Randy
Showing posts with label Judaism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Judaism. Show all posts
23 November 2010
A Conversation Between Friends
Preface: Eric Reed is a world-class Jazz pianist and a "Facebook Friend" as well. He was Mitchell's ensemble instructor at the 2004 UCSD Jazz Camp and was and still is a great example of someone who tries to put back into life some of what he has taken out by doing educational programs all the time. He is evidently a very religious man, something that I respect. I am very interested in whether anyone thinks I went overboard in my comments about bowing down to Jesus and your opinion of the whole conversation in general. Please let me know in the comments here or privately if you're so inclined.
Randy
Randy
31 July 2008
The Freedom To Be Religious: Wins and Losses
The Freedom To Be Religious: Wins and Losses
July 31st, 2008by Gershom Gorenberg · 1 Comment · Judaism and Religion
Gershom Gorenberg
Religious freedom is often confused in our parts with freedom from religion, and atheism is mistakenly equated with liberalism. For the state to be secular - so goes the thinking - everyone who lives in it should secular too. As political scientist Yaron Ezrahi once said to me, “The Israeli secular community lacks the understanding that you don’t have to secularize individual identity to evolve a secular state.”
Ezrahi made the comment to me when I was writing a story on Gil Kopatch, a stand-up comedian who for several months in the late 90s appeared on a Friday night TV show and presented a pointed, often-ribald commentary on the weekly Torah portion. Kopatch was attacked by the ultra-Orthodox for his supposed blasphemy. But he confused his secular supporters when he insisted “I’m a believing Jew” and expressed “love of Torah.” Secular MKs presumed that in defending Kopatch’s freedom of expression, they were also attacking religion as such. The idea that freedom of expression includes religious expression was beyond them.
Ezrahi’s comment fit the American model: secular state, religious society. But “liberal” Israelis aren’t alone in assuming that for the state should impose secularism. Here are several recent stories, starting with the most important:
Turkey’s top court voted narrowly yesterday against banning the country’s ruling party. The alleged offense of the Justice and Development Party was that it engaged in “anti-secular” activity, as proven by its attempt to allow women attending state universities to wear headscarves. Six out of 11 judges voted to shut down the party, but a majority of seven was needed. But the court did cut half of the party’s state funding. The court and the prosecutor represent Turkey’s old nationalist establishment, based in the military, viligantly loyal to Kemal Ataturk’s program of forced secularism.In its defense, the Justice and Development Party cited European Union principles of democracy. That fit its basic European orientation. (So much for the clash of civilizations: The pro-Islam party is also pro-Western and pro-democracy.)
A British court ruled yesterday that a school could not suspend a Sikh girl for wearing the bracelet required by her religion. Fourteen-year-old Sarika Singh of South Wales said the bracelet should be exempt from a school ban on jewelry; her school disagreed. In this case, at least on the surface, the school wasn’t trying to crush religion as such, but it didn’t understand that there was a difference between fashion and faith. But were it not for the assumption that people should give up their irritatingly non-conformist attachments to their religion in favor of fitting in, the school authorities would have seen this. Fortunately, the judge righted the wrong.
A French court turned down an immigrant’s application for citizenship because she wears the veil, in accordance with her understanding of Islam. According to the New York Times, “France’s highest administrative court upheld a decision to deny citizenship to Ms. Silmi, 32, on the ground that her ‘radical’ practice of Islam was incompatible with French values like equality of the sexes.” Now Faiza Silmi’s “radicalism” did not express itself by seeking to overthrow the state by force and violence, and there’s no report that she discriminated in any way against other women. Rather, the state decided in a somewhat patriarchal manner that by failing to dress as other women do, she was violating the principle of equality. Put differently, one can’t be too religious and also be French.
As my friend and mentor Marc Howard Ross wrote in his book, Cultural Contestation in Ethnic Conflict, the battles over scarves and veils in France aren’t only about Islam (The word “Republican” in the following quote refers to French belief in the republic; it’s got nothing to do with the American party.):
In the hard-core Republican narrative, the French emphasize the individual citizen’s relationship to the unitary state that has historically rejected the relevance of intermediate group identities. It is the product of a centuries-long struggle to limit the power of the Catholic Church in the public domain. For its adherents, the secular state [is]… not all that is at risk - so is French culture.
In other words, a Frenchman is supposed to identify with the state, and the state is secular. Identifying with a religion as well is virtually an act of civic adultery. The Turkish generals feel just the same.
So do a good many Israelis, who see Zionism as having replaced religion as the way to express being Jewish. Their ultra-Orthodox opponents agree that one can be religious or Zionist, but not both. The classic religious Zionist position sought to solve the problem by making the state religious, at least in some ways. That way you could identify with both the state and religion without a conflict.
What all three positions miss is that the state can be the neutral protector of one’s right to have multiple, overlapping identities. It can be secular, and protect the right of a citizen to be religious.
28 July 2008
Our Dwindling Spirit
View from the booth by the window, view of the ocean:
That Israel's spirit is dwindling is no surprise. This is a refrain which I have heard personally from people just returned from Jerusalem. There is a pall cast over the country, beset as it is with problems that a peaceful and stable democracy in a stable part of the world could deal with. But Israel does not have the luxury of existence and life in a part of the world that welcomes their drive and determination to make something out of nothing, which is what they have done.
With in excess of 60% of Israelis not practicing Judaism or who no longer identify with Judaism at all, is it any wonder that there is a paucity of budding Bubers in philosophy departments in Israeli universities? There are plenty of Israelis who have no use for Judaism, as they view themselves as being redeemed by the very fact of their living in Israel. The truth, it seems to me, is that for the vast majority of Israelis, Judaism is not viewed as an important part of their lives; for too many, Judaism is represented by the Haredim and settlers who have made Jewishness seem, well, quaint, and at the same time out of touch with reality, the cause of more problems than it resolves. Dangerous, even, to the continued existence of the State. In a world which is changing far too rapidly and in uncertain ways, the only thing that Israelis can offer the world that will pay the bills to live in it is of course the ability to create and to discover.
Today, Shai Agassi is making a bid to make Israel the first westernized country to run its automobiles completely on electricity. Is the focus on current problems that people of Buber's generation did not have to face necessarily counter to Jewish principles? It would seem to me that those Israelis who claim to have no affiliation with Judaism can never escape who they are - or what the perceptions of the world are of them - as Jews, living in a place that is constantly in bitter bloody fights with its intractible and growing enemies at its borders and, as we have seen over the past few days, even within them. They have a responsibility to themselves, their families and their country to make advances where they are needed. Does Israel need philosophers? Probably. But that is a requirement for a country that can afford to have its best minds studying Plato and Sartre. Or Talmud for that matter. Can Israel's best and brightest afford, in any sense of the word, to take their eyes off of immediate concerns to ponder the meaning of Judaism in 2008, with Hezbollah on the North and Hamas in Gaza and Iran ever present everywhere? With Syria's allegiances in play between Iran and reality? Science and engineering are existential for Israel. Undertaken to preserve Israel, does it matter that the people doing the preservation do not outwardly identify as Jews? I think not. As long as the job gets done - that Israel is preserved for future generations, what people call themselves is immaterial. Living is proof of success.
