Judgement and Matchmaking

“I really don’t know her,” was the reply on WhatsApp from a Rabbi in New York about a woman who was suggested as a marriage partner for one of my sons. The Rabbi was listed on the young woman’s “Shidduch” (match-making) resumé as a reference. He was replying to my message from July 2024, about setting a time to do a reference check about a potential bride. The delayed response is a funny illustration of the challenges of Modern Orthodox Jewish matchmaking.

Jewish marriage is regarded as a sacred reunion between two half souls, separated prior to birth (1). It is the fulfilment of divine design that “a man will leave his mother and father and cleave to his wife, and will become as one flesh.” (2) The tomb in which Abraham and Sarah, Isaac and Rebecca and other Jewish forebears were buried was named the “double cave” because the couples buried there were profoundly united and became part of a set (3).  Abraham cried for his beloved Sarah when she died (4).   

Ultra-Orthodox Jewish matchmaking to set up such unions has changed in the 30 -plus years since I got married. At that time, a matchmaker who knew the two families made a suggestion. The parents of the prospective young couple made a few calls to check if the young man and woman had compatible values and goals and checked out the families.

I don’t know when it changed, but we now have the “Shidduch resumé”. Men and women prepare a resumé that lists where they went to school, Yeshiva (Talmudic college post high school) or girls Torah seminary, summer jobs, some will include a short description of their qualities and those they are seeking in a partner, and a list of names of references with their phone numbers.  The parents will usually make multiple reference calls before suggesting to the young couple that they consider meeting. If they agree, they begin a series of dates.

The Shidduch process involves serious judging, but with limited information. Some references are afraid to paint their friend in a bad light. Many times, I was told, “She is not the loudest person in the room … but she is not quiet either.” I have found that it was often the little anecdotes that gave me a sense of the prospective partner’s values and character.

There is a great precedent for that. When Abraham’s servant was seeking to find a match for his master’s son Isaac, he focused on observing how helpful Rebecca was at a well. When she offered him and his camels water to drink, he decided she was a suitable wife (5).

We might feel uncomfortable making judgments; as Pirkei Avot teaches us, “Do not judge another person until you have been in their situation.” (6) However, the rules are different when there is a legitimate purpose for the judging. Choosing to spend one’s life together with another person (or advising a son or daughter about this) involves a judgement about how that person measures up against one’s own most cherished values, principles and ideals.

It sounds very unromantic but the initial part of orthodox Jewish matchmaking is similar to recruitment to fill a position in a work context. The critical question in both cases is, is it a good fit?  

In both cases there is a risk that emotion will cloud our judgement. Nobel Prize winner Daniel Kaheneman (6) writes about one way to stuff up an interview process. If you do the emotional stuff first, you might feel good about a candidate because they are similar to you, even if they lack the skills for the job. The emotional connection creates a bias. To avoid that problem, he suggests, do the boring bits first. In the Shidduch process, some young people will want to know more about the person to decide if it is a likely fit before looking at the photo and being swayed by someone’s appearance.

This might sound like a hit-or-miss approach, but if we apply Kahenman’s logic to matchmaking it is more likely to work than being guided by emotions alone.

Once the couple are deemed likely to be technically compatible, they then need to work out if they are emotionally drawn to each other.

Another element in all this is the idea of “Bashert” – that the couple are divinely destined for each other.

In the case of Isaac and Rebbecca, the match certainly seemed “bashert”. They got married and the Torah states that Isaac loved Rebecca (7).

In addition to Rebecca being a kind and sensitive woman, she was a good fit for another reason. Isaac was a reserved man who spoke little and is associated with judgement. Rebecca’s character is also associated with judgement (8). She made a snap judgment (10) about going ahead with the proposed marriage with Isaac; without hesitation, she simply said, “I will go” (11). When her husband seemed to be fooled about his eldest son’s character, because of the delicious meat Esau brought her from his hunt, Rebecca discerned the truth about both her sons (12). 

