Reb Barry's Blog ... neshamah.net

Balak 5767

What does the prophet say to his donkey?  "And Balaam said to the ass, Because you have mocked me; I wished there was a sword in my hand, for now would I kill you."  Of course, what's even more interesting is that it was the donkey that opened the conversation!

This is one of my favorite stories in the Torah: Balaam, the non-Jewish prophet, and his talking donkey.

Just think of how many different lessons we can learn just from outline of the story!

First of Balaam is a prophet -- he speaks to God, God appears to him.  And he is NOT Jewish.  This is a hugely important lesson.  One of the great novelties of the founding fathers of Judaism was the idea that there was one God who was in charge of everything -- the whole world, the whole universe.  In our prayers we call God "koneh hakol," the creator/possesor of everything.  So it's only logical -- if God is God to the whole world, he would speak to others, not just our particular group, even if we do feel we have a special relationship with the Creator.

This non-exclusivity is a very important and fundamental religious concept.  I am very troubled by some of the more fundamentalist branches of Christianity that maintain if you don't believe the right way (like them) you will go to Hell.  If God is God to everyone, doesn't He love and accept all his children?  How could the God of Everyone punish someone for an accident of where they were born? Exclusivity to one group of people is definitely totally contradictory to the idea of "the God of the Universe."

And our non-Jewish prophet has a talking donkey.  What's more, the donkey has a clearer vision of reality at times than the prophet does: when there is an angel of the Lord standing in the road with a sword in his hand, ready to attack Balaam, Balaam is clueless.  It's the donkey who sees the angel, and saves the ungrateful prophet's life by turning away from the sword-wielding angel.

There are important messages in this episode as well.  Even prophets can have blind spots, can miss things that might be obvious to others.  It's worth keeping this in mind as we consider our earthly leadership -- presidents and prime ministers are no more immune to blind spots than prophets.

And the fact that it's a donkey that shows the prophet reality -- I guess we need to be open to having the truth pointed out to us from the most unlikely of sources.  Of course, any parent has gained tremendous insights through the eyes of his/her children.  So we are not surprised at learning and perception being able to come from seemingly humble sources.

There's also an interesting lesson about free will in the tale of Balaam the prophet: he can't curse the people in the name of God, because God doesn't want them cursed -- he keeps giving them blessings.  But the midrash tells us that even though Balaam knew that the Jewish people were in favor in the eyes of God, he was able to use his free will and give the wicked king Balak advice that Balak was able to use against the Jews.  Of course, it might not have been smart for him to do that, as he later got his come-uppance.  But he did have the free will to go against what he knew was the will of God.

May we all use our free will in line with the will of God, not in opposition to it!

Shabbat Shalom,

Reb Barry

 

Do Palestinians have to become Zionists?

For months now, the Israeli government has been maintaining that the Palestinians must accept Israel as a Jewish state.  In his recent policy speech at Bar Ilan University, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said "Therefore, a fundamental prerequisite for ending the conflict is a public, binding and unequivocal Palestinian recognition of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people."

I really don’t understand the obsession with getting the Palestinians to accept a “Jewish state.”  All I care about is that they accept us as a “sovereign state.”  I’m happy to accept Saudi Arabia as a “sovereign state.”  Why do I have to accept it as a “Muslim state?”  I accept China as a “sovereign state,” do I have to accept it as a Communist and totalitarian state?  What difference does it make? 

As far as I know, the Jordanians and Egyptians never accepted us specifically as a Jewish state.  This insistence that the Palestinians accept us as a “Jewish” state strikes me as incredibly petty and paranoid.  Are we really so insecure in our place in the world that we have to force people who might disagree with some of our principles to “accept” them?  It is perfectly legitimate for people to think that Israel should be a secular democracy of all her citizens.  A lot of Jews think it should be (I’m NOT one of them, personally I prefer that Israel has an avowedly Jewish character).

The whole push to force the Palestinians to “accept us” as a “Jewish” state (and what the heck does that mean anyway, we can’t even agree among ourselves who is a Jew) strikes me as an attempt to taunt them similar to the border patrol guards making Palestinians sing “I love the border patrol” (captured on YouTube, see http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1094242.html ).   

