"Hayei ahad haam: psifas mitokh ktavav uktavim aherim" ("The Life of Ahad Haam: A Web of Writings of Ahad Haam and Others" by Shulamit Laskov, Tel Aviv University, World Zionist Federation, 666 pages

Even for those conversant with the recent Jewish past, Ahad Ha'am occupies an ever-vague, indeterminate status. He remains known as a crucial influence on those who are still influential (Haim Nahman Bialik, Gershom Scholem). He is lauded, distantly, as something of a prophet of the peace movement, as someone who combined in Zionism's classical stage the roles of preeminent ideologue and internal critic. And he is shunned, at least ignored, in much the way anyone might be when their prose was - as was true of Ahad Ha'am's in Israel in the 1950s and '60s - thrust onto schoolchildren as a model for emulation. In contrast to Theodor Herzl (who remains revered, if little read) or Yosef Haim Brenner (who retains an edgy, fierce vitality), Ahad Ha'am tends to be relegated, on the whole, to the back shelves as a Russian-Jewish born Victorian who aged poorly.

Of all the significant currents in Zionism, his - called "cultural" or "spiritual" Zionism - seems the least concrete: It had little institutional buttressing (outside, that is, of the Israeli school system); it left little palpable mark on public life except, perhaps, for an influence on the sentiments of some toward theocracy, repression of Arabs, openness, or truth-telling in politics. (Among Ahad Ha'am's best-known essays is one called "The Truth From the Land of Israel.")

	Advertisement

This new book, with its decidedly old-fashioned feel, will do nothing to alter this situation. Shulamit Laskov, the prodigious, venerable documentary historian of Zionism, has produced an odd, but also an oddly fascinating new book. It is a dense, voluminous pastiche of letters to and from Ahad Ha'am, reminiscences of him, and many other bits and pieces, a compendium of countless scraps culled, meticulously, by Laskov. She calls it a "web," but it is better described as an overflowing attic, an enthusiast's vault of data. Once mined, it offers few new insights into his thought, but a good deal about the man behind the austere, seemingly benign, but coolly distant pseudonym.

Born Asher Ginzberg (1856-1927) to a Hasidic family, he wrote no full-length book, only essays, he held no position of any significance in the Zionist movement that nonetheless, intermittently, venerated and savaged him, and he was seen by some as intensely charismatic and by others as all-but characterless, a cold mask, a prissy bourgeois. Critics inside the Zionist movement (and these included a good many early, fervent enthusiasts) insisted that, despite his airs and the aura of importance surrounding him, he was capable only of carping, of tearing down but never building anything, and that his idea of Zion as a "cultural center" reduced the movement's goals to that of little more than a university campus. Yet, his reputation as a prime, if also mysterious mover and shaker in Jewish life, as someone who was immeasurably more significant than a mere leader, but for whom the source of his importance was unclear, inspired such a clamor around him that in at least one, widely circulated anti-Semitic tract, he was credited as having been the author of the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion."

Stunning Hebrew

Ahad Ha'am's Hebrew is stunning, it draws deftly on midrashic influences, it is European without being slavish, modern but also with echoes of classical Jewish texts, it is strong, lucid and often truly beautiful. He edited the most influential Hebrew intellectual journal of the late 19th century, Hashiloah; he launched a series of initiatives, most significantly, perhaps, the Bnei Moshe, a semi-secret, Masonic-like group that sought to recast the priorities of Zionism; and his closest admirers included Tel Aviv's Meir Dizengoff, and the founder of this newspaper. He lived much of his life in Russia, he moved in 1908 to England (where he worked as an executive for the Wissotzsky tea company), and he spent the last years of his life in Tel Aviv on the street named for him.

He was a relentless, often brilliant critic of Herzl's diplomatic moves, insisting that they were unnecessarily, even dangerously enveloped in secrecy, that they would harm Jews worldwide immeasurably more than help them, that they encouraged in Herzl's Jewish followers a potentially lethal messianism. And yet so much of what Ahad Ha'am himself did - from his first days on the Jewish public stage in Odessa in the late 1880s - was clothed in secrecy, coded in (an albeit secularized) Hasidism, meant to be read on different levels, as a series of subtle hints more than declamations, and rarely quite in the literal terms in which he wrote them. This master of essayistic clarity was, arguably, among the least transparent of all those engaged in the creation of modern Hebrew letters.

