MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019110259 · doi:10.1353/coj.2011.0024

The Boy on the Door on the Ox (review)

2011· article· en· W2019110259 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Avraham H. Feder

Bibliographic record

VenueConservative Judaism · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJewish and Middle Eastern Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSensibilityNarrativeMAGIC (telescope)Order (exchange)LiteratureArtArt historyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: The Boy on the Door on the Ox Avraham H. Feder (bio) The Boy on the Door on the Ox, by Martin S. Cohen. New York: Aviv Press, 2008. It can be argued that there are sections of talmudic literature that are not only emotionally dry but also cognitively opaque to the contemporary sensibility. In Martin S. Cohen’s preface, he acknowledges that Seder Tohorot—the order of the Mishnah that he has invited his readers/ students to study with him—“is unremittingly obscure in more places than anyone writing about the material should feel comfortable admitting in print.” Yet, [End Page 111] Cohen explains that he was drawn to this material precisely because it represents for him a golden opportunity to cultivate both “spiritual and intellectual integrity while searching for God in this peculiar world we all inhabit.” How does Cohen convince his readers/students to join him on a journey in search of God by means of—what seems at first thought—a quixotic exploration of an ostensibly irrelevant text? He claims that he has discovered within Seder Tohorot individual guides to accompany us on this journey; that is, human beings who may not be real (as literary characters are not real), but who appear fortuitously between the lines of the legalistic mishnaic text. But Cohen himself is the principal guide, teacher, and communicator, as he weaves back and forth in his narrative between his own “real-world” travels and the spiritual journey that he is recommending through the “magic mishnaic multiplex” that is Seder Tohorot. Cohen adopts a disarming strategy of narrating his own contemporary physical and spiritual journey with rich novelistic imagery, as he welcomes his readers/students into this ancient world so consumed with issues of ritual purity and impurity. Cohen’s journey is framed by his and his family’s professional moves from Canada to California to New York. But his spiritual and ethical goal is to journey to his spiritual Jerusalem. And as a pulpit rabbi—that is, as a rabbi serving living Jewish souls, whom it is his charge to help along in their search for their own spiritual Jerusalems—Cohen is honest enough to admit his own inadequacies. He has committed himself to the study of these mishnayot as part of his own perceived need to grow spiritually, long after he qualified for his profession intellectually. The journey to the spiritual Jerusalem is the search for communion with God. Where is God? For Cohen, “God . . . exists in the world at the unattainable yet fully real confluence of the focused intellect, the willing spirit, and the soul unsullied by sin.” Put another way, Cohen brings his readers/students to an appreciation of the sages’ spiritual-moral achievements. It is they who have taken the bald, often stern, scriptural laws, and through their own “unfettered human intelligence,” buttressed by uncompromising moral integrity, have built a spiritual edifice waiting to be discovered by those curious and courageous enough for the spiritual-moral struggle. The struggle, as Cohen readily testifies, is difficult: full of doubts, ambiguities, and insecurities. But one learns, for example, from the woman entering and emerging from her mikveh with coins in her mouth that honest doubt is a precondition for genuine faith; that ambiguity as a bedfellow of insecurity is not to be denied, concealed, and thereby falsified, but is to be accepted as “honorable” in the search for faith. One has to read Cohen’s virtuoso explorations of the mishnayot to see how these and other guides—the boy holding the lilies by the side of a cemetery, the former leper with no right ear, the ape-valet, the maid losing milk over an oven, the zav lying on a scale, the boy on the door on the ox, and others—contribute [End Page 112] to his understanding of major theological, psychological, and ethical issues. Without being esoteric, he succeeds in explaining why the Bible and its later exponents, the rabbis, were so concerned about tumah, about impurity. According to Cohen, they saw all things as existing “in some sort of real or potential relationship with the three ever-burning, ever-whirling axes of contamination—sex, death, and...

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.135

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0400.012

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.138
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.173 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConservative JudaismSame topicJewish and Middle Eastern StudiesFrench-language works237,207