I feel no need to force Palestinians to be Zionists.  I will settle for them stopping terrorists, and being peaceful neighbors.

Reb Barry

Iranian Revolution Redux

(picture taken from the balcony of my apartment in Tehran, February 10, 1979)  

As Yogi Berra said, “It’s déjà vu all over again.”  I lived in Tehran during the Iranian Revolution of 1978-79.  I have the distinction of having been on the first official evacuation flight to leave Tehran in February of 1979.  Following the recent news out of Tehran is just like “the old days.”

The Edmonton Sunstarts their report on the goings on in Iran as follows:

In the Persian legend of Zahak and Kaveh, the evil King Zahak has two snakes growing out of his shoulders where the devil has kissed him. The snakes demand a daily diet of one human brain each. After years of having their brains used for snake food, the people get very fed up. One day, a blacksmith from out of town named Kaveh shows up, leads a revolt against the king, who is locked in a cave with the brain-eating snakes, and the kingdom is saved.

An Iranian friend, commenting on election reports from home on Friday, said, "It's our national story. Iranians are always waiting for another Kaveh to save the kingdom from tyranny."

 It really was the same story back in 1979.  One of the most astute political cartoons I have ever seen was one that ran in the International Herald Tribune back then: it showed a bunch of protesters waving signs, some said "The Shah is liberalizing too fast" others said "The Shah is liberalizing too slow" some said "The Shah is too pro-Western," others said "The Shah is not pro-Western enough."  The caption read, "We'll settle our differences when we get rid of the Shah.

 

Back then, the Iranian Revolution arrived not because the Iranians were so pious they wanted to live under an Islamic Republic -- rather it arrived because the people were disgusted with the Shah.  Ayatollah Khomeini was the only choice, he was the "Kaveh" coming to save the kingdom from tyranny.

 

Of course, hindsight shows they made a bad choice, and all they did was exchange one form of tyranny for another.  As we bought a Persian carpet from a Jewish rug merchants "going to Geneva" sale, he said "these poor people, they think when Khomeini comes the streets will be paved with gold. The truth is the streets will be paved with mud."

 

Back in 1978-79, the riots and protests started in the poorer southern part of Tehran -- where the people were mostly protesting because their lives were economically miserable, while the Shah -- and the elite who lived in the northern part of the city (where I lived) -- were enjoying lavish life styles.

 

This time, the riots and protests have started in the more affluent northern part of Tehran -- among the more educated, sophisticated people who don't want to live in a backwards country, but want to see Iran take it's place in the modern world.  Iran really has the resources -- intellectual, financial, etc., -- to be "the Japan of the Middle East."  Not that they would rival Japan, but they could be the economic leader of the region, a big and respected player.

 

 In January and February of 1979, as the Iranian Revolution was moving full speed ahead, there were power outages every night -- right at 8:19pm, every night, my power went out as electric workers form of protest.  We'd go on our roof top and look at the eerily dark and quiet city of millions, listening to people chanting "Allahu Akbar" (God is great) from roof top to roof top.  My friend David, a fellow refugee from the first Iranian Revolution, found this recording of the same thing happening today:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztE-z0ooXd4

 

There are things about this revolution that are the same as in 1979 -- and things that are very different.  As in 1979, the Iranian people are protesting against tyranny.  They are protesting against political leadership that considers itself above the law and treats the people as inconsequential.  They are protesting against a government more concerned with keeping itself in power than in meeting the needs of the people.  And they are protesting against a vicious government that probably will not hesitate to use force if they feel really threatened.  So far, thank God, deaths among protesters have been few.  If the protesters don't get tired and give up, however, it is quite possible that violent repression will come next.