It seems to me that what Israel really needs right now are not philosophers necessarily but a new class of Jewish politicians who can lead the country into the future. It is shocking to me that there can be serious discussion about philosophy and philosophers in Israel when it seems that the entirety of the government is either indicted or under suspicion of bribery or sexual peccadilloes or abuse. Who will take the place of the old guard? Shimon Peres, for all his 85 years, and all his smarts and reason, is 85 years old. This does not represent the future. People like Ehud Olmert, Binyamin Netanyahu and Ehud Barak are known quantities and have had their time to make life better for Israelis, though certainly their failures are not entirely their fault. The only new name of which I am aware is Tzipi Livni, but she is in the process of being marginalized by Mr. Olmert, prepared as he is to move the Minister for Transportation, Shaul Mofaz, into the P.M. spot after the forthcoming elections. Who else is there? Adding to the difficulty is the fact that Israel does not have a qualified partner for peace as no P.A. leader can guarantee that they can control their own people. There have to be new ideas in place. The ideas coming out of Israel today, in my view, are shopworn and tired, understandably so. The problems coming from the other side are the same as they have been for quite some time. Perhaps it is time to change the perception of the problem, to force responsible Arabs to take some of the load off of Israel. Dubai, Abu Dhabi and Qatar are wealthy sheikdoms who have only one thing in mind: to maintain control of their wealth. An uncontrolled Arab mob has the potential to destabilize all of those countries and more. It behooves the wealth in the region to take affirmative steps to bring the neanderthals among them into the 20th century, if not the 21st.
At some point, philosophy becomes useless - an academic discussion - if it is not put into action. After 5000 years of Hebrew and Judaism, we probably have enough philosophical discourse to last another 5000 years. I only hope that Israel can make it another 60. With a reserve of strength, nerve and will, I hope that Israel can raise its collective heads high enough to see and feel a horizon instead of the constant heavy and loud breathing of enemies at and within the gates. It is a heavy load. Pray that the bearers are strong enough to resist the temptation to give up.
Randy Shiner
Our Dwindling Spirit
By Aaron Ciechanover
Tags: Israel, Judaism
In her opinion piece "Shakespeare is not a moneymaker" (Haaretz,July 25), Na'ama Shefi lamented the demise of the Israeli spirit in academia. Making income the number-one goal of academia has sidelined Shakespeare and Plato. I can only agree with every word she wrote and add that in Israel, the Jewish state, the study of Judaism, archaeology, literature and Israeli and Jewish history are fading in a process that endangers our very existence.
For over 2,000 years in exile, carrying the torch of hope and yearning for political and religious freedom has kept Judaism rooted. Erosion of these principles may now unhinge our ideological, religious and historical claim to being here. Indeed, we are witnessing the dwindling down of our academic leadership and the failure to produce heirs. There are few successors to academics such as philosophers Martin Buber and Gerhard Scholem, historians Joseph Klausner and Jacob Talmon, archaeologists Benjamin Mazar and Yigael Yadin, and poet Leah Goldberg, just to name a few of the groundbreaking thinkers who taught at the Hebrew University. The university's humanities departments have shrunk and no longer attract many students.
Their very existence is in danger. Universities are becoming trade schools bereft of any Israeli or Jewish spirit. It is of particular concern that the disappearance of fields that are not profitable does not stem from budget cuts. Rather, they result from a deep shift in principles and culture felt both at home and on the streets and which have caused the younger generation to abandon them. So we can't put all the blame on the universities. They cannot fight against the sweeping cultural changes; perhaps not even the country's leadership, if such a thing exists, could do so.
It is unfortunate, however, that Shefi quoted me saying things that I never did in order to support her argument. As for the comparison between the brain drain from Israel and the flight of Jewish scientists from Nazi Germany, that comparison was never made and my words were taken out of context. What I meant to say was that cultural and scientific creativity is very sensitive to pressures and reacts to them by escaping elsewhere. I mentioned Germany's Jewish scientists as an extreme example and said unequivocally that I was not comparing them to the situation in Israel. But even though I felt I was taken out of context I apologized in the media to anyone who may have been hurt by what I did not say. On the subject of a broad education, I have made myself clear time and again. I quote from an interview I gave with my colleague and fellow Nobel Prize laureate Robert Aumann to Sever Plocker, only one example in many: "An educational deterioration exists on all levels. Those with academic titles are inarticulate, lack cultural depth and are ignorant in general and Jewish history. Where are the great thinkers of the past? I see a direct link between the demise of the Israeli spirit and that of the nation.
Without advanced humanities and Jewish studies, quality scientific research will not be carried out in Israel, not in physics, chemistry, mathematics or medicine." Only recently, in a speech I gave at the Open University, I spoke about the road that connects Jewish prayer and winning the Nobel Prize; the road between a broad education and succeeding in the tumultuous world of science.
Aaron Ciechanover is a Nobel Prize winner and faculty member at the Technion - Israel Institute of Technology.
That Israel's spirit is dwindling is no surprise. This is a refrain which I have heard personally from people just returned from Jerusalem. There is a pall cast over the country, beset as it is with problems that a peaceful and stable democracy in a stable part of the world could deal with. But Israel does not have the luxury of existence and life in a part of the world that welcomes their drive and determination to make something out of nothing, which is what they have done.
With in excess of 60% of Israelis not practicing Judaism or who no longer identify with Judaism at all, is it any wonder that there is a paucity of budding Bubers in philosophy departments in Israeli universities? There are plenty of Israelis who have no use for Judaism, as they view themselves as being redeemed by the very fact of their living in Israel. The truth, it seems to me, is that for the vast majority of Israelis, Judaism is not viewed as an important part of their lives; for too many, Judaism is represented by the Haredim and settlers who have made Jewishness seem, well, quaint, and at the same time out of touch with reality, the cause of more problems than it resolves. Dangerous, even, to the continued existence of the State. In a world which is changing far too rapidly and in uncertain ways, the only thing that Israelis can offer the world that will pay the bills to live in it is of course the ability to create and to discover.
Today, Shai Agassi is making a bid to make Israel the first westernized country to run its automobiles completely on electricity. Is the focus on current problems that people of Buber's generation did not have to face necessarily counter to Jewish principles? It would seem to me that those Israelis who claim to have no affiliation with Judaism can never escape who they are - or what the perceptions of the world are of them - as Jews, living in a place that is constantly in bitter bloody fights with its intractible and growing enemies at its borders and, as we have seen over the past few days, even within them. They have a responsibility to themselves, their families and their country to make advances where they are needed. Does Israel need philosophers? Probably. But that is a requirement for a country that can afford to have its best minds studying Plato and Sartre. Or Talmud for that matter. Can Israel's best and brightest afford, in any sense of the word, to take their eyes off of immediate concerns to ponder the meaning of Judaism in 2008, with Hezbollah on the North and Hamas in Gaza and Iran ever present everywhere? With Syria's allegiances in play between Iran and reality? Science and engineering are existential for Israel. Undertaken to preserve Israel, does it matter that the people doing the preservation do not outwardly identify as Jews? I think not. As long as the job gets done - that Israel is preserved for future generations, what people call themselves is immaterial. Living is proof of success.
