Monthly Archives: April 2014

Why Money Given to Charity by Donald Sterling Can Be Accepted with Conditions

30 Wednesday Apr 2014

Posted by in American Jewish Life, American Politics and Life, Ethics, Social Justice, Women's Rights

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, ,

The sullied moral character of Donald Sterling is clear to anyone with eyes and a conscience.

In the days since his now infamous tapes were leaked we have learned that Sterling has been charitable to Jewish organizations and other groups, such as the NAACP. Why he has given money away, who knows? (PR? Tax deductions? Moments of generosity that remind him of what his mother may have once wished for him?)

In recent days leaders of the Los Angeles Jewish community have sought to distance themselves and their organizations from Sterling’s past gifts and have pledged not to accept anything more from him going forward.

Not so fast!

What does Jewish tradition say about receiving financial gifts from someone of Sterling’s character?

There is much discussion in Halachic literature (Jewish legal literature) concerning the bringing of donations to the synagogue. The Hebrew Bible rules that a sacred object cannot be brought to the Temple in Jerusalem that has immoral origins (Deuteronomy 23:19). Later commentaries come to a consensus that a donation from an individual who acquired the object through immoral or criminal means can be given to the Jewish community.

The 17th century Polish Commentator Rabbi Abraham Abele Gombiner (known as Magen Avraham) refers to a comment of Rabbi Moses Isserles (Shulchan Aruch, Orah Hayyim 153:12) and notes that if the object is first converted into money, and then that money is exchanged for other money, the second set of cash can be given to the synagogue.

Rabbi Solomon Freehoff in his Responsum “Synagogue Contribution from a Criminal” (Contemporary Reform Responsa, CCAR Press, 1969, pp. 52-55) concludes:

“In my judgment you should accept the gift, because it is his [the sinner’s] obligation (a mitzvah) to support the synagogue and we have no right to prevent a sinner from performing a righteous act.”

Tradition, however, conditions the giving of such a gift to its anonymity. No plaque or public mention may be noted about the origin of the gift in order to prevent the donor from enjoying the honor (kavod) of giving the gift. Rabbi Freehoff, however, says that if the sinner/criminal wishes to honor his/her parents, then acknowledgment of his parents may be publicized.

A related matter concerning the public role of a sinner is raised in a Responsum cited in The Holocaust and Halakhah (by Irving J Rosenbaum, Ktav, 1976, p. 154). In this case a particularly brutal and despised Kapo (Jewish policeman) in the Kovno ghetto claimed after the Shoah to have suffered great remorse for the evil he perpetrated on the Jews in the ghetto, and to have sincerely repented from his crimes. He approached the leadership of the Jewish community and requested to act as shaliach tzibur (prayer leader) in the synagogue.

Though acknowledging the great power of repentance, Rabbi Efraim Oshry (a survivor himself) ruled that

“A She’liah tzibur must be fitting; ‘fitting’ means that he must be free from sin and not have had an evil reputation even in his youth.”

This Kapo’s evil reputation, regardless of the t’shuvah he may have undergone that wiped clean his sin, permanently kept him from assuming any public leadership role in the Jewish community.

From these two Responsa, we can draw the following conclusions:

First, Donald Sterling ought to be excluded from any public leadership role in the community (as the NBA has properly done) regardless of whether he ever does t’shuvah in the way, for example, that the former racist Alabama Governor and presidential candidate George Wallace did before his death (Wallace publicly repented of his racism and apologized personally to Reverend Jesse Jackson, representing the African American community), Sterling’s current bad reputation would continue to exclude him.

Second, should Sterling wish to donate money to Jewish causes or other non-profit charitable organizations anonymously, his money need not be rejected. Not only could his donation serve greater community interests, but one day they may be part of the means by which he does sincere t’shuvah.

In this regard, I hope he gives generously and anonymously to all kinds of good causes. While doing so, he ought also to sincerely apologize to and makes amends with all the apartment dwellers he has victimized, to the African American community, to Latinos and peoples of color he has insulted, to women he has exploited, to the Jewish community who by association he has demeaned, and, of course, to the Los Angeles Clippers organization and the NBA.

I wish him courage, the strength and decency to do so.