The marriage between Rebecca and Isaac was not one of constant agreement or acquiescence (13). But there was love and care, based on a sound foundation of compatibility, discovered through sound judgement.

Returning to the young woman who was the subject of the delayed WhatsApp message, at the time of my evaluation process, I was fortunate to get through to most if not all of the other eight references listed on the resumé. They provided enough information for my wife and me to suggest to my son that he should meet her. After the young people spent time dating, they made a decision by using their heads and their hearts. They are now happily married.

1)       https://www.chabad.org/parshah/article_cdo/aid/2634/jewish/The-Half-Shekel-of-Marriage.htm

2)       Genesis 2:24  

3)       Genesis 23:1

4)       The Shaloh on Chayei Sarah

5)       Genesis 24:12-20

6)       Pirkey Avot 2:4

7)       Kahneman, D., (2021) Noise, William Collins

8)       Genesis 24:67

9)       The Shaloh on Chayei Sarah

10)    Genesis 24:55

11)    Gladwell, M, (2005), Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking

12)    Genesis 25:25 and commentary

13)    Genesis 27, Shlomo Riskin 

Judgement Acceptance and Celebration Rosh Hashanah

Accommodating! The word appeared in large font, an accusation, that screamed at me from my Lumina Spark personality report. The report that was generated in response to a detailed survey about my workplace behaviours featured a word cloud with the most significant of my characteristics shown in the biggest writing. There it was, in huge type - ACCOMODATING.

One of my hang-ups, and I don’t think I am unique in this, is questioning my own strength. Am I strong or weak? Does my reluctance to confront conflict prove that I am a wimp? Are my doubts and agonising about decision-making further proof of weakness? These kinds of ruminations are not useful, but if we have them, we are better off dealing with them than avoiding thinking about them.

As I reflect on such questions, it occurs to me that the Jewish New Year’s Day, Rosh Hashanah is fast approaching on 7-8 September. The words “behold, the day of judgement” echo in my mind. At my synagogue on Rosh Hashanah, we would have  a choir, and two of its members with very strong deep singing voices – one a lawyer the other a judge – would sing these words in Hebrew in a slow solemn melody: Heenaaaay Yom Hadeeen, Heee-naay, Yo-o-m, Ha-----deeeen! Behold, the day of judgement!

The backstory of the Jewish day of judgement is that the first humans, Adam and Eve, were created on this date, and on that same day they ate forbidden fruit and were judged for it (1). History is repeated every year on the same day.

As He did to Adam in the Garden of Eden, God calls out to us, “where are you?” (2) “Where are you in the world? What have you accomplished? You have been allotted a certain number of days, hours, and minutes in which to fulfil your mission in life. You have lived so many years and so many days,”- over 50 years in my case - “Where are you? What have you achieved?” (3). And the super-ego can’t help itself but to appropriate the role of the divine judge to do a bit of judging of its own. Are you good enough? Big enough? Strong enough?

For a long time, I regularly showed up to the court of the false God in my head. I pleaded my case and presented my defence. I protested too much, then noticed that these thoughts were never enough to end the judgement. Self-criticism and self-doubt continue to be part of my life. But one day I decided that I had enough. I declared to the inner critic that I no longer recognised the legitimacy of his court. This is a pointless exercise! I thought, I just need to ignore it.

It worked to some extent but the other day I decided to change tack and take ownership of who I am and accept the gifts and challenges that God has given me.

I am accommodating! That is my nature. I am not a tough New Yorker. I am not Donald Trump. Good. I acknowledge that sometimes I will be accommodating in situations in which it would be more useful to me and the people I care about, or the cause I serve if I were to be assertive. But I also celebrate that I can tune in to other peoples’ perspectives and see the world through their eyes, and do what they want when it does not compromise my principles at all.

I remind myself that strength is defined by our sages as the conquest of one’s own self (4). To act with self-control. I am not perfect at this, but I often score some victories here. I would love to do even better.