 

Unlike in 1979, the protesters are connected to each other and the world in new and powerful ways.  Back in 1979, I had to get up early in the morning and listen to the BBC at the very bottom edge of the AM radio -- near shortwave frequencies -- to know what was happening in another part of Tehran.  The news was censored.  Today, thanks to cell phone cameras and twitter, there is a lot more information readily available, both inside Iran and abroad, as to what is happening.  You can follow persiankiwi on twitter for updates: http://twitter.com/persiankiwi .  Morningside Post has an interesting item about twitter and the revolution you can see here.

 

Some of my fellow Israelis think we are better off with Ahmadinejad: they think that Moussavi (who started Iran's nuclear program in the '80s) will just keep the nuclear program going, but with a "kinder gentler face" that will mislead the West.  I disagree.  Ahmadinejad is a nut case.  I don't want him anywhere near the command post responsible for Iran's military.  I far prefer Moussavi, who wants to respond to Obama's outreach in kind, who would release the screws on his people (at least to a significant degree if not completely).  Our best form of security with Iran would be to woo them into the Western sphere, get them to voluntarily give up on any weapons program.  A pipe dream?  It happened with Libya, it could happen in Iran.  Maybe it's time for carrots, not sticks...

 

Reb Barry

 

PS.  An interesting collection of links about what's happening in Iran can be found at China in Africa (yes, I realize that's not a likely place!)

 

 

 

 

 

Baha’alotcha 5769 – God hidden in Mitzvah

"And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, Speak to Aaron, and say to him, When you light the lamps, the seven lamps shall give light in front of the lampstand. And Aaron did so; he lighted its lamps to give light in front of the lampstand, as the Lord commanded Moses."

…Numbers 8:1-3

 

What's the reward for doing a mitzvah (commandment)?

Some people think you do mitzvot for rewards in this world – follow the rules and God will do nice things for you. Which is sort of implied in the Shema, which we recite a twice a day. All that stuff about if we disobey the commandments the skies will be shut and we won't have anything to eat. However, we often see righteous people suffering, and vice verse. All the tzaddikim who perished in the Holocaust show us that the rewards for doing mitzvot are not in this world, at least not in a physical sense.

Others think you do mitzvot for rewards in the next world. Be good here, get into heaven. But is that really much of a motivator? Who among us has seen heaven? How do we know? Most people can't put off instant gratification for a day, let alone a lifetime.

If neither of those really work, what IS the reward for obeying the commandments?

Regarding the above verse which appears at the beginning of this week's Torah reading, Rashi says "this is to tell you of the praise of Aaron: he did not digress from the mitzvah," he was prompt and particular. Aaron loved doing mitzvot – and Pirke Avot, "The Teachings of the Fathers" tells us that the reward for doing a mitzvah is you get the opportunity to do another mitzvah. A mitzvah is its own reward.

What kind of a reward is that?

Maor Einayim (the Chernobyler rebbe), one of the early Chasidic rebbes, says that the joy of doing a mitzvah is that it connects us with God. And we can have no greater joy than to be connected with God. The word "mitzvah" itself alludes to the connection between the commandments and God.

The kabbahlists talk of a "substitution cipher" that encodes certain information in the Bible. One of those substitution ciphers is called "at-bash" because the first letter – alef – become the last letter, tav. The second letter beit, becomes the second to last letter, shin, and so on. The first two letters of "mitzvah" – mem and tzadi – become yud and heh, the first two letters of God's name. The second two letters in mitzvah – vuv and heh – combine with yud and heh to spell out the tetragrammaton, the sacred name of God that Jews never pronounce.

But what's the significance of the two hidden letters? Maor Einayim says it is an allusion to God's presence in the commandments, to the way we can connect to God through doing the commandments. But they are hidden – and the hiddenness is our "ikavvanah," our intentions when we do a mitzvah. The action is the "body," and having the right intent is like the "soul." He says that if we do a mitzvah without kavannah, without intent – if we do it on autopilot – it's like talking to a dead body without a soul. It won't help connect you with God, and you are disconnected from the reward for doing the mitzvah, which is the joy of being closer to God.