Gratitude to Reform Movement Institutions That Support J Street’s Inclusion in The President’s Conference

29 Tuesday Apr 2014

Posted by in American Jewish Life, American Politics and Life, Ethics, Israel and Palestine, Israel/Zionism, Jewish History, Jewish Identity, Social Justice

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

As a co-chair of the J Street Rabbinic Cabinet (representing 800 rabbis from across the religious streams and hundreds of American Reform rabbis), as member of the Central Conference of American Rabbis (CCAR – the Reform Rabbinical association) for the past 34 years, as congregational Rabbi serving a Union for Reform Judaism (URJ) synagogue (part of a total of 1.4 million American Reform Jews), I am proud of the  CCAR, the URJ, the Association of Reform Zionists of America (ARZA), and the Women of Reform Judaism (WRJ) for their support of including J Street as a member of the Presidents Conference of Major American Jewish Organizations to take place this week.

The vote by any of these Reform organizations in favor does NOT mean that each of these groups endorses the viewpoint of J Street. It does signify, however, that our Reform movement organizations understand the importance of being as inclusive as possible of diverse points of view in the American Jewish community vis a vis Israel and American Jewish life.

J Street has earned clear bona fides as a pro-Israel American Zionist organization supporting two-states for two peoples in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and is committed to the two-state solution despite the discontinued negotiations.

I want to thank most especially my friend and colleague, Rabbi Rick Jacobs, the President of the Union for Reform Judaism, who led the way early on in advocating for inclusion of J Street in the Presidents Conference.

The immediate past-President of the URJ, Rabbi Eric Yoffie, has written a compelling rationale for J Street being included in his Haaretz op-ed “J Street is Part of the American Jewish Family.” (http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.587822)

I can only hope that other Presidents of Major Organizations will read Rabbi Yoffie’s piece and vote for inclusion whether or not they agree with J Street’s positions.

Rwanda, Bibi, Abbas, and What Comes Next? – Four Articles Worth Reading

27 Sunday Apr 2014

Posted by in American Politics and Life, Ethics, Health and Well-Being, Israel and Palestine, Israel/Zionism, Jewish History, Social Justice

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

The following New York Times photo essay on reconciliation in Rwanda between Hutus and Tutsis will disturb, challenge and amaze anyone who sees it, who looks into the eyes of the murderers and the relatives of the victims as they pose together, and tries to imagine oneself in either of their places.

Jewish ethics posit that no one other than the actual victim of murder is in a position to forgive the murderer for his evil. This isn’t to say, of course, that the relatives of those murdered have not suffered and been victimized as well. This is what the photo essay is about.

If forgiveness means to “let go” of injury, pain, suffering, hatred, and the thirst for revenge in order to live any kind of normal life (especially in Rwanda where Hutus and Tutsis live amongst each other), I can understand why the relatives of those murdered victims have chosen to forgive and reconcile, as difficult as this is to imagine.

I cite the NYT’s “Portraits of Reconciliation” now, in the wake of the discontinued negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians in order that we might glimpse a model of what is possible despite Israeli and the Palestinian distrust and hatred towards each other.

“Portraits of Reconciliation – 20 years after the genocide in Rwanda, reconciliation still happens one encounter at a time.” Photographs By Pieter Hugo & Text by Susan Dominus – http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/04/06/magazine/06-pieter-hugo-rwanda-portraits.html?src=me&ref=general&_r=0

The second piece was written by Haaretz journalist and author Ari Shavit who recently published “My Promised Land: The Triumph and Tragedy of Israel.” Shavit argues that Palestinian President Machmud Abbas has consistently refused to compromise with Israeli negotiators on anything of substance since the late 1990s, and it should no longer surprise anyone that he has refused to compromise again in these just-halted negotiations. Shavit lays the blame of the failure of the negotiations solely at Abu Mazen’s feet.

“Waiting for the Palestinian Godot – Why are we repeatedly surprised every time Mahmoud Abbas fails to sign a peace agreement with Israel?” – By Ari Shavit, Haaretz Blog, April 24, 2014 – http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/1.586945

The third piece, written by Lisa Goldman of The Weekly Wonk, takes a different view. Reporting from America and reflecting the views of Secretary of State John Kerry, she writes that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is primarily responsible for the breakdown in the negotiations with the Palestinians, though she opens her piece by saying that it is not in either Abbas’ or Bibi’s interest to change the status-quo.

