Hillel: If Not Now, When? by Joseph Telushkin

Hillel: If Not Now, When? Reviews

• 
  Deena

  It's very hard to know how to review this book because there were so many aspects of it that spoke to me. We are fortunate, I think, to have Rabbi Telushkin with us in this age...
  
  I don't think I fully understood the extent to which our religion owes its modern manifestation to the teachings and philosophy of Rabbi Hillel. I certainly didn't understand the extent to which I personally encapsulate so much of his belief and interpretation of Judaism and the Jewish life.
  
  One would not need to be Jewish to gain from reading this - but anyone Jewish who doesn't know Hillel well definitely will benefit from it.
  
  I'm adding some more because the above just wasn't worthy...
  
  I appreciated the explanation of "there is no messenger in a case of sin," for its historical applications (not that they were mentioned in the book).
  
  The discussion on willingness to hear alternative or conflicting viewpoints really resonates today, in so many aspects of life.
  
  The entire chapter on teaching and teachers... can I trade the term "Socratic" for "Hillel-esque" when people describe my classroom method?
  
  So many parts of this book are worthy of mention... It is also extremely readable. You don't need to be a Talmudic scholar to get through it; Rabbi Telushkin offers a glossary, footnotes, and endnotes to help those of us who don't have the religious or historical background to follow along completely. But that makes it sound like this is very dense, and it really isn't. Anyone who is interested in the material could get through this succinct work, regardless of their previous level of knowledge. The length of time it took me to get through it is reflective of my life, and has nothing to do with the book itself - which was so very worth my time.
  
• 
  Craig Bolton

  "Hillel: If Not Now, When? (Jewish Encounters) by Joseph Telushkin (2010)"
  
  This volume is the latest example of the evolution of Joseph Teluskin from a rather shallow popularizer to a profound Jewish thinker. The two volumes of his planned three volume set on Jewish Ethics are also well worth reading.
  
  This is a pretend biography of Hillel, in fact, we know very little about Hillel on which to base any such biography. The sparcity of the source material has led to all sorts of speculations regarding what Hillel's complete views are like, some of which speculations have been very very different than Teluskin's present volume.
  
  This volume is really an extended essay and declaration by Teluskin in favor of what might be called "pluralistic Judaism." Pluralistic Judaism is the view that there is no one absolutely indisputably view of the particulars of Jewish law, but that there are and always have been many competing views on virtually every question concerning "observance." Pluralistic Jews not only acknowledge that state of affairs, but consider it as essential to an understanding of the living character of Judaism - which is principally centered around "taking seriously" such questions and debating over them. Those interested in that "take" on Judaism may want to look into the Shalom Hartman Institute, the scholars of which have similar views.
  
  This volume will have one of two fates. It will be totally ignored by Jews [my money is on this one] or it will result in a bloody fight between fundamentalist and nonfundamentalist Jews.
• 
  Hollisa Alewine

  Excellent analysis of the House of Hillel as well as the House of Shammai, its family foil. I didn't agree with all the author's conclusions concerning the similarities/differences between Yeshua and Shammai, but his historical log and method of presenting those facts and sources is admirable. I have used this book as a research source for my own books in the past, and will likely use it again. The failure of Christian education to help New Testament readers put the dialogues and letters into historical context is remedied by sources such as Rabbi Telushkin's. If students of the Christian Bible understood the dynamics presented in Hillel, it could help them decode "The Pharisees" dialogues in the Gospels and attribute statements and attitudes to the proper "House."
  
