meat that had been slaughtered ritually.40 clusively the same article also complainedabout the absence of high-quality nonkoshermeatin the CentralWorkers' here,he argued, Cooperative: "almostall employeesin the meat sector are former katsovim [butchers]/' Mostkoshermeat in the citywas sold with a stampcertifyingits ofJewishdietarylaws) There were mashgihim authenticity. (supervisors sometimesacting as the only vetworkingin the CitySlaughterhouse, erinaryinspectorsof the animals,determiningwhethertheyweremedor not.41 And the korobka, the existenceof which icallyfit for slaughter in 1925,42 was had verymuch surprisedthe correspondent of Derernes the shohetreceivedone stillin effectin 1928.Foreach cowslaughtered, ruble,which correspondedto 1,800-2,000 rublesa month. Fortypercent of the ritualslaughterer's revenuewentto the rabbi.43 With few exceptions, there was little opposition to the production of koshermeat on the part of localJews.In an open letter published in Oktiaberin February1928,KhaymVilentshikinvitedRabbiGluskin to reimbursehim the extra money he paid in the course of several In anotherinstance yearsfor unknowinglypurchasingkoshermeat.44 that same month, a delegation of 40 Jewishworkingwomen signed a petition to the MinskCitySovietin which they condemned the extensive production of kosher meat, "11years after the October Revolution."45 Althoughwomenwere more likelyto engage in protestswhen the price of foodstuff was at issue, besides the abovementionedpetition (probably Jewishhousestaged by the trade union'sleadership), wives did not organize a grass-rootscampaign against the rabbis demanding a just price for meat. In fact, the absence of a popular protest indicates that a large proportionof Jewishwomen were willing to purchasekoshermeat, or at least were accustomedto payinga higher price to bring it to their tables.46 In the effort to discontinueor, at least, to reduce the productionof kosher meat in the city, the local Evsektsiia appealed to the Central Bureauof theJewishSection of the CommunistPartyin Moscow. The MoscowEvsektsiiacalled for the creation of a special commission under the leadershipof Bruskin,the deputy people's commissarfor trade. In its resolution on slaughtering and meat production in Minsk, the commission demanded that "cattlenot intended for ko-
sher consumptionshould not be killed in accordancewith [Jewish] There is no evidence that the city agencies actuallyenritual laws/*47 did [11] dorsed and carried out this resolution,but the MinskEvsektsiia achieve a small victory:the CentralWorkers' Cooperativeagreed to Religious open two shops in which meat would be sold without distinction be- Jewish Practicein tween kosherand nonkosherquality.48 SovietMinsk was far from securing its control over the The Evsektsiia, however, local productionof koshermeat. In mid-April1928,for example, the Elissa Thirteenth CityCooperativein Nemiga, also known as the Artel (co- Bemporad operativeassociationof workers)of the Disabled,began selling a new koshermeat product. Badras,the official in charge of the manufacture of intestine productsat the CitySlaughterhouse, supportedthe proposal of the cooperative'schairman to process kosher sausages. The mashgiahin chargeof verifyingthat sausageproductionmet the standardsof kashrutwas none other than a relativeof the Minsker the greatscholarof Minskand famousnineteenth-century rabbi, godly JerohamJudah Leib Perelman(1835-96).49 Soviet authoritiesdid not resistreligious slaughteringwithin governmentalstructuresso long as it did not interferewith the "rationality" of production. On Friday,April 7, 1928, a group of shohtim refrainedfrom slaughteringthe entire quantityof beef cattle ordered by the three main food cooperativesin Minskbecause of the imminent adventof the Sabbath.The financial loss inflicted on the City by the shohtim'sdecision promptedthe party-cellto Slaughterhouse employformershohtim,who were now membersof the subsequently Butchers'Trade Union, and probablyno longer religious, as slaughterers.The latterslaughteredthe cattle in the manner to which they wereaccustomed,in accordancewith the basicpreceptsof shehitah.50 The shift from religious supervisionover shehitah to state control symbolized the progressiveloss of rabbinic authority.Employedas state workers,most shohtim continued to slaughtercattle following the traditionalrituals,generallywithoutthe inspection of the rabbi's appointed mashgiah.From the vantage point of OrthodoxJudaism, meat from cattle or fowl slaughteredwithout the supervisionof the rabbiwas not kosher.Yetfor a significantproportion of Jewish consumerssuch meatwassufficientlykosher,even withoutrabbiniccertification.This combinationof the decline of the traditionalrole of the rabbiand the retentionof conventionalkosherslaughteringmethods based on dietarycustomsand generated a new kind of folk-kashrut, eating habitsratherthan on religiousauthority. institution,whichhad ensuredfinancial By 1930,the "redkorobka" supportfor the rabbisand the illegal educationalnetworkthroughout
[12]
the 1920s, began to collapse and slowly gave way.The regime's turn to rapid industrialization, forced collectivization, and a centralized economy (which caused, among other things, massive food shortages in urban areas) made kosher butchering increasingly difficult. Kosher meat was no longer available in the city's cooperatives; the Minsk yeshivah was closed down in the early 1930s; and Rabbi Tsimbalist, the driving force behind the underground educational network, managed to Whereas cattle slaughtering according to leave for Palestine in 1933.51 the Jewish method became almost impractical in the 1930s- primarily because the government took control of food production and restricted cattle supply for religious purposes - kosher fowl was easily accessible.52 Upon the request of individual citizens, state-employed former shohtim or unemployed religious shohtim slaughtered chickens throughout the mid-1930s, generally undisturbed. As late as 1934, for example, a small slaughterhouse for kosher fowl operated on Karl Libknekht Street; Soviet citizens brought their own chickens, and the shohet performed the ritual slaughter.53 In April 1934, kosher butchering in Minsk was dealt a mortal blow and driven to the margins of even smaller underground circles. The butcher Yankev-TevyeRapoport, the same shohet indicted in the 1925 notorious shohtim trial, was accused of raping several young girls who had been sent by their mothers to the shohet with a chicken to slaughter.54Exploiting Jewish sexual anxieties associated with the figure of the shohet - the only man who in traditional Jewish society had regular contact with women, often in semi-private settings - the masterminds of the new Rapoport case were hoping to bring the kosher business in Minsk to a close, for good.55The show-trial took place April 2-4 in the locale of the Belorussian Yiddish State Theater - the former Choral Synagogue and the same venue as the 1925 shohtimtrial- in front of a large audience, a significant proportion of which was almost certainly drawn by the lurid details of the alleged rapes.56 The public prosecutors - Leyme Roznhoyz, delegate of the Central and Committee of the League of the Militant Godless (bezbozhniki), and chief commissar for education Khazkl Dunets, deputy people's - emphasized the relationship between the shohet's editor of Oktiaber religious beliefs, his social background (he was a relative of the wealthy Wissotzky tea-merchant family), and his sexual deviance. Rapoport was sentenced to eight years in prison.57 Whether as a consequence of the 1934 show-trial or because of the relentless assault on religious practice under Stalinism, the demand for kosher fowl significantly declined during the 1930s. However, it most likely did not subside entirely. After all, Minsk remained the