“Why the U.S. should step away from Israel-Palestine Negotiations – for good! It’s time to admit we’ve seen enough” –The Weekly Wonk – By Lisa Goldman, April 16, 2014 – http://theweek.com/article/index/259957/why-the-us-should-step-away-from-israel-palestine-negotiations-mdash-for-good

The fourth and last piece is written by Rabbi Donniel Hartman of the Shalom Hartman Institute in Jerusalem (Times of Israel blog), who looks to the future and discusses what is likely to come in light of these recently failed negotiations. He writes:

“The making of peace requires two sides. Whether we did everything in our power, and whether the Palestinians did everything in theirs is a factual question, and as such, paradoxically, unresolvable, for we rarely shape our opinions on the basis of facts, and instead shape our perception of the facts on the basis of our opinions.”

The Day After The Negotiations Fail – by Rabbi Donniel Hartman, The Times of Israel, April 21, 2014 – http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/the-day-after-the-negotiations-fail/

Less we fall into despair, we American Jews, Zionists and Ohavei M’dinat Yisrael (Lovers of the State of Israel) would do well to reflect upon what has taken place in Rwanda over the last twenty years, and remember that once Germany was the Jewish people’s greatest enemy. Today, Germany is the least anti-Semitic country in Europe. Seventy years ago Germany and Japan were bitter foes of the United States, and Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland were killing each other. Today, all these former enemies have laid down their guns and established peace.

In other words, the story of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is far from over!

 

 

 

Does the Command to “Love Our Fellows” Include “Loving Our Enemies Too?”

25 Friday Apr 2014

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , ,

In this week’s Torah portion Kedoshim a verse appears in the very center of the portion that Rabbi Akiva called “Klal gadol baTorah – a great rule of the Torah.”

The verse is among the most famous in the Bible, and I believe among the most misunderstood – “V’ahavta l’reiacha kamocha… You shall love your fellow/neighbor as yourself….” (Leviticus 19:18)

There are at least three questions this verse raises. The first is how a human being can be commanded to feel love?

Actually, we can’t, which means that the mitzvah to “love” must be understood as involving something other than feelings.

The spiritual teacher David Steindl-Rast writes that there’s one thing that characterizes “love” in all its forms – erotic, romantic, familial, tribal, national, spiritual, religious, even love we feel for our pets – and it is found in our yearning to belong to and be connected with something greater than ourselves.

“Love,” he says “is a wholehearted [and willful] ‘yes’ to belonging” (Essential Writings, p. 73) with all the implications that attachment to, responsibility for and accountability with others bring.

Our yearning to belong opens us to greater understanding of who we really are and what our role is in the world. That yearning links us heart to heart with others, with creatures large and small, with nature, the universe, the cosmos, and God.

Jewish mystics have taught for centuries a central truth, just as scientists today have concluded, that we are physically and spiritually part of a vast Oneness. We share common origins and a common destiny with each other, with every people and nation, and because of this we’re responsible for one another and accountable for how we behave with friend, foe and stranger alike.

Too often our idea of “self” as suggested in “You shall love your fellow as yourself,” is limited to our little egos. If that verse, however, is to mean something, then we need to think about “love” differently; not as a feeling alone, but as an attitude of the heart.

V’ahavta understood this way enables us to fulfill the commandment because our response is not based in a feeling but as an act of will that we exercise when we take responsibility for others because we belong to each other as part of the great Oneness of humankind.

What does it mean then to “love” someone as we love ourselves?

Rambam taught that if it’s ever a toss-up between saving our own lives and saving another, we’re obligated to save our own lives first.

Ramban (a century later) interprets the mitzvah as meaning that what we wish for ourselves we must also wish for others whether we know them or not.

The third question is perhaps the most challenging. Does this commandment call upon us actually to “love” our enemies in some way?

No. Indeed, there are some people we cannot wish well as we wish for ourselves because their deeds have been too heinous to tolerate or forgive.

That being said, I’ll never forget a speech delivered nearly thirty-six years ago on the White House lawn by Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin on the occasion of the signing of the Camp David Peace Accords with Egypt.

Begin told the world that day that the Jewish people considers it amongst the greatest of mitzvot to make of a “ra” ( an “evil” person –an enemy) into a “rea” (“a fellow” – a friend).

Though Egypt and Israel are hardly “friends” as we understand friendship between nations, it’s a fact that since that day, September 17, 1978, there has not been one day of war between Israel and Egypt.

