Emil Fackenheim (b. 1916)

Fackenheim is one of the more important contemporary philosophers of Judaism. One of his primary concerns is to come to terms with the Holocaust. In a way he is seeking how to relate to the Holocaust emotionally, and he seems willing to consider any philosophical position that allows him to do so.

For this reason it is often difficult to tell exactly which philosophical position Fackenheim endorses; he is pursuing a variety of options searching for one that will meet his emotional needs. In the following notes I will try to draw forth one of the recurring philosophical positions suggested by his writings.

In order to understand this position we must take a very brief look at the views of the 19^th century German philosopher, Hegel.

Among his many contributions to philosophy Hegel put forward a philosophy of history. Hegel thought that history had a certain logic to it. Each period in history contains a structure which eventually collapses and brings forth a new period in history. This new period contains its own structure until it too collapses and ushers in a new period. This process continues until the final stage of history is reached. This final stage contains a stable structure; that is, it is not doomed to collapse and bring forth a new era in history.

Hegel viewed this entire process of history moving along as inevitable and he named this process as Geist or Spirit. Many (but not all) of Hegel’s followers interpreted this Spirit as God. 

One of Hegel’s followers (who did not accept the identification of Spirit and God) was Karl Marx. Marx adopted, for the most part, Hegel’s philosophy of history and thus we can use the familiar views of Marx to illustrate Hegel’s views. Fackenheim also adopts aspects of Hegel’s philosophy of history; however, it is important to note that Fackenheim is not a Marxist. 

Marx used Hegel’s philosophy of history to explain the evolution of the world’s economic systems. For example, he thought that the feudal system of the middle ages could only be stable for a certain amount of time. With the inevitable introduction of the middle-class, who were neither noble nor serf, the feudal system collapsed and gave way to capitalism.

Marx’s views about the capitalist stage of economic history are well known. He thought the people in a capitalist society would divide into different classes: the workers and the owners of capital. This system could survive for awhile; but, the ever widening rift between the quality of life between the workers and the owners could not last forever. Eventually and inevitably the workers would revolt and bring to an end the capitalist system. Even though this process was inevitable it is the duty of the enlightened vanguard of people to help usher an end to the capitalist system.

In its place the workers would institute a classless society—an age where property was owned communally and thus there would be no distinction between owner and worker. This classless society would represent the end of economic history since there would be no more class divisions to push history onto another stage.

Fackenheim’s applies Hegel’s philosophy of history to the history of the Jewish people. Fackenheim identifies certain events in Jewish history as epoch-making events and tries to discern a logic of history that connects them together. Following is a list of possible epoch-making events:

• Exodus from Egypt
• The theophany (the revelation of God) at Sinai
• The fall of the Temples of ancient Israel
• The Crusades
• The Inquisition and the Expulsion of the Jews from Spain
• The Emancipation of the Jews in Europe
• The Holocaust
• The founding of the State of Israel

It is hard to tell exactly which events count as epoch-making because Fackenheim gives conflicting accounts; however, he does say that these events establish new demands on Jews as well as all others. They also alter the ways we see future events. For example, the Holocaust is epoch-making because it is a unique event that makes new moral demands on all of mankind, and alters the perception of consequent history. 

Drawing from Hegel, Fackenheim thinks that the epoch-making events of Jewish history are pushed along by a process. Fackenheim thinks the force involved here is the God of the Bible. His view of God is as of an active agent who has a special relationship with the Jewish people and who reveals his/her/its self from time to time through this epoch-making events.
Like Hegel, Fackenheim seems to think that there is a final stage of Jewish history where history, so to speak, runs out of steam. I will talk about this final stage later in these notes. 

Like Marx, Fackenheim thinks that although the progression of history is inevitable, we are obligated to play our own roles within that progression. In particular, he says that Jews should have an authentic response to the epoch-making events that confront them.

For example, for the Jews who experienced the revelation at Sinai the only authentic response would be to believe in God. For the Jews who experienced the destruction of the second Temple, the authentic response would be to turn to (or remain with) rabbinic Judaism.