In this commentary Maor Einayim does not talk about what kind of kavannah you should have. But Rebbe Nachman of Breslov teaches that the right kavannah is to be joyful. That when we feel joy from doing a mitzvah – then getting another mitzvah to do really does feel like a "reward." Rebbe Nachman teaches that we should remember to be happy about the mitzvot we have done, and not worry so much about the ones we didn't do. Getting depressed over our shortcomings is a barrier to making any spiritual progress at all – you won't even fix the shortcomings, you'll just be paralyzed. Hence Rebbe Nachman recommends that we focus on the positive, take joy in whatever good things we have done, and work on fixing ourselves up coming from the perspective that we are basically good, and have much to be happy about.

Given that Shabbat is almost here, that is certainly something to be happy about…my favorite holiday! J

Shabbat shalom,

Reb Barry

June 5th and Iran

The kabbahlists say there are no coincidences: everything happens because God planned it that way.

I was thinking about this teaching today.  Every week I try and do one of the tours in Eyal Meiron's excellent book "Jerusalem: A Walk Through Time."  Totally coincidentally (?) I picked a tour today that included Ammunition Hill.  I didn't realize the coincidence until I got there, and started the tour, and realized that today was June 5 -- the exact same day that the Six Day War started in 1967.  The exact same day that the battle for Jerusalem started.  The day before the battle for Ammunition Hill.

In May of 1967 Gamal Nasser was making very bellicose noises toward Israel:

"Preparations have already been made. We are now ready to confront Israel. They have claimed many things about the 1956 Suez war, but no one believed them after the secrets of the 1956 collusion were uncovered - that mean collusion in which Israel took part. Now we are ready for the confrontation. We are now ready to deal with the entire Palestine question."  

Nasser was doing more than giving speeches.  He was making physical preparations for war:

Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser expelled the United Nations Emergency Force (UNEF) from the Sinai Peninsula in May 1967.^[7] The peacekeeping force had been stationed there since 1957, following a British-French-Israeli invasion which was launched during the Suez Crisis.^[8] Egypt amassed 1,000 tanks and nearly 100,000 soldiers on the Israeli border^[9] and closed the Straits of Tiran to all ships flying Israeli flags or carrying strategic materials, receiving strong support from other Arab countries (source Wikipedia).

Nasser's acts were clearly hostile, and Israel was bracing for an attack.

On June 5, the Israeli government decided that instead of waiting for the Egyptians to attack, they would launch a pre-emptive attack against the Egyptian Air Force to gain an advantage in the war that seemed inevitable.  That morning the Israeli government sent a message to Jordan that if they stayed out of the war Israel would not attack them.  At 0745 Israeli jets launched a massive attack against the Egyptian Air Force, effectively wiping out the Egyptian Air Force.  Later that morning, Jordan decided to support Egypt, and the battle for Jerusalem started.  Armon Hanatziv, the nearby neighborhood where one of the synagogues I belong to is located, was captured later on this day.

In 1967 I was 12 years old.  Looking at the young faces of the soldiers killed -- many of them just 6 or 7 years older than I was then -- I silently saluted their bravery, felt remorse for the lives cut short, and thanks for the fact that their sacrifice made it possible for me to live here today.  If Israel had lost that war in 1967, there would be no Israel today.

So what's the connection between June 5 and Iran?  On June 5, 1967, Israel launched a pre-emptive attack against Egypt.  It was clear they were preparing for war; they had engaged in hostile acts; Israel decided to follow the Talmudic dictum, "if someone is coming to kill you, rise up and kill him first."  Good advice, especially if you are a small country surrounded by strong enemies.

There are many people saying we should do the same thing against Iran.  A pre-emptive strike before they can acquire nuclear capabilities.

There are several problems with this logic.  Iran of 2009 is not Egypt of 1967.  Iran's acts are in no way comparable to Egypt's acts.  Despite Ahmadinejad's bellicose rhetoric, Iran is not making any physical preparations to attack Israel.  He is not amassing troops or cutting off Israeli shipping.