There are many examples in which enemies have been transformed into “fellows” by sincere t’shuvah (penitence) and s’lichah (forgiveness) on the part of one or both parties.

Though Judaism doesn’t command us to “love” our enemies, tradition does require us to give a penitent person a chance at reconciliation.

As a people we’re only required to act ethically towards our enemies thereby leaving open the possibility of transformation should circumstances warrant it (see Exodus 23:4).

This week negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians verge on derailment, but we need to remember that once Germany was the Jewish people’s greatest enemy and today Germany is the least anti-Semitic country in Europe.

Germany and Japan were bitter foes of America seventy years ago, and Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland were killing each other. Today, these former enemies have laid down their guns and established peace.

My Israeli friend, Yaron Shavit, likes to say – “B’Yisrael ye-ush lo optsia! – In Israel, despair is not an option!”

That is an important attitude to remember as we keep open our hearts that we may now or in the future fulfill the mitzvah “V’ahavta l’reiacha kamocha!”

Shabbat shalom!

 

 

 

J Street Calls on Secretary Kerry to Make Public US Positions on Core Issues for Israeli-Palestinian Peace

24 Thursday Apr 2014

Posted by in American Jewish Life, American Politics and Life, Israel and Palestine, Israel/Zionism, Jewish History

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

As a co-chair of the National Rabbinic Cabinet of J Street that includes close to 800 American Rabbis from across the religious streams, I fully support the call by J Street (see below) to support Secretary Kerry’s peace mission and for the United States to take the next step by putting forth specific principles on which Israel and the Palestinians will negotiate.

The only way forward to insure the health, security and sustainability of the state of Israel as the homeland of the Jewish people and a vital democracy is in a two-state solution.

The time is now to continue what Secretary Kerry began with Israel’s leaders and the leaders of the Palestinian Authority.

Achieving an agreement will take substantial courage, will, vision, leadership, and statesmanship for both Israeli and Palestinian leaders, and they will need to resist those extreme elements in their respective societies who oppose peace and compromise.

Here is J Street’s statement:

J Street, the pro-Israel, pro-peace advocacy organization, commends Secretary of State John Kerry for his tireless efforts to achieve a comprehensive peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians.

With those efforts at a critical juncture, J Street urges the Administration to remain steadfast in its active leadership of the effort to reach a two-state resolution to the conflict.

As the Administration weighs its next steps, J Street calls on the Secretary to put forward publicly an American framework for a two-state solution, which we believe should reflect the principles outlined below, and to ask both parties to continue talks on that basis.

We believe that fairly and impartially stating the US view on resolving the core issues of the conflict could be an important step to keep the prospects of reaching an agreement alive.

We know from polling that the majority of both Israelis and Palestinians would support an agreement based on the principles outlined below. International support could be rallied behind such a statement of principles, and it would have the support of a majority of Americans and American Jews in particular.

Taking such a step might also encourage the politicians on both sides not to allow yet another historic opportunity to slip away.

President Obama himself declared in his speech in Jerusalem in 2013 that political leaders only take risks when pushed by their people to do so. And Secretary Kerry has called on Israelis, Palestinians and Americans to join a “great constituency for peace.”

Now is the time to inspire public support for this effort by putting forth a set of actual principles and specific requirements.

J Street recommends that an American statement of principles be based on the following elements:

  1. Borders based on pre-1967 lines with limited, agreed-upon land swaps of equivalent size and quality.
  2. Robust security provisions and guarantees from the parties, as well as international partners including the United States.
  3. Compensation to Israeli settlers who relocate to within the future border of Israel to make peace possible.
  4. Options for Palestinian refugees including settlement in the future state of Palestine or third countries, compensation and a symbolic level of family reunification in Israel itself.
  5. Jewish neighborhoods of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and Palestinian neighborhoods as the capital of the future state of Palestine. Holy sites would be protected under international law and accessible to all.
  6. Recognition of the right of the Jewish people to statehood and the recognition of the right of the Palestinian people to statehood, without prejudice to the equal rights of the parties’ respective citizens.

http://jstreet.org/blog/post/j-street-calls-on-secretary-kerry-to-make-public-us-positions-on-core-issues-for-israelipalestinian-peace_1

 

Until Death Do Us Part – How Couples Successfully Sustain Their Marriages Over Time

23 Wednesday Apr 2014

Posted by in American Jewish Life, Ethics, Health and Well-Being, Life Cycle, Tributes

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , ,

For the past twenty-five years on the Shabbat evening in Pesach my congregation has celebrated the Biblical Song of Songs as well as “milestone” wedding anniversaries of members of our community.