  A most pleasant surprise to Christian readers would be how many of the Pharisees from the House of Hillel welcomed a non-Jew to worship the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Additionally, Christian readers would have a new context for Pharisees, one that did not include words like "outward observance," "hypocrisy," "self-righteous," or "pretentious." Just as denominations would hate to be judged as a whole by the worst examples of the faith, Judaism should be evaluated according to the facts instead of lazy theology.
• 
  Karen

  A friend who grew up in and is active as an adult in a Conservative Temple really loved this book and I think it may resonate more strongly with people who share his background. A major theme of the book is that the Jewish religious community should be more liberal in welcoming potential converts. My personal experience as a convert to Judaism (Reform)felt like the experience that Teluskin advocates---so I didn't feel compelled by his argument that radical change from current attitudes back to the philosophy of Hillel is needed.
  Of interest to me were two commentaries: why Hille's reply to the potential convert was stated in the negative "do not do onto others"....rather than the positive "do onto others" (easier to commit to; consistent with the approach of the 10 commandments) and the three core differences between Christian and Jewish theology (God can forgive all sins vs. God forgives sins against God, you must seek forgiveness from the person for sins agains them; meet evil with pacifism by turning the other cheek vs. meet evil with resistance as in Moses killing the foreman who abused the slave; know God only through Jesus vs. any person can know God directly.)
• 
  Ellen

  Hillel's wisdom has continued to be studied by Jewish people from his death to the present, and he is among the most popular Rabbis and philosophers in the Jewish canon.
  
  Rabbi Telushkin's portrait of Hillel is clear, concise, and well-researched. What I found especially enlightening is the way Telushkin compared and contrasted Hillel's beliefs with his more conservative and traditional contemporaries. This contrast highlights how liberal and progressive Rabbi Hillel's views are, and how these ideas opened the door to Judaism for both his own contemporary "common readers" and those of the present.
  
  Without Hillel, it's doubtful that the Jewish people would be as compassionate, as open-minded to new ideas, or as welcoming to people who wish to become Jews themselves as we are in the 21st. century. I am grateful for his words - he was a blessing to all of humanity.
• 
  Patrick Aleph

  Amazing. Connecting Hillel to conversion was really interesting.
• 
  Philipp

  
  There was [an] incident involving a Gentile who came before Shammai and said to him: “Convert me to Judaism on condition that you will teach me the entire Torah while I stand on one foot.” Shammai pushed the man away with the building rod he was holding. Undeterred, the man then came before Hillel with the same request. Hillel said to him, “That which is hateful unto you, do not do unto your neighbor. This is the whole Torah, all the rest is commentary. Now, go and study.”
  

  
  
  Extremely interesting quasi-biography of Rabbi Hillel, a Babylonian Rabbi who was only a few decades older than Jesus (in fact, there's a good chance that Jesus learned from Hillel), one of the earliest teachers to coin the golden rule (see above). Telushkin has an obvious motivation in writing this book, it's the question of whether Judaism should allow converts or whether it should deter them, and if it should allow them, what it should expect from converts. Telushkin worries that Judaism may become a weak voice in public life if there are too few Jews, so he looks to Hillel, who, as you can see above, was extremely open to converts. Hillel let anyone in and didn't expect too much. Telushkin sees Hillel's motivation as unconditional love of people - given enough study, they'll be observant, don't worry.
  
  But the book is about so much more than the convert-question. There's much to learn from Hillel and in turn, from the Torah. I've once heard the Torah described as 10% 'original' text and 40% arguments between various scholars on that text, then another 50% arguments around the first arguments. The story of the House of Hillel and the House of Shammai fits right in there, two 'competing' schools of Torah study with their own interpretations, one more humanist/as long as it makes things better for people, one much more literal, "let's follow the letter of the law". There's a great view of life there, one that takes nothing at face-value, where everything needs to be discussed, and nothing is the way it is because it has always been like this. Everything loses flexibility once it becomes encoded.
  
  

  
  It isn’t simply the answer that is prized, it is the argument itself, the culture of disputation, the wrestling with the truth.
  

  
  
  I'm a big fan of learning for learning's sake, and Hillel gave me some more fuel for my conviction:
  
  

  
  Hillel is most famous as a teacher, but the Talmud makes it clear that his ability to teach anyone was connected to his ability to learn from anyone. The knowledge attributed to him by the Talmud has a quasi-magical element, like the wisdom of Solomon, who, we are told, knew the language of the birds and the beasts. All creation was for Hillel a subject worthy of study and capable of imparting wisdom. [...] Everything, in this view, has been created by God and is therefore worthy of study, worthy of compassion. Which is why, in the Talmud, nothing botanical or zoological was alien to Hillel. But also why it would not be sufficient to say of Hillel that nothing Jewish was alien to him. Nothing human was alien to him, and this insight only served as a bulwark for his Jewish faith.
  