destinationof a large and steadymigration movementof thousands of Jews from the surroundingprovincialcities and shtetlswho relocated to the capitalin searchof employmentand a better livelihood. [13] Althoughit is hard to ascertainhow manyof these new migrantswere observant,it is fair to saythata numberof them came from JewishReligious religiously in traditionalhomes and abidedby certain religiouspractices.In fact, it Practice SovietMinsk may have been easier to purchase kosher meat in the anonymityof the big city than in a smallshtetlwhereeveryoneknewwhateveryone Elissa unlike mostJewswho moved to faraway Bemporad else wasdoing. Furthermore, Moscow,those who settled in Minsk preservedfamily bonds more often than not, chieflybecause of the geographicproximitybetween their shtetlor cityof origin and the Belorussiancapital.The constant resultedin the persistinflux of this populationinto the cityprobably ence of kosherbutcheringin Minskin the second half of the 1930s.58 To Circumciseor Not to Circumcise? workerOrman,employedin On September19, 1928,the construction a Minskstate factory,addresseda letter to the Jewish Section of the CentralCommitteeof the CommunistPartyof Belorussia,the Evsektsiia.He complainedabouthis son not being acceptedinto a local Soviet The reason,he stated,wasthathis son (presumYiddishkindergarten. At first,the possibility ablyborn in 1922)had not been circumcised.59 of such a case occurringin the late 1920sin the capitalof a SovietRepublic might seem highly remote.As a Sovietinstitution,the Yiddish kindergartenwas, at least in theory, committed to conveyingto the youngergenerationthe idealsof communismand the rulesand princiwhich includedamong the core foundaples of good Sovietbehavior, tions an atheisticapproachto the worldand a passionatecriticismof letter within the conviewingthe worker's religiousbeliefs. However, text of the widespreadobservanceof thisJewishpracticeallowsus to reconsiderthe nature of this case, thereforecomplicatingour understandingofJewishintegrationin Sovietsociety.During the 1920sand early 1930s,circumcisingone's son was the norm among SovietJews, not the exception.This norm could have led someJews to view with disfavor Jewishchildrenwho had not been circumcised,and it could even havebeen sharedby the personnelof a SovietYiddishkindergarthe firsttime thatajewishchildwhowas ten.Afterall, thiswasprobably attendedthatYiddishkindergarten. not circumcised The archivescontain much evidence of Jewish CommunistParty The observanceof members who had theirnewbornsons circumcised.
[14]
religiousritualswasconsideredespeciallydeviantwhen carriedout by wereprofessional revolutionaries well partymembers,who supposedly versedin the worksof Marx,Engels,and Leninandwereaffiliatedwith the country'smost sacredinstitutions. As the vanguardof Sovietsociand theirconety,theiradherenceto partydisciplinehad to be flawless formityto Sovietpracticeunconditional.Yet,thoughJewishCommunists rarely married with a religious ceremony and rarely,if ever, attendedsynagogueor performedthe Sabbathritual of candle-lighting, many of them were still committedto the traditionof circumciCommunist sion.As one memberof the MinskConstruction Workers' Party-cellpointed out in 1927, "The performanceof circumcisions who are membersof the Communist Partyand are emamongworkers ployedin the factoriesof the cityof Minskis so widespreadthat it has In most assumeda 'chroniccharacter' ... it hasbecomean epidemic."60 cases, the circumcision,or bris, was performedby a mohel. In other cases,especiallyamong the local partyleadership(as,for example,the memchairmanof the MinskMetalWorkers' Union),Communist Party bersrequesteda doctor'scertification of medicalnecessityand had the circumcision performedas a medicalprocedure.61 Twoobservationsseem necessaryprior to the examinationof specific cases of circumcision.First,if a significantproportionof Jewish partymembersperformedthe ritual,we must assume that circumciand nonworksion waseven more commonamong thoseJews,workers ers alike, who did not belong to the CommunistParty.Second, the commitmentto the practiceof circumcision on the partofJewishCommunistsshouldnot necessarily be seen as an indicationof religiousbehavior. one'snewbornson wasperceived, at leastbymany Circumcising who had it privately JewishCommunists performed,as the expression of ethnicidentification, of a specifically and it wasthe outgrowth Jewish mentality(or,in the wordsofJacquesLe Goff, "what changeslessin the historicalevolutionof the everyday which even Communists man"),62 found difficultto renounce.AsJacobKatzexplainedin his studyabout in nineteenth-century the debateon circumcision CentralEurope,the power of circumcisionlies in "aritual instinct in the human psyche [that] predisposesus to attributemore importanceto once-in-a-lifetime ritualsthan to repetitiverituals.... It is this instinctualresponse thatassuresthe greaterpersistence of the practiceof circumcision over those ritualsperformeddaily or weeklyor yearly."63 Katz'santhropological explanation of circumcision becoming the indispensable markerof Jewish identitywas true not only for manyJews in Central Europein the second half of the nineteenthcenturybut also for most Soviet Jewsin the interwar period.
in a publicCommunist In Minsk,the firstdebateaboutcircumcision commission 1924,when an investigative settingtook place in mid-May of the Construction found three membersof the Communist Party-cell Workers' Union guilty of circumcisingtheir sons. Althoughthere was no official Sovietprohibitionon circumcision,there were numerous whichvariedaccordingto local rulingandwereaimedprirestrictions, of the ritual,mohels marilyat the mohels.In the Sovietunderstanding werenot doctorsand shouldnot havebeen performingan unnecessary The investigamedicalproceduredetrimentalto the infant'shealth.64 tive commissionwas usuallycomposedof three fellowpartymembers whowouldgo to the home of the accusedmemberafterthe birthof the babyto verifywhetherthe newbornson had been circumcisedor not. the guilty party Followingthe uncoveringof the 1924 transgression, members attempted to avoid the standard punishment for nontheir expulsionfrom the party.One man, GurCommunistbehavior: vitch,statedthathe found out abouthis son'scircumcision onlyseveral weeksafterit wascarriedout;as soon as he did and decided to inform his wife imploredhim not to, promisinghim thatno cirthe party-cell, cumcisionwouldbe carriedout in the future. "Ina couple of months Gurvitchstated to the party-cell,"andI we will have another baby," He stressedhis loyaltyto communism swearthat therewill be no bris." and emphasizedhis serviceas a volunteerin the Red Armyand as a memberof the local communistundergroundmovementbefore the Another comrade,whose son had been circumcised,unRevolution. derscoredhis commitmentto the Sovietvalue-system by statingthat "I would more easily accept a death sentence than expulsion from the a third man asserted that "theverdictof exclusion from the party"; Yet will party be a hugeblow;I'd moreeasilyagreeto divorcemywife."65 Thereis no theydid not denythattheyhad had theirsons circumcised. reasonto doubtthe sincerecommunismof these partymembers,who frompartynormsin this one specificarea. soughtto deviate,privately, Whereas Gurvitchwas expelled from the party for one year, his two comradeswere advised to bring those responsiblefor carrying out the circumcisionbefore the MinskCentralJewish Court, a body that functioned in Yiddishand tried both criminaland civil cases. In the meantime, the ConstructionWorkers'Party-cellresolved to report the circumcisioncases to the city'sExecutiveCommitteeof the CommunistParty;they expected the local party agency to petition partyorgans so that these would in turn issue higher all-Belorussian a directive forbiddingthe carrying out of circumcisionwithout the The ConstructionWorkers' consent of both parents.66 Party-cellwas evidentlyin searchof an officialpartyline on circumcision.67