It seems to me that what Israel really needs right now are not philosophers necessarily but a new class of Jewish politicians who can lead the country into the future. It is shocking to me that there can be serious discussion about philosophy and philosophers in Israel when it seems that the entirety of the government is either indicted or under suspicion of bribery or sexual peccadilloes or abuse. Who will take the place of the old guard? Shimon Peres, for all his 85 years, and all his smarts and reason, is 85 years old. This does not represent the future. People like Ehud Olmert, Binyamin Netanyahu and Ehud Barak are known quantities and have had their time to make life better for Israelis, though certainly their failures are not entirely their fault. The only new name of which I am aware is Tzipi Livni, but she is in the process of being marginalized by Mr. Olmert, prepared as he is to move the Minister for Transportation, Shaul Mofaz, into the P.M. spot after the forthcoming elections. Who else is there? Adding to the difficulty is the fact that Israel does not have a qualified partner for peace as no P.A. leader can guarantee that they can control their own people. There have to be new ideas in place. The ideas coming out of Israel today, in my view, are shopworn and tired, understandably so. The problems coming from the other side are the same as they have been for quite some time. Perhaps it is time to change the perception of the problem, to force responsible Arabs to take some of the load off of Israel. Dubai, Abu Dhabi and Qatar are wealthy sheikdoms who have only one thing in mind: to maintain control of their wealth. An uncontrolled Arab mob has the potential to destabilize all of those countries and more. It behooves the wealth in the region to take affirmative steps to bring the neanderthals among them into the 20th century, if not the 21st.
At some point, philosophy becomes useless - an academic discussion - if it is not put into action. After 5000 years of Hebrew and Judaism, we probably have enough philosophical discourse to last another 5000 years. I only hope that Israel can make it another 60. With a reserve of strength, nerve and will, I hope that Israel can raise its collective heads high enough to see and feel a horizon instead of the constant heavy and loud breathing of enemies at and within the gates. It is a heavy load. Pray that the bearers are strong enough to resist the temptation to give up.
Randy Shiner
Our Dwindling Spirit
By Aaron Ciechanover
Tags: Israel, Judaism
In her opinion piece "Shakespeare is not a moneymaker" (Haaretz,July 25), Na'ama Shefi lamented the demise of the Israeli spirit in academia. Making income the number-one goal of academia has sidelined Shakespeare and Plato. I can only agree with every word she wrote and add that in Israel, the Jewish state, the study of Judaism, archaeology, literature and Israeli and Jewish history are fading in a process that endangers our very existence.
For over 2,000 years in exile, carrying the torch of hope and yearning for political and religious freedom has kept Judaism rooted. Erosion of these principles may now unhinge our ideological, religious and historical claim to being here. Indeed, we are witnessing the dwindling down of our academic leadership and the failure to produce heirs. There are few successors to academics such as philosophers Martin Buber and Gerhard Scholem, historians Joseph Klausner and Jacob Talmon, archaeologists Benjamin Mazar and Yigael Yadin, and poet Leah Goldberg, just to name a few of the groundbreaking thinkers who taught at the Hebrew University. The university's humanities departments have shrunk and no longer attract many students.
Their very existence is in danger. Universities are becoming trade schools bereft of any Israeli or Jewish spirit. It is of particular concern that the disappearance of fields that are not profitable does not stem from budget cuts. Rather, they result from a deep shift in principles and culture felt both at home and on the streets and which have caused the younger generation to abandon them. So we can't put all the blame on the universities. They cannot fight against the sweeping cultural changes; perhaps not even the country's leadership, if such a thing exists, could do so.
It is unfortunate, however, that Shefi quoted me saying things that I never did in order to support her argument. As for the comparison between the brain drain from Israel and the flight of Jewish scientists from Nazi Germany, that comparison was never made and my words were taken out of context. What I meant to say was that cultural and scientific creativity is very sensitive to pressures and reacts to them by escaping elsewhere. I mentioned Germany's Jewish scientists as an extreme example and said unequivocally that I was not comparing them to the situation in Israel. But even though I felt I was taken out of context I apologized in the media to anyone who may have been hurt by what I did not say. On the subject of a broad education, I have made myself clear time and again. I quote from an interview I gave with my colleague and fellow Nobel Prize laureate Robert Aumann to Sever Plocker, only one example in many: "An educational deterioration exists on all levels. Those with academic titles are inarticulate, lack cultural depth and are ignorant in general and Jewish history. Where are the great thinkers of the past? I see a direct link between the demise of the Israeli spirit and that of the nation.
Without advanced humanities and Jewish studies, quality scientific research will not be carried out in Israel, not in physics, chemistry, mathematics or medicine." Only recently, in a speech I gave at the Open University, I spoke about the road that connects Jewish prayer and winning the Nobel Prize; the road between a broad education and succeeding in the tumultuous world of science.
Aaron Ciechanover is a Nobel Prize winner and faculty member at the Technion - Israel Institute of Technology.
23 July 2008
Israel and Jews' Friends, the Christian United for Israel - John Hagee, Joe Lieberman and Eschatology
Nary a word was mentioned in any Jewish media of which I am aware of the appearance of Sen. Joseph Lieberman at the Christians United for Israel convention. Is this some kind of theological con-game that Israel is playing on Christian Zionists or vice-versa? As Aretha Franklin once sang, "Who's zooming who?"
As I have written before in the context of "Messianic Jews", the closer Christians come to imitating Judaism in their attempts to convert Jews to Christianity, the closer they are to adopting Judaism.
I do not know if the same quantifiable analysis of Christian fundamentalists who are truly praying for Armageddon, ushering in the second coming of Jesus Christ, can apply here. These people are not seeking conversion in this lifetime - perhaps. But by their rabid and irrational support of miilitary options for Israel, they certainly seem to be throwing their weight at fostering such a war in the middle east - that they do not mind Israel starting against Iran, which such attack, they hope, will be the beginning of the end of the world as it is after which time Jews will either embrace Jesus as the Moshiach, or burn in hell.
In this video, the true aims of the rank and file of CUFI are exposed. Also exposed is the hypocrisy of its Jewish Israel supporters, who are party to the mass murder of a people. That is, again, assuming that the whole thing isn't a con-game against the CUFI and like thinkers to have their immediate support for Israel against known present enemies, without much care about their world-view or their end-of-the-world view.
The video was done by Max Blumenthal (h/t to www.maxblumenthal.com) and Thomas Shomaker (myspace.com/tshomaker) and is a great piece of work, well worth the 10 minutes of your time to watch and especially to listen. Who's zooming who?
Randy Shiner
16 July 2008
Taking On Israel’s Chief Rabbinate
Taking On Israel’s Chief Rabbinate
A reluctant rebel’s challenge to the haredi establishment could make or break Israel’s Religious Zionist movement.
by Gary Rosenblatt
Editor And Publisher
Rabbi Benjamin (Benny) Lau does not look the part of a revolutionary.
At 47, his youthful appearance, warm smile and engaging personality have helped him become a popular Orthodox rabbinic figure in Jerusalem, where he has revitalized the Ramban community synagogue in Katamon and heads the beit midrash program at Beit Morasha, a communal and educational leadership institute for observant men and women.