Fackenheim spends a considerable amount of effort trying to figure out the authentic response to the more modern of the epoch-making events. These modern events are emancipation, the Holocaust, and the establishment of the State of Israel. Today’s Jews are to be judged by how authentically they respond to modern epoch-making events.

It is difficult to tell what counts for Fackenheim as authentic response. As we will shortly see, he gives some examples; but, he does not give general criteria. Later in the course I will suggests a way fill out Fackenheim’s position.

In response to the Holocaust Fackenheim suggests a variety of authentic responses. But first, Fackenheim urges us to understand the peculiar nature of the Holocaust. He claims that the Holocaust was unique because the primary goal of the Nazis was to kill Jews. Ideology flowed from this primary goal. The Holocaust was evil for evil’s sake. It was unequaled in history.

Authentic Responses to the Holocaust

1) As philosophy used logic in the past to judge all religions, including Judaism, so now after the Holocaust Midrash, the storytelling of Judaism, must judge all philosophy. In the handout by Bar-On we see how Himmler, one of the highest ranking people in the Nazi hierarchy, was reading Kant’s works on morality even as he was helping carry out the Final Solution. Philosophy did not stop the murders; indeed, it may have even played a role. It therefore loses its moral status as judge of everything else.

2) A religious response is not necessary to be authentic. The Jews who witnessed the revelation at Sinai could authentically respond only by believing in God. The Jews who must respond to the Holocaust need not do so with a belief in a traditional God, or any God at all.

3) Rather, the Jews of today, indeed all people, are "forbidden to hand Hitler yet another, posthumous victory." Fackenheim calls this the 614^th commandment. Traditional Judaism recognizes 613 commandments in the Bible. The Holocaust adds another commandment of Biblical significance.
But what would such a victory be? Fackenheim suggests the following ways to keep victory from Hitler.

• We must not forget the victims
• We must affirm the sacredness of live over death
• We must have hope for the world and not allow another Holocaust
• We must not despair of God
• Jews must survive, raising Jewish children
• We must not compromise with evil, no matter how insignificant
• Uniqueness: The Holocaust defies any form of rational explanation; it can be overcome in action, not by rational thought

4) It is not enough, though, for the authentic Jew to observe the 614^th commandment. The authentic Jew must understand the logic of modern Jewish history which includes the epoch-making events of emancipation, the Holocaust, and the establishment of the state of Israel.

The emancipation of the Jews in Western Europe allowed them to achieve forms of individual self-liberation. Through the use of reason and culture Jews were able to attain a state of individual enlightenment. Unfortunately, this emphasis on the individual opened the door for the next stage in history. Since liberated Jews were liberated as individuals they were not able to resist the forces that sought to destroy them in the Nazi era.

The authentic Jew of today, recognizing the logic of the history of modern Judaism, will strive for collective self-liberation. This liberation is achieved as a people, not as individuals. Of course the model of this collective self-liberation is a liberated, safe and secure Jewish state.
Through this liberated, safe and secure state the Jewish people will live neither as "free people" absent of Judaism nor as Jews divorced from the world; rather, Jews must live as into "the realm of lived history" 

Summary of Questions for Fackenheim

• How do we determine what is an epoch-making event?
• What constitutes a correct authentic response?
• Why can’t reason judge itself? And if reason can’t judge it itself what reason could we have for turning to Midrash? Isn’t there a danger of becoming tribalistic and divorced from morality?
• How does belief in this sort of God solve the problem of the Holocaust, and more generally of the problem of evil. 

Comments on Fackenheim’s View on God

Fackenheim views God in the way that Hegel views Geist. God is the process which unfolds through the logic of history. This is a philosophical position which Fackenheim does not expect the authentic Jews of any era (yet) to understand. 

He does expect the authentic Jews who witnessed the revelation at Sinai to believe in God, although not his Hegelian version of God. The authentic Jews of today responding to the Holocaust are called upon neither to believe in a traditional view of God, nor Fackenheim’s philosophic view.

Perhaps, once there exists a liberated, safe and secure Jewish collective the final stage of Jewish history will be possible—an age which, among other things, would allow Jews, and all other peoples, to come to a proper, i.e. Hegelian, understanding of God.