[15]
The Case of ComradeGorlin

[16]
At the end of 1924,a case of deviancein the CommunistParty-cell of the clothing factory of Minsk set off another debate pertaining to Communistsand circumcision.During the 1920sand early1930s,the workingforce of the Minshveiclothing factorywas largelyJewish.68 Preciselybecause of the high proportionofJews, the outcome of the debate was viewed as crucial to determining the accepted norm of - Communistsand behaviorvis-a-vis circumcisionforJewishworkers non-Communists alike.Veryfewissuesconcerningthe livesand identity of Jewishworkersemerge in the protocolsof the factory'spartycell. Besides questions related to the use of Yiddishin everyday life, the only "Jewish topic"that regularlyappearsin the minutes of the Minshveiparty-cellis the circumcisionof children of Communists. Comrade Gorlin informed the party-cellthat his wife's parents had "performed the religiousrite of circumcisionduring his and his wife's absence."After further investigation,the commission found that Gorlin'swife was awareof her parents'initiative.One comrade argued that Gorlin should leave his wife;if he refused, he should be expelled from the party.In the opinion of another comrade,Gorlin was not guilty and should not be deprivedof his partymembership: had it not been for the "bourgeoisenvironment"surrounding his wife, the religious ritualwould not have been carried out. It was the CommunistParty member, not his wife or the milieu in which he who washeld responsible.Byneglecting to educatehis lived,however, wife and preventthe circumcisionfrom takingplace, he had failed to behaveas a true Bolshevik.Although he had foreseen the possibility of the circumcisionbeing carriedout, he had not taken the necessary steps to preventit. After all, besides the substantialset of privilegesto which the partycard pavedthe way (suchasjob advancement, priorities for the acquisitionof a new apartment,and permitsfor vacations in resort areas),being a Communistalso entailed a "specialcalling" and an absolutefaith and devotionto the party's"sacred cause."69 In the mid-1920sespecially,Communistssuch as Gorlinwerepunished for having their sons circumcisedmainlybecause their behavior representeda threatto the primacyof communistnormsin Soviet society.If the small caste of partymembersset the wrong examplein 1924,there were847Jewishpartymembersand candidatesout of a - their transgressivebepopulation of approximately50,000 Jews70 haviorwouldbecome the acceptedsocial norm for non-Communists. As the party-cellresolutionofJanuary9, 1925,stated, "[T]hecircumcision ritual discredits the prestige of the party in the eyes of non-
partyworkers. . . for carryingout such an act it is necessaryto expel And Gorlinwas,accordingly, from the party." expelled.71 Butduring theJanuary13, 1925,meeting, the party-cellseemed to retraceits steps.There were protestson the part of severalmembers, who arguedthat the resolutionwastoo severeand that Gorlin,a party member since 1920, was not guilty. Another party-cellmember emphasized that it was preciselybecause of his party experience and service as a volunteerin the Red Armythat Gorlin should have prevented the circumcisionfrom being carriedout. Becauseof his weakness,arguedanotherpartymember,Gorlinshouldat leastbe reduced to the status of candidacyfor party membership.In spite of the numerousprotestsand suggestionsto reducethe punishment,the partycell confirmedthe verdict:expulsion from the party.72 The closing chapterof the Gorlinaffairtook place on May5, 1925, during the meeting of the Minshveiparty-cell,in front of 240 party membersand candidatesand with the participationof higher party organs. In his opening statement,the secretaryof the CentralControl Commission,Beilin (himself aJew and most likelycircumcised), joins the partyin order to benefit from it, explained that "[w]hoever whoeveracts againstwhat the partyfights for, and whoeverdoes not behaveas a Communistand does not educate those around her/him The last is not a partymemberand, consequently,not a Communist." two points, he continued,applied to Gorlin,who wasrightlyexpelled from the partybecause of religious practice.However,the party-cell and the DistrictControlCommissionfailed to consider that "Gorlin is a worker,and when he was mobilized by the party to the front he did not refuse.His levelof politicalconsciousnessis mediocre. . . . [In other words,]we should not execute someone who is ill when he can still be saved.. . . Gorlin acted against the party . . . , but we can still cure him, we must try."To the Central Control Commission'sproposal to reinstateGorlin in the party,severalparty-cellmembersreworkersstill abide acted with surpriseand pointed out that "Jewish strictlyby the traditionof circumcision,even when they do not attend synagogueor believein God, . . . and a Communistwho carriedout a circumcision cannot be a model of behavior for non-party members . . . this act [i.e., circumcision]concerns not only Gorlin but the In spite of the opposingview,the party-cellresolved partyas a whole." to reinstateGorlinin the party,albeitwith a warning,and to payclose The outcome attentionto his workand education as a Communist.73 of the Gorlin case, in which the party member was ultimatelynot punished with expulsion but was encouraged to "recoverfrom his bourgeoisillness,"might indicate the intention of local partyleaders
[17]
[18]
to warnother partymembers:the firsttime you will be sparedexpulsion, but, if you engage in the anti-Communist practiceof circumcision again, evictionfrom the partywill become the stringentnorm. Wivesand FamilyMatters Backward In his shortstory"Karl-Yankl," IsaacBabellaysout a brilliantsatireof Jewishreligiouslife during the earlySovietyears.It takesplace in the of Odessa,and depictsa familyconspiracy 1920s,in the suburbs against a good Communist fatherwho is duped by his wife and mother-in-law. is away on a businesstrip,his mother-in-law WhileOfseyBelotserkovsky (with the approvalof his wife) takes the newborn grandson to the mohel Naftulaand has the babycircumcised"in the presenceof ten - ten ancient and impoverishedmen, denizens of doddering wrecks the hasidicsynagogue." Upon returningfrom his trip and discovering and the mohel the women's evil scheme,Ofseytakesthe mother-in-law to court, in whatbecomesa show-trial at the OdessaPetrovsky factory. He also namesthe babyKarl,in honorof KarlMarx,refusingthe tradiand motheroptedforduring tionalJewishname thatthe grandmother holds acIn this story,Babel-the-narrator the clandestineceremony.74 and the wife, countablefor the circumcision schemethe mother-in-law and he presentsthe readerwith an idyllicportraitof a Communistfather who is absolutely unawareof the women'splot and wrongdoings. In reality,however, familymattersinvolvingcircumcisionwere much more complicated,and Communistmen weremore implicatedin the than Babel'sstoryseemsto suggest. bris-plots When confrontedwith the failure to behaveas true Communists, partymen wereusuallywilling to blame theirwivesand mothers,who allegedly associatedwith dangerous "bourgeoiscircles,"in order to avoid expulsion from the party.Blaming one's wife as the exclusive source of "bourgeoisbehavior"became the standard reaction of a man who wasa memberof the CommunistPartyand wasfound to be In November1927,Combreaking the rules of "partymindedness." rade Zorin warned the party-cellto which he belonged about the likelihood of his wife planning to have their son circumcised(which almostcertainlyimpliesthat the deed wasalreadydone). When, a few weekslater,the investigative commissionof the party-cellconfirmed that the infant had indeed been circumcised,Zorinwas held responsible. As the party-cellresolution stated, by failing to convince his wife to renounce her "bourgeoisbeliefs,"he had fallen shortboth "as a man and as a Communist."75 Also in November1927,the construe-