He also lectures at Bar-Ilan University (where he received a Ph.D.) and teaches at both a boys’ and girls’ yeshiva high school in Jerusalem.
The rabbi is soft-spoken, but his message of late — in sermons, lectures, newspaper columns and interviews — is blunt and compelling, offering up sharp criticism of the Chief Rabbinate and its role in the deteriorating relationship between religion and state in Israel.
Rabbi Lau, himself the nephew of former Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi Yisrael Meir Lau, is leading a campaign among like-minded, more tolerant Orthodox rabbis to wrest control of the Chief Rabbinate from the influence of a group of elderly ultra-Orthodox, anti-Zionist haredi religious leaders whose dictates often are followed by the two state-appointed chief rabbis.
Rabbi Lau says he and his colleagues, primarily from the rabbinic group, Tzohar (Hebrew for window), seek to restore a sense of compassion toward all Israeli Jews, no matter their level of observance.
“We can’t accept it,” Rabbi Lau says of the haredi style, which demands the strictest levels of adherence to Jewish law. “We are the Zionists and we should be the ones with the power. It’s not normal for the state to be the captive of the haredim,” who don’t acknowledge the authority of the state.
He says he would prefer that more senior rabbis in his camp take the lead in this campaign, “but I look around and see that the responsibility is on our shoulders, and it cannot wait. We are very close to the end of the relationship” between religion and the state, he says, as Israelis become increasingly disenfranchised with the Judaism they see practiced and adjudicated by the Chief Rabbinate.
“As a strong Zionist, I want to be part of the Jewish state,” he says. “I need to serve the needs of the people,” regardless of their level of observance.
Listening to what the rabbi has to say these days calls to mind Howard Beale, the fictional character in the classic 1976 movie “Network,” who as anchor of a major television network urged viewers to stick their heads out of their windows and shout, “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore.”
Israelis who care about the state of Judaism in the country don’t need much prompting — especially now.
The association between Israeli society and the Orthodox-controlled Chief Rabbinate has always been problematic, with many secular and less observant Jews resenting the control the rabbinate has over their personal lives in matters of marriage, divorce, conversion and burial.
What has changed dramatically in recent months is that more and more Orthodox Jews as well are adding their voices to those who have long expressed frustration and anger with a Chief Rabbinate that appears increasingly rigid and narrow in its outlook and rulings, to the detriment of Israeli society.
The two recent episodes that have become “the last straw” for many, particularly in the Religious Zionist/Modern Orthodox camp, were the Chief Rabbinate’s strict rulings regarding the current sabbatical (or, shmitta) year, and especially its rulings over conversion.
Shmitta, which falls every seven years, is the commandment that calls for Jewish-owned land in Israel to lie fallow. In the past, a halachic loophole was followed, allowing Jewish farmers to maintain their income by having their land symbolically sold to a non-Jew. But under pressure from haredi leader Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv, Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi Yona Metzger gave rabbinic councils the option to disallow the loophole, in effect having people purchase produce from Arabs rather than Jews.
Even more upsetting was the rabbinic ruling that led to nullifying conversions permitted over the last 15 years by Rabbi Chaim Druckman, a Religious Zionist leader and head of the government’s special conversion administration.
Not only does such a move show the haredi leadership’s disdain for the Religious Zionist camp, but also for a society with an estimated 300,000 Russian immigrants who are not Jewish. Many of them probably would be willing to convert if the procedure was not onerous, but the haredi standard is for the convert to adhere to all 613 commandments.
Rabbi Lau says such actions by the haredim underscore their indifference, if not hostility, toward a modern Jewish state, and he says the time to act against them is now.
“Many secular Jews in Israel would respond positively to a rabbinate that shows openness and compassion,” he told me over the course of several conversations. “But the people have become alienated.”
He likens the haredi view to Noah on the ark, protecting his own family while the rest of the world drowns. Rabbi Lau prefers the model of Abraham, who even argued with God in an effort to save the wicked cities of Sodom and Gomorrah.
“We can’t just live on the ark,” he said, noting that Israel is a vibrant society, not just an enclosed religious community.
That’s why the rabbi says he is leading an effort to try to gain control of the Chief Rabbinate, consulting with the former Sephardi Chief Rabbi Ovadia Yosef and his son, Yitzchak, who Rabbi Lau sees as open to a more tolerant kind of Jewish authority.
If the cooperative effort fails, there is the option of appealing to the Supreme Court to appoint a Chief Rabbinate more reflective of Israeli society and Zionist values. Rabbi Lau says he knows that could “open up the process” to include non-Orthodox representation, but he finds that healthy, and notes that he often cooperates in programs with Conservative and Reform rabbis.
A final option is for Rabbi Lau and his allies from Tzohar — a group of about 300 rabbis who seek to be more accessible and welcoming to non-Orthodox Israelis — to compete directly with the Chief Rabbinate, creating their own religious courts to deal more sympathetically with Israelis on issues like marriage, conversion, agunot and divorce.
Such a confrontation would be messy, Rabbi Lau acknowledges, but no worse than the current sorry state of affairs, he says.
Does he have a chance at effecting change? Not in the short-term, according to Israelis knowledgeable about the situation.
Prime Minister Olmert “needs the haredim in his coalition and he will not struggle with them,” notes Yair Sheleg, a reporter for Ha'aretz who covers the religious world. But he adds that “the feeling of crisis that Rabbi Lau, and others, express” may have a long-term positive impact.
Sheleg suggests that in the future, haredi parties may be more sensitive to public criticism, for fear of losing political clout, and/or the Religious Zionist camp may come to soften its stand on settlements so as not to weaken its support for change on social issues, like calling for a more tolerant Chief Rabbinate.
The outcome of this conflict could decide the fate of Religious Zionism in Israel — whether it will take on the mantle of leadership or bow to the clout of the haredim. And this brewing dispute may well determine whether the growing gap between religious and secular Jews in the country can be narrowed.
In the meantime, Rabbi Lau is ready to lead, though not sure how many rabbis will be with him.
“I feel I am doing the right thing,” he says. “The halachic tradition has always been about meeting the needs of the people. That’s all we’re trying to do. And we’re ready to take a stand.”
A reluctant rebel’s challenge to the haredi establishment could make or break Israel’s Religious Zionist movement.
by Gary Rosenblatt
Editor And Publisher
Rabbi Benjamin (Benny) Lau does not look the part of a revolutionary.
At 47, his youthful appearance, warm smile and engaging personality have helped him become a popular Orthodox rabbinic figure in Jerusalem, where he has revitalized the Ramban community synagogue in Katamon and heads the beit midrash program at Beit Morasha, a communal and educational leadership institute for observant men and women.
He also lectures at Bar-Ilan University (where he received a Ph.D.) and teaches at both a boys’ and girls’ yeshiva high school in Jerusalem.
The rabbi is soft-spoken, but his message of late — in sermons, lectures, newspaper columns and interviews — is blunt and compelling, offering up sharp criticism of the Chief Rabbinate and its role in the deteriorating relationship between religion and state in Israel.
Rabbi Lau, himself the nephew of former Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi Yisrael Meir Lau, is leading a campaign among like-minded, more tolerant Orthodox rabbis to wrest control of the Chief Rabbinate from the influence of a group of elderly ultra-Orthodox, anti-Zionist haredi religious leaders whose dictates often are followed by the two state-appointed chief rabbis.