With regards to one’s failure to exercise self-control, it is also useful to practice some degree of acceptance. We can work to address problems we own and acknowledge, but not those we deny. The first human to be judged, Adam, admitted to God that he ate the forbidden fruit (5).  But as he did, he used the present tense, admitting that after he was offered the forbidden fruit, “I am eating it.” That is, I ate some, and I will continue to eat it (6). While some would regard this as brazen, another perspective is that Adam was owning up to the truth about himself. He knew his own reality that included a weakness for these forbidden fruits and was completely honest about this (7). This honesty is surely the first step to growth.

As we look back at a year that included challenges relating to COVID and lockdowns, let us be honest about what we noticed about ourselves and accept the truths we learned. Then let us forgive ourselves as surely as we believe that a Merciful God certainly forgives us (8). In fact, as Jews we approach the day of judgement as a celebration, wearing our best clothing; we eat and drink as we are confident in God’s mercy (9). We also engage in some serious self-reflection and prayer. Not a bad mix of responses to honestly engaging with the truth of our flawed and lovable selves.  

For all who are observing Rosh Hashana, I wish you a happy and sweet new year. May it be sweet prosperous, free and healthy for all of humanity.

Sources

1. Rabbi Nissim in Pesikta
2. Genesis 3:9
3. R. Schneur Zalman of Liadi,  https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/1107/jewish/Where-Are-You.htm
4. Pirkey Avot 4:1
5. Genesis 3:12
6. Genesis Rabba 19:22
7. Rabbi Mendel of Kotzk, in Oratz, E. (1990) Nothing but the Truth p. 43-44 Judaica Press.
8. Tanya, end of chapter 26
9. Jerusalem Talmud, Rosh Hashana 1:3

Physical and mental illness does not devalue a person - Vayelech

I saw his fear filled eyes and anguished face across a crowded room. How long has it been since I saw him last? Thoughts of pity filled my mind. He was clearly suffering from a severe mental illness. Then I caught myself. Did I value him less because of his illness? Did I see the person and respect him for his intrinsic worth or did I see him primarily through the lens of his condition?

Jane Caro once said about ageing: "Your outside deteriorates, but by God, your inside improves". Yet, still, physical strength seems also to be erroneously equated with virtue. In the US presidential election, ‘Hillary’s health’ has been highlighted, not just because it is necessary for a demanding job but, in my view, as way of devaluing her as a person (especially as a woman) aspiring to leadership. Trump’s sniffles at last week’s debate were also jumped on by commentators, for the same reason. I object to that. Surely, there are people whose physical or mental health is not optimal; they might tire more quickly, be unable to walk, be in pain, depressed or anxious, yet they can be intelligent, compassionate and productive. It is wrong to suggest there is something shameful about a loss of physical strength or mental health difficulties. As the late Stella Cornelius used to say; “The best things in this world have been done by people who were not feeling well that day” (1).  

The tendency to equate physical strength with virtue can be inferred from the commentary on the following verse. Moses, said simply “"Today I am one hundred and twenty years old. I can no longer go or come” (2). Rather than take this at face value, some of the classical commentators jump in with denial of his physical decline. “You might think that his strength was weakened, so the Torah tells you (in another verse) that although “Moses was one hundred and twenty years old when he died. His eye had not dimmed, nor had he lost his moisture” (3). His being unable to “go and come” is interpreted as him being denied divine permission to enter the promised land (4).

In one dramatic commentary we have Moses feeling afraid that the people might take his words literally and think that he is not physically strong. To counter this “Moses walked (5) the length and breadth of the whole camp quickly or vigorously to show that his strength at this time (at the age of 120) is the same as it was then (when he was younger)” (6).  

Alternative commentators, however, have no problem acknowledging the changing degree of physical strength or prowess of the great man of the spirit (7). A compromise position is that although Moses was still physically strong at the time he told the people “it is not proper that I fool myself that it will always be thus, because due to my being elderly, despite my current good health, I have no doubt that it will not be this way in the future, per force, weakness will come upon me quickly…” (8) Clearly, there is no shame in physical weakness, it is the way of all men and women, including the greatest.

