Ingathered Rotating Header Image

September, 2009:

Netanyahu at the 92 Street Y

The appraisals of Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech at the UN range from an exercise in futility to an address worthy of the new leader of the free world (especially against the backdrop of Obama’s tepid remarks).

Whatever one may think of the UN speech, I have found Netanyahu’s address before the Jewish American leaders at the 92nd Street Y to be very poignant. In it Netanyahu cited the Lubavitcher Rebbe as the driving force behind his 25-year-long career as Israel’s leading advocate abroad and the inspiration for the latest appearance before the UN.

Netanyahu revealed that he had met the Rebbe in 1984, while serving as Israel’s ambassador to the UN, and was instructed to light a candle of truth in the pitch darkness reigning inside the house of lies (Rebbe’s assessment of the UN). In his interview to the Israeli TV, Netanyahu said this message has been guiding him ever since.

Giving credit where credit is due is always admirable.

You can view Netanyahu’s entire speech at the 92 street Y here:

From Mahmoody to Goldstone and back

While reading Betty Mahmoody’s For the Love of a Child (the sequel to Not Without My Daughter), I got an insight into the folly known as the Goldstone Report. What’s the connection, you may ask? Read on.

As a mother, I wholeheartedly understand Betty Mahmoody’s motivation for fleeing Iran to bring up her daughter in a democratic Western society. But if we put aside our cultural biases, is there really a difference between Betty’s abduction of her daughter to the US (following which, the girl was forever separated from her father) and the husband’s original insistence on moving the family to Iran, even at the expense of separating the child from the mother? Each one of the parents wanted to bring up the child in his or her native culture, and, unable to reach an agreement, acted unilaterally on this desire. (I am aware of Betty’s claims of abuse, but I am setting this issue aside for the sake of the argument).

Likewise, though I wholeheartedly support the efforts of Yad Leachim to bring Jewish women married to Arab men (as well as the children of these marriages) back to the fold, I understand that my outlook is colored by my Jewish faith. The mechanism by which a Jewish woman takes her children unilaterally from Ramallah to Jerusalem to bring them up as Jews is the same as the one employed by her husband to take them back and raise them as Muslims.

So long as humanity is not united by a single ethical belief, the moral high ground often depends entirely on the subjective position of the observer. The same goes for Israel’s attempts to defend itself from its neighbors’ attacks. As long as the observers (be it the UN or the self-appointed European freedom fighters) have undertaken the Palestinian cause, no amount of ethical safety measures will absolve Israel from accusations of human rights violations.

To the contrary, the higher the hyper-ethical standard Israel attempts to maintain, the louder the accusations. I will never forget the terrifying hours during which we frantically tried to contact my brother-in-law stationed in Jenin, after hearing rumours of heavy casualties in the city during Operation Defensive Shield in April 2002. Though he emerged from combat unscathed, 13 of his comrades paid with their lives for Israel’s insistence on sending in ground troops in an effort to preserve civilian Palestinian lives. The “reward” for these efforts were movies the likes of Jenin Jenin and a worldwide outcry against Israel’s humanitarian violations.

In a similar vein, though IDF is the only army in the world to go through the pains of telephoning enemy civilians to warn them of planned air raids, as was done during the 2008 incursion into Gaza, Judge Goldstone and his ilk have no qualms lambasting Israel as a perpetrator of genocide.

Judaism’s dedication to the values of human life and compassion is unmatched by any religion. From ancient Jewish kings known throughout the world as “the kings of mercy” (1 Kings 20:31) to outstanding levels of voluntarism in modern Israel, Jews in general and Israelis in particular have no need for anyone’s ethical preaching. All efforts to live up to a superlative level of morality, not practiced anywhere else in the world, has so far backfired on Israel’s defensive efforts to defend itself.

The time has come for Israel to redefine its military ethic to conform to the Talmudic teaching of “if someone comes to kill you, arise and kill him first” (Sanhedrin 72a) and dispense with the attempts to save face while doing so. Though there’ll be little change in Israel’s public image, its defensive abilities will improve tremendously.

Tour of Jerusalem (in 4 minutes)

After living in and near Jerusalem for more than 15 years, I have finally found my favorite take on the city.

Thank you @CharlieKalech for sharing this on twitter.

Motivating Atonement

With Yom Kippur less than 24 hours away, I would like to share a novel thought I heard from Rabbi Reuven Fireman.

Though a person’s ability to mend his ways through teshuva (repentance) is a very basic concept in Judaism, like every other rule it has an exception. The Talmud states one and only case in which someone was prevented from returning to his faith – Elisha ben Avuya, aptly called the “Acher” (the other).

In his better days, Rabbi Elisha ben Avuya reached one of the pinnacles of spirituality by entering the Pardes (according to the Tosafot he achieved a spiritual elevation by intensely meditating on G-d’s Name) along with Rabbi Akiva, Ben Zoma, and Ben Azaai. However, unlike Rabbi Akiva, Elisha ben Avuya was unable to sustain this lofty experience and ended up renouncing his faith altogether. When his loyal disciple Rabbi Meir urged Elisha to repent, the latter disclosed that he had heard a Heavenly proclamation that his teshuva would not be accepted –“return, you wayward children, except for Acher.”