  
  
  I leave you with this great quote:
  
  

  
  Knowledge is not static. If you don’t keep reviewing and adding, you decline. Which is why Hillel’s advice to the would-be convert, “Go and study,” applies to all of us, and at all times.
  
• 
  Donald

  I was totally unfamiliar with Telushkin before reading this book, but apparently he's generally a sort of pop theology type writer. There are some elements of that here (the book is not technical at all), but this book is not lazy pop theology: Telushkin knows his shit and cites everything. It can get repetitive at times (he makes his point about conversion over and over again), but it covers a lot of ground. He makes a strong argument for ethics being the defining characteristic of religiosity, rather than ritual observance. Highly recommended.
• 
  Eris

  Telushkin's writing is clear and concise, easy to read without being simplistic. I love the chance to learn more about my favorite figure in Jewish history. There are points which may find disfavor among the more legalistic or exclusive of thought, but Hillel's inclusive and loving approach to faith speaks to the heart of what is beautiful in Judaism.
• 
  Nathan Albright

  In general, I enjoyed reading this book.  For one, I must admit that my knowledge of the Jewish context of the New Testament, even when I do not consider writers like this one to be very knowledgeable and accurate when writing about the New Testament because they take their ideas about Jesus Christ and the Apostle Paul from mainstream Christianity, which itself does not understand the relationship between Christianity and the law.  Likewise, I appreciate this book in large part because it does not make the subject matter of the book (or the author) appear to be entirely sympathetic.  We see the author seeking to use the stories and examples of Hillel in order to promote a certain understanding of evangelism and Jewish identity in light of the demographic fears the author has about the decline of acceptance of Judaism and identification as Jewish among many people who could see themselves as such.  This motive is so honestly admitted and so transparently viewed, though, that it is impossible to think badly of the author for seeking to use the past, especially the underappreciated past, as a way for the Jewish community to strengthen itself in the present-day.
  
  This short volume of just a bit more than 200 pages consists of eighteen chapters in four parts along with three additional appendices.  The author begins with six chapters that discuss some of the unique teachings of Hillel (I), including his role as a particularly ardent student (1), his rise to leadership (2), his belief that at least a fundamental aspect of Judaism could be explained by standing on one foot (3), his relationship with three converts (4), his view of repairing the world through ethical conduct (5), and five traits of his that the author finds useful for contemporary Judaism (6).  After that there are five chapters that examine the contrast between Hillel and Shammai, the Talmud's most famous adversaries (II), including chapters about their different approaches in interpretation as opposed to literalism (I favor the latter, generally) (7), issues of thieves, brides, and lying as a virtue (8), issues regarding women (9), Shammai beyond the stereotype (10), and the discussion of the two Torahs (11).  There is one chapter that discusses the relationship between Jesus and Hillel (III, 12) that points to issues of interaction with Christianity, before the author closes with six chapters that look at lessons from the first century that apply to the contemporary situation of (American) Judaism (IV), including the need for outreach to others (13), the need for teachers to be patient (14), the need for students to question while they learn (15), the need to devote time to study even if one is busy (16), passionate moderation (17), and final thoughts about why we need Hillel more than ever now (18).  After this there are three appendices on additional teachings of Hillel (i), seven rules of Torah interpretation (ii), and Hillel's teachings in the Ethics of the Fathers (iii).
  