tion workerand partymemberFuntwas accused of circumcisinghis newborn son, and he provided the following explanation. At first, when he workedat a constructionsite not far from home and could easilycheck on his son, the wife agreed not to have the babycircumcised. But as soon as he was transferredto a second constructionsite, far from home, and could no longer keep an eye on his wife, her parents pressuredher and the circumcisionwas carried out. Funt told the party-cellthat he would leave his wife at once, divorce her, and payalimony.ComradeLernerblamedFuntfor not implementingthe at home."Another party-cellmember, Reginbogin, was "revolution he had appliedthe proudto sharewith his comradeshowsuccessfully tenets to the home: two yearsearlier,his wife had their revolutionary first-bornson circumcised without his permission, but when their second son was born, his wife did not even hint at the possibilityof carrying out a circumcision:"The truth is that wives can be easily bent in our direction."76 behavIn these instances,the man is expected to forge the woman's ior:his conductis tantamountto that of a good Communist,whereas hers is closer to that of a bourgeoisstill anchoredto the principlesof in whichthe versionof "paternalism," the old world.In thisCommunist aJewishman- whether for his wife'sbehavior, husbandis responsible - uses his "backward wife"as a pretext or non-Communist Communist to engage in religiouspractices.After all, wiveswereusuallyexcluded from skilled or professionalemploymentand had no careersto lose, whereasthe husbands,as membersof the party,could lose the privientailedand be dismissedfromtheirjobs. leges thatpartymembership Justifyingbehaviorby blamingone'swife wasso common that, in Febcondemnedthis misuseof gender.Ensarcastically ruary1930,Oktiaber the articlereads: titled "OurBackward Wives," is sweatIf youmeeton the streeta worker who,on the eveof Passover, and a sackof matzah, youmightthinkthathe is religious ing,carrying to do with ... he has God forbid traditions. follows nothing religious andwantsonlymatzah. who persists that.It is she, the "cursed wife," a newritualof circumcising out the barbaric Whensomeonecarries bornson,the blamefallsagainon thewife,whoputherfootdownand to beJewish.77 thebaby wanted During the late 1920s,most membersof the CommunistPartywho had their sons circumcisedand whose cases became known to party officials,wereipso facto expelled from the party.On October6, 1928, the party-cellof the Metallfactoryin Minskdebatedthe case of Comrade Yofin.After the investigativecommission established that his
[19]
[20]
son had indeed been circumcised,Yofinresortedto the usual ploy of blaming his wife and parentsfor performingthe religiousritualsupposedly without his approval,while he was out of town. Yofinmight even havebeen the same Minskworkerwho some monthsbefore sent an anonymousletter to Oktiaber with a warning:"Iadviseall the mohels of Minsknot to circumcisemyson. If myson is circumcised,I will hold responsible each and every mohel in Minsk."78 Although the Minskmohels were most likely not reading official CommunistYiddish newspapers, Yofincould still have used this letter as evidence of his "Communist" attemptto preventthe circumcisionof his newborn son. Openly advertisingone's objection to this "shamefulpractice" But in was a rather common practice among Communistfathers.79 this case, at least, the party-celldid not fall for the cunning scheme and thus resolved to exclude Yofin from party candidacy.Incidentally, his sister,a member of the Komsomol (the YoungCommunist League),wasalso presentat the circumcisionceremony.80 The ComplicatedLives of Jewish Communists The official Yiddishpress carries almost no reference to the aforementioned circumcisioncases of children of Communistsdebatedat The most length during the closed-doormeetingsof local party-cells. plausiblereason seems to be that manyJewish Communists,in particularthose who had had their sons circumcised,might havefelt uneasy revealing how common this unbecoming behaviorwas among partymembers.Whether they resented their families for pressuring weakthem to act againstthe partyor wereashamedof the "religious nesses"of their fellow comrades,they recognized that, unlike other forms of Jewish religious practice or ethnic identification,circumcision remained a fairly conventional practice for Communists. In other words, lighting candles on the Sabbathor purchasingkosher meat in the citycooperativewas,for mostJewishCommunists,anachronistic;therefore,it was easy to point a finger at the "bourgeoiselements"on the Jewish street that carried out such behavior,and, for example, to campaign publicly against the production of matzah flour for Passover. Circumcision,by contrast,was performedalso by Communists, and thus was not called into question in the public forum of the newspaper with the same frequencyand invective. During the early1930s,cases of Communistshavingtheir sons circumcisedwere hardlyever debated in local party-cells.Not only was their number in progressivedecline but also the practice itself was
consideredsociallydeviantregardlessof the specificcontext in which it occurred. In other words,no matterwho orchestratedthe circumcision, expulsion from the party had become the standardpunish- [21] ment for partymemberswhose sons had been circumcised.When, in 1933, the OktiaberfactoryworkersD. M. Dvorkinand E. S. Deifer, JewishReligious in were expelled for Practice party memberssince 1931 and 1930, respectively, SovietMinsk havinghad their sons circumcised,their behaviorwassimplydeemed Debate had become superfluous. "aviolationof partydiscipline."81 Elissa Withthe fierceassaulton religionthatcharacterizedthe campaign Bemporad for collectivizationand industrializationof the 1930s, maintaining the practiceof circumcisionbecame more challengingfor SovietJewish citizens. The social pressureon those who carried out the ritual intensified, and the number of active mohels, or doctors willing to perform the procedure, graduallydecreased. In the case of a newborn's accidental death, the mohel was brought to court in a showtrial, usually found guilty of performing an "unnecessarysurgical and sentencedto prison. treatment," wasaccusedof cirIn March1931,the MinskmohelYoyneRadunski cumcisinga newbornbabyunbeknownstto the father (a 23-year-old TradeUnion), therebycausing Workers' memberof the Construction the infant'sdeath by hemorrhage.The show-trial againstthe "slaughas he wasreferredto in the trial'soffitererof chickensand children," cial account,was held in the LeninJewishWorkers' Club,on March 21-24, 1931.During the trial, the mohel admittedthat the ritualwas not carriedout accordingto traditional Jewishlaw:it was performed withoutmetsitsah (the suckingof the blood at circumcision)and in the Radunskipointed out, "thenarod absenceof a minyan."Inour times," Yetthe prosecutorassertedthe [people] . . . are satisfiedwithoutthis." hollownessof the 1921document that certifiedthe mohel's expertise andwassignedbya Minskdoctor.He also in performingcircumcisions emphasizedthe lackof hygieneand poor sanitaryconditionsin which the ceremonywascarriedout, accusingthe mohel of storinghis ritual In in whichhe workedas a shohet.82 in the slaughterhouse instruments Tribunal blamedthe infant'sdeathon the finalverdict,the Proletarian the "barbaric and, in full agreementwith the practiceof circumcision" officialSovietmedicalview,rejectedcircumcisionas a harmfulproceRadunskiwas sentencedto three dure that causesillness and death.83 yearsin prison.84 In spite of the growingdemand to conform to Sovietbehaviorand - and among them a large segtherebyrejectcircumcision,mostJews ment of Jewish Communists continued to look for waysto abide by thisJewishpractice.Some even deferredtheir son'sbrisbya fewyears
[22]
