Reb Barry's Blog ... neshamah.net

Tisha b'Av 5770

Below you will find a "recycled" post, something I wrote about Tisha b'Av a few years ago.  I think many people can use the reminder of what this holiday is about--as well as some thoughts appropo to the holiday this year.

I am already in the depressed mood of the day.  As you can read below, I fast as much -- if not more -- because of the problems of the present as to remember the calamities of the past.  And every year, there is something going in Israel or among the Jews that makes fasting on Tisha b'Av meaningful.

This year what weighs on my heart is sinat chinam, "gratuitous hatred."  The Talmud teaches that the Temple was destroyed in 70 CE because of gratuitous hatred between Jews.  This year, it seems, gratuitous hatred is all around us.  A woman, Anat Hoffman, arrested for the "crime" of "praying with a Torah." The charedim trying to push through a bill that would have the effect of delegitimizing conversions the Chief Rabbinate does not approve of (e.g., Reform and Conservative).  Gender segregation on Israeli buses.  Vandalism of Conservative and Reform synagogues in Israel. Charedim holding violent demonstrations over bones, over parking lots, over business that need to run on Shabbat.  And the gratuitous hatred isn't limited to intrafaith issues, don't worry, we have plenty left over for Palestinians.  We still have many reasons -- too many reasons -- to fast today and reflect on our national shortcomings.  May the fast serve not just to make us depressed, but may it strengthen our will to work harder to make the world a better place, to bring the coming of the Messiah, so that next year Tisha b'Av can be a day of feasting, not fasting,

Amen.

Tisha b’Av—the ninth of the month of Av—is not one of the most widely observed holidays in the “progressive” movements of Judaism.  Many modern Jews don’t connect with the disasters the holiday commemorates—the destruction of the First and Second Temples, the fall of Betar (signifying the end of the Bar Kochba rebellion in 135CE), the expulsion from Spain in 1492.  The centerpiece of Tisha b’Av observance is certainly mourning for the loss of the Temple.  Which can make it a difficult commemoration since many Jews feel at least ambivalence, if not outright opposition, about the idea of the restoration of the Temple if it also means the restoration of animal sacrifice.  Many Orthodox Jews don't understand the ambivalence many more liberal Jews feel about the Temple;  a blogger, Bec, wrote "please, please tell me that all of conservative judaism doesn't believe that there's no need for the templeplease, please tell me that all of conservative judaism doesn't believe that there's no need for the temple."  This Conservative rabbi at least does pray for the restoration of the Temple--my vision of what that time of the restored Temple woud look like can be read here.

The annual cycle of Jewish holidays is designed to cover the range of human emotions—joyous, sad, reflective, commemorative, and so on.  Tisha b’Av is the time for mourning.  However, I believe that for Tisha b’Av to accomplish its purpose, it needs to be more than a time for commemorating disasters that have befallen our people.  It needs to be a time to inspire us to do something to prevent more disasters from occurring. 

Kabbalah teaches that the Messiah will not come until we have done “tikkun olam,” healing or repair of the world.  Velveteen Rabbit brings a nice teaching about Tisha b'Av and the "four worlds" model of Kabbalah, suggesting that the on the level of atzilut, emanation, Tisha b'Av represents our distance from God; I would say instead perhaps that Tisha b'Av represents not the brokeness in our relationship with the infinite, but rather the brokeness in our relationship with the part of the infinite that consists of our fellow man.

There’s a teaching that says the Messiah won’t come until three days after he’s no longer needed.  According to this view of the Messianic age, the Messiah doesn’t come to make everything perfect—instead, the Messiah’s arrival is sort of a “graduation ceremony,” an acknowledgement that we created the kind of world into which the Messiah could come.

If we are observing the holiday of Tisha b’Av, it means we have failed.  It means that once more, we have not done the work to create the kind of world into which the Messiah could come.  The Temple has not been rebuilt.  There is still strife and senseless hatred in the world.  I fast on Tisha b’Av not so much in mourning for the destruction of 2,000 years ago, but to remind myself that we have not accomplished our work of making the world a better place.  Given the realities of the “neighborhood” Israel lives in, the Temple will not be rebuilt until our Arab cousins decide to invite us to do so—and today we seem further away than ever from such an eventuality.

The Bible and the Occupation

Warning: this blog post is going to be somewhat “political,” and it’s going to violate a “rule” of blogging: it’s going to be long.  If you read my blog more for Torah than political commentary, or if you prefer to read stuff that’s short and pithy, you might want to skip this one…

What does the Bible teach us about political philosophy?  How do those teachings play out in Israel today?  What’s the relationship between the Israeli occupation of land won in 1967 and the Zionist/Biblical vision for Israel?

Yesterday I had the opportunity to study with my teacher Rabbi Daniel Gordis (now relatively well known for his writings that appear in the NY Times among other places).  Some of what he taught I agree with; some I’m not sure about; but there was one thing I strongly DISAGREED with, that I want to talk about.