That being said, I do believe the military option should be "left on the table."  Negotiating without the background threat of military action would be relatively ineffectual.  But that's what it should be -- a threat, not a real plan.  An attack on Iran would be very difficult -- far more difficult than the attack on Saddam Hussein's nuclear reactor in the '80's -- and therefore much likelier to fail.  And succeed or fail it would undoubtedly result in a rain of missiles on Israel from Iran, Hizbullah, and Hamas.  Despite (or maybe because of) last week's civil defense drill, when we dutifully shuffled into a "protected room" in the office next door, I don't really feel prepared for missiles landing on our heads.

The Talmudic advice is still applicable today -- but you have to be very careful and very wise in knowing just when is that time when someone is "rising up to kill you."  Acting prematurely can be just as bad as acting too late.

Shabbat shalom,

Reb Barry

 

 

A new beginning?

Many of my fellow Jews are prone to "shrei gevalt," to "cry out woe." President Obama gave a speech in a country that likes to fancy itself the leader of the Arab world in which he said the Jews have a right to be a nation in their homeland, he denounced Holocaust denial, he affirmed America's commitment to Israel -- yet many find fault.

For example, fresnozionism.org says "Throughout, Obama struggles to equate Israel with ‘Palestine’, so he can justify taking from one to give to the other. Of course, ‘Palestine’ will never be satisfied until there is nothing left of Israel — but apparently he is unable to see this."

As Rabbi Daniel Goldfarb puts it, "When Obama holds a Seder at the White House, they love it.  When he quotes Koran or cites Arab achievements (the list ain't so long, Algebra and arches in buildings - so what's the big deal?) he's become the agent of Muhammed."

Obama's speech brings back an era of diplomacy.  Instead of painting the world into black and white, calling for Crusades, and labeling other nations part of the axis of evil, Obama shows he hears the valid concerns of both sides, while condemning the radicals who are opposed to peace on both sides.  He praises his hosts -- recalling the glory days of the Muslim world and quoting the Koran -- which is of course both good manners, and guaranteed to make the audience feel good.  All the while not letting them off the hook for things like violent extremists or lack of democracy.

And what is it that gets some Israelis so upset?  Obama had the temerity to say that settlements are a problem.  And they are.  The 40-year long occupation of the West Bank was supposed to enhance our security and deepen our connection with historic Israel.  Instead it has caused endless friction, cost tons of money, drained resources and people away from the Negev and Galillee, and has eroded the Zionist commitment of a large number of secular Israelis.

What Obama had to say is mostly what the center of Israel would say: we have a right to peace and security, and the Palestinians should be able to live in dignity in a state of their own.

The NY Times has a good roundup of opinion on the speech from a variety of sources in the Middle East.  You can read it here.

Will the President's speech herald "a new beginning between the United States and Muslims," as he called for in his speech?  I don't know, but I sure hope so.

We can almost (but not quite) take it for granted that America's relationship with Israel is rock solid.  So if America's relationship with the Muslim world improves, ours is likely to improve as well.  And that's the real key to our security and stability.

The Torah charges us to "seek peace and pursue it."  I am feeling cautiously optimistic knowing that America has a President who seems to understand diplomacy.  We will never be able to bomb our neighbors into peace.  We will have to talk them into peace.  And we'll need some help.

Reb Barry

Shavuot in Jerusalem

If you haven't experienced Shavuot in Jerusalem, you've never experienced Shavuot.

If you live anywhere else, and want to experience a holiday that is celebrated in Jerusalem in a fashion unlike anywhere else, Shavuot is the holiday.

The Torah commands us to gather in Jerusalem for three holidays in particular -- the "Shalosh Regalim," or Three Pilgramage Festivals.  Passover, Shavuot (the feast of weeks) and Sukkot (the feast of tabernacles).  Why do I single out Shavuot?

Passover is very much a family holiday, ideally celebrated at home with friends and family -- it's really not that different here, other than you can find a lot of kosher restaurants open during chol hamoed.  Sukkot, I will admit, is also special here -- the weather is generally pleasant, and it's cool to see sukkot all over town.  But nothing, in my opinion, compares with Shavuot.