I have offered hundreds of blessings – once to a couple married for 70 years, twice to couples married for 65 years each and three times for 60 years. Many have celebrated 55 and 50 years continuing in descending integrals of 5 years each that we arbitrarily designate as “milestone anniversaries.” It is a joyous Shabbat including children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren.

Given the 50% divorce rate among American Jews (now equal to the general American population) I ask each couple as they come forward for a blessing:

“How have you done it? What has sustained you for so long?”

Responses vary; some are hysterically funny and others wise from experience:

“She talks; I listen.”

“I agree with everything he says… especially when I don’t!”

“I let him think that every major decision went her way!”

“We laugh a lot!”

“We’ve learned to be patient and we forgive.”

“We don’t sweat the small stuff!”

“We communicate constantly.”

“We adore our kids, but they know that our marriage has always come first.”

“We love family time!”

“We fight fair – we are never nasty.”

“We value each other’s privacy and know when to leave the other alone!”

“We have our separate interests but we spend a lot of time together.”

“We’ve never let anyone come between us.”

“We share many good friends.”

“We’ve resisted temptation and stayed faithful to each other.”

“We trust each other as we trust no one else.”

One bold forty-something wife announced this past Shabbat before 200 people, “We have great sex!”

Over the years I’ve also learned that long-term happily married couples don’t take each other for granted. They tell each other frequently that they love one another. They hold hands. They bring each other unexpected gifts at unexpected times. They accept each other’s differences and have long since stopped trying to change the other. They don’t harbor resentments and they avoid blame. They respect each other’s talents, viewpoint, opinions, and feelings. They cherish each other in ways large and small. They compromise. They share their economic resources as equal partners (money being just one dimension of their partnership) regardless of who earns the most or who brought the most into the marriage. They give generously to each other and there’s never a quid pro quo.

No marriage, of course, is perfect. No marriage has all the above going for it. Every marriage has challenges, difficulties and moments of tension. However, successful and happy marriages are those in which both partners work hard to understand and accept the other as well as accommodate the other’s needs.

Marriages fail for all kinds of reasons. Some die natural deaths when one or both partners grow apart; when one or the other stops caring; when there is disloyalty and unfaithfulness; when injury is left unaddressed and unresolved; when one or both cannot own and apologize for bad behavior; when spouses are rigid, uncompromising, and insistent that things be their way; when one person must always have the last word.

Marriages fail as well when one or both partners have an untreated personality disorder, suffer from mental illness, are abusive, or are plagued with addiction problems.

When I meet and talk with couples before officiating at their weddings, I try and identify areas where I sense that there may be conflict that could develop into serious trouble if left unaddressed, such as how the couple communicates, what are their shared values, and how each partner approaches sex, power, money, in-laws, and leisure. I remind them that marriage is dynamic and ever-changing, and that honest and open communication is critically important to their marital well-being.

I remind them as well that no matter how much they love each other now and how good their relationship is, they will certainly experience peaks and valleys going forward. However, if they place the well-being of their marriage and each other above all other concerns (e.g. work, in-laws, children, extended family, and finances), then it is likely that they will deepen their bond as the years pass.

Doing so is always worth it. In this spirit Mark Twain captures the wonder and ineffability of the marital bond:

“A marriage…makes of two fractional lives a whole; / it gives to two…lives a work, / and doubles the strength of each to perform it; / it gives to two questioning natures / a reason for living, / and something to live for; / it will give a new gladness to the sunshine, / a new fragrance to the flowers, / a new beauty to the earth, / and a new mystery to life.”

 

 

To Be or Not To Be Spock – Leonard Nimoy Discusses his “Live Long and Prosper” Hand Gesture

20 Sunday Apr 2014

Posted by in American Jewish Life, Inuyim - Prayer reflections and ruminations, Jewish Identity, Tributes

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, ,

My friends know that Leonard Nimoy is married to my first cousin Susan (her father and my mother were brother and sister). I have been close with Susan, who is a “smidge” older than me, throughout my adult life from our 20s when we rediscovered each other as young adults outside of childhood.