But before we get to what I disagree with, we need to put it in the context of the ideas he shared.  There were two important and interesting concepts:

1. Ideas are important to the existence of some nations, and when that idea is defeated – as happened for South Africa and the Soviet Union – the nation state founded on that idea collapses.
2. There is tension in the Western World between the ideal vision of the Hebrew Bible, as represented by the song “Hatikvah,” Israel’s national anthem – and the ideal vision of Christianity, as represented by the song “Imagine” by John Lennon.

What, you may be wondering, is the relationship between Hatikvah and Imagine?  R. Gordis maintains that the political philosophy of the Hebrew Bible is a vision of ethnic nation states, separate in their identities, but ideally living in harmony.  We see this first in the story of the tower of Babel: the people started out unified, one language, one culture.  God didn’t like that; he mixed things up, and when people have different languages they will also have different cultures and ultimately different world views.  And that’s OK.  You look at the prophetic visions of the future world, and it’s not a world where everyone is Jewish.  The prophet Isaiah quotes God as saying “my house shall be a house of prayer for all peoples.”  Not everyone becomes “one people.”  They retain their separate “peoplehood” and status.  But they do recognize God, and we do all get along.  In the Talmud it teaches that on Sukkot (the feast of Tabernacles) 70 bulls were sacrificed, one for each of the 70 nations – but they remain separate nations, they don’t all become Israeli-Jewish.

The Jewish vision is not one big homogenous world, all McDonalds and Starbucks, everyone getting along because there is no difference.  Israelis seem to have absorbed this ideal, and appreciate our differences: felafel is still our national fast food, and Starbucks tried, and failed to compete with our local coffee shops.  Our vision is we are an independent nation, with our own identity, living at peace with our neighbors.  As it says in Hatikvah, “the hope of 2,000 years has not been lost, to be a free nation in our land.”

On the other side is the vision of the Christian Bible – a world where “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus (Galatians 3:28).” The lack of importance of nations is also represented by the idea of “render unto Ceasar what is Ceasar’s.”  All those petty differences are not important and are not the fundamental reality.  Don’t concern yourself with political stuff like that.

That idea – one world, all the same, no difference between Jew and Greek, male and female, etc. – is what John Lennon expresses so poetically in “Imagine:”

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace

Imagine is the exact opposite of Hatikvah.  A nation fulfilling its dream, living as a nation in its own land – versus no more nations.

So now we can bring these two ideas together: the state of Israel is clearly one of those countries for whom an idea is important.  What is our founding idea?  The Jewish people returned to their ancestral home, the end of 2,000 years of exile, etc. 

One of the people at the seminar asked Rabbi Gordis an excellent question: she said that while she knows many Jews in America who support the basic idea behind the Jewish state, they are very troubled by the Occupation – so much so that they get turned off to Israel completely.  How do we respond to that?

R. Gordis replied (this is a paraphrase, not a direct quote): "That’s an important question that I can answer one of three ways: I could just agree, yes, the Occupation stinks. But that would be pretty boring.  I could try to defend the Occupation, but I won’t, because I don’t defend it.  Instead, I’ll be a little in your face.  How dare you sit in comfort in America and tell us we need to pull out of the West Bank when that would endanger us, and our children?  This building – the Hartman Institute – is also home to the Hartman Boy’s High School.  It is in Qassam rocket range of the Green Line.  My son prays every day in this room.  When you can tell us how we can end the Occupation without endangering ourselves, without making it dangerous for us, fine.  Until then, keep your mouth shut."

That’s a terrible answer.  When I heard that answer I was reminded of the story from the Talmud about a Gentile who asks a famous rabbi a difficult question.  The rabbi gives some facile answer, which the Gentile accepts and goes away.  His students turn to him and say, “OK rabbi, you pushed him off with that lame answer, but what do you have to say to us?”

R. Gordis can push off someone from the US with his answer – you don’t live here, don’t dare tell us what to do – but what does he say to me?  I also live here.  I live even closer to the Green Line than he does.  My kids ride city buses to go to school.  And I think his answer is a bunch of hooey.  What’s more, I suspect he knows his answer is hooey too.

Why is it such a big deal?  We’ve lived with the Occupation for forty years.  What difference does it make if we live with it for another forty years?

The problem is the Occupation is bad for the Palestinians, and it’s bad for us.

It’s obvious why it’s bad for the Palestinians: they are not citizens of any country, they don’t have the normal rights that go with citizenship, their movement is restricted, a government not their own controls decisions about their daily life including whether they can add a room to their house. 

Perhaps less obvious is why it is bad for the Jews.  I have several reasons why I think it’s bad for us:

• It is making us a pariah in the view of the rest of the world.  We are being compared (unfairly, but still…) with South Africa and apartheid. 
• The risk of violence hurts our economy.  Even though tourism is at record levels, no one doubts tourism would be higher still if we had peace.
• It has a corrosive effect on Zionism: many young secular people do not want to serve in the IDF because they don’t want to risk their lives defending a bunch settlers living in the West Bank surrounded by people who don’t want them there.
• As pointed out by the woman who asked the question, the Occupation has a corrosive effect on how much Jewish youths in the Diaspora identify with Israel. 
• It is morally wrong, and as such represents a sort of communal corruption.