His personal affairs, not surprisingly, were clothed in great secrecy, and not the least of which because - as Laskov demonstrates with the use of extensive correspondence - of evidence of considerable mental imbalance in his immediate family. Ahad Ha'am feared, perhaps not without justification, that the problem was genetic in origin. (He, too, wrestled with persistent ailments, frequent depressions that doctors couldn't quite diagnose and, of course, among his greatest strengths as an essayist was his willingness, as he often insisted, on to unearth the "ugliest side" of contemporary Jewish affairs.) One of his sisters, Chana, suffered from recurrent emotional problems, as did his daughter Leah. Another sister, Esther, also had a nervous disorder, albeit a less serious one.

Aside from these dilemmas, Ahad Ha'am faced the marriage of his daughter, Rachel, to a Russian (he was converted by a liberal rabbi, but the father-in-law refused to recognize the conversion, and cut off all communication with his daughter for more than a decade); his son lived, openly, with a woman, refusing to marry because he declared the institution of marriage loathsome.

The rough contour of these details was previously known, but Laskov provides rich biographical buttressing, especially in terms of Ahad Ha'am's own active, at times maddeningly inflexible engagement with them. Especially fascinating is Laskov's lengthy treatment of his sister Esther's courtship, in truth her love affair, with Judah Magnes, then associate rabbi of New York's flagship Reform synagogue, Temple Emanu-El, later the first president of the Hebrew University. The couple met soon after Esther qualified as a doctor in Paris in 1906. He courted her and showered her with compliments, and she moved, with Ahad Ha'am's financial assistance, to New York, to be with him, it seems. And then, suddenly, Magnes began to shun her, and even his sister, who had been close to Esther at first, cut her off. (Soon after her departure, Magnes - who had, it seems, a soft spot for the offspring of Jewry's reigning elite - met and married his wife, a member of one of the wealthiest of American Jewish families.)

Astonishingly, it was in the midst of this domestic drama that Magnes delivered at Temple Emanu-El a sermon, later widely reprinted as "The Harmonious Jew," in which he lauded Ahad Ha'am as the only one capable of reproducing that "symphony of goodness and truth-telling" that had, in the past, so sustained Judaism. Esther wrote bitterly to her brother at the time about how deplorable it was that Magnes could so lavishly praise him from the pulpit while, at the same time, privately so mistreating her.

More than books, art or music

At the heart of these teachings - which Magnes so embraced, that so bedeviled the Zionist movement that Ahad Ha'am savaged, and alienated, and yet more than obliquely influenced - was the belief that nationalism's first task was to salvage culture, which meant for Ahad Ha'am immeasurably more than a people's books or art or music.

The most palpably indispensable fixtures of Jewish culture through the ages were, as he identified them, Jewry's commitment to an intellectual elite (perhaps his most brilliant, impassioned essays were those he wrote on Moses and Moses Maimonides), its belief in honesty, and justice.

His primary theme, throughout his long, contentious career, was arguably the prerequisites for leadership. The values embodied in Jewry's most preeminent leaders, prophetic in their origins and more fundamental than kashrut or Shabbat, made it inconceivable for Jews to oppress, or to persecute. As he wrote, close to the end of his life, in 1922: "Our blood was spilled like water in every corner of the world for thousands of years, but we did not spill blood."

Ahad Ha'am was, as he saw it, a moralist who felt it essential for Jews to carve out for themselves a home, a national state where they could continue to survive, perhaps to flourish, a state whose existence was essential for the continued existence of the Jews but where the needs for pragmatism, essential as they were, would never outweigh the imperative for decency. He helped draw up the maps that set the stage for the 1917 Balfour Declaration; he was key advisor to Chaim Weizmann in London. He pushed for the eventual creation of a Jewish state, but because he understood that this would cause harm, and would be resented by another people, he insisted that it must be accomplished with the minimum of aggression, and accompanied by an awareness that while satisfying one's own needs wasn't immoral, they must always be balanced, perilously, against the needs of others.

