The Object of Sentiments

I’ve seen them before, but never bothered to investigate their presence. Honestly, it didn’t even cross my mind they could be religious. On many doorways into homes, a very small container (sometimes placed vertically, sometimes tilted towards the door) is affixed to the frame at shoulder height. Generally nondescript, I had honestly assumed it was a doorbell without taking a second glance. That is, until I saw it at an office, outside of its usual context. My roommate works in the Textile Building on 5th Avenue, and at my last visit I noticed this ‘doorbell’ where there shouldn’t have been one. As it turns out, it’s actually a Jewish Mezuzah. According to my Jewish friend, it’s quite common, even for the most casual practitioner of Judaism, to adhere to this mitzvah, or holy commandment, of Mezuzah.

This particular mezuzah is colored to match the wall it is placed on. I imagine in the workplace it’s less accepted to be blatantly affiliated with one religion or another (with exception to companies that build it into their business), so it makes sense that one would avoid a more decorative ornament. In fact, its simplicity is calming and its construction appears sturdy. These traits, stability and tranquility, are traits often sought in a religion. While minimal, the mezuzah is located about at eye level, and is plainly visible to anyone passing through the doors. This serves as a constant reminder of God’s presence and protection for Jews in this workspace, as well as a declaration of faith to the outside world and those with alternative views. This duality of both commitment and declaration is present in many religious objects, such as the hijab for Islamic women, or the clerical collar for Christian priests.

Reinhold Niebuhr highlights a particularly interesting point regarding objects and obligations of faith. He identifies the difficulties in comprehending an abstraction and suggests that a concrete object or representation may be of use in guiding one’s loyalties, particularly to a specific person/deity. In ‘Moral Man and Immoral Society’, he uses the example of a king as representative of a nation as one might use a mezuzah as representative of God and his presence. “The king is a useful symbol for the nation because it is easier for the simple imagination to conceive a sense of loyalty toward him than toward the nation. The nation is an abstraction which cannot be grasped if fitting symbols are not supplied.” (Niebuhr 54)

This kind of representation of direct connection to, and attention from, God, I would argue, is exactly counter to the God of Joshua Liebman, as detailed in ‘Peace of Mind’. Perhaps this is the old idea of God he references. The mezuzah does not seem to include a Power that relies on us to channel good into the world, but rather, it brings about images of the big guy in the sky watching over us. Simply as a portrayal of his presence, it serves as more of a reminder that the power in his hands and renders us entirely dependent.

William James also touches on the topic of religious objects in ‘The Varieties of Religious Experience’, when he attributes ‘religious sentiment’ to the objects these feelings are directed towards. He even goes so far as to suggest that these mental states do not exist at all without an object, “...the moment we are willing to treat the term ‘religious sentiment’ as a collective name for the many sentiments which religious objects may arouse in alternation, we see that it probably contains nothing whatever of a psychologically specific nature...there is no ground for assuming a simple abstract ‘religious emotion’ to exist as a distinct elementary mental affection by itself, present in every religious experience without exception.” (James 27-28) The implication here is that religious objects are key to connection with one’s faith or with a higher power, and this is why the mezuzah becomes important for Jews to integrate into their everyday lives.