What about Elisha ben Avuya’s actions were so grave that the gates of repentance were closed before him? Was he really that much worse than other infamous characters we come across in Jewish sources? Even Menashe, the wicked king who swayed the entire Jewish people to idol worship and killed the prophet Yeshayahu (his own grandfather) was given a chance to repent and his teshuva was accepted. By gaining an insight on the reasons for excluding Acher from the fundamental ability to repent, we can shade light on our own power to return to the proper path and do teshuva.

To understand this, we must keep in mind that teshuva comes in two different flavors, teshuva originating in fear of retribution, and teshuva motivated by the love of G-d. Though both types of teshuva are accepted, the first voids the sin and clears the scoreboard, while the second places the repentant at an advantage by turning his sins into virtues. “זדונות נעשות לו כזכויות”.

What ensues is a paradox by which it becomes “worth our while” to repent out of love so as to make the greatest gain. On the other hand, so long as we stand to gain something by doing teshuva, our motivations are less than 100% pure and our teshuva is, by definition, not motivated by love.

There are just two ways out of this catch-22. The first is to make the repentant aware that his teshuva would not be accepted. once a person expects no gain out of his doing teshuva, he can do so without ulterior motives and ironically gain everything. Note that G-d’s unwillingness to accept Elisha’s teshuva is articulated by Elisha himself. He was the only one to hear the decree.

In order to enable Elisha ben Avuya, who was so intimately familiar with the spiritual frameworks of Judaism, to repent out of love, G-d created the illusion that his teshuva was undesirable. The Baal Shem Tov was put through a similar test, when following a set of circumstances he was notified that he had lost his share in the world to come. Unlike ”Acher,” the Baal Shem Tov was overjoyed by the newly-found ability to worship G-d out of pure love without standing to gain anything. (And of course his after-life position was immediately returned to him.)

The second solution to the paradox of pure teshuva is G-d’s offer of pardon regardless of whether or not we have done teshuva. According to the Rambam in Hilchot Teshuva, at the time of the Beit Hamikdash (the Temple), all but the gravest of sins were forgiven by the end of Yom Kippur even if the person did not repent. By granting forgiveness “free of charge,” G-d enables us to cleanse our teshuva of ulterior motives and to take our eyes off the “bottom line.”

This is one of the reasons why Yom Kippur is known as the day the slaves are released. While in the days of yore, slaves were set free on the Yom Kippur of the Jubilee year, this day also frees us from the enslavement of keeping accounts with G-d. Even though we don’t have the Beit Hamikdash and atonement is no longer automatic, somehow Yom Kippur empowers everyone to return, and even those who are far from Judaism find their way to shul on this day. The emotional prayers and the very atmosphere of Yom Kippur seldom leave people unmoved. G-d gives each of us the chance to mend our ways and come close to Him.

It is my sincere wish that we all take this opportunity to purify ourselves and be inscribed for a year of happiness, prosperity, and peace.

On modesty and spirituality

A Mother in Israel blogged about a sign from a Jerusalem playground, which had called on women maintaining a high level of tzniut (modesty) to stay away from other women, dressed in a more relaxed fashion. Most people have a gut feeling that this kind of segregation within a community is wrong, but in my opinion it’s much more serious than that. It breaks down our ethics and completely distorts Judaism and halacha.

An old dictum says that a chumra (stringency) in one area almost always results in a kula (leniency) in something else. Placing excessive focus on a specific halacha carries the risk of blurring the larger picture. For example, someone careful to pray vatikin on Shabbos is less available to educate his kids to daven properly (unless he goes to shul twice). Likewise, the growing preoccupation with modesty is leading our community to deemphasize women’s feelings.  I am not saying we should tell men “to control themselves” and encourage women to dress as they please, but as a community we have to include both considerations when setting social norms.

Reading the post reminded me of a story about Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, related by Rabbi Eliyahu Yosef during the last Binyan Shalem convention (Rabbi Yosef is the author of HaTorah HaMesamachat, an inspiring biography of Rabbi S. Z. Auerbach; volume two is due to be published after the holidays).

About 25 years ago, a well-known Jerusalem yeshiva high school employed a female science teacher. Other staff members felt that to be inappropriate and resolved to pose the question to Rabbi Auerbach. After ascertaining that the teacher in question was maintaining appropriate appearances, Rabbi Auerbach ruled that while it was undesirable to employ a female teacher in a boys’ school, the school would have to retain her until the end of the year, since it was too late for her to find other employment. At the same time, the administration was instructed to tell the teacher that she should start looking for a different position for the following year.

To me this story illustrates one component of Rabbi Auerbach’s greatness, namely his ability to find a solution that would maintain harmony between seemingly opposing values. Though he was very concerned about tzniut, this concern did not prevent him from ensuring compliance with halachot of Yorah Deah and proper interpersonal relationships.

While very few people are blessed with Rabbi Auerbach’s genius and sensitivity, we can all draw inspiration to take a more holistic approach to our spirituality. And there is no more befitting time to do so than during these days of repentance and awe.

Powered by Netfirms