I want to address the last point in more detail.  What makes it morally wrong?

Many of my “lefty” friends may be offended by the following statement.  I believe that since we won the war in ’67 (and affirmed our victory in ’73) if we want to, we can keep all of the lands in the Occupied Territories (aka the West Bank and Gaza, aka Yehuda and Shomron).  We won.  The winners get to set the borders.  There is just one catch: if we keep the land, we have to keep the people and make them citizens.  The problem with that is Israel does not want to make another couple of million Muslims citizens, because it would mean the end of a Jewish state in a generation or two as there would be a Muslim majority before too long. 

We can’t be pigs.  We don’t get to have our cake and eat it too.  If we want the land, fine, we can have the land, and welcome a bunch of new citizens to Israel.  If we don’t want the additional Muslim citizens, we don’t get to keep the land.  I see it as a basic human right to be a citizen of your country.  To be able to vote for the people who decide how much taxes you pay and how those taxes are spent.  The Torah tells us “mishpat echad yiyeh lachem,” there shall be one form of law for you, for the native born and the convert, the citizen and the resident alien.

There are also plenty of moral problems in how the Occupation has been administered: privately owned Palestinian land has been unfairly confiscated, excessive checkpoints make movement difficult, the security fence and a small number of violent settlers have made access to Palestinian agricultural lands difficult, the route of the security barrier (an evil necessity because of those Palestinians who want to blow us up) unfairly favors settlers over Palestinians in land conquered in '67.

To go back to R. Gordis’ answer – the reason the Occupation is continuing is NOT because we don’t know how to end it without endangering ourselves.  That’s nonsense.  The problem is our terribly broken political system.  The reason we are not making more progress toward peace with the Palestinians is because Israel’s political leadership is more interested in keeping their jobs than in furthering the national interest.  Tzipi Livni’s ego kept her out of a coalition with Netanyahu.  As such we have a government with a racist foreign minister, under police investigation for corruption, who makes us a laughing stock around the world.  We have a government that can’t move because if Netanyahu did actually start to make the compromises necessary for peace with the Palestinians his government would collapse and he’d be either at the mercy of Tzipi Livni, or facing new elections.

It’s not completely the fault of Netanyahu and Livni: it’s partly the fault of the crazy political system that puts them into this situation, where a government needs to cut a deal that inevitably ends up including small radical parties.  The charedi (ultra-Orthodox) at the moment have a huge amount of clout politically, because they are the ones keeping Netanyahu in office.

If Israel doesn’t get its act together, I suspect the Palestinian state will happen all on its own within two years.  Salam Fayyad, the Palestinian prime minister has been busy building a state already.  One small sign: in Israel and in Jewish circles in the West, the “disputed territories” are called either the West Bank, or Yehuda and Shomron, sometimes “the Occupied Territories,” sometimes the “Palestinian Authority.”  I have had a few meetings recently with businessmen from Ramallah.  You know what it says on their business cards?  Ramallah, Palestine.  Fayyad has been quietly building a country called Palestine.  Their economy is improving, their security situation is stable.  Within a couple of years—and on their schedule, not Israel’s—they will simply announce a state.  How long do you think if will take before the UN and the EU recognize Palestine?  Probably less than five minutes.  At that point Israel’s negotiating position will be seriously eroded: it will be negotiating with a sovereign state that will no doubt have the backing of the EU and the UN, if not the United States.

If I were Rabbi Gordis, I probably would have gone with the boring answer: just agree with the questioner, yes, the Occupation sucks, I hope we have a country with real borders one of these days.  A country fulfilling the Biblical vision of a unique nation, with a unique culture, living at peace with the neighbors.

Reb Barry

March for Shalit, US govt funding for settlers, Intl Human Rights Law, performance art protest

There is no connection whatsoever between the above topics, other than they are a random sample of things going on here that inspire commentary this week:

March for Shalit: traffic in Jerusalem today was somewhat disrupted as the march of Gilad Shalit's parents and supporters arrived in Jerusalem.  For those living in a cage, Gilad Shalit is the Israeli soldier who was captured by Hamas four years ago.  Israel has offered to trade 1,000 prisoners, including a number of terrorists with "blood on their hands" for Shalit.  Hamas wants more.

I truly sympathize with the Shalit family; I can't imagine the pain they are in, knowing their child has been a prisoner of Hamas for four years.  But I think they are protesting in the wrong place. 

The following words are not ones you will see me write or say often: I agree with Benjamin Netanyahu.  "Not at any price."  There has to be limits to the price we are willing to pay to get Shalit back.  One estimate I read said terrorists have about a 50% recidivism rate.  If we release a terrorist who kills someone after his release, how will the family of the victim feel about the deal to release Shalit?  If Hamas said "we'll release Shalit if you let us pick an Israeli at random and kill him first" of course we would refuse.  The Talmud teaches you can't sacrifice someone else for yourself -- the Talmud asks "is your blood redder than his?  Perhaps his blood is redder than yours!"  Yet if we release a significant number of terrorists, we are essentially making that same deal.  Innocent people will die.