  Admittedly, I do not agree with everything in this book.  In particular, I find the author (following Hillel, it must be admitted) made some terrible logic in assuming that because the written Bible includes obvious unwritten material as part of its context that the Oral Torah held to by the Pharisees and their successors, including the author, is correct.  There is a leap here that deserves to be contested concerning the authority of the scribes and Pharisees and Orthodox rabbis in contradicting scripture through their human traditions and in disregarding the authorities that God had set over them, as well as disregarding the authority of God when He Himself came as a man to rebuke and correct them in the person of Jesus of Nazareth.  Likely, an examination of these issues is likely not to be harmonious and easy, but it does suggest that the approach of the author in praising Hillel shows a certain blind spot to questions of transmission of tradition in the Talmud that, like the analogous issue in Islam concerning Hadiths [1], deserves to be questioned and dealt with openly.
  
  [1] See, for example:
  
  
  https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2015...
  
  
  https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2016...
  
  
  https://edgeinducedcohesion.blog/2018...
• 
  Carol

  I was interested in reading this book because (1) I knew nothing of the relationship between Hillel and Shammai and (2) what religious teachings by Hillel influenced Jesus’ teachings?
  
  The School of Shammai -- It is difficult to comprehend the structure of the theocratic government of Israel in the time of Christ. But the most important group in Israel was the Pharisees who sat under the teachings of a rabbi named Shammai, who founded his school shortly before Jesus was born. Most believed, among other things, that the Hebrew descendants of Abraham were the only people beloved of God, and that no other people were of value in His sight. Salvation was thus only available to Jews--and so, in their early days, the Shammaiites wouldn’t even welcome Gentile converts to Judaism. The school of Shammai, which was politically proactive, also had close ties to the infamous zealots, a group of fanatics who favored armed revolt against Rome. It’s critical to note that virtually every time you see Jesus or the apostles in strife against what the Bible labels as “Pharisees,” it is almost certainly referring to Pharisees or ex-Pharisees from the School of Shammai. Even before he became a Christian, Paul would have had many differences with his fellow Pharisees from this school, which would be the dominant influence in Judaism until the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD.
  
  The School of Hillel -- The school of Hillel was far more liberal, and its founder was renowned for placing people and justice at the heart of Judaism, whereas Shammai stressed strict observance of religious laws. While Hillel’s followers acknowledged that the Jews were God’s special people, they willingly accepted Gentile converts to Judaism in the belief that the God of Abraham allowed all to worship Him who would turn from idolatry. When you read about Hellenistic Jews (or about Jews with Greek names), this was the school whose rabbis would typically have accepted these Gentiles into the Jewish faith. Soon after the time when Jesus, at age 12, was in the Temple astonishing the priests with his wisdom, Hillel died and was eventually succeeded by his grandson Gamaliel, who was Paul’s tutor. Modern-day Judaism traces its roots to the teachings promoted by the followers of Hillel who survived the destruction of Jerusalem and began codifying their teachings around 200 AD.
  
  Hillel was so wise that even two sayings we commonly attribute to Jesus were supposedly coined by Hillel before his death, and were being quoted by Jesus in the Gospels. These were the Golden Rule, along with the summary of the Law and the prophets-- "Love God with all of your heart", and "love your neighbor as yourself." Whenever you see Jesus interacting positively with the Pharisees (Nicodemus or the rich young ruler), he is probably interacting with Pharisees from the school of Hillel.
  
  An example of the differences between Hillel and Shammai can be seen in the many cases where “the Pharisees” watch Jesus to see if He will heal someone on the Sabbath. We can reasonably surmise that these are Shammaiites by the fact that the school of Shammai viewed attending to a sick person on the Sabbath as work, while the school of Hillel viewed this as a good deed that was permissible on the Sabbath. Another example of the struggle over Jesus between both schools is seen in John 9:16: “Therefore said some of the Pharisees (probably from the school of Shammai) This man is not of God, because he keepeth not the Sabbath day. Others (probably from the school of Hillel) said, How can a man that is a sinner do such miracles? And there was a division among them.”
  
  Difference betwn error & sin --
  * A sin is a wrongful act that one knows is wrongful at the time of its commission.
  * An error is a wrongful act that is committed at a time when the person does not know (or has not yet realized) that such an act should not be committed.
  