When Susan married Leonard twenty-five years ago I had only known him the way the public does, as a fine actor and director, the creator of Mr. Spock on the Star Trek series, as Morris Meyerson, the husband of Golda Meir, in Leonard’s Emmy-nominated role opposite Ingrid Bergman in “A Woman Called Golda,” as a liberal political activist, and as a committed Jew.

What I didn’t know was Leonard’s heart, and over these past two plus decades as a close family member, I have grown to love Leonard for so many reasons, not the least of which is that he makes my cousin Susan so happy (as she does him), but also because of his seriousness as an thinker and artist, his sense of humor and loving heart, his kindness and menschlechkite. My wife Barbara and I love him.

This five-minute interview with Leonard is a classic, and if you have not heard the story of his signature hand gesture of greeting/farewell as a Vulcan in Star Trek, do click onto the link below.

Leonard wrote two autobiographies; the first he called “I Am Not Spock”; the second he called “I Am Spock” – both are true, depending on circumstances.

As you will see, the hand gesture that accompanies “Live Long and Prosper” emerged out of Leonard’s earliest memories as a Jew accompanying his grandfather, father and older brother to shul on Shabbos morning in South Boston.

What I love most about this interview is that Leonard’s joy and love come pouring through, clearly reflecting that side of him which is NOT Spock!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyiWkWcR86I

 

Erotic Poem, Intra-Divine Allegory – or Both?

18 Friday Apr 2014

Posted by in Beauty in Nature, Divrei Torah, Holidays, Inuyim - Prayer reflections and ruminations, Musings about God/Faith/Religious life, Poetry

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

“The world is not as worthy as the day on which the Song of Songs was given to Israel, for all the writings are holy, but the Song of Songs is the Holy of Holies.”

So said Rabbi Akiva (2nd century Palestine), who believed that The Song of Songs, traditionally attributed to King Solomon as a young man, is an allegory between two lovers, God and Israel.

According to Moshe Idel, Professor of Jewish Thought at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem (Kabbalah – New Perspectives, 1990), the 12th century Spanish mystic, Rabbi Ezra ben Solomon of Gerona, the 13th century Castilian mystic, Rabbi Isaac ibn Avi Sahula, and others focus on what are called the theosophical processes taking place between the two lower Sefirot of Tiferet (symbolized by the bridegroom) and Malchut (symbolized by the bride). According to these Kabbalists, both the biblical description and human love itself reflect or symbolize higher events within the metaphysical structure of God. (p. 206)

In other accounts, such as that of the 13th century Spanish Kabbalist, Avraham ben Shmuel Abulafia, The Song of Songs is an allegory of the intellect and its union with God.

These allegorical interpretations of The Song of Songs, beginning with Rabbi Akiva, are the basis upon which The Song of Songs is read each year on the Shabbat during Pesach, for it is then that we celebrate our people’s redemption on the one hand and the hoped-for-redemption of God within God’s Divine Self on the other.

All that being said, this extraordinarily enriched poetry seems at first glance to be a purely secular poem (God’s Name is never mentioned) celebrating young, sensuous and erotic love, the passionate draw of two lovers yearning for relief from their existential loneliness:

“For Love is strong as death / Harsh as the grave. / Its tongues are flames, a fierce / And holy blaze” (8:6 – Translation by Marcia Falk)

Taking the Songs as a secular poem, an allegory, or both, the emotional and spiritual longing can be sated only by one’s human and/or Divine lover.

The great Rav Avraham Isaac Kook wrote of the higher love this way (Translation by Ben Zion Bokser):

“Expanses divine my soul craves. / Confine me not in cages, / of substance or of spirit.

I am love-sick / I thirst, / I thirst for God, / as a deer for water brooks.

Alas, who can describe my pain? / Who will be a violin / to express the songs of my grief?

I am bound to the world, / all creatures, / all people are my friends.

Many parts of my soul / are intertwined with them, / But how can I share with them my light.”

          Shabbat shalom and Moadim L’simchah!