Rabbi Lau says he and his colleagues, primarily from the rabbinic group, Tzohar (Hebrew for window), seek to restore a sense of compassion toward all Israeli Jews, no matter their level of observance.
“We can’t accept it,” Rabbi Lau says of the haredi style, which demands the strictest levels of adherence to Jewish law. “We are the Zionists and we should be the ones with the power. It’s not normal for the state to be the captive of the haredim,” who don’t acknowledge the authority of the state.
He says he would prefer that more senior rabbis in his camp take the lead in this campaign, “but I look around and see that the responsibility is on our shoulders, and it cannot wait. We are very close to the end of the relationship” between religion and the state, he says, as Israelis become increasingly disenfranchised with the Judaism they see practiced and adjudicated by the Chief Rabbinate.
“As a strong Zionist, I want to be part of the Jewish state,” he says. “I need to serve the needs of the people,” regardless of their level of observance.
Listening to what the rabbi has to say these days calls to mind Howard Beale, the fictional character in the classic 1976 movie “Network,” who as anchor of a major television network urged viewers to stick their heads out of their windows and shout, “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore.”
Israelis who care about the state of Judaism in the country don’t need much prompting — especially now.
The association between Israeli society and the Orthodox-controlled Chief Rabbinate has always been problematic, with many secular and less observant Jews resenting the control the rabbinate has over their personal lives in matters of marriage, divorce, conversion and burial.
What has changed dramatically in recent months is that more and more Orthodox Jews as well are adding their voices to those who have long expressed frustration and anger with a Chief Rabbinate that appears increasingly rigid and narrow in its outlook and rulings, to the detriment of Israeli society.
The two recent episodes that have become “the last straw” for many, particularly in the Religious Zionist/Modern Orthodox camp, were the Chief Rabbinate’s strict rulings regarding the current sabbatical (or, shmitta) year, and especially its rulings over conversion.
Shmitta, which falls every seven years, is the commandment that calls for Jewish-owned land in Israel to lie fallow. In the past, a halachic loophole was followed, allowing Jewish farmers to maintain their income by having their land symbolically sold to a non-Jew. But under pressure from haredi leader Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv, Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi Yona Metzger gave rabbinic councils the option to disallow the loophole, in effect having people purchase produce from Arabs rather than Jews.
Even more upsetting was the rabbinic ruling that led to nullifying conversions permitted over the last 15 years by Rabbi Chaim Druckman, a Religious Zionist leader and head of the government’s special conversion administration.
Not only does such a move show the haredi leadership’s disdain for the Religious Zionist camp, but also for a society with an estimated 300,000 Russian immigrants who are not Jewish. Many of them probably would be willing to convert if the procedure was not onerous, but the haredi standard is for the convert to adhere to all 613 commandments.
Rabbi Lau says such actions by the haredim underscore their indifference, if not hostility, toward a modern Jewish state, and he says the time to act against them is now.
“Many secular Jews in Israel would respond positively to a rabbinate that shows openness and compassion,” he told me over the course of several conversations. “But the people have become alienated.”
He likens the haredi view to Noah on the ark, protecting his own family while the rest of the world drowns. Rabbi Lau prefers the model of Abraham, who even argued with God in an effort to save the wicked cities of Sodom and Gomorrah.
“We can’t just live on the ark,” he said, noting that Israel is a vibrant society, not just an enclosed religious community.
That’s why the rabbi says he is leading an effort to try to gain control of the Chief Rabbinate, consulting with the former Sephardi Chief Rabbi Ovadia Yosef and his son, Yitzchak, who Rabbi Lau sees as open to a more tolerant kind of Jewish authority.
If the cooperative effort fails, there is the option of appealing to the Supreme Court to appoint a Chief Rabbinate more reflective of Israeli society and Zionist values. Rabbi Lau says he knows that could “open up the process” to include non-Orthodox representation, but he finds that healthy, and notes that he often cooperates in programs with Conservative and Reform rabbis.
A final option is for Rabbi Lau and his allies from Tzohar — a group of about 300 rabbis who seek to be more accessible and welcoming to non-Orthodox Israelis — to compete directly with the Chief Rabbinate, creating their own religious courts to deal more sympathetically with Israelis on issues like marriage, conversion, agunot and divorce.
Such a confrontation would be messy, Rabbi Lau acknowledges, but no worse than the current sorry state of affairs, he says.
Does he have a chance at effecting change? Not in the short-term, according to Israelis knowledgeable about the situation.
Prime Minister Olmert “needs the haredim in his coalition and he will not struggle with them,” notes Yair Sheleg, a reporter for Ha'aretz who covers the religious world. But he adds that “the feeling of crisis that Rabbi Lau, and others, express” may have a long-term positive impact.
Sheleg suggests that in the future, haredi parties may be more sensitive to public criticism, for fear of losing political clout, and/or the Religious Zionist camp may come to soften its stand on settlements so as not to weaken its support for change on social issues, like calling for a more tolerant Chief Rabbinate.
The outcome of this conflict could decide the fate of Religious Zionism in Israel — whether it will take on the mantle of leadership or bow to the clout of the haredim. And this brewing dispute may well determine whether the growing gap between religious and secular Jews in the country can be narrowed.
In the meantime, Rabbi Lau is ready to lead, though not sure how many rabbis will be with him.
“I feel I am doing the right thing,” he says. “The halachic tradition has always been about meeting the needs of the people. That’s all we’re trying to do. And we’re ready to take a stand.”
11 July 2008
The Abraham Complex
View from the booth:
It's a good sign that the Saudis are sponsoring this event. It's just a pity that it cannot take place IN Saudi Arabia. Because to do so would involve the arrest and possible death or imprisonment of all non-Muslim attendees. The Saudi government is single-handedly responsible for the spread of Wahabbism in the Islamic world and for funneling its oil money (of which there is now more, thanks very much)into 20,000 madrassas worldwide which spread this kind of radical thought. It's difficult for me to believe that when one compares the Saudi purchase of influence and the aura of legitemacy bestowed on it by its generous sponsorship of various Middle Eastern and Islamic studies programs in universities throughout the United States with its insistence on an extreme form of Wahabbism which it likewise generously sponsors, that this conference is nothing more than a publicity stunt.
However, if there is one thing that is redeeming about this talk it is that even the Saudi royal family sees that there is some benefit to talking about differences. This in and of itself indicates some level, however minimal, of willingness to listen to other points of view. And that, in and of itself, is a positive development regardless of the short-term public relations benefits that it might see as the result of this conference. With the rise of radical Shi'ia majorities in, for example, Iran, the Saudis clearly have an understanding that a lack of rapprochement with the West (e.g., Christians and Jews) will lead to revolution - buckets of blood - all over the Sunni world and the concomitant loss of power and money to which they are ultimately and really betrothed to.
Money don't care who owns it.