  This distinction is important in understanding how men came to know the Law, and how they treated others who were yet unenlightened.
  
  (1) Moses was the first to come to discover the Law (he learned the hard way- through error.) Moses' first important error was smiting an Egyptian who was beating a Jew. Moses' act of vengeance was driven by his passion (anger): he met violence with (an even greater) act of violence. Moses' second important error was striking the rock when God had commanded him to speak to it. (Should call this one a sin because Moses knew he was acting wrongfully.) The choice of speaking (asking) versus striking (coercing) appeared to be unimportant, because it led to the same outcome (the rock gave water). What Moses had not considered was the rock's point of view. By striking the rock, Moses forced it to give water. Had he spoken to it, he would have created an opportunity for the rock to do a Mitzvah, a good deed. Moses' error was in depriving the rock of an opportunity to choose to be helpful.
  
  (2) Hillel discovered the fundamental rule of human conduct: "That which is hateful to you do not unto your fellow man." Hillel understood why adherence to this rule would lead to social stability, but Hillel probably did not know what action to take when the law was being violated in an important way. In other words, Hillel stated the conditions that had to be met for mankind to live in peace; but he did not have a plan for bringing the nonconforming members of society into compliance.
  
  (3) Jesus was the first man to solve the problem of what to do when Hillel's Law was being violated. He publicized the acts that caused one man to hurt another, and he made clear that the victim (himself included) was being hurt. However, he scrupulously avoided the act of vengeance, and he taught his disciples to do the same ("turn the other cheek"). Jesus, using Hillel's Law as a guide, and introducing the use of nonviolence as a tool to effect social change. Jesus restated Hillel's Law from the negative form ("Do not do unto another that which you would not want done to you") to the positive form ("Do unto others as you would have them do unto you").
  
  This is just a small part of this "biography."
  
  
  
  
  
  
• 
  05450003081322

  Informative read on Hillel. The author takes pains not to offend Christians, which I find a little tedious - though as a former Christian, I loved the comparison with Jesus to give extra context to Jesus' teachings. (The idea that Jesus never intended to start a new religion struck me particularly acutely.) Sometimes the footnotes and endnotes were redundant/repetitive. There were times where I lost the thread as Telushkin jumped from one topic to another, though his reasoning within each topic was easy to follow (maybe an issue with structure?). Feels like a book written by a kind and capable speaker, but not a rigorous or brilliant historian/philosopher/writer. Quick read, good supplement to other Torah commentaries.
• 
  Raymond Lu

  Easy to read and follow even for non-Jews
  
  The book is not specifically written either for Jews or Gentiles. As a non-Jew myself, this is the first time I’ve read a book on Judaism. Neither do I have any Jewish friends (as I live in Asia). I have heard of Hillel though, particularly the anecdote about summarizing the Torah. And that is what attracted me initially to read this book. It goes to explain the anecdote in more detail and gave me a better understanding of Hillel’s teachings far beyond the anecdote. Many of things, I find, can be applied to my life as a non-religious person.
• 
  E.S. Danon

  I learned a great deal about Hillel from this book, and also that there’s another way of being a Jew than what the “religious” tell us to be. Perhaps we follow too much of Shammai’s teachings in today’s age and have forgotten some of the most important lessons given to us.
• 
  Victor Del Rio

  Great book.
• 
  Sean

  I cannot remember that I have ever eagerly waited for a book to be published. I must say that I was not disappointed! For starters there is not any real biographical information on Hillel in the Talmud, but from what I grasped from this was that Telushkin wanted to revive the essence of Judaism that Hillel promoted. That essence is centered around ethics rather than on ritual observance.
  
  As a Christian I noticed that a similarity between Jesus and Hillel is that both are apparently talked about much more than listening to what they're saying and doing what they are asking. In the section where Telushkin compares and contrasts Jesus and Hillel I was forced to see Jesus in a different light. It is easy to understand one's faith when always surrounded by it, but it is quite another to see it from the viewpoint of an outsider. Even more so when the faith of the one on the inside stems from the faith of the one on the outside. I am impressed by Telushkin not bashing Jesus or Christians, but that he raised certain questions about Jesus concerning his Jewishness and how it differed from Judaism in specific ways and how it also was similar in specific ways as well.
  
