Criticism, Defensiveness and Repentance - Yom Kippur

It really got under my skin. An article was posted on a Muslim website making the ridiculous suggestion that the “Jewish Lobby” has taken credit for the election of Australian Prime Minister elect Tony Abbott because of his position on Middle East conflict (1).  It also hinted darkly about some kind of connection between secular groups in the Jewish community and the Mr. Abbott’s lesbian sister. If the article was focused on concerns for justice for the Palestinians, I would respect it, but why fabricate garbage about “Jewish control”? The sources cited in the article show clearly that the assertion is baseless. (Update: In response to my contacting the website that published the story, the words were changed to "all but too the credit"). What on earth is he getting at with the gay angle? More broadly my indignation with this article is an opportunity for a deeper reflection on criticism, defensiveness and repentance ahead of our Day of Atonement tonight and tomorrow.

I have been thinking about how religious communities respond to criticism. I hate the pattern in which communities, as well as political parties, are often focused on preserving a positive image, asserting an “us good, them bad” view rather than on exploring how we might not be so great and can improve. An impressive deviation from this was the unqualified apology and acknowledgement by Rabbi Moshe Gutnick this week of  a “culture of cover up, often couched in religious terms, (which) pervaded our thinking and actions“ relating to child sexual abuse (2).

While stirring up stereotypes and false or exaggerated negative beliefs about any community is reprehensible, raising legitimate concerns regarding any community should be welcomed. The above-mentioned Muslim website article clearly does the former.  Notwithstanding that problem, I think it still raises a useful question for Australian Jews about our obligations as Australian citizens regarding what we should take into account when we vote. In fairness to many Jews, a range of ethical views relating to Australia were debated and given prominence on blogs and Facebook, yet the extent to which exclusively Jewish priorities figured for some Jews in their voting decision is a legitimate topic for debate.

One of the things included in the confession test of our Yom Kippur prayer service is the sin of being judgemental.  I think it is important for people tempted to make judgements about perceived defensiveness in some communities to consider the following anecdote:

“Why are you so defensive?” I asked D., a 19 year old Hebrew School teacher when I first started out running a Sunday school almost 20 years ago. I had been trying to guide her about how she can do things better, but each time I suggested something D. gave me an argument about how she was already doing it. “If I wasn't feeling attacked, would I be defensive?” D replied. The penny dropped for me.

A prominent Muslim woman and leader has made the point to me that her communities’ internal efforts at self-criticism is hampered by the relentless attacks they are subjected to. I suggest this is also true for Jewish communities.

I noticed this dynamic in myself. I was sent an article by an American Jew, Mark Braverman relating to Israel’s “separation barrier” (3). Mark writes that when he stands in the Synagogue on Yom Kippur to pray for forgiveness he will: “stand before [ is] an 8 meter-high wall of concrete and steel that now stands between me and my maker, between me and my faith, and between me and my sisters and brothers in Palestine who in their call for justice and coexistence are calling me – and my Christian brothers and sisters in the UK and around the world – to faithfulness.  We Jews can be forgiven for our sins – this is without question – but we must begin by acknowledging them.”

Mark argues for collective Jewish responsibility, pointing out that the Yom Kippur confession prayer is “recited in the first person plural – and only so always in the plural”. “For the sin, that WE sinned …” we say as we physically (symbolically) beat our chests. My visceral reaction to Mark’s piece was defensive. I focused on Mark's argument that Israelis’ attitude is “fear-based … because they do not know the Palestinians.  That’s what the wall does…” I think that implies that the only reason Jews have negative feelings toward Palestinians is because of prejudice, itself caused by the wall. What about suicide bombing and the stabbing murders of men, women and children in their homes, I asked indignantly.

Yet, the prophets spoke scathingly, without context or qualification, about the Israelites, comparing them to Sodom. Prodding the people with hyperbole, the prophets’ technique could be seen to work in the same way that satire or cartoons help make a point by focusing on it.  In my own reserved way I have been critical of the approach Jews and Israel take to the endless peace process, suggesting a greater emphasis on justice is needed if we are ever to achieve the aim of peace.

On Yom Kippur I need to own up to my own shortcomings, as well as any faults of those of the various communities I am part of - Jewish, Hasidic, middle class, white, Australian and the Interfaith/Peace community. None are perfect. All can do better to avoid sins of commission or omission, to ensure we are not complicit with any evil and that we are as active as we can be to promote justice, peace and virtue.

I suggest that there needs to be a combination of effective self-criticism, generally avoiding defensiveness and taking ownership of our faults and those of our communities, while still also taking into account a concern about apportioning blame unfairly to our own communities.

Wishing the entire Jewish community and all people to be sealed in God’s good book and for those participating in the fasting and worship over the 25 hours of Yom Kippur a most rewarding day. 

