 |
| This image is from http://david.sickmiller.com This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
Yesterday a Muslim educator taught me
something very powerful about silence. Students from Australian Arabic Muslim
families will be meeting with Jewish students in the coming weeks in the
aftermath of the death, despair and destruction in Gaza and Israel. From an
adults perspective, it is “the elephant in the room”, that needs to be
discussed. Yet, the educator pointed out that by discussing it in the context
of an interfaith school program we are giving an implicit message that Israel
and Palestine should be seen as integral to interaction between Jews and
Muslims in Australia. He thought the right message for his students in that
particular context is that we are Australians of different faiths who are
learning to respect and like each other.
On the other hand this week, I spoke
with a number of educators responsible for supporting migrant children, some of
whom are likely to lose their jobs due to government cuts. I began the
discussion with the inspiring clip from Martin Luther King Jnr. He invokes
Moses standing on the mountain top seeing the promised land of Canaan that he
will never reach but to which his people will soon arrive. King says that he
too is facing hard times, but despite having loved to live a long life, “it
doesn’t matter about me now…because I have been to the mountain top and I have
seen the Promised Land…” and he was confident that his dream would be realised.
The message to the teachers was although it is a difficult time, the work they
do and the broader shift to at least a general acceptance of diversity is
unstoppable. Having acknowledged the difficult issue on people’s minds and seen
it in this context was really uplifting, we were then able to discuss other
matters.
The following is a more general reflection
on speaking out and silence mostly written in 2010 but still relevant.
The obligation to speak out or be
silent
If we are
silent in the face of apparent injustice, at least certain circumstance we can
be considered complicit in it. Speaking Talking about our grievances, might
result in resolution, or at least give us the feeling that we did what we can.
The negatives of silence need to be considered against the problems arising out
of speaking out. In some situations, our critique can be ill-informed, driven
by unconscious and unsavory motives, cause unnecessary embarrassment, or fail
to achieve anything apart from defensiveness, hostility or even escalated
offending behaviour and “push-back”. The Talmud comments about the people in
its own time[i],
there was no longer anyone with either the ability to offer or accept criticism[ii].
Style.
Wording, tone, privacy/audience etc.
“It's not
what you say, but how you say it”- is a view that I don't think is true all the
time, but it does have some merit. The commandment in Leviticus (19:17) to
rebuke, rebuke your fellow[iii]4”,
is followed with a caution “and do not bear sin because of him” which is interpreted
as demanding concern, in some circumstances, about humiliating the person being
criticised.
Being wrong
– asking a question
If we
approach what appears to be a problematic situation with a recognition that we
might not have all the facts, we can carry our responsibility to stand up for
justice without judging others unfairly. Our patriarch Jacob sets a friendly
tone and uses the approach of asking a question of a group of shepherds that
seems to be workers, idle on the job. “My brothers, where are you from?”
Jacob begins, after some small talk he observes “The day is still long, it
is not time to gather the flocks, give your sheep some drink and go take your
sheep to pasture[iv].” The shepherds explain that they
are unable to carry out their next task without more help because there is a
big stone on top of the well that can only be moved when their colleagues
arrive so they can all give water to their sheep. No harm done.
Unresolved
issues- One cost of silence
A sad, but
rarely discussed episode in the lives of the biblical Rachel and Leah occurs
when their brothers and father (Laban) become resentful of Jacob's prosperity.
Their brothers are heard saying to anyone, but the accused party “Jacob took
(stole) everything that belonged to our father , and from what belonged to our
father he created all this honour[v]”. Jacob notices, Laban's face, “and
it is clearly not the same as it was yesterday, and the day before that”. He
had accepted the slander (Lashon Harah- evil tongue) against Jacob[vi] without bothering to check with
Jacob about his side of the story. The opposite of “when a man sins against
another man, he should not hate him and be silent...it is a Mitzvah to notify
him and say, why did you do this to me?[vii]”
Jacob and
his wives, Rachel and Leah discuss the need to leave the employ and town of
Laban over his on-going financial mistreatment on the part of their father. The
two daughters/wives reply, “Do we still have any part or inheritance in our
fathers house? Did he not consider us as strangers to him, selling us and
eating our money”. I find it very significant, that neither sister ever
said anything to Laban about their hurt feelings or anger about being sold to
Jacob. Jacob also does not talk to Laban about his complains about the
financial dealings, instead explaining only to his wives that Laban changed “my
wages, 10 times”.
Unlikely to
be heard
To rebuke
someone involves some hope that it might help. The Talmud states that just as
we should say words of rebuke that will be heard, it is a Mitzvah
(Commandment) not to say that which will not be heard[viii]. As a Christian Australian Member
of Parliament, Shayne Neummann, pointed out to me a while back, it is hard to
imagine Jacob having any confidence in talking to Laban after he substituted
his beloved Rachel with Leah. Especially, considering that when Jacob first
protests to Laban “Why did you deceive me”, instead of an apology, Laban
attacks Jacob cleverly saying “it is not done thus in our place, the younger
before the older”, implying like you who usurped the right of your older
brother Esau. Clearly, Laban's rebuke of Jacob is driven by an ulterior motive,
seeking to justify his own wrong doing. A caveat on the principle of rebuke
that will not be accepted is that in some cases where our silence can be seen
as acquiescence, we need to consider the wider audience, not just the
perpetrator.
Conclusion
There is a western idea that talking
is always good. I think it is ethical
and wise to consider the situation and benefit or harm that will be caused by
either speaking or being silent.
It is a tough one Zalman particularly given the current events. I think the adults involved should send a message by their relationship to each other. If they talk about their feelings and no doubt their disagreements but point out that they can still talk to each other and work with each other it will go a long way to saying that Israel vs Palestine should not poison relations or stop civil interaction and co-operation with each other. Somewhere people on both sides of the conflict need to keep talking to each other. If it can't be done in a setting away from the death and destruction where can it be done?
ReplyDeleteThanks Gary, the point you make certainly makes sense. Ultimately it is a judgement call about what kind of views communities in Australia or elsewhere are prepared to tolerate. For some, it comes to down to "don't mention the war". Perhaps a lost "teachable moment" or perhaps the wise choice. Hard to tell.
Deleteas it is written : a time to speak out and a time to keep silent.....God give me the wisdom to know the difference.
ReplyDeleteAmen!
Delete