in order to circumvent the party's official line and avoid finger-pointing by the investigative commission of the local party-cell.85 One final observation seems useful with regard to the coexistence between Jewish Communists and circumcision. The Bolshevik ideal of a revolutionaryvanguard of young true believers who were fiercely committed to the creation of a new socialist system and devoted to the cause of communism often shapes our perception of party members. Although most party members might have matched this ideal, many did not. For some of them, the borderline between proper Communist behavior and deviant social practice was unclear or of little concern. Because Communist Party policy on member recruitment fluctuated during the interwar period, different groups of people with different aims and motivations aspired to become part of the new elite class in Soviet society and joined the party. Following Lenin's death in 1924, and throughout the late 1920s, Stalin launched heavy recruitment campaigns to strengthen his base in the party and reduce the influence of Communist veterans, or Old Bolsheviks. This mass intake of members saw the party expand from approximately 470,000 members and candidates in 1924 to several million in 1933. For many, membership in the party became first and foremost a path to privileges, such as access to housing, holiday resorts, and prestigious jobs usually denied to average Soviet citizens. But party membership had its risks, particularly in the 1930s when reviews (proverki)and purges (chistki),during which the member's past was closely scrutinized, resulted in the expulsion of those "hostile elements"who failed to adhere to party discipline. In 1930, during the review of party members and candidates of the Communist cell of the Minsk factory Elvoda, Lipa Livshits, who had served on the Western front from 1919 to 1922 and had joined the party in 1924, was accused of being a Trotskyite. He was also found guilty of having kept for five years a mezuzah attached to the doorpost by the entrance to his home. When asked why he did not remove it, Livshits replied that he had not noticed it.86 During the 1933 party review,Yankl Bliakher, a worker in the Telman Minsk shoe factory and a party candidate since 1931, was expelled from the party for attending synagogue services. Born in 1870, Bliakher had joined the party at the unusually late age of 61.87David Shapiro, a worker in the Kaganovich Minsk factory since 1930, had joined the party in 1932. Although he had served in the Red Army from 1919 to 1923, which was considered an asset, he had also worked as a sofer, or religious scribe, from 1926 to 1928, an occupation that was not exactly in tune with Soviet social norms and that ultimately led to his expulsion from the party in 1933. What is interesting is not so much that a former sofer was expelled from the party but,
rather,that a Red Armysoldierwouldbecome a soferand, later,apply Whetherthe ambitionfor a careerand social for partymembership.88 mobilityin the SovietsystempersuadedShapiroto join the party,or whetherhe did so out of ideological conviction,is hard to establish. is that the formersofer did not rejectall What seems likely,however, of hisJewishreligiousidentification. expressions Body, Gender,and FamilyNetworks so committedto this one element JewishCommunists Whyweremany - circumcision - and not, for example,to of traditional Jewishidentity the purchaseof koshermeat?The practiceof circumcision,it seems, In defianceofJewishlaw, wasintegralto the questionof "beingaJew." accordingto whichone isJewisheven in the absenceof circumcision, to be the bedrockofJewconsideredcircumcision Jewishfolkmentality from the family,these In Sovietpublicsettingsaway ish ethnic identity. the importanceof the Marxistidea of the Communists acknowledged "mergingof nations"to build socialism,but in the privatesphere of their home they could not fully renounce the deeply entrenchednotion that only through circumcisionwould their son be trulyJewish. Evenfor SovietJews, circumcisionwas, as SanderGilman put it, the UnlikeUkrainian, thatset the boundariesofJewishness.89 bodymarker who in the absenceof baptism Communists, Russian,and Belorussian and Bebut werestill Ukrainians,Russians, wereno longerChristians lorussians,manyJewish Communistscould not envisionJewishness as echoed in the Yiddishexpressionfor circumwithoutcircumcision, doskind,or to make the childJewish.And the cising one's son:yidishn wasbyrelyingon their onlywaytheycouldensurethisethniccontinuity wivesand mothers,the alleged corruptingforce on the Jewish street of theJewishhome. Insteadof and the barrieragainstthe Sovietization enlightening their wives and mothers, Communistmen joined with them, in secret, to circumventthe Sovietcode of behaviorforJewish membersof the Communist Party. cannotbe examinedat length without The practiceof circumcision takinginto accounttwointertwinedand largelyunexploredthemesin Soviet the studyof everyday period- namely, Jewishlife in the interwar genderand familynetworks. If we compare the circumcisiondebates in interwarSoviet Minsk with the circumcisiondebatesin Germany during the late nineteenth 1908debatethat and earlytwentiethcenturies,or with the well-known Jewishcommunitywhen the HevrahKadishah eruptedin the Warsaw
[23]
[24]
(burialsociety)refusedto buryan uncircumcised Jewishchild,we notice a strikingdifferencein the role playedbywomen.In RobinJudd's as well as in Gersdiscussionof the Germandebateovercircumcision, hon Bacon'sdiscussionof the Warsaw debate,women are completely absent,the onlyactorstherebeing men,fathers,rabbis,German Jewish In the thinkersand reformers,and Yiddishwritersand journalists.90 becomesfor the firsttime a womSovietcontext,however, circumcision en'sdomain and liability. Communistmen, or men who held keyposiblametheirwivesand mothersfor tionsin Sovietsociety, wouldpublicly circumcisingtheir sons while privatelyentrustingthem with the reof arrangingthis "newSovietJewish ritual," secretlypersponsibility formed by a doctor or by a mohel. Mothersand grandmothersthus all-male came to replacefathersin this traditionally Jewishcovenant. Although generationalconflicts playeda crucial role in the process of Sovietizationof Russian Jewry,it seems that the importanceof the familyand close-to-kinnetworkin SovietJewishlife should be reAs a rite of pasconsidered and not reduced to "Jewish patricide."91 sage, the practiceof circumcision(like baptismfor SovietChristians) was closely connected to the life of the family,the community,and In the case ofJewishCommunists, deeplyingrained social customs.92 livingin largeJewishcenterssuch as Minsk,familyloyaltywasa source of tension with their party allegiance. Although sons and daughters rebelledagainsttheir familiesand background,theystill had to come when to terms with their parents'views and traditions,particularly realityof living together in the same home, coping with the everyday on the same street, in the same neighborhood,or even merelyin the same city. This was much less the case in Moscowand Leningrad, which were centers of recent migrationfrom the formerPale of Settlement, often by young people without their parents and relatives. The degree to whichfamilyties shaped the decisionsand viewsof the youngerJewish generation of the 1920s and 1930s, and influenced their level of obedience to partyguidelines, awaitsfurther investigation. This studyof circumcisionsuggeststhat they did. Conclusion In everysociety,individualsare forced to adapt to the commonlyac- all the more so, of course, in a ruthlesssystem cepted social norms like the one createdby the Soviets,wherethe individualwasexpected to subscribeto the tenetsof Sovietideologyand spiritually mergewith the collective,convertinghis or her privatesphereinto a publicone. It