Randy Shiner
It's a good sign that the Saudis are sponsoring this event. It's just a pity that it cannot take place IN Saudi Arabia. Because to do so would involve the arrest and possible death or imprisonment of all non-Muslim attendees. The Saudi government is single-handedly responsible for the spread of Wahabbism in the Islamic world and for funneling its oil money (of which there is now more, thanks very much)into 20,000 madrassas worldwide which spread this kind of radical thought. It's difficult for me to believe that when one compares the Saudi purchase of influence and the aura of legitemacy bestowed on it by its generous sponsorship of various Middle Eastern and Islamic studies programs in universities throughout the United States with its insistence on an extreme form of Wahabbism which it likewise generously sponsors, that this conference is nothing more than a publicity stunt.
However, if there is one thing that is redeeming about this talk it is that even the Saudi royal family sees that there is some benefit to talking about differences. This in and of itself indicates some level, however minimal, of willingness to listen to other points of view. And that, in and of itself, is a positive development regardless of the short-term public relations benefits that it might see as the result of this conference. With the rise of radical Shi'ia majorities in, for example, Iran, the Saudis clearly have an understanding that a lack of rapprochement with the West (e.g., Christians and Jews) will lead to revolution - buckets of blood - all over the Sunni world and the concomitant loss of power and money to which they are ultimately and really betrothed to.
Money don't care who owns it.
Randy Shiner
The Abraham Complex
The grave implications of how Islam and Christianity have dealt differently with their Jewish roots.
Avi Beker, The New Republic Published: Thursday, July 10, 2008
King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia
The grave implications of how Islam and Christianity have dealt differently with their Jewish roots.
Avi Beker, The New Republic Published: Thursday, July 10, 2008
King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia
"Abrahamic religions" has become a widely used term, particularly among interfaith groups, to designate the three major monotheistic religions. King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia has called for an interfaith meeting to be attended by representatives of the "Abrahamic religions," beginning with a Saudi-sponsored conference in Madrid next week. This phrase, focusing on the character of Abraham, seeks to emphasize the shared characteristics of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. As the first person to establish a covenantal relationship with God based on His role as the sole deity and supreme authority, Abraham is accepted as a prophet by all three monotheistic faiths.
On a theological level, both Christianity and Islam have had to reconcile their belief that Abraham is a true prophet, but that his religion--Judaism--is not the true religion. This inherent need to invalidate Jews as the "chosen people" has had concrete manifestations throughout history--and is at the root of much of medieval and contemporary anti-Semitism. Resolving this seeming paradox has been the first step in healing Christian-Jewish relations, and is a necessary process for Muslim leaders as well before any serious interfaith work can be successful.
Jews themselves have historically recognized the difficult situation imposed on them by their "chosen" status. Sigmund Freud, using his theory of the subconscious, blamed this special categorization (in his words, "the first-born, the favorite child of God") for the world's obsession with and hatred of Jews. In turn, Jews throughout history have looked upon the "chosen" concept as controversial and arrogant, and many have tried to reject or deny it. In 1885, the Jewish Reform movement in America adopted the Pittsburgh Platform, declaring that they didn't wish to be a nation at all and thus reinterpreting the concept of chosenness as part of a moral mission to help the world. About 50 years later, Mordecai Kaplan, the founder of the Reconstructionist Movement, proposed a Judaism that rejected, in his words, the "anachronistic" and "arrogant" concept of the chosen people that perpetrated "race or national superiority." Early Zionists also tried to escape the fate of "the chosen" in order to be a "normal" nation. Yosef Haim Brenner, an influential writer for the socialist Zionism and the Kibbutz movement, wrote at the beginning of the twentieth century: "I would blot out from the prayer book of the Jews of our day the [words] 'Thou hast chosen us' in every shape and form."
Jews themselves have historically recognized the difficult situation imposed on them by their "chosen" status. Sigmund Freud, using his theory of the subconscious, blamed this special categorization (in his words, "the first-born, the favorite child of God") for the world's obsession with and hatred of Jews. In turn, Jews throughout history have looked upon the "chosen" concept as controversial and arrogant, and many have tried to reject or deny it. In 1885, the Jewish Reform movement in America adopted the Pittsburgh Platform, declaring that they didn't wish to be a nation at all and thus reinterpreting the concept of chosenness as part of a moral mission to help the world. About 50 years later, Mordecai Kaplan, the founder of the Reconstructionist Movement, proposed a Judaism that rejected, in his words, the "anachronistic" and "arrogant" concept of the chosen people that perpetrated "race or national superiority." Early Zionists also tried to escape the fate of "the chosen" in order to be a "normal" nation. Yosef Haim Brenner, an influential writer for the socialist Zionism and the Kibbutz movement, wrote at the beginning of the twentieth century: "I would blot out from the prayer book of the Jews of our day the [words] 'Thou hast chosen us' in every shape and form."
Nevertheless, the concept of the Jews as "The Chosen People" had become a central tenet of both Christianity and Islam. Christianity's relationship with Judaism has long been governed by the "supersessionist theory," established by Paul at the end of the first century, which claims that the followers of Jesus replaced the Jews as the "true Israel." It's a theme that is found in Christian literature as early as the second century, with Christians envisioning themselves as "Israel after the flesh" in order to justify why Jews had fallen out of favor with God. One of the earliest Christian saints, Justin Martyr, refers in 160 A.D. to the Christian Church as "the true spiritual Israel." This urge to discredit the merit of Judaism also explains the Christian obsession with Jews as the killers of Christ--an element in the religion's early attempt to vilify Jews. As characterized by scholar David Flusser, "Christian anti-Judaism was not a coincidental lapse" but a tool serving as "godfather to the formation of Christianity."
Christian vilification of "the Chosen Jews" inspired several waves of violence, such as the attacks on the Jewish communities in Europe that followed Pope Urban II declaration's in 1095 of a "Holy War" led by the "race beloved and chosen by God." During the Second Crusade half a century later, Peter the Venerable incited his troops to liberate the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem as a way to confirm the rejection of the Jews and the election of the believers in Christ. The supersessionist theory also motivated the expulsion of the Jews in 1492 from Spain, as the Jewish refusal to convert clashed with the Spanish claim to be replacing the Hebrews as the new "Chosen People" who would transform Spain into "God's Land," and the royal family into the new "House of David." Even Hitler used Christian theology to justify his slaughter of Jews, writing in Mein Kampf, "By fighting off the Jews, I am doing the Lord's work." For him, the choice was unequivocal: "There cannot be two Chosen People," he once said. "We are God's People."
It took Christianity 2,000 years of policies that persecuted and demoralized Jews to arrive at Vatican II, the hugely significant gathering in 1965 that confronted the charge against the Jews as the killers of Christ. By removing the collective blood guilt from "the Jews of today" and in ancient times, the gathering's pronouncement allowed the recognition by the Catholic Church of the Jews as "Thy Chosen People" and led later to Pope John Paul II's declaration, during his historic 1986 visit to the Synagogue of Rome, that the Jews are "our elder brother." Some elements of the supersessionist theory still sporadically appear in Christian theology--such as in the Dominus Iesus document, written in 2000 by the current Pope, Benedict XVI, who has stressed a desire "for the instant in which Israel will say yes to Christ." But the 1965 modifications in the doctrine and the reconfirmation of the strong Jewish roots of Christianity have contributed mightily to a more harmonious relationship between the two religions.