 

 

 

 

“Is It Possible to be a Jewish Intellectual?” – Eva Illouz in Haaretz

16 Wednesday Apr 2014

Posted by in American Jewish Life, American Politics and Life, Ethics, Israel and Palestine, Israel/Zionism, Jewish History, Jewish Identity, Social Justice

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

“Is It Possible to be a Jewish Intellectual?” is an expansive six-thousand-one-hundred-word essay written by Sociology Professor Eva Illouz of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem that was published this week in Haaretz, Israel’s equivalent of The New York Times. It is a must-read piece for both Israelis and American Jews. I am grateful to my friend Mike Rogoff in Jerusalem for sending me the link to it. [Note: You must be a subscriber to Haaretz to access the article. In my view, this article makes a subscription worthwhile in and of itself].  http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/jewish-world-features/.premium-1.585401 

Dr. Illouz considers in-depth the concepts of “Ahavat Yisrael – Love for Israel” and “Solidarity for the Jewish people” as well as the ethical and tribal challenges that confront intellectuals in remaining detached from their national or religious group in order to retain their moral integrity.

Dr. Illouz begins her discussion by citing the famous exchange between Gershom Scholem, the great 20th century scholar of Jewish mysticism at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and Hannah Arendt, the German Jewish political theorist who covered the Adolph Eichmann trial in Jerusalem in 1961 and who wrote a number of essays about it in The New Yorker and a book entitled Eichmann in Jerusalem.

After their publication Scholem accused Arendt, as a Jew, of

“…not having enough ‘ahavat Yisrael – love for the Jewish nation and people’ …. Instead of displaying what we would have expected from a Jew on such an occasion – undiluted horror at Eichmann’s deeds; unreserved compassion for the moral dilemmas of the Jewish leaders who dealt with the Nazis; solidarity with the State of Israel – Arendt analyzed each one with a cold sense of truth and justice, and blurred the moral terms in which these had been hitherto judged by the public.”

Dr. Illouz goes on to discuss the forces that have influenced contemporary American Jewish identity in light of the Holocaust, the establishment of the State of Israel, American Jewish political advocacy for Israel, and American Jewish organizational politics, all of which have served to embrace a priori the Jewish principle of “Ahavat Yisrael – Love of the people of Israel” as identical with “hyper-solidarity” with the political State of Israel and its policies regardless of their moral imperfections.

This essay lays the ground for us to consider both the nature of Israeli and American Jewish identity since the establishment of the state of Israel and the consequences of Israel having assumed political and governmental power as a nation-state for the first time in two thousand years. It also considers the impact of American Jewish organizational support for Israel and what it means to be pro-Israel.

 

 

Good Wishes and Hopes for Pesach – 5774

11 Friday Apr 2014

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

This will be my final blog before Pesach begins, and I want to take the opportunity to wish all of you a season of renewal and joy.

May your Seders be punctuated with hope, enveloped by family and good friends, open to strangers and people in need of material and spiritual uplift, filled with prayers for justice and peace for our people, for the Palestinians, Syrians, Ukrainians, Venezuelans, Sudanese, Congolese, Egyptians, Iraqis, Afghanis, and all peoples suffering under the reality of and threat of violence and living with injustice.

I pray as well that all who are suffering from addictions and abuse of every kind find wholeness and relief from their wounds, and those suffering from illness and chronic pain find a way to overcome.

As Jews, we are a people of hope, not false hope, but a deeper kind of hope based in the unity of our people am Yisrael, the unity of humankind and the recognition that each human being belongs to each other. Our faith calls upon us to seek holistic and holy ways of being with each other and with the “other” with whom we live.

As a Jew and an ohev am u-M’dinat Yisrael, I have not given up on the current Israeli-Palestinian negotiations. I believe they will continue not only because there is too much to lose for Israel, the Palestinians and the United States if they end, but because in the Middle East maximum demands and extremist posturing usually precede breakthroughs. We will, of course, have to wait and see.

I wish for President Obama, Secretary Kerry, Prime Minister Netanyahu, and President Abbas not just the fortitude to carry on, but the wisdom and courage to find a way through the morass of issues that need resolution and compromise.

Jeffrey Goldberg has written a fine piece in the Bloomberg View on the dynamics of the current negotiations that is worth reading – “When Will Netanyahu Hail Himself to the Cross” (don’t let the title deter you from reaching his words) http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-04-10/when-will-netanyahu-nail-himself-to-the-cross.

Shabbat shalom v’Chag Pesach Sameach, biv’racha u-b’ahavah,

Rabbi John Rosove