  Overall I think it is a good, quick read, but with a lot of good things to remember tucked in there. His annotated bibliography section is also very helpful.
• 
  Amanda

  For the past few years, attending Passover Seder at a friend's home, I have been drawn to stories that come up about Rabbi Hillel. The one that impressed me to read more about him was his explanation of the whole Torah to a convert while standing on one foot: "That which is hateful to you, do not do to others. That is the whole of the Law; the rest is commentary. Now, go study." This book not only gave great insight into that story (Hillel's phrasing in the negative which echoed the Ten Commandments, and his very positive attitude towards anyone who wanted to learn more) but also was a crash course in some other basics of Jewish thought. Comparisons between Hillel and Jesus were also very interesting (they were two generations apart), and we're an interesting summary of some basic differences in thought between Jews and Christians through these two figures.
  
  
• 
  Bill Dauster

  Joseph Telushkin’s book, “Hillel: If Not Now, When?” is a wonderfully alive and tendentious biography of Hillel and his teachings. Telushkin, a Rabbi, writes fluidly and widely on matters of Jewish ethics, often from a how-to perspective. In this book on Hillel, Telushkin plausibly reconstructs the great Jewish sage’s character from his teachings recorded briefly and episodically in the classical sources. But Telushkin does not stop there, provocatively projecting Hillel’s teachings onto contemporary issues like openness to conversion and mistreatment of animals. The result is a splendidly engaging interaction with one of Judaism’s greatest minds, channeled through another. The result is a worthy addition to Nextbook’s Jewish Encounters series, of which it is a part.
• 
  Carl Marcus

  Unlike many of the reviewers here, I was somewhat disappointed with this book, although I do feel it is worthwhile.
  
  Admittedly, this cannot be a true biography of Hillel, there is not a great deal of information concerning him. Still I believe that the book would have been better with more history and less of Telushkin's sometimes strained interpretations of how Hillel would respond to ethical issues today.
  
  It also seems to me that the author occasionally reuses material from some of his earlier books. Ths may simply be that he addresses the same topics, but he could expand rather than repeat himself.
• 
  Rebecca

  Excellent book about the thinking of the most famous Tanna, Hillel, who lived about 2000 years ago. Rabbi Telushkin writes with enthusiasm and makes challenging ideas easy to understand. The one thing that disappointed me is that when presenting the "Hillel" side of arguments - particularly regarding modern day conversion - he doesn't show the strongest or most contemporary arguments on the other side. That doesn't mean I disagree with Hillel or Telushkin, over all, but there are things to be learned on the other side that we won't pick up because he has overlooked counterreasoning.
• 
  Samantha

  
  
  This little book was a pleasure to read. Telushkin left me wanting to read more, but the strongest part of this book comes when he presses contemporary Judaism to truly listen more closely to the open-hearted intention with which its most-quoted sage clearly speaks. And I like what he says about the destructive effects of inpatient teachers. A good reminder for me as a parent and co-worker too.
• 
  Birte

  The book is reads well, and at the same time goes into depth in describing Rabbi Hillel, as a person, as expounder of Jewish law in 1st C Eretz Israel.
  It explains well the different schools of thought at the time, and show the influence these schools often still have today.
  All too often there is a tendency to dismiss people of old as not having relevance on modern life. Joseph Telushkin clearly shows that great men like Hillel still have messages for us in the 21st C.
• 
  Barbara

  Hillel has a great heart and I liked hearing more about him. Telushkin is making some pointed arguments, but I'm not his prime audience, so I'd be curious what Orthodox readers think about this book.
  
• 
  Dara

  Excellent book that talks about the ways Hillel's thinking is and could be intrinsic to vibrant, progressive Judaism. His open and thoughtful approach has a lot to teach us about learning and understanding the diverse viewpoints of those around us.