US Govt Funding for Settlers: Just as Netanyahu was getting ready to meet with Obama in Washington, the NY Times ran a front page article: "Tax Exempt Funds Aid Settlements in the West Bank."  Is the timing a coincidence?  Look, I admit to being opposed to ideologically oriented settlement in the West Bank.  I think they are a barrier to peace.  However, I also think the NY Times article is bogus.  The article claims that organizations supporting settlers have donated $200 million over the last few years to support a policy that the US government opposes.  And they present it as if this is shocking news.  OK, that may be true, but it's irrelevant.  The Obama Administration favors gun control.  Yet the NRA collects $200 million tax deductible dollars each and every year.  Same exact thing: the government is subsidizing an organization that espouses policies contrary to the wishes of the ruling party.  So what?  Tax exempt status is not reserved for those who "toe the party line." Not even when it's the line I prefer...

International Human Rights Law: Have been studying international human rights law at the Hartman Institute with a couple of world class experts, Tal Becker and Daniel Taube.  Fascinating discussions.  I have generally not wanted to get too involved with International Human Rights Law in my work with Rabbis for Human Rights, because I have felt that all too often it just gets used to bash Israel, and my interest is more in what Judaism has to say, not what the UN has to say.  Studying with these two guys has changed my views -- I now think it's important for human rights activists, including rabbis, to be up on IHR.  There are certainly parallels between IHR and Jewish law, and there are rabbis who say that IHR has acquired the status of "dina d'malchuta dina," the law of the land is the law.  It's a complex and difficult subject: we spent an hour and a half debating the definition of terrorism without coming up with an answer (the UN doesn't have a single answer either).

Performance Art Protest: and last but not least, leaving the opening night party for the Jerusalem Film Festival there were young people doing "protest performance art," posing blindfolded and handcuffed in submissive positions on the sidewalk, drawing attention to the plight of the Palestinians.  An older Israeli group accosted one of the youngsters, yelling, calling him an embarrassment, etc.  One of the older women said before the War of Independence (60+years ago) she was a little girl, and there was an Arab village near Gan Sacher.  She remembers hearing them yell "destroy the Jews," and said "how can you expect to make peace with someone like that?"  Sixty years later, and she judges the possibilities for peace on what a few rowdies said way back then.  And we wonder why it's hard to make peace here.  If we don't forget anything, you can bet the Palestinians don't forget anything either...

In case you were wondering, I wasn't at the Film Festival because of my little known career in film making (although I do share "story by" credit on a cool script the wife wrote which hasn't sold yet).  I was there because the spousal unit was a volunteer, which was enough to get me free drinks and food.  I was at a gathering of rabbis just before the Film Festival party, and I can tell you one thing: movie people have better refreshments than rabbis!

One thing about living in Jerusalem: it's never boring!!  :-)

Shabbat shalom,

Reb Barry

Some thoughts for parshat Pinchas

Pinchas is the Bible's great zealot.  Last week we read how in a fit of zealotry, he killed a couple who were engaging in public very naughty behavior by skewering the two of them with his spear.

There are those who say this is a time for Israelis to be more zealous, to be more like Pinchas, to rise up and defend ourselves in the most vigorous possible fashion.

I wrote a response to someone who said just that -- it's a little bit of a "vent," but I thought it's too good a vent not to share...so here you go:

I understand how people living in America – especially rabbis – can feel passionate about Israel and want to comment about what’s going on here.  I certainly publicly shared lots of opinions about Israel while I still lived in the US.  

However, now that I’ve made aliyah, I have to say that I’m bothered by people who from afar call for things like “Pinhas zealotry.”  I’m the one who has to live with the consequences of Israeli chutzpah and stupidity. 

If “Pinhas zealotry” is called for, it’s called for in moderates being as passionate about their position as the extremists.  It’s certainly NOT a time to pick up spears and skewer anyone who offends our sensibilities.  It’s time to be less “righteous” and more “wise.”  It’s time to realize that a dinky country like Israel can’t take on the whole world.  1,941 years ago our ancestors thought they could take on Rome.  They were wrong.  

We can be “strong” and find ourselves an international pariah.  We can be “strong” and find that we have no allies left.  We can be “strong” and find ourselves subject to a REAL Boycott-Divestment-Sanctions campaign that could cripple our economy, and put many of us out of work.  

Or we can act in a more intelligent fashion, let the world see that Hamas is the problem, not Israel.  The Shalit family should organize marches to Gaza, not marches to the Prime Minister's residence.  Hamas is the one holding their son prisoner, not Netanyahu.  We can try and make friends with countries like Turkey instead of turning them into enemies.  

We’re not going to be able to bully our way to peace.  We’re going to have to negotiate our way to peace.  We’re going to have make territorial compromises for peace.  We’re going to have to act a little more humble and a little less self-righteous if we want peace.  