At this holy time of the year for Jews (leading up to Yom Kippur when our fate for the following year is “sealed”), I wish everyone optimal physical and mental health and strength, and for those of us for whom that might not be possible, let us be spared the pain of stigma and judgement and instead do the best we can. This is certainly virtuous and honorable.

Notes

1. Stella Cornelius, cited in a comment on my blog by Paul Reti, and also quoted to me by Donna Jacobs Sife
2. Deuteronomy 31:2
3. Deuteronomy 34:7
4. Talmud Sotah 13b, based on Sifre, cited in Rashi, and second opinion in Daat Zekainim M’baalei Hatosofot. The interpretation is made more plausible when reading the second half of the verse that mentions the matters of permission: “and God said to me you will not pass this Jordan river”. This argument is challenged by Mizrachi and Maharsha who argue that the letter Vav means “and”, and we don’t find it used as “because”. Tzeda L’Derech counters that in fact in Genesis 2:5 the letter Vav which means: and, is taken to also mean ‘because’. The verse states: “God had not made it rain and, -meaning because- there was not a man to work the land”. Ramban also does not accept the simple meaning of the text and instead suggests that Moses’ comment was (a false) comfort for the people, implying that his imminent death was not such a great loss.
5. This is the reason for “Moses going”, mentioned in Deuteronomy 31:1
6. Klei Yakar
7. Ibn Ezra, Bchor Shor and implied in Seforno
8. Abarbanel

The thwarted kiss between Joseph and Jacob – practical & conditional love Vayechi

The hearts of so many adults bear the scars of conditional parental love. Their parents were so fixated on what they wanted for or from their children that they failed to embrace their children as they were.  A related theme is the seemingly transactional and predominantly practical nature of relationships between some fathers and sons. I see these same dynamics in some of the commentary about the attitudes of our patriarch Jacob.

Around the time of Jacob’s death, as he prepared to bless Joseph’s children he asked “who are they?[i]” The question is interpreted as questioning their suitability for blessing. ‘Was their father’s and mother’s union validated by a religious marriage contract (Ketubah)[ii]?’  Another practical consideration that is suggested is that Jacob knew that they were to have wicked descendants[iii]! In contrast Joseph was more present in the emotional dimension of the moment. He “immediately prostrated himself on the ground before God, and begged for mercy that he not be humiliated[iv]”.  Tuning in to his practical oriented dad, Joseph also pleaded: “they are my sons, they are righteous like me[v]!” It is only after this reassurance that Jacob asked that they be brought to him. He kissed and hugged them before he proceeded to bless them[vi].  

Similar commentary suggests that Jacob focused on merit at the very moment of his reunion with his son Joseph, after twenty-two years of separation and grief. Joseph was only seventeen when he went missing, reportedly killed by a wild animal. When father and son reunited, Joseph fell on his father’s neck and cried[vii]. According to commentary Joseph sought to kiss his father and be kissed by him but his father would not allow it. The reason given for this is that Joseph had been aroused by the seduction of his master’s wife, despite the fact that in the end he did not commit adultery[viii].  I am troubled by the view that technicalities and judgements would be in play at a time one would expect intense parental love. I also think this interpretation is implausible in light of the next verse, in which Jacob exclaims “now I can die (happy) after seeing your face because you are still alive![ix]” 

The Torah does not tell us about another word being spoken between Jacob and Joseph for the next almost seventeen years. The next conversation was practical and short. Jacob requested that his son Joseph bury him in Canaan rather than Egypt and Joseph agreed to do so[xi].  Finally, in one of the last chapters on Jacob’s life did he talk to his son in a reflective way about how he had been blessed and about the death of his first love, Joseph’s mother, Rachel[xii]. According to commentary, Jacob told Joseph that he knew that Joseph felt resentful about his mother being buried on the side of the road, so he explained the decision [xiii]. 