was extremelydifficult,and it entailed a considerableamountof skill and luck, to survivein the Soviet systemwithout participatingin it agencies,offices,institutions)and withoutac(usingthe bureaucratic the principlesof Communist behavcepting,or at leastacknowledging, ior.The rhythmof the livesof Sovietcitizens(Jewsand non-Jews alike), so profoundlymarkedby the familiarityof the religiousexperience, wassuddenlyaltered,and behaviorthat had been perfectlynormative in pre-Soviet timescame to clashwith the newSovietworldview. The studyof religiouspracticein an urban setting providesa winRussian dow into the fragmentedlivesof post-1917 Jews,illuminating the intricaciesof their acculturationinto Sovietsociety and showing thatreligiousidentificationwasmore common and multifacetedthan is usuallythought. Makinga tabularasaof the past and erasing centuries-oldtraditionswas not so easy in a place like Minsk,whereJewish religiouspracticewasdeeplyembeddedin dailylife. If the number of rabbisand OrthodoxJewsinvolvedin organizingreligiousand edsmall and in proucationalinstitutionsin the citywas comparatively gressive decline, the number of Jews who participatedin religious life, togetherwith those who supportedthe institutionsthat made re- especiallygiven that Minsk ligious practicepossible,wassignificant was not a shtetl or a small provincialcity,further removedfrom the but was the capitalof a SovietRepublic. violence of Bolshevization, The lives thatJewscame to lead involvedparticipationin, circumvention of, and resistanceto the terms of daily life that developed in SovietRussia.The tendencyto conform one's behaviorto the norms, values, and practicesaccepted in Soviet society,which Stephen Kotkin has called "speakingBolshevik,"93 inevitablycame to clash with Jewish"or conducting oneself according to Jewish customs, "acting religiouspractices,or political beliefs. Within the context of the new system, the Jews of the Soviet Union were constrained to redefine their livesand reinventan identitythat was SovietandJewish,univerat the same time. Some wereindeed eager to speak sal and particular, Bolshevik.Others could not avoid doing so. Most continued acting theirJewishJewish:at times in publicspaces,at times circumscribing ness to the privatesphereof their livesonly. Ironically,neither of the parties who took part in the 1922 strife over the former Talmud-Torah building noted at the beginning of this article (JewishCommunistsversusrank-and-file Jews) relied on officialreligiousinstitutionsto expresstheirJewishidentity. Although someJews were impatient to escape the confines of Jewish religious practice,manyothers soughtwaysto maintain religioustraditionsin light of Soviet reality,either out of their own desire or because of
[25]
[26]
their allegiance to preexisting social networks and family ties. The sharp decline of rabbinic authority due to Bolshevik persecution did not lead such Jews to abandon folk yidishkayt. In fact, the latter emerged with unusual strength precisely because of the weakness of official religious authority. The persistence of kosher meat production (often without rabbinic supervision) and circumcision (often by a medical doctor) are indicative of the evolution of Jewish practices from religious commandments to ethnic habits and the transformation of Jewish identity from a religious to an ethnic category.94
Notes I wouldlike to thank MarionKaplan,NancySinkoff,and BarryTrachtenberg for their commentsand suggestions. 1 Natsionalniy ArkhivRespublikiBelarus(NationalArchiveof the Bela53-69. rus Republic,hereafterNARB),f. 42, op. 1, d. 1437,11. 2 On Apr.16-18, 1922,a group of delegatesfrom the Commissionfor the Requisitionof ChurchTreasures of the MinskRegion,agentsof the BelorussianSecretPolice (GPU),and membersof the Evsektsiia (the JewishSection of the CommunistParty),took possessionof synagogue buildingsand nationalizedceremonialobjectsfor propagandaand 1-5. By 1924,Soviet culturalpurposes.See NARB,f. 521,op. 1, d. 1, 11. 70 of the 120 synagogues authoritieshad confiscatedapproximately and houses of prayerexisting in Minskbefore the Revolution.GosArkhivMinskoiOblasti (StateArchiveof MinskOblast, udarstvenniy hereafterGAMO), f. 591, op. 1, d. 14,1.82. 3 On the conversionof the MinskTalmud-Torah building into a secular Yiddishschool and a centerfor orphanedchildren after 1917,see Elias in Khesed lein Minsk,1917-1941," Schulman,"Yidishe kultur-tetikayt ed. MosheStarkman(LosAngeles, 1970),782;NARB,f. 42, op. 1, d. 8-11. 1137,1.117;and NARB,f. 42, op. 1, d. 649, 11. 4 GAMO, f. 37, op. 1, d. 224, 11. 97, 99. 5 In 1897,there were47,562Jewsliving in Minsk,forming52.3 percentof the citypopulation;in 1923,theJewsnumbered48,312 and constituted 43.6 percentof the population;in 1926,they numbered53,686 and, though their percentageof the populationdropped to 40.8, they still constitutedthe single largestnationalgroup in the cityafter the Be43 percentof the citypopulationwasBelorussian,10 perlorussians: cent wasRussian,and a little over3 percentwasPolish."Minsk,"
Bolshaia Sovetskaia 39 (1926): 465-68. Entsiklopediia
Avraham: Seyfer ha-yoyvel le-Avraham Golomb tsu zayn akhtsikstn geboyrn-yor>
6 Yuri Slezkine, The Jewish Century(Princeton, 2000), 254. 7 Carlo Ginzburg, Ilfilo e le tracce: Vero, falso, finto (Milan, 2006), 258. 8 In 1924, there were 30 registered rabbis living in Minsk. See GAMO, f. 591,op.l,d. 14,1.82. 9 GAMO, f. 48, op. 1, d. 51, 11.4, 8. 10 On the institution of the korobka, see Isaac Levitats, The Jewish Commuin as well as his The 1772-1844 York, 52-57, Russia, (New 1943), nity Jewin Russia, 1844-1917 (Jerusalem, 1981), 23-31. ish Community 11 Kh. Ber, "Der protses fun shokhtim-trest in Minsk: Driter briv,"Der Mar. 6, 1925, p. 3. ernes, 12 Nikolai V. Brovkin, Russia AfterLenin:Politics, Culture,and Society, 1921-1929 (London, 1998), 30-31. 13 Gita Gluskina, daughter of the Minsk rabbi Menachem Mendel Gluskin, recalls that her family was not entitled to an apartment because of her father's lishchentsy status. As a result, the rabbi, his wife, and their three daughters lived in the Main Synagogue, also known as Kalte Shul, located on Shkolnaia Street in Nemiga, and part of the With no access to heating or city's Synagogue Courtyard, or shul-hoyf. water, they slept in the women's section of the synagogue, among seforim (religious books), until 1930, when they moved to Leningrad. Personal interview with Gita Gluskina, June 18, 2004, Ramat Gan, Israel. 14 NARB, f. 6, op. 1, d. 133, 1. 13. 15 On the life and activities of Rabbi Yehoshua Tsimbalist, see Rabi Yehoshua me-Horodna zatsal moreh tsedek ve-rosh metivtah, kovets le-zikhro (Jeru-
[27]
salem, 1949). Le-korot ha-dat (Jeru16 A. A. Gershuni, Yahadutbe-rusyah redifot ha-sovyetit: salem, 1961), 140-42. Tsimbalist was the founder and head of the yeshivah, Rabbi Leibovich was the magidshiur (instructor of Talmud), and Rabbi Yitzchak Tuvya Goldin was the administrator. I thank Ben-Tsion Klibansky for sharing this information with me. 17 "Report of the Accomplishments of the Rabbinical Board in Russia During 5688,"JDC Archives, Collection 21/32, file 476, p. 11. 18 Ibid., p. 3. For more on the Council of Rabbis of the USSR, see David E. Fishman, "To Our Brethren Abroad: Letters and Reports by Soviet Rabbis, 1925-1930,"/^5 in Russia and EasternEurope1-2, nos. 54-55 (2005): 108-79. 19 GAMO, f. 12, op. 1, d. 1016, 11.25-30. 36-37. 20 Rabi Yehoshua me-Horodna, 21 "Surveyof the Religious and Cultural Work Accomplished with the Funds Offered by the Joint Distribution Committee in the USSR by Means of the Rabbinic Committee of the USSR,"JDC Archives, Collection 21/32, file 473, p. 3, and file 476, p. 3. On Jewish students in Minsk who attended both Soviet schools and heders in 1929, see GAMO, f. 320, op. 1, d. 600, 11.3-6, 10-12. 22 See Yidsektsye fun der Vaysrusisher visnshaftlekher akademye, Di Rabonim in dinstfun finants-kapital (Moscow, 1930), 26-27.