The problem is not the morality of the IDF.  The IDF is, indeed, one of the most moral fighting forces in the world.  The problem is our political leaders need to stop putting our troops into situations where they have to face those difficult decisions, like whether to fire on an apartment building where gun fire is coming from, but where there are also a lot of innocent civilians.  The problem isn’t the IDF, it’s the politicians.  

It bugs me when people sitting in comfort in America call on Israelis to “kick ass,” when we’re the ones who will have to live with the consequences of stupid behavior.  It bugs the hell out of me when some guy in Brooklyn calls on us to defend the settlements to the last of drop of MY children's blood, not his children's blood.  

Sorry for the venting.  Maybe it’s partly because I just came from taking my family on an outing to Castel--a site just outside Jerusalem where many fierce battles were fought during the War of Independence. At Castel I saw a monument listing the names of the men killed in the battle for that small patch of land.  Life is precious.  I want my kids to live in Israel at peace with her neighbors, including a Palestinian state. We need to be more like Aaron -- bikash shalom v'rodef shalom -- seek peace and pursue peace -- not more like Pinhas.

Shabbat shalom,

Reb Barry

Rabbis for Human Rights Beit Midrash

There is no shortage of human rights related stuff in Israel to blog about these days: protests that turned violent in Sheikh Jarrah, the mayor of Jerusalem's "tone deaf" plan to "help" the residents of Silwan regardless of how they feel about the help, Gilad Shalit still captive in Gaza.

There is always something "exciting" going on in the human rights scene in Israel, and our executive director, Rabbi Arik Ascherman is often in the middle of it, getting arrested, standing in front of bulldozers, etc.

Which is why much of the other very important work that Rabbis for Human Rights (RHR) does often goes unnoticed by the public at large.  It's not so dramatic.

Last week I had the opportunity to attend the end of year ceremony for the graduates of this year's Human Rights Beit Midrash at Hebrew University in Jerusalem -- a joint project of RHR and Hillel.

Over the course of the last year, the graduates each spent 150 hours learning some of the fundamental sources for human rights in the Jewish tradition.  Major topics included: "The Image of God," "Tzedaka (charity or righteousness) and Justice," "Equality" (including gay rights), "The relationship between the citizen and the resident alien."  Additionally, as a group, the students contributed 1200 hours of community service with human rights NGOs.

It may not make headlines, but RHR's educational work is incredibly important.  Many liberal secular people have been put off towards religion because they believe religion is a reactionary force concerned with the Jews, not concerned with the world.  By putting human rights issues into a Jewish context -- and by educating them on the important things the Torah has to say on the most contemporary of issues -- we are helping to create a generation of future leaders in Israel that will appreciate the wisdom in Judaism. We are helping create future activists who will work for "tikun olam," the repair of the world. 

I was delighted to see how they put volunteer work together with learning: they were living out the teaching from the Talmud about the debate in R. Tarfon's attic: "Which is greater," they asked, "study or action?"  R. Tarfon said "action."  R. Akiva countered, "study, for it leads to action." The collected rabbis agreed with R. Akiva that study is greater because it leads to action.  This isn't just a beit midrash where the students argue obscure points of halacha; it's a beit midrash where study leads to action.  It was a privilege to be a part of their graduation.

Reb Barry

Zionists Not Welcome

"No Entry for Zionists." Where do you think you would be likely to see a sign like that?

Saudi Arabia?

Iran?

If I said in Jerusalem, you'd probably assume I meant one of those Arab villages.

I certainly know I was surprised to be walking in Mea Shearim, in the heart of the Jewish section of West Jerusalem – in the heart of a very religious Jewish neighborhood – and to see such a sign.

The sign in Hebrew reads "Ein Ma'avar L'Tzioyim," more literally "no passage for Zionists." I also saw signs that said "Shilton Aravi Ken, Shilton Tzioni Lo," "Arab Government Yes, Zionist Government No."

I'm not easily shocked, but I was shocked. And somewhat shaken. Yes, I have always known there were anti-Zionist groups like the Neturei Karta, that believe Zionism is slowing the coming of the Messiah. Groups that believe it would be better to live under Arab rule. Rabbis who have served on Yasser Arafat's cabinet as his minister for Jewish Affairs. And I know that the charedi ("ultra-Orthodox") in general have been getting more restive, more outspoken, more violent. Admittedly it's been a couple of years since I last went to Mea Shearim – I generally only go there to buy obscure religious books, it's not a place I generally like to take tourists. Last time I was there I didn't see so much visible antipathy toward Zionism. I'm sure the antipathy was there, but they were more quiet about it.

What struck me is what a "generation of the desert" mentality they have. A "slave" mentality. A "galut" (exile) mentality.