As a son I feel challenged by all of this. I reflect about my own relationship with my father—how often do we talk about matters of the heart? It is easier to talk shop, getting advice about working in non-profit leadership, or to talk about Torah. Like Joseph, I am tuned in to the emotional side of life. Talking about feelings with my dad might be really useful., I suspect this  might be true for many fathers and sons. On the other hand a commitment to a relationship includes respect between both parties to allow both to determine the nature and content of the relationship.

[i] Genesis 48:8

[ii] Masechet Kalah, chapter 3, 15a, or Were they born out of a holy pregnancy? Manuscript Midrash Habiur, cited in Torah Shlaima p.1751 note 60

[iii] Pesikta Rabbati 3,

[iv] Midrash Tanchuma Vayechi 6, Manuscript Midrash Habiur, cited in Torah Shlaima p.1751 note 61

[v] Pesikta Rabbati 3

[vi] Genesis 46:29

[vii] Genesis 48:8

[viii] Masechet Kallah, 3, cited in Torah Shlaima, p 1697

[ix] Genesis 46:30, on the other hand even this expression of emotion is interpreted as being practical. Rashi suggests that Jacob was thinking that he “would die twice, once in this world and a second time in the world to come because God would demand your death from me (that is to hold me liable for your death), but now that you are alive I will only die once”  and I would die twice

[x] Unkelus

[xi] Genesis 47:29-31

[xii] Genesis 48:7

[xiii] Rashi

Judgement, Muslims and responses to terrorism (Miketz 2015)

Photo by Scott under https://www.flickr.com/photos/skippy/
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/

The other day I discussed with a group of Muslim high school students the Islamic principle that one must make 70 excuses for a friend who appears to have done the wrong thing.[i]  It is an interesting variation of the Jewish principle of judging everyone favourably.[ii]  I wonder to what extent these ideals are applied in either community when it comes to judging people outside our own faith communities. Giving the benefit of the doubt can also inhibit fighting evil, if we offer excuses when it would be more useful to name the problem and address it.  These considerations are relevant to judgements regarding terrorism.

This issue of judging others plays out in the discussion of the description of Joseph by Pharaoh’s chief butler in Genesis. The Pharaoh was distressed about a dream that no one could interpret. The chief butler told him that in prison there was a ‚“youth, a Hebrew slave”, who can interpret dreams.^[iii]  This description has been interpreted as malicious – “Cursed are the wicked that even the good that they do, is done with evil intentions!” – because Joseph’s Hebrew ethnicity calls attention to his membership of a hated people, his youth to his foolishness and his status as a slave to a restriction on Joseph ever holding high office.^[iv] 

An alternative interpretation suggests that the description was motivated by fear rather than malice. Joseph had interpreted the chief butler’s own dream two years earlier, when they were both prisoners, and had requested that the chief butler mention his unjust imprisonment to the king. The chief butler had forgotten about Joseph. He was now worried that if Joseph succeeded in interpreting the king’s dream he would be appointed to high office and would then take revenge against the chief butler for letting him down.^[v] 

Considering these two interpretations together, I suggest that:

a. Fear is a big motivating factor in denigrating the other. We need to resist excessive fear.  

b. It is sometimes absolutely right to judge. The tradition calls out the prejudice and mean spiritedness of the chief butler.  Muslim leaders have publicly called out prejudice and injustice where they believed it was at play in the way the “war on terror” is being prosecuted and have suggested that this injustice can contribute to radicalisation. The latter opinion is widely held by counter terrorism experts.^[vi]  Equally, it is right for Muslim leaders and others to make crystal clear that there are no excuses for perpetrators of terrorism or for advocates of extremist ideology and generalised anti-Western, “conflict-of-civilisations” or other “us & them” narratives.

c. There is a temptation for religious people and members of in-groups to assume the most negative interpretation of the character and motives of the “other”. One of the Muslim teenagers made the observation in our session that misjudgement goes both ways. “Some non-Muslims judge Muslims in general based on the actions of a minority of extremists, while some Muslims judge non-Muslims in general based on a minority of people who are prejudiced against Muslims, but the truth is that most people are not prejudiced.” I think he is right.

d. One flaw of reasoning is the assumption that if I don’t know about it, then it did not happen. Muslims I know and trust assure me that their religious leaders have been very clear in their condemnation of terrorism as absolutely unjustified. Yet, people who don’t have first-hand knowledge of these efforts assume they are not happening.