Islam faces a similar theological need to explain away Jewish "chosenness." But unlike Christianity, the Muslim displacement theory does not base itself on being the "New Israel;" instead, it recasts the Jewish prophets as Muslims by creating a direct link with Ishmael, the son of Abraham, the "first Muslim" according to the Koran. As philosopher Abraham Geiger (later the founder of Reform Judaism) wrote in his 1833 doctoral thesis, Did Muhammad Borrow from Judaism?, the need to distance Islam from its Jewish roots explains much of the anti-Jewish sentiment in its theology. Sheikh Abd Al Rahman Al Sudayyis, the imam of the most important mosque in Mecca, said as much in February 2004: he described the existence of Jews as a major challenge to "our religious principles, historical rights, and past glories"--a conflict "of creed, identity, and existence." The denial of the role Judaism played in the foundation of Islam is a significant part of Islamic theology.
Vilifying or killing Jews is a recurring motif in Muslim holy texts. An oral tradition from the Prophet Mohammed, for example, contends that the rivalry with the Jews will continue until the end of the days: "The Last Hour will not come until the Muslims fight against the Jews," it reads, "and the Muslims will kill them until the Jews will hide themselves behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say: 'O Muslim, the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me. Come and kill him.'" The Koran accuses the Jews, repeatedly, of falsehood, distortion, and of being "corrupters of the scriptures." It argues that the Jews did not deserve to be the chosen people, and because of their sins they are condemned to "degradation in this world." Islam's obsession with Judaism is no less serious than the Catholic Church's before Vatican II--and, unfortunately, it has become even more severe in the past few decades.
So, much of the Muslim world's current hatred of Israel has theological roots. The return of the Jews to their homeland, and even worse, their victories over Arab armies, is seen as a contradiction of the fact that Jews are supposed to be relegated to a life of dispersal and humiliation. In 1968, for example, the Grand Imam of Al Azhar University referred to the Arab defeat by Israel in 1967 as an "unexpected event [that] occurred before a roguish Zionism whose adherents had been destined to dispersion by the Deity," and quoted the Koran (2:61): "And humiliation and wretchedness were stamped upon [the Jews] and they were visited with wrath from God."
Many contemporary Muslim adversaries of Israel draw from the most derogatory and bellicose anti-Jewish expressions in the Koran to justify current attitudes. In a recent sermon, Al Sudayyis called Allah to annihilate the Jews, "the scum of the human race, rats of the world, the violators of pacts and agreements, the murderers of the prophets, and the offspring of apes and pigs [quoting from the Koran]." The Saudi government has put their own theological spin on the Russian-produced anti-Jewish tract The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, adding references to the "Jewish sense of superiority in the world" and blaming the Jews for deceiving the world into thinking that "they are the chosen people and that God wants them to once more take possession of Palestine, the promised land."
There's an irony, then, in King Abdullah's call for a dialogue of "Abrahamic religions." Saudi Wahhabism is responsible more than any other segment in Islam for the most extreme interpretation of their religion's superiority--and the resulting pathologies that have come from the need to deny Islam's historical entwinement with Judaism. As religious leaders from around the world gather in Madrid next week under the auspices of the Saudi government, history teaches us that only by finding a way to reconcile the existence of Judaism with the existence of Islam--a difficult but fruitful process undertaken by Christians in recent decades--can a productive dialogue actually begin.
Avi Beker is the Goldman Visiting Professor at Georgetown University at the Department of Government and the former Secretary General of the World Jewish Congress. He is the author of The Chosen: The History of an Idea and the Anatomy of an Obsession.
09 July 2008
Orthodox group drops meat boycott
Orthodox group drops meat boycott
Published: 07/08/2008
An Orthodox social justice group called off its boycott of the country's largest kosher meat supplier less than a month after it began.
The boycott, organized by Uri L'tzedek, went into effect in mid-June in an effort to pressure Agriprocessors to institute mechanisms to ensure compliance with U.S. labor laws.
On Tuesday, the group said it was suspending the boycott because the company "is beginning to take significant steps towards directly addressing the concerns" raised about treatment of its workers.
Agriprocessors has sustained a wave of negative media coverage since May 12, when federal authorities conducted the largest workplace immigration raid in American history at its meat-packing plant in Postville, Iowa.
In the wake of the raid, employees have claimed they were underpaid and sexually and physically abused. Agriprocessors officials deny the allegations and the federal government has yet to bring any charges against the company's owners, the Lubavitch Rubashkin family of Brooklyn, N.Y.
As evidence of the company's apparent turnaround, Uri L'tzedek cited a number of reforms it says have been instituted by James Martin, the new compliance officer hired by Agriprocessors. Among the reforms named are the creation of an anonymous tip line for workers, a new safety department and new safety training initiatives.
"In light of these early signs of reform, Uri L'tzedek is no longer calling for the community to abstain from purchasing Agriprocessors' products," the group said. "Time will show what kind of results these reforms will yield for the workers at Agriprocessors."
Published: 07/08/2008
An Orthodox social justice group called off its boycott of the country's largest kosher meat supplier less than a month after it began.
The boycott, organized by Uri L'tzedek, went into effect in mid-June in an effort to pressure Agriprocessors to institute mechanisms to ensure compliance with U.S. labor laws.
On Tuesday, the group said it was suspending the boycott because the company "is beginning to take significant steps towards directly addressing the concerns" raised about treatment of its workers.
Agriprocessors has sustained a wave of negative media coverage since May 12, when federal authorities conducted the largest workplace immigration raid in American history at its meat-packing plant in Postville, Iowa.
In the wake of the raid, employees have claimed they were underpaid and sexually and physically abused. Agriprocessors officials deny the allegations and the federal government has yet to bring any charges against the company's owners, the Lubavitch Rubashkin family of Brooklyn, N.Y.
As evidence of the company's apparent turnaround, Uri L'tzedek cited a number of reforms it says have been instituted by James Martin, the new compliance officer hired by Agriprocessors. Among the reforms named are the creation of an anonymous tip line for workers, a new safety department and new safety training initiatives.
"In light of these early signs of reform, Uri L'tzedek is no longer calling for the community to abstain from purchasing Agriprocessors' products," the group said. "Time will show what kind of results these reforms will yield for the workers at Agriprocessors."
08 July 2008
Rethinking Judaism and Christianity
July 08, 2008
Rethinking Judaism and Christianity
Another discovery may shed light on the period prior to the birth of Jesus, and add to discussions about Judaism and Christianity. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/06/world/middleeast/06stone.html?sq=jesus&st=nyt&scp=4&pagewanted=all
What is called "Gabriel's revelation" is a stone tablet with 87 lines of Hebrew writing. It describes a prominent national leader who died and came to life after three days.
A day after an article about the stone appeared in the New York Times, a Hebrew translation of the Times article began on the front page of the Israeli newspaper, Ha'aretz. That evening two professors from the Hebrew University appeared on a major television news program to discuss its significance.
Analysis of the stone has appeared in a prominent journal serving the professions of archaeology and biblical studies. Experts quarrel about individual words that are blurred, and may be crucial to the interpretation. The provenance of the stone, or its history and authenticity, may yet be subject to dispute.
Given the standing of scholars who have invested their time in the stone, we can at the least speculate about its impact on conceptions of Judaism and Christianity at about the time of Christ.