The theology behind the anti-Zionists comes from a passage in the Talmud at the end of tractate Ketubot known as the "three oaths." Based on a midrashic interpretation of an obscure three fold repetition in Song of Songs of a phrase "I adjure you, o daughters of Jerusalem, not to arouse love before it's time" they believe we should do nothing to "force God's hand" so to speak. We should sit and pray, and when God is ready, God will send the Messiah, the Third Temple will dramatically fall in a fiery cloud from the sky, sacrifices will again be offered in that new Temple, and Israel will be ruled by a king descended from David, aided by a Supreme Court of rabbis (ultra-Orthodox ones, of course!).

That midrash came in the wake of the destruction of the Temple and the crushing of the Bar Kochba revolt. Jews had learned their lesson: keep your place, don't take on Rome. For the better part of 2,000 years, following those instructions led to Jews living in exile, often in horrible conditions, often facing pogroms. When God comes along and performs a miracle for us, and brings us back to the land of Israel, the modern day anti-Zionists turn their back on it, and because it wasn't done the way they picture it, they reject it. The idea that God would accomplish His miracles through human agents seems impossible for them to grasp.

It is good to honor "minhag avoteinu," the customs of our ancestors. But they go too far. They are like the slaves that God brought out into the desert, on the path to the promised land, who complained about the leadership of Moses and Aaron. God did miracles for them, and all they wanted was to go back to Egypt. We are taught that the generation that died in the desert had to die out in the desert because they had a "slave mentality," they weren't psychologically suited for the challenges that go with establishing a sovereign nation in Eretz Yisrael. The slave generation basically said, "our ancestors were slaves in Egypt, it's good enough for us to be slaves in Egypt."

Likewise, the anti-Zionists in Mea Shearim are looking backwards. They fail to see the miracles that God has wrought on their behalf. It doesn't match their preconceived notions, so they think it is "treif" (not kosher).

At the other extreme, we have "ultra-Zionists" who have gone from a "slave mentality" to a "Pharaoh mentality," thinking it is OK to oppress others, thinking it is OK to steal land from anyone who isn't Jewish.

Is my vision – which was Herzl's vision – the odd one here? I'm a Zionist, so I didn't enter that passageway. Yet I'm a Zionist who wants to see Israel live up to her role as a light to the nations – an Israel that is a beacon of hope, of justice, of mercy, not just toward Jews but to all her residents and citizens.

Just like those anti-Zionist residents of Mea Shearim, I pray fervently for the coming of the Messiah. Yet my vision of what that day will be like is as different from their vision as it is from a Christian vision. With all these different visions of what the days of the Messiah will look like, how will we ever recognize them when they come?

Shabbat Shalom,

Reb Barry

No news is good news

Jerusalem, Rosh Chodesh Sivan 5770 (May 14, 2010): This morning a group of women prayed together at Judaism's holiest site, the Kotel (Western Wall).

Other than one guy who yelled for a while about how terrible it was that women were doing this at a holy place, and I understand from the women's side, some elderly women who complained that women would actually pray there, there were no problems.  At one point, a group of Haredim, led by a guy with a cell phone but no prayerbook, organized a large group near the mechitza (divider) and started praying a little loudly, but that was all they did, and they broke up without doing anything untoward.  

In other words, not much of anything happened, other than some women prayed.

Which is good news!  In months past, I have witnessed cursing, spitting, and flying chairs when the Women of the Wall pray at the Kotel.  The Haredim (ultra-Orthodox) seem to be getting more and more violent and hard to control.  Some of them have engaged in vandalism and attacked police over things ranging from parking lots that are open on the Sabbath to the fact that Intel has to operate their semiconductor fab in Jerusalem on the Sabbath.  The most recent outrage was this week, when a woman was attacked at a bus station for for having tell-tale lines on her arm indicating she had put tefilin (phylacteries) on that day, an act which Haredi believe is reserved for men.  The woman, Noa Rez, wrote a report which you can read on Rabbi Menachem Creditor's blog here. 

The police had a significant presence, and did a GREAT job of keeping things quiet.  They didn't allow anyone to harass the women, they stopped the nut case who was yelling.  After the prayers were over I made a point of walking over to the police...I told them (in Hebrew of course) "it's a pity you have to be here just because some women want to pray, but thanks for doing a good job."

I had decided I would go ahead and pray on the men's side while the women were praying on their side.  It was time for prayers anyway, and I figured I could be there if anything happened, to see it, record it, and/or try to defuse it.  Rather than join one of the minyanim, I just prayed on my own at the back, as close as the police would let me be to the mechitza.  It was beautiful morning, temperature was very pleasant, birds were flying, (rain and chairs were not).  The women had started before me, but I caught up with them so I was able to say my Hallel as they were reciting theirs, and I enjoyed hearing their beautiful harmonious voices and quietly singing along.  And then the Haredi group came along with their loud and cacophonous prayers and totally interrupted my kavvanah (focus).  I have to say, the women sounded a lot better!  In accord with the agreement reached with the authorities, after Hallel, the women relocated to Robinson's Arch (aka "the Masorti (Conservative) Kotel").  In the past, women have been subject to cursing and spitting when they do a procession moving the 100 meters, but today was quiet.