I fell into that kind of trap in 2010 when I wrote^[vii] about Reuben in the story of Joseph and his brothers.  Reuben castigated his brothers for selling Joseph: “Did I not say to you, do not sin with the boy and you did not listen?! And now his blood is being demanded (we are being held accountable for it).”^[viii]  At the time I asserted that Reuben “might have wanted to say that, it seems clear that he certainly meant to say that^[ix], but he did not quite tell them that. Compare his record of what he told them with his actual words at the time, ’let us not kill his soul, do not spill his blood, (instead just) throw him into this pit in the desert (filled with snakes and scorpions^[x]) but do not send your hand against him’.”^[xi]

Two prominent commentators disagree with my judgement of Reuben. “There is no doubt…that all of these words [that Reuben claimed to have said, he in fact] spoke to them at the time, but the Torah abbreviated the story.”^[xii] 

Perhaps, rather than judging Muslim leaders for failing to condemn, when we don’t really know how much they do or don’t condemn, we can ask them about their efforts to ensure their followers are well educated about positive messages from within their own tradition about conflict and generosity.  For example, a prominent Muslim leader who attended the session with the Muslim teenagers where I raised the teaching about the 70 excuses expressed concern that not one of the boys knew of this teaching. Equally it would be worth asking: how well educated are Jewish teenagers, or adults for that matter, about positive messages in their own traditions that can contribute to peaceful relations between people who believe differently?

---

[i] “If a friend among your friends errs, make seventy excuses for them. If your hearts are unable to do this, then know that the shortcoming is in your own selves.” [Imam Bayhaqi, Shu`ab al-Iman, 7.522] cited on http://seekershub.org/blog/2010/02/making-70-excuses-for-others-in-islam-a-key-duty-of-brotherhood/

[ii] Pirkei Avot 1:6

[iii] Genesis 41:12

[iv] Midrash Tanchuma, Bereshit Rabba 89 cited in Rashi

[v] Chizkuni, alternatively the butler might also have been afraid of the King, who could be angry about why the chief butler never bothered to tell him until now about such a wise person as Joseph being in the land

[vi] Professor Boaz Ganor in a public lecture in Sydney on 27 July 2015 talked about the art of counter terrorism which involves the need to tackle capability and motivation, but the efforts to address the former through arrests etc. negatively impacts the attempt to win hearts and minds and decrease motivation for terrorism

[vii] http://torahforsociallyawarehasid.blogspot.com.au/2010/11/shame-pride-striving-case-of-reuben.html

[viii] Genesis 42:22

[ix] Yefat Toar, cited in Torah Shlaima p 1584, note 79, suggests that the meaning of what Reuben said was not to sin with the boy. However, the tone of the words he later claims to have said with those he said a the time differ significantly, which led me to wonder whether there was a discrepancy between what he felt like saying and the weaker words he actually used, perhaps out of fear of fully confronting the wrongful mindset of his brothers.

[x] Rashi

[xi] Genesis 37:22

[xii] Abarbanel in agreement with Ramban on Genesis 42:22 

Who will Rest and who shall wander? Rosh Hashanah

Image was originally posted to Flickr
by james_gordon_losangeles at
http://flickr.com/photos/79139277@N08/7435923074
Image licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic

At a time that terrible suffering afflicts millions in the Middle East and continues to traumatize those who have escaped, Jews prepare for our New Year and day of judgement: Rosh Hashanah.  In the synagogue the solemn words will ring out: “Who will live and who will die? Who will die in their time and who before their time? Who by fire? Who by the sword? Who by hunger? Who by thirst? Who will find rest and who shall wander?  Who shall be at peace and who shall be pursued? …who shall be tormented?” This prayer talks about these decisions as being made by God alone. Yet, you and I are also making choices as citizens that might have some influence on these terrible questions.