A prominent conclusion is that an important element in the story of Jesus is not unique. Jewish ideas of that time and earlier also conceived of a messianic figure who would die and come back to life.
Add this to readings of Jesus' preaching that find them similar to ideas expressed by Hebrew prophets for several hundred years. The conclusion is that Jesus did not differ from other individuals circulating in the Jewish community. The Roman occupation was oppressive. It produced not only the rebellion of Jesus as described in the New Testament, but two widespread uprisings of Jews, including one civil war. It is not surprising that the period included messianic figures who were said to produce miracles, and predicted an end to suffering.
The New Testament is not the work of Jesus, but appeared several decades after his death. The claim that he is the messiah, along with reports of his virgin birth and resurrection came from his followers. They worked to elevate his status, and distinguish themselves from the Jewish establishment. Ideas about the corruption of Jewish leaders, their lack of morality, and their inflexible preoccupation with small details of law appear in the New Testament, and made their contribution to anti-Semitic stereotypes promoted by Christian Churches subsequently.
Jesus might have had the standing to earn a place in a Hebrew Bible if it was not for his followers. It is they who declared war against the Jews, and made it difficult for Jewish scholars over the years to view with equanimity the affinity between Jesus and Judaism.
Writing by Christian and Jewish scholars in recent decades have contributed to a rapprochement that sees Jesus not only as a Jew, but as one who reflected sentiments apparent in Jewish thought at the time of his life. Commentators see the Holocaust as impacting on the work of Christians about Judaism. Jewish scholars have contributed their own evolving ideas about Christianity. Pope John Paul II symbolized the new spirit when he referred to Judaism as Christianity's older brother while on a visit to Jerusalem in the year 2000.
No one should expect Christian churches to fold themselves into Judaism, or to be received as Jews as a result of the stone called Gabriel's revelation. Theological tensions remain. Religious movements resemble government bodies and large corporations. The perpetuation of their structures, key personnel, laws, traditions, and customs take priority over new ideas that challenge what is well established.
New discoveries may nonetheless blunt antipathies between religious communities as they pass from scholars to professors of religious history and theology, and eventually to teachers in religious schools and preachers. We may also hope that something will come out of an invitation for an Israeli rabbi to attend an interfaith conference in Spain, organized by the World Muslim League, and sponsored by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia. http://www.boston.com/news/world/middleeast/articles/2008/07/03/israeli_rabbi_invited_to_saudi_interfaith_meeting/
The applause would be louder if the conference was in Saudi Arabia, and if a Saudi official did not deny that an Israeli rabbi had been invited. http://www.gulf-news.com/news/gulf/saudi_arabia/10226693.html
Currently we have to rest with the realization that it has been a while since Christian authorities burned Jews. Hopefully it will not take as long for the jihads to stop, and for leaders of all the Muslim countries to welcome Israel's presence in the Middle East.
Ira Sharkansky (Emeritus)
Department of Political Science
Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Home tel: 972-2-532-2725
Cell phone: 054-683-5325
Fax: 972-2-582-9144
msira@mscc.huji.ac.il
Posted by Ira Sharkansky at July 08, 2008 04:57 AM
Rethinking Judaism and Christianity
Another discovery may shed light on the period prior to the birth of Jesus, and add to discussions about Judaism and Christianity. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/06/world/middleeast/06stone.html?sq=jesus&st=nyt&scp=4&pagewanted=all
What is called "Gabriel's revelation" is a stone tablet with 87 lines of Hebrew writing. It describes a prominent national leader who died and came to life after three days.
A day after an article about the stone appeared in the New York Times, a Hebrew translation of the Times article began on the front page of the Israeli newspaper, Ha'aretz. That evening two professors from the Hebrew University appeared on a major television news program to discuss its significance.
Analysis of the stone has appeared in a prominent journal serving the professions of archaeology and biblical studies. Experts quarrel about individual words that are blurred, and may be crucial to the interpretation. The provenance of the stone, or its history and authenticity, may yet be subject to dispute.
Given the standing of scholars who have invested their time in the stone, we can at the least speculate about its impact on conceptions of Judaism and Christianity at about the time of Christ.
A prominent conclusion is that an important element in the story of Jesus is not unique. Jewish ideas of that time and earlier also conceived of a messianic figure who would die and come back to life.
Add this to readings of Jesus' preaching that find them similar to ideas expressed by Hebrew prophets for several hundred years. The conclusion is that Jesus did not differ from other individuals circulating in the Jewish community. The Roman occupation was oppressive. It produced not only the rebellion of Jesus as described in the New Testament, but two widespread uprisings of Jews, including one civil war. It is not surprising that the period included messianic figures who were said to produce miracles, and predicted an end to suffering.
The New Testament is not the work of Jesus, but appeared several decades after his death. The claim that he is the messiah, along with reports of his virgin birth and resurrection came from his followers. They worked to elevate his status, and distinguish themselves from the Jewish establishment. Ideas about the corruption of Jewish leaders, their lack of morality, and their inflexible preoccupation with small details of law appear in the New Testament, and made their contribution to anti-Semitic stereotypes promoted by Christian Churches subsequently.
Jesus might have had the standing to earn a place in a Hebrew Bible if it was not for his followers. It is they who declared war against the Jews, and made it difficult for Jewish scholars over the years to view with equanimity the affinity between Jesus and Judaism.
Writing by Christian and Jewish scholars in recent decades have contributed to a rapprochement that sees Jesus not only as a Jew, but as one who reflected sentiments apparent in Jewish thought at the time of his life. Commentators see the Holocaust as impacting on the work of Christians about Judaism. Jewish scholars have contributed their own evolving ideas about Christianity. Pope John Paul II symbolized the new spirit when he referred to Judaism as Christianity's older brother while on a visit to Jerusalem in the year 2000.
No one should expect Christian churches to fold themselves into Judaism, or to be received as Jews as a result of the stone called Gabriel's revelation. Theological tensions remain. Religious movements resemble government bodies and large corporations. The perpetuation of their structures, key personnel, laws, traditions, and customs take priority over new ideas that challenge what is well established.
New discoveries may nonetheless blunt antipathies between religious communities as they pass from scholars to professors of religious history and theology, and eventually to teachers in religious schools and preachers. We may also hope that something will come out of an invitation for an Israeli rabbi to attend an interfaith conference in Spain, organized by the World Muslim League, and sponsored by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia. http://www.boston.com/news/world/middleeast/articles/2008/07/03/israeli_rabbi_invited_to_saudi_interfaith_meeting/
The applause would be louder if the conference was in Saudi Arabia, and if a Saudi official did not deny that an Israeli rabbi had been invited. http://www.gulf-news.com/news/gulf/saudi_arabia/10226693.html
Currently we have to rest with the realization that it has been a while since Christian authorities burned Jews. Hopefully it will not take as long for the jihads to stop, and for leaders of all the Muslim countries to welcome Israel's presence in the Middle East.
Ira Sharkansky (Emeritus)
Department of Political Science
Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Home tel: 972-2-532-2725
Cell phone: 054-683-5325
Fax: 972-2-582-9144
msira@mscc.huji.ac.il
Posted by Ira Sharkansky at July 08, 2008 04:57 AM
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