In the past, women have been harassed -- briefly detained even -- by the authorities for wearing a tallit (prayer shawl).  Today women walked with tzitzit (fringes) flying, and no one seemed to care or notice.

I hope it's progress.  I hope the police have finally realized why they are there and who it is they have to protect.  I hope the Haredi have decided it's not worth harassing the women because all it does is create ill will and give them bad press.

This week's Torah reading is Bamidbar, the opening chapters of the book of Numbers.  The reading starts out with a census, which brings up a question: Why do we have all this counting of the Jews, why the repetition of the exact same phrases for each tribe? 

Rabbi Yitzhak Arama (15th century, Spain), said the reason for all the counting was to teach us that “they were not just like animals or material objects [to be counted one, two, etc.], but each one had an importance of his own like a king or priest and that indeed God had shown special love toward them, and this is the significance of mentioning each one of them by name and status; for they were all equal and individual in status.”

Could it be that we are making progress in getting Israeli society to recognize that we are, indeed, all "equal and individual in status?"  Even women?

A friend of mine, a little more cynical than me perhaps (of course he's lived here a lot longer than I have) said he would not count on it being progress...the Haredi just like to pray earlier during the summer months.

I hope he's wrong!

Shabbat Shalom,

Reb Barry

Yom Yerushalayim

Today is "Yom Yerushalayim," Jerusalem Day. The day when we celebrate the reunification of Jerusalem (according to the Hebrew calendar) in 1967.

I have to admit, I feel deeply ambivalent about this day.  On the one hand, 'when I watch the news clips from that June day in 1967 -- which you can see here -- a shiver runs down my spine when I hear the announcer yell "har habayit b'yadeinu!"  The Temple Mount is in our hands!  After 19 years of being in Jordan, 19 years when Jews were not allowed to pray at the holiest site in Judaism, to be able to return was fantastic.  To have the Temple Mount under Jewish authority for the first time in nearly 2000 years -- what can you say?

On the other hand, the "reunification of Jerusalem" is used (abused) by those on the right who say "Jerusalem will never again be divided."  Meanwhile, the government of Israel has engaged in quite a bit of subterfuge in defining "Jerusalem."  Land miles away is now part of "Jerusalem."

Jerusalem has grown over time, from about 35 acres during the time of King David.  But in the interests of furthering a "land grab" the Israeli government has annexed land far from historical Jerusalem.

The truth is that Jerusalem is already a divided city.  Not too many of my Jewish friends hang out in Arab East Jerusalem, and you don't see a lot of Arabs in my neighborhood other than construction workers.  I'm one of the few Jewish Jerusalemites who actually does occasionally wander into the eastern part of the city.  It's a different world.  You go there and you really feel you are in a different country.  You feel much more like you are in the "Middle East" with signs all in Arabic and lots of street vendors, etc.

I certainly agree that in any peace deal with the Palestinians, there is no way that Israel should divide the historic part of the city most important to us.  We have to retain control over the Western Wall, etc.  At the same time, giving Jabal Mukaber or Sheikh Jarrah to the Palestinians is not going to hurt us.  Jews don't live in those places anyway, other than the ones who are trying to "Judaize" Arab neighborhoods.

I want to celebrate Yom Yerushalayim as meaning we can go to the old city.  I don't want to celebrate Yom Yerushalayim as a day meaning we insist on hanging on to Arab villages like Sheikh Jarrah.  Ceding the Arab part of East Jerusalem is not really dividing Jerusalem in my mind -- it's not the historical Jerusalem, and it's not the part of Jerusalem that means that much to me.  What to do with the Old City is a much more complicated issue.

However you celebrate it...have a great "Yom Yerushalayim!"

Rabbi David Forman, z"l

The first time I met Rabbi David Forman would have been around February 2007.  My initial impression was that he was a somewhat difficult character who held strong opinions.

At his funeral today, his family -- especially his daughter Shira -- shared a side of him that I unfortunately never had a chance to know.  What a dedicated, loving father, husband, brother, father-in-law he was.  Despite all of his accomplishments -- and he had many, including writing four books and founding Rabbis for Human Rights -- the emphasis of everyone who spoke was his love and caring for his family.  Followed by his love and caring for Israel and the Jewish people.

So having seen more of his "difficult and strong opinion" side, and less of his loving family member side, maybe I can share a slightly different perspective.  I think what I saw as difficult and opinionated were in fact the strengths that allowed David to succeed in the way he did.

"Difficult" can be a code word for "stubborn."  The Talmud teaches us that when dealing with our personality traits we are not supposed to try and conquer the "bad" ones, but rather redirect them.  We don't strive to obliterate our "yetzer hara," our evil inclination, but rather we strive to direct that energy -- that life force -- into a positive direction.  In other words, if you are stubborn, don't necessarily try to get rid of your stubbornness: rather be stubborn in a good cause.