The much-vaunted delicacy of liberal Zionism has inspired much contempt in recent years: It has come to be seen as a convenient shield for oppression, as a way of massaging one's conscience while robbing another people of their land, their rights, their humanity. It is seen by some as hypocritical, in its willingness to acquiesce to the humiliation of another people without admitting as much and, hence, while it clothes itself in claims of its own decency, it lacks the essential decency to tell the truth with the unvarnished transparency that is ever more characteristic of those on the political right.

Zionism is by no means the first or only ideology to inspire a modern state confronted with the necessity to balance exasperating, often seemingly intractable needs of this sort, and while Ahad Ha'am offered no concrete solution to these dilemmas, he managed, some one hundred years ago, to outline their contour with an uncanny, impressive clarity. There is little reason to disbelieve his sincerity, his lifelong preoccupation with the underbelly, the tugs and pulls, the possible horrors unveiled in the making of utopia.

He resembles, in this respect, another 20th-century essayist, far better read than is Ahad Ha'am, but who shared with him a strikingly comparable set of persistent concerns - a similar predisposition for the sketching of dystopia, utopia's ugly sibling, a keen awareness, a bemused, but deep love for his own people that he explored time and again, a patriotism that he insisted was wholly consonant with humanism, hatred for xenophobia, and cant.

George Orwell saw nationalism as fundamentally jingoistic, but he understood patriotism, which he explored frequently, especially during the years of World War II and their immediate aftermath, in terms that Ahad Ha'am would immediately have understood. In "The Lion and the Unicorn: Socialism and the English Genius" (1941), he admitted that while national characteristics are "not easy to pin down," they are an undeniable reality. He suggested that England has a civilization as distinctive as Spain's - he focuses on aspects, both seemingly mundane and self-evidently significant, but he insists that in the identification of culture even the most mundane can be eminently significant. English culture is "somehow bound up with solid breakfasts and gloomy Sundays, smoky towns and winding roads, green fields and red-pillar-boxes. It has a flavor of its own." It is made of a people who are un-artistic, un-intellectual, practical, hypocritical, who treasure, above all, privacy, shun organized religion, are gentle, essentially anti-militaristic.

In his essays Orwell praises, sardonically but also vigorously, English food; he insists that "Bad Climates are Best." "There is a time to sit in the garden in a deck chair, and there is a time to have chilblains and a dripping nose. Perhaps five days out of seven our climate gives us cause to curse it, but there are also days, especially in the spring and autumn, when even the streets of London take on a beauty that is not to be found in sunnier lands."

No doubt old-fashioned

Much of Ahad Ha'am's essayistic career was spent in an attempt to identify how Jews might build for themselves a sliver of a land where they might permit themselves to deepen, to nurture features as distinctively theirs as damp winter afternoons, theological indifference, and dull, listless Sundays were to the English. Culture, both Ahad Ha'am and Orwell understood, is cooked slowly, mysteriously over centuries; the peculiarities of a people's history, its good and bad traits, its tics, its biases, its predilections - whether gastronomic or ritualistic, playful or obsessive - are difficult to define, and no less difficult to wish out of existence. Both insisted that these are best nurtured in a land, in the concrete reality of daily life whose contour Ahad Ha'am as well as Orwell most readily imagined in terms that were horrific (Orwell's "1984" is a deeply, relentlessly English novel, as anyone who has read it since high school can attest to), but that both desperately hoped could rise above their peoples' worst, most lamentable traits.

There is something no doubt old-fashioned about all this: essentialist in its presuppositions of a national life, in its belief in boundaries, in distinct cultures, in cultural continuity. But there is also a bracing realism one feels in reading Ahad Ha'am, as well as Orwell, today - in their insistence on bettering people who ought to, but rarely seek to be better, in their love for their own, a deep, inescapable love but one felt without denigrating others, in their seeking to build into a modern life key features of an older life that might deepen and strengthen it, that might rid it of some of its anomie, its disconnectedness, its inability to link itself to a history that, as both felt, is all around us.

Steven J. Zipperstein is a professor of Jewish culture and history at Stanford University. His books include "Elusive Prophet: Ahad Ha'am and the Origins of Zionism."