f. 428, op. 1, d. 164, 11. 23 GAMO, 80-81, 93, 119-23, 137. 24 In 1935,a numberof undergroundheders still operatedin Minsk.See
[28]
Arn Rozin, Mayn veg aheym: Memuamfun
an asir-tsiyon in ratn-farband
25 26
27
28 29
30
31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38
(Jerusalem, 1981), 76. For the existence of an institution for adults to study Torah in Minsk until the eve of World War II, the so-called "heder Shul," see Gershuni, Yahadutbe-rusyah 142. ha-sovyetit, See, e.g., Yidsektsye fun der Vaysrusisher visnshaftlekher akademye, Di Rabonimin dinstfun finants-kapital, 26-29. Inaugurated on Sept. 1, 1906, the Great Minsk Choral Synagogue was requisitioned on Feb. 2, 1923, "to satisfy the cultural needs of the Jewish working masses of the city."First transformed into the Jewish Workers' House of Culture (Evreiskii Rabochii Dom Kul'tury), a club that hosted political and cultural events, in 1928 the synagogue was converted into the Belorussian Yiddish State Theater. See NARB, f. 4, op. 1, d. 1, 11.192-93, and GAMO, f. 591, op. 1, d. 13, 1. 19. Kh. Ber, "Der protses fun shokhtim-trest in Minsk: Tsveyter briv. Der Mar. 5, 1925, p. 3. Here, for the shohet tog fun protses," Der ernes, Droykin, and for a number of other people mentioned in this article, I identify them by surname only because the documents did not provide first names or initials. Kh. Ber, "Der protses fun shokhtim-trest in Minsk: Zekster briv,"Der Mar. 11, 1925, p. 2. ernes, Known as halef,the knife used during kosher slaughtering must have a perfectly sharp blade, free of dents or imperfections. If the blade is damaged or uneven, the meat may not be eaten byJews. According to custom, the rabbi is the person who inspects the knives of the ritual slaughterers and provides them with a written authorization attesting their qualification as shohtim.As a result, even if Droykin followed the remaining rules of shehitahbut did not operate under rabbinical supervision, his meat was technically not kosher. Zelig Kalmanovitch, "Yidishe bildlekh fun rusland," Letstenayes,Mar. 24, 1925, p. 2; Zelig Kalmanovitch, "Yidishe tipn in ratn-rusland," Letste nayes,Apr. 7, 1925, p. 3. 1 thank Joshua Karlip for bringing these articles to mv attention. M. Shimshelievitsh, Minskershokhtim-trest, (Minsk, 1925). Ber, "Der protses fun shokhtim-trest in Minsk: Zekster briv,"2. Kalmanovitch, "Yidishe bildlekh fun rusland," 2. Kh. Ber, "Der protses fun shokhtim-trest in Minsk: Ershter briv,"Der Mar. 3, 1925, p. 3. ernes, Kh. Ber, "Der protses fun shokhtim-trest in Minsk: Zekster briv. Haynt iz der yom ha-din," Der ernes, Mar. 10, 1925, p. 2. Kh. Ber, "Der protses fun shokhtim-trest in Minsk: Der psak-din," Der Mar. 11, 1925, p. 2. ernes, GAMO, f. 12, op. 1, d. 539, 11.22-24. Robin Judd, "The Politics of Beef: Animal Advocacy and the Kosher
Butchering Debates in Germany,"JewishSocialStudiesn.s. 10, no. 1 (Fall 2003): 126-27. Feb. 4, 39 Abe, "Zol nemen a sof tsu der shvartser khutspe!," Oktiaber, 1928, p. 3. See also Yidsektsye fun der Vaysrusisher visnshaftlekher akademye, Di Rabonimin dinstfun finants-kapital,27. 40 GAMO, f. 12, op. 1, d. 1016, 1.37. For a similar case in Germany in which the German Army consumed meat from cattle that had been slaughtered ritually, see Judd, "Politics of Beef," 127. 41 An eygener [pseud.], "Gots-straptshes in Minsker shekht-hoyz," Oktiaber,Feb. 25, 1928, p. 3. 42 Ber, "Der protses fun shokhtim-trest in Minsk: Ershter briv,"3. 43 Abe, "Zol nemen a sof tsu der shvartser khutspe!," 3. This amount included only cattle, not chickens, sheep, or calves slaughtered according to the Jewish method. 44 Khaym Vilentshik, "Anofener briv dem Minsker rov Gluskin," Oktiaber, Feb. 5, 1928, p. 4. 45 GAMO, f. 12, op. 1, d. 1016, 11.37, 43-44. See also "Di yidishe arbetndike froy kegn shtrayml: Rezolutsye fun der yidisher sektsye fun der delegatn-farzamlung in shtotishn rayon ongenumen 22 februar 1928," Feb. 26, 1928, p. 4. Oktiaber, 46 On the involvement of Jewish women in food riots, see, e.g., Paula E. Hyman, "Immigrant Women and Consumer Protest: The New York JewishHistory20, no. 1 City Kosher Meat Boycott of 1902," American 91-105. 1980): (Sept. 47 GAMO, f. 12, op. 1, d. 1016, 11.34-35. 48 See GAMO, f. 12, op. 1, d. 1016, 1. 74, and "Afnveg fun opshafn di Feb. 26, 1928, p. 4. takse," Oktiaber, 49 G. Naumov, "Akoshere artel," Oktiaber, Apr. 18, 1928, p. 4. 50 GAMO, f. 12, op. 1, d. 1016, 1.48. 51 According to Rabbi Asher Karshtein, the Shoavei Mayim yeshivah was closed down following Rabbi Tsimbalist's departure for Palestine in 7. 1933. See Rabi Yehoshua me-Horodna, Yahadutrusyahmi52 A. A. Gershuni, Yehudim ve-yahadutbi-vritha-moatsot: vol. ha-zman 2 ve-ad Stalin ha-aharon, (Jerusalem, 1970), 86. tkufat 53 Shifres, "Shoykhet Rapoport, der held fun mord un oysgelasnkayt, Mar. 30, 1934, p. 3. Oktiaber, 54 A.D., "Di klerikal-sadistishe fizionomye fun reb Yankev-TevyeRapoApr. 2, 1934, p. 3. For a radically different assessment of port," Oktiaber, ve-yahadutbi-vritha-moatsot, Rapoport's figure, see Gershuni, Yehudim 88-91, and Rozin, Mayn vegaheym,38, 43-45. 55 On sexual anxieties and Jewish butchers in fin-de-siecle Germany, see Judd, "Politics of Beef," 125. 56 For the official account of the Rapoport show-trial,see "Gerikhtibern farreb Yankev-Tevye Apr. 1, 1934, Rapoport,"Oktiaber, brekher-sadist-shoykhet p. 4, and "Protsesibern klerikal, farbrekher-sadistdem shoykhet YankevApr. 3, 1934, p. 4. Tevye Rapoport: Ershterovnt fun gerikht,"Oktiaber,