Shavuot is the holiday when we celebrate the receiving of the Torah (especially the Ten Commandments) on Mt. Sinai.  The Torah says that the giving of the the Torah was accompanied by thunder and lightning -- and midrash says that's because our ancestors slept in late on the big day and God had to wake them up.  So to do a "tikkun," a healing or repair for that lack of enthusiasm over 3,000 years ago, we stay up all night studying Torah, and then recite the Ten Commandments at the earliest hour, at dawn.

Most congregations in the US don't manage to stay up all night.  They'll do some learning -- maybe until midnight -- and then gather again at the usual time for morning services at 9 or so and read the Ten Commandments.  The six years I served as a congregational rabbi in the US and Canada, I always tried to do the all night study session, and more often than not we had dwindled to less than a minyan (ten people) by dawn. 

In Jerusalem the experience is completely different.  In every neighborhood you'll find study sessions; at the major learning institutes you'll find world class scholars teaching all night long.  There are people out walking the streets from one learning session to another all night long.  At about 4am if you didn't know where the Kotel (the Western Wall) was, you could find it by just following the stream of people heading that direction.  It's absolutely eery.  And very exciting, to be gathering at the site of the Temple, on a pilgramage festival, to receive the Torah.

This year I studied at the Hartman Institute, Pardes, and the Conservative Yeshiva.  At Hartman I heard Rabbi David Hartman share some fascinating insights about what's wrong with how much of the Jewish world treats the "other" these days (other including anyone not like them -- women, non-Jews, Jews with opinions that differ from theirs).  He accused the Charedi, who want to seclude themselves away from the world, live in a separate neighborhood with no contact with outsiders, who consider Conservative and Reform as less than Jewish, "Reform" Jews, because that is not what Judaism is about they have reformed themselves away from the essence of Judaism and have kept the window dressing.  We're supposed to bring a message of hope and reconciliation to the world, not a message of fear, not a message of retreat, not an identity based on the Holocaust.

At Pardes I heard Judy Klitsner talk about contrasting views of women in the Tanakh (Hebrew Bible).  She maintains that often stories should be read in comparison, and that sometimes a later story will be subversive to the image you get from an earlier story.  The prophetess Deborah certainly turns a lot of the assumptions about women upside down! 

At the Conservative Yeshiva I participated in a group studying midrashim on revelation.  And at about 4:30 in the morning, I joined the sea of people heading for the Kotel.  At 5am we had a few hundred people at the "Masorti (Conservative) Kotel" at Robinson's Arch, and there were a few thousand people fifty meters away from us at the Western Wall Plaza.  After staying up all night, you are automatically in a state of "altered consciousness."  Saying our prayers in the pleasant cool temperature as star light turned to sunlight, with the sounds of not just our group but other groups singing and praying, was very powerful.

Shavuot is my favorite holiday because it's a celebration of learning.  On Simchat Torah we rejoice just with the Torah itself, we rejoice that God gave us the gift of the Torah.  But Shavuot is about learning, and celebrating learning, and learning is what leads to growth and progress.

Another fun image of Shavuot in Jerusalem comes from my wife, who went to the "shuk," the outdoor market at Mahane Yehuda, to buy supplies before the holiday started.  In particular there is a kosher gourmet wine and cheese shop in the shuk, and she said it was jammed -- we customarily eat dairy foods on Shavuot, so it was probably their busiest day of the year.  Where else can you find some good kosher port to go with your cheese on Shavuot?

Next year in Jerusalem...

The Pope Walked Out ???

  Photo: (REUTERS/Tony Gentile)

The blogosphere is abuzz with the news that the Pope walked out on a sheikh delivering an anti-Israel diatribe at meeting devoted to leaders in inter-religious dialog and peace work in Jerusalem yesterday (May 11).

I was there, and it didn't quite seem the way being reported to me.