This week’s decision by the Australian Government to resettle 12,000 refugees fleeing the conflict in Syria and Iraq, with a focus “on those most in need – the women, children and families of persecuted minorities”, 1 followed pleas by citizens as well as politicians. Last year I heard a representative of the Assyrian community describe the killing and devastation inflicted on his community by Daesh/IS. I connected with their pain and deeply wished this evil would stop! Now, thankfully, at least Assyrians will likely get some relief and be shown some compassion. 

On the other hand, one Australian Muslim who I respect and trust had a different perspective on the government’s announcement. “Muslims will forever remember a time that Australia turned its back on them, or planned too, when they are at their most vulnerable.  This is what radicalises people. Do you see why I say that this government doesn't really care about true de-radicalisation? This is the beginning of the end. Remember this moment! It's when we sacrificed our security, humanity and self-worth for political manoeuvring”. This perspective must be taken into account.

The decisions about who should be resettled and who will continue to suffer and “find nowhere to rest their feet” should be, and should be seen to be, based on need rather than ethnicity or religion. The right to save this one and leave another to suffer could only be claimed by God. Human justice must be procedural and impartial. The NSW Jewish community 2013 policy statement asserts that government should “not adopt any policy that arbitrarily limits or excludes from refugee protection any category of people with a genuine and well-founded fear of persecution in their homeland”. 2

The argument that a non-sectarian policy is necessary for social cohesion is consistent with an article written this week by former UK Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks. It should be noted that Sacks is not on some kind of left-wing politically correct bandwagon. In fact in 2007, he wrote that “Multiculturalism has led not to integration but to segregation…societies more abrasive, fractured and intolerant…”.  3 This week he wrote that it “is hard is to love the stranger, one whose colour, culture or creed is different from yours. That is why the command, “Love the stranger because you were once strangers”, resonates so often throughout the Bible. It is summoning us now. A bold act of collective generosity will show that the world, particularly Europe, (or the west) has learned the lesson of its own dark past and is willing to take a global lead in building a more hopeful future. Wars that cannot be won by weapons can sometimes be won by the sheer power of acts of humanitarian generosity to inspire the young to choose the way of peace instead of holy war”. 4 As my respected Muslim correspondent quoted above points out, the opposite is also true.


We must be hard on the problems and refuse to accept the avoidable suffering of our fellow humans, regardless of ethnicity or religion.  On Rosh Hashanah, I will pray that ‘God reign over the world in a way that will be known to all’. To me, this means that principles of justice and mercy prevail rather than the interests of the rich and powerful or the short term political interests of politicians. At the same time, let us treat each other with understanding and grace. A beautiful Rosh Hashanah prayer asserts that humans are “like a fading flower, like a broken shard of earthenware, and a dream that flies away”. This is a challenging time for those who are suffering and for the preservation of the fragile fabric of our still largely cohesive society. I pray for wise, responsible and compassionate choices by all concerned. 

Notes:
1.    https://www.pm.gov.au/media/2015-09-09/syrian-and-iraqi-humanitarian-crisis
2.    http://www.nswjbd.org/Our-Policies-/default.aspx, policy last updated (according to the website at 11 am on  10.09.2015) on 17.9.2013
3.    Sacks, J, (2007), the Home We Build Together, p.3, Continuum, London.
4.    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/06/refugee-crisis-jonathan-sacks-humanitarian-generosity accessed 10.09.15

Words that Insult, Humiliate, Agitate, or Inspire Togetherness

Introduction: Dear Friends,

I am thinking about the importance of words at this time.  A lot of angry words are being spoken, many motivated by altruistic, passionate concern for the innocent and outrage over the loss of life and the violence. Some have been simply abusive words by ignorant and even drunk individuals. A man screamed “Allah Akbar” at me in the middle of Bankstown.