Similarly, being opinionated can be a good thing, if you are opinionated in the right way.  David was very opinionated when it came to pursuing justice and doing the right thing.  Tzedek tzedek tirdof, "Justice, justice you shall pursue" was more than just another slogan to David.  It was his mission in life.

If you combine being opinionated about pursuing justice, with being stubborn about seeing things through, you get just the sort of person who could do something crazy -- and vitally important -- like found Rabbis for Human Rights.  I'm sure it was a very difficult thing to do.  Someone less stubborn, or less opinionated about pursuing justice probably would never have put in the kind of energy it must have taken to get the organization off the ground.

In later years there were times when he had differences of opinion with some of the people who came into leadership roles in the organization he founded.  Differences of opinion that he was not shy about expressing.  But that's OK: in a way, RHR was like one of his children, and every parent knows that there comes a time when your kids grow up and they express opinions of their own.  And that's OK.  You still love them.

Alas, I can't say I knew David well: I only knew him in the context of RHR board and other meetings.  So maybe some of his close friends and family will look at what I wrote here and say, "wow, did that miss the mark!"  If so, I apologize.  Whether I captured his personality traits right or not, his life is one that many can find inspirational -- both professionally and personally.  These days, 65 seems a life cut unfairly short.  Yet Rabbi David Forman certainly leaves a legacy that almost any rabbi--any person--would be proud of.

May his memory be a blessing.

Reb Barry

A Palestinian State: Good News for Jews?

Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad has told a leading Israeli newspaper that a Palestinian state will be unilaterally declared by August 2011 if negotiations with Israel don't allow it to happen sooner.  Click here to read the story.

What would Jewish values have to say about such a declaration?

On the one hand, you might think that since the Jewish tradition promises the land the Palestinians are living on as an inheritance for the Jewish people, we would take a dim view of this pronouncement.  After all, the territory they want to establish their nation on is the same chunk of land that many call by their biblical names "Judea and Samaria" (or "Yehuda and Shomron").  The central mountain range of the West Bank is where my nomadic made their home.  This is the countryside where a lot of Jewish history happened.  Hotly contested Hebron includes the Cave of the Patriarchs where according to legend many of the most important persons in the Bible are buried.

However, as always, there is more to the story and more to the answer than "this is our land, how dare you guys declare a nation here!"

There are two major reasons the Jewish tradition would support Fayyad's declaration.

First of all, there is a teaching that says t'fasta meruba lo t'fasta, "if you grab too much, you grab nothing."  If you are greedy -- and go for the "two in the bush" -- you may find yourself losing "the one in your hand." 

One of our greatest rabbis, Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai, was a realist -- he knew he wasn't going to be able to beat the Romans, so instead of trying to get everything, he negotiated with the Roman emperor Vespasian and got an agreement that saved the critical mass of Jewish leadership, who were able to setup the Sanhedrin in Yavneh and adapt to the changing reality.

We also learn this lesson from looking at the example of another Roman emperor -- one much hated by the Jews for his crushing of the revolt in 132, Hadrian.  Even mighty Rome had limits -- Hadrian chose not to take on the Parthians, even though he had the mightiest armed force in the world at the time.  He knew that if he took on the Parthians, he would be spread too thin, and it would jeopardize other parts of his empire.

If Israel refuses to cede to the Palestinians sufficient land for them to have a viable country of their own, we will find ourselves with no choice but to share a single country.  And the prospect of a single bi-national state between the Mediterranean and the Jordan is not one that I find pleasing.  Given the demographic realities in this part of the world, if that happened in a generation or two there would no longer be such a thing as a Jewish state.

The other reason the Jewish tradition might look favorably on Fayyad's declaration is because of all the people in the world, the Jews should appreciate another people's desire for self-rule.

We are right now in the middle of celebrating Passover, the holiday when we celebrate our liberation from living under Egyptian rule.  As a people, we know what it's like to be a slave, we know what it's like to live under someone else's rule.  Now I'm not comparing our slavery in Egypt to the Israeli occupation of the West Bank.  The situations are nowhere near comparable.  However, there is no denying that Israeli rule has a heavy impact on the average Palestinian's life.  They do not have freedom of movement, job and education opportunities are limited, they are not even "second class citizens" because they are not citizens.  The Torah tells us mishpat echad yiyeh lachem "you shall have one manner of law" for both citizens and "resident aliens."  The status quo is not acceptable morally, theologically, or practically.

Not only were we "strangers in a strange land" in Egypt over 3,000 years ago, but much more recently we have been a "stateless" people, with no home to call our own.  The Palestinians today find themselves in an analogous situation -- they have been rendered "stateless" people, albeit while continuing to live on the land they have called home for generations.

I visited Yad Vashem today with my three oldest children.  Always a sobering experience.  A reminder of  how important it is that we have a Jewish state as a refuge.  And a reminder that the world needs compassion, not cruelty.  Tolerance and acceptance, not hatred. 

I hope Fayyad gets to realize his dream of a Palestinian state.  It will be good for the Palestinians.  And good for the Jews.  And not bad for the rest of the world.

Shabbat shalom,

Reb Barry