There were about 350 people present, representing about 100 organizations involved in various kinds of inter-religious work in the Holy Land.  I was there as a representative of Rabbis for Human Rights, on whose board I serve, along with Rabbi Arik Ascherman our director, and his wife Rabbi Einat Ramon of the Schechter Institute, and Quamar Mishirqi-Asad, one of our Israeli Arab staff members (RHR's Legal Director, and a Catholic).  I was pleased that besides my colleagues from RHR, there were a lot of people I knew there including Rabbi David Rosen of the Interreligious Affairs Department of the American Jewish Committee, Dr. Yehuda Stolov of the Interfaith Encounter Association, YIzhar Hess and Rabbi Barry Schlesinger of the Masorti Movement, Rabbi Chaim Cohen (who is also on the RHR board, but I think was representing another organization), Rabbi Michael Klein-Katz, as well as Brother Franz from the monastery at Emmaus.

As reported in the Jerusalem Post, and picked up in numerous places such as  catholic.org  and Gateway Pundit, Sheikh Taysir al-Tamimi, chief Islamic judge of the Palestinian Authority, delivered a rant at the gathering at the Notre Dame center in Jerusalem.

I don't speak Arabic -- and I presume the Pope doesn't either -- so at the time all I could tell was that the Sheikh was very animated.  At one point whatever he said received some modest applause from the Arabic-speaking crowd. According to the J Post report, here's what he was saying:

In an impromptu speech, delivered in Arabic at the Notre Dame Pontifical Institute in Jerusalem, Sheikh Tayseer Tamimi, chief Islamic judge in the Palestinian Authority, launched a 10-minute tirade against the State of Israel for confiscating Palestinians' land and carrying out war crimes against the residents of Gaza.

He also called for the immediate return of all Palestinian refugees, and called on Christians and Muslims to unite against Israel.

The reports are headlined "Sheikh attacks Israel, Pope walks out."  While the sheikh was delivering his rant, one of the officials tried, unsuccesfully, to stop him a couple of times.  The Pope, like most of the rest of us, just sat there -- I presume he had no more idea than I did what the sheikh was saying.  When the sheikh finished the Pope shook his hand and left.  According to the reports, this was before the official end of the program.  But I have to say, it certainly did not feel like the Pope was walking out on the speech -- he sat there until the speech was over.

I'm sort of pleased that the "spin" being put on it is that the Pope walked out on him, because it certainly would have been a good thing for the Pope to walk out on something like that.  I don't know if the Pope would have walked out in the middle of it if he knew what the man was saying.  The Pope did not come back and say anything else afterwards.

Speaking of which, so what about the words of the Pope?

No offense to His Holiness, but the Pope is not the most dynamic speaker I've ever heard.  He read his remarks, clearly staying close to the text, in clear, understandable English with a fairly heavy German accent.  The text of the Pope's speech is available here.

However, two things I especially like about his speech.  His quoting from my bar mitzvah parsha, Lech Lecha, at the beginning: "God said to Abram, ‘Go from your country, your kindred and your father’s house for a land I shall show you."  And I liked his concluding words, which really caught the purpose of the gathering:

Friends, the institutions and groups that you represent engage in inter-religious dialogue and the promotion of cultural initiatives at a wide range of levels. From academic institutions – and here I wish to make special mention of the outstanding achievements of Bethlehem University – to bereaved parents groups, from initiatives through music and the arts to the courageous example of ordinary mothers and fathers, from formal dialogue groups to charitable organizations, you daily demonstrate your belief that our duty before God is expressed not only in our worship but also in our love and concern for society, for culture, for our world and for all who live in this land. Some would have us believe that our differences are necessarily a cause of division and thus at most to be tolerated. A few even maintain that our voices should simply be silenced. But we know that our differences need never be misrepresented as an inevitable source of friction or tension either between ourselves or in society at large. Rather, they provide a wonderful opportunity for people of different religions to live together in profound respect, esteem and appreciation, encouraging one another in the ways of God. Prompted by the Almighty and enlightened by his truth, may you continue to step forward with courage, respecting all that differentiates us and promoting all that unites us as creatures blessed with the desire to bring hope to our communities and world. May God guide us along this path!

The important thing for me was not so much the words of the Pope as the fact that he called the gathering together, he gave some of his precious time to this group of 350 people working for interfaith dialog and peace, in order to encourage our work and our efforts.  It certainly doesn't hurt to have the spiritual leader of a billion Catholics on your side!