I write these words with the threat of renewed hostilities in the air. There are very small things I can do to try to prevent the on-going killing in the Middle East. I am doing these quietly. As Joe Wakim of the Arab Council said about another bridge builder, this “role is to prevent this kind of stone throwing, not engage in it”. This is a small meditation regarding words and people of different backgrounds getting along in Australia.

All the very best,

Zalman

An example of the power of positive words.
The wonderful Paul Benett's book that I
launched. A real example of living
with light. http://thecrankyguru.net/

We saw a victory this week for collaborative efforts between communities. The Australian government accepted their joint calls against the humiliation of people on the basis of ethnicity or “race”.  

Yet a dark cloud hangs over community harmony in Australia. Yes, there is an elephant in the room that is a matter of life and death.  The burning question is how to stop the killing, violence and the suffering? This is a vital question that I care passionately about. Our tradition teaches that “to kill” is to diminish the “image” of the King, namely God, in whose image ALL humans are created (1). This question must be answered, in certain contexts, not by me in this public context. This is because I sincerely believe I might do more harm than good.  Every blame claim, justification, refutation and counter argument that  I can imagine, has already been shouted endlessly, motivated by a mix of anger, hatred, as well as sincere desires for justice and to protect the innocent.

Here is another question: What will be the impact of all this death and conflict here in Australia, where we Australians of Jewish, Arabic, Muslim, Sunni, Shia, Ukrainian and other backgrounds live?

An old Rabbi was attacked in Perth this week. School children were terrorized in Sydney. Shia Muslims have been copping it for many months, Muslims generally, for years. Less significantly, yesterday, I walked through a state school playground filled with Arabic teenagers. When they saw me, an identifiable Jew, they chanted at me: “Free, free, Palestine”.  A sheikh, who had been working with me and a group of students at the school, walked alongside me to support me as I walked quickly to my car. 

Students in Australia should be encouraged to care about the world they live in and engage with the pursuit of justice.  However, chanting at a Jewish man reflects a generalized hostility to the “Jewish people”, rather than advocacy for aggrieved Palestinians.  I don’t blame the kids. The distinction is not an easy one.  A Muslim who works with me, made the point that what I felt in that playground is very similar to how she feels when people shout out “terrorist” to her. “It has nothing to do with me,” she said.

Perhaps, of equal importance, was the raising of this very painful and difficult topic in our group that has been working together regularly from the beginning of this year. The question about the current situation was raised by a student in one word, “Palestine?” It was a useful conversation to have. At the same time it reflects a growing tendency to talk and think in slogans rather than fully developed ideas with any nuance. A lot of the “dialogue” about Gaza and Israel has been via Facebook and Twitter - images of dead children, other images with captions or slogans. 

I accept that, in some cases, one may insult, provoke, polarize, simplify and ridicule as part of agitating for change. The Biblical prophets resorted to exaggeration, simile and ridicule to argue for change. On the other hand, we need to get along in Australia. If we can’t do it here, where our lives are not under direct threat, how can the people who have lost relatives and their sense of security, not lose hope?! To some extent, hope has been another casualty of this terrible situation. It must be restored.

Words matter. According to the Jewish sages, humiliating another person to the point where the colour drains from his face is equivalent to spilling his blood. I think that is hyperbolic, but reflects the seriousness of the harm caused by denigrating speech, suggesting a psychological death. Perhaps, more to the point, if people with authority engage excessively in denigrating groups, younger people and less educated people will take that as a licence for violence and a signal that they have a right to be “bigots”.

I don’t have a formula for preventing murder, killing or war, but I know that listening from the heart, goodwill and nuanced conversation are part of the answer. Polarization is usually less helpful. We cannot banish darkness by beating it with sticks. We can only overcome it with light. I pray for the preservation of life, dignity, justice and peace. 

1      1) Mechilta