[29]
[30]
57 "Protses ibern klerikal, farbrekher-sadist dem shoykhet Yankev-Tevye Rapoport: Urteyl," Oktiaber, Apr. 7, 1934, p. 3. 58 For the influence that the shtetl had on Jewish life in Soviet urban centers until World War II, see Mordechai Altshuler, Soviet Jewryon theEve
of the Holocaust: A Social and Demographic Profile (Jerusalem, 1998),
59 60 61 62
45-46. On the persistence of kosher butchering in Soviet cities in the 86-87. 1930s, see Gershuni, Yehudim ve-yahadutbi-vritha-moatsot, NARB, f. 63, op. 2, d. 462, 11.24-25, 72. GAMO, f. 37, op. 1, d. 229, 11.417-18. Ibid., 11.408-10. Francois Furet and Jacques Le Goff, "Histoire et ethnologic," in Methodologie de Vhistoireet des sciences humaines, vol. 2 of Melanges en Vhonneur de
FernandBraudel(Toulouse, 1973), 237. New 63 Quoted in Elizabeth Wyner Mark, ed., The Covenantof Circumcision: on an Ancient Perspectives JewishRite (Hanover, N.H., 2003), xx. 64 Joshua Rothenberg, The JewishReligion in theSovietUnion (New York, 1971), 142-43. 65 NARB, f. 37, op. 1, d. 228, 11.37-38. 66 Ibid., 1. 38. 67 As of 1924, 984 (or 60 percent) of the members of the Construction Workers' Union in the city and district of Minsk were Jewish. GAMO, f. 12, op. l,d. 166,1. 11. 68 In 1928, e.g., the party-cell of Minshvei counted 155Jewish members and only 6 Belorussians. GAMO, f. 1260, op. 1, d. 3, 11.37-41. 69 Stephen Kotkin, MagneticMountain: Stalinismas a Civilization(Berkeley, 1995), 295. 70 GAMO, f. 12, op. 1, d. 166, 11.11-12. 71 GAMO, f. 1260, op. 1, d. 2, 11.54-56, 64. 72 GAMO, f. 1260, op. 1, d. 3, 11.75-76. 73 Ibid., 11.99-101. 74 "Karl-Yankl," in The Complete Works of Isaac Babel,ed. Nathalie Babel (New York, 2002), 619-27. 75 GAMO, f. 37, op. 1, d. 308, 11.16-17. 76 GAMO, f. 37, op. 1, d. 229, 11.216-17, 408-10, 417-18. 77 Sholem Levin, "Undzere 'opgeshtanene' froyen," Oktiaber, Feb. 28, 1930, p. 2. 78 "Abrivin redaktsye," Oktiaber, Tan.15, 1928, p. 4. 79 See, e.g., Rothenberg, JewishReligion in theSovietUnion, 147, and Arkadii Zeltser, Evrei sovetskoi provintsii: Vitebski mestechki, 1917-1941 (Mos-
cow, 2006), 271. 80 GAMO, f. 37, op. 1, d. 1335, 11.5-6. 81 GAMO, f. 164, op. 5, d. 89, 11.231-34. Mar. 22, 82 "Di klerikaln-shediker farn proletarishn gerikht," Oktiaber, 1931, p. 3. 83 For Soviet propaganda literature against the practice of circumcision, see Dr. Olshanetskii, "Doloi obrezanie," Bezvimik,nos. 21-22 (1930): 33-36,
84 85
86 87 88 89 90
reissued in L. I. Kilimnik, ed., Kommunisticheskaia vlasVprotiv religiiMoiseia:Dokumenty 1920-1937 i 1945-1953 gg. (Vinnytsya, 2005), 146-51, and i obrezanii G. la. Kiselev, O kreshchenii (Moscow, 1937), esp. 24-30. "Di klerikaln-shediker farn proletarishn gerikht," Oktiaber, Mar. 25, 1931, p. 3. See, e.g., Gershuni, Yehudim 93-95, and ve-yahadutbi-vritha-moatsot, David L. Mekler, Mentshun mashinin Sovyetn-land: Faktn, bilder,ayndruknfun a rayzeiberSovyetRusland (Warsaw, 1936), 297-98. GAMO, f. 1257, op. 1, d. 21, 11.32-35. GAMO, f. 164, op. 5, d. 94, 11.17-30. GAMO, f. 164, op. 5, d. 92, 11.143, 175. See Sander Gilman, The Jew'sBody(New York, 1991), 123, 155. See Robin Judd, "Circumcision and Modern Jewish Life: A German Case Study, 1843-1914," in Mark, Covenantof Circumcision, 142-55, and Gershon Bacon, "Kfiyahdatit, hofesh bitui ve-zehut modernit be-polin: Y. L. Peretz, Shalom Asch ve-shaaruriyat ha-milah be-varshah, 1908," in
Mi-Vilna li-Yerushalaym: Mehkarim be-toledotehemuve-tarbutam shelyehudei mizrah eropah mugashim le-profesorShmuel Werses,ed. David Assaf et al.
[31]
(Jerusalem, 2002), 167-85. 91 S\ezY\ne,Jewish Century, 254. 92 On baptism, see Christel Lane, ChristianReligion in theSoviet Union:A Sociological Study(Albany, N.Y., 1978), esp. 59-62. With the exception of Lane's sociological study, which focuses primarily on the postwar years, there is no historical research about the practice of baptism among Soviet citizens during the 1920s and 1930s. One plausible reason for this deficiency is that, in the absence of a "body marker"such as in the case of circumcision, it is more difficult for historians to ascertain the level or degree of baptism. Likewise, Communist Party officials could not easily check after the fact whether a child had been baptized, as they could with circumcision. 93 Kotkin, MagneticMountain, esp. chap. 5. 94 This kind of synthetic SovietJewish identity has been explored recently by Anna Shternshis, who examines similar phenomena but from an anJewish thropological vantage point. Anna Shternshis, Sovietand Kosher: in theSovietUnion, 1923-1939 (Bloomington, Ind., 2006). PopularCulture

Behavior Unbecoming A Communist - Religious Practice in Soviet Minsk

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Behavior Unbecoming A Communist - Religious Practice in Soviet Minsk

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Behavior Unbecoming a Communist: Jewish Religious Practice in Soviet Minsk Author(s): Elissa Bemporad Source: Jewish Social Studies,

Behavior Unbecoming a Communist: Jewish Religious Practice in Soviet Minsk

(Winter 2008): 1-31

The Case of ComradeGorlin

Arn Rozin, Mayn veg aheym: Memuamfun

You might also like