Rav Barry 

Decide for yourself

Dear reader,

I'm interested in what you think about Caryl Churchill's play "Seven Jewish Children."  Many people have said it's anti-Semitic.  Most of the people who claim it's anti-Semitic have not read the whole play.  They react on the basis of hearsay, or from reading a few lines.  You need to read the whole thing to put it in context.

The play is very short.  You can read the whole thing easily in five minutes.  Click here to read it. Or click here to see it performed by Jennie Stoller.

After reading (or watching) it, come back and comment.  Scroll down to see my comments, but I suggest you read it first and form your own opinion before reading my comments....

Reb Barry

----------------------

I found the play very powerful -- and NOT anti-Semitic.  It's strong -- but the things she says that are offensive are things you can read in the paper as quotes from various Israelis.  She's not making stuff up -- sadly we do have people who say things like what you read in the last section.

Clearly she starts out very sympathetic to the Jews as she describes the fears and horrors of pogroms and the Holocaust.  She chronicles how opinions change when you're under attack.  Yes, she makes it a bit of a caricature, but I can tell you having lived in Israel during the start of the Second Intifada that my politics took a definite rightward shift and my heart was somewhat hardened in the wake of the many innocent people killed by terrorists.  It's sad; but it happens.

The play has been attacked on the basis that it is not "balanced."  Or that "not all Israeli are like that."  Well, duh!!  I'm an Israeli and I'm not like that.  But the play is art.  The goal of art is not to be "balanced."  Art does not claim to represent the average -- art shows people who are exceptional.  That's what makes it interesting.  A play that was balanced and presented the exact average would be as boring as watching paint dry.  There is nothing balanced or representative about Hamlet, either.

You can read an interesting blog entry with Churchill's comments here.

The appropriate response if you think the play is not balanced is to write a different play of your own that presents your view.  Deb Margolin has done just that, in a response play called "Seven Palestinian Children."  With the author's permission, the script is posted here.

My wife Lauri and I are thinking of staging a reading of the play -- probably both plays together.

Josh Ford wrote an interesting piece "Why Do a Reading of Caryl Churchill’s “Seven Jewish Children” at a Jewish Theater?"  Click on the title to read it. 

If you'd be interested in participating in, or seeing, a production of Seven Jewish Children: A Play for Gaza" in Jerusalem, let me know.

Yom Hazikaron -- Israel's Memorial Day

Today at 11am I heard a siren go off.

I hurriedly finished a phone call, opened my window so I could hear the siren better, and stood at silent attention.  From my office window on the 16th floor of the Technology Park in Jerusalem I could see  that traffic on the roads below had come to a complete halt.  People were respectfully standing outside their cars.  Buses were stopped.  There was no sound except the sound of the breeze and siren.  The country paused for two minutes -- two long minutes -- to remember the 22,570 soldiers killed in the line of duty and civilians killed by terrorists.  22,570 lives lost, most of them young lives, lives full of potential, lives yet to be lived.

What do you think of during those two minutes?  As I fought back a tear reflecting on the lives lost, I asked myself, "is it worth the price?"  "It," of course, being a country for the Jews -- Israel.

The answer, both immediate and on reflection, is a strong "yes!"  It's a huge price to pay: if America had a similar loss on a percentage basis, 1.2 million would have died defending the country or to terrorists since 1948.  The reason Yom Hazikaron is such a big deal here is that most people know someone who died, or have a close friend who lost a loved one.  It's not a remote holiday that has lost it's meaning.  The price is high, and for many people here it is personal.

But it is worth it.  As Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. said "if you've got nothing worth dying for, then you've got nothing worth living for."

In a brilliant reminder of the purpose of all those deaths, we celebrate Yom HaAtzmaut, Independence Day, the Israeli 4th of July, on the very next day.  Since with the Jewish calendar the day changes at sunset, later this evening, as the sun sets, we shift gears, we go from remembering our dead to celebrating our country.  We mourn the loss, and then we celebrate what they gave their lives for.

And, just like in America, we celebrate Independence Day by firing up the BBQ!