1) http://muslimvillage.com/2013/09/10/43706/abbot-victory-seen-as-victory-for-jewish-lobby/
2) http://www.tzedek.org.au/yom-kippur-acknowledgement-and-apology/
3) http://markbraverman.org/2013/09/talking-about-israel-at-the-greenbelt-festival-in-the-uk-a-yom-kippur-meditation/

New Year’s repentance, reality, “addictive” behaviours and change – Nitzavim Vayelech

In less than a week I will join my fellow Jews in prayer facing God’s judgement on Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year. The prayer, Unesaneh Tokef (“Let us acknowledge the potency of the holiness of this day”) that inspired Leonard Cohen’s song “who by fire”, will be solemnly read and sung. Its phrases inviting us to reflect on our fate, either tranquillity or distress, life or a harsh death but disaster can be prevented if we repent. Yet, repentance becomes harder over time.  Like the infamous New Year’s resolutions, it involves me making a commitment to myself that I will behave differently next year. Can I trust myself to change when the context in which I make choices about my behaviour remain the same? 

In our Torah reading just prior to this holy day, Moses in tell the Israelites, “You are standing together today, all of you… to enter into a covenant ”. Perhaps one way to improve our prospects for doing right is by drawing strength from a community or fellowship. This is one of the key ingredients in the success of twelves steps programs .

On the other hand, identifying with a faith community can be used to perpetuate poor choices. We have the sinner who “will bless himself in his heart, telling himself, I will have peace as I follow my heart's desires (concluding cryptically with the words) to add the “Rava”  רוהwatered to the thirsty” . One commentary explains that he convinces himself that his sins won’t matter because the majority of people will behave uprightly and so as a member of the community he will still be able to enjoy the benefits of others good works . This is compared to a field that is not watered (the wicked) next to a regularly watered field (eg. the righteous), the unwatered/thirsty field’s crops would benefit from the watered field . 

Judaism teaches that our hearts follow our actions. The rituals are activities that influence our attitudes. In this model, although it is hard to change our attitude, we can change our practices and this in turn influences our attitudes. Following this theory, if I go to the fridge when I feel stressed, I am reinforcing a dependency on food for mood management. If I abstain from snacking on “comfort food” I am reinforcing my capacity for self-control.

One problematic commentary by Nahmanides (1194-1270) emphasises behaviour. It translates the word “Rava” as “sated” and relates it to the situation of the spirit that does not desire “things that are bad for it”. It relates the word “thirsty” to the desire for beautiful women. It suggests that if a man is submerged in promiscuity with women, his desire will increase greatly until he will want things he did not originally desire such as homosexuality and bestiality .  An obvious problem with this commentary is that his 13th century view of homosexuality does not conform to the reality reported by homosexuals about their own experience. A second problem is his equation of bestiality and homosexuality which I find offensive. I have dealt with attitudes toward homosexuals within Torah in an earlier post http://torahforsociallyawarehasid.blogspot.com.au/2011/04/torah-based-responses-to-homosexuality.html. In this post I explore the “desire” aspect of this commentary.

I am concerned about the way this commentary deals with desire, particularly the way the commentary is adapted by a modern scholar, Nechoma Leibowitz in she which uses the word “addicted” to describe the sinner. I am concerned that the reader might miss the recognition of the way the person begins to lose control. I am afraid of some getting an impression that we are dealing with person who is simply evil and happily indulging him or herself. There is little scope for considering the profound pain suffered by addicts, including those addicted to sex, the internet or work that leads them to “self-medicate”.  It is critical to avoid judgement because we can never truly stand in another person’s shoes or “place ”.

Rabbi Schneur Zalman of Liadi, who I am named after, manages to articulate a powerful message of understanding for people’s circumstances. He suggest that when tempted to judge others we should consider that it is “his physical environment that causes him to sin, since his livelihood requires him to go about the market-place all day…(or) he is of those who sit at the street-corners. Thus his eyes see all sorts of temptation; and “‘what the eyes see, the heart desires….” R. Shneur Zalman also asks us to avoid judgement based on other factors including individual temperaments . The caveat on this is Judaism holds a very strong belief in free choice and ultimate personal responsibility. How much choice there is in the lived experience of the addict is a difficult question I don’t feel qualified to answer.   

For me part of the frustration is founded in unrealistic expectations about how much I can change my habits. I think I need a balance between hope and realistic caution about the prospects for success. Our reading combines these two messages. It tells us that “indeed, this matter is very close (achievable) to you, in your mouth, and your heart to do it ”.   Yet, we have Moses and God both clearly pessimistic about the people changing their habits. God predicts that when Moses dies the people will stray  and Moses expects that the rebelliousness he saw while he was still alive will continue and perhaps get worse after he dies , because “I know that you will be become corrupted ”. The reading offers a lot of punishment, which I guess I can apply in my own life by considering the consequences of various choices and recognise that if I want certain things to happen in my life, family and work there are choices that makes those outcomes either more or less likely. 

As is customary, we respond to the weighty day of judgement with good wishes ahead of this awesome day.  So, to all members of the human family, including my Jewish sisters and brothers, may the next year be a good and sweet one. May we all once again back ourselves and affirm that we will give it our best shot and try, yet again, to be better next year. Let us not imprison our future by our past. Equally, let us be gentle to ourselves and each other by accepting the very compassionate words about ourselves at the conclusion of the frightful “Unesaneh Tokef” prayer, we humans are as a species need “to use our very soul just to earn some bread, we are compared to withering grass, a fading flower, a passing shade, a dissipating cloud, a blowing wind, flying dust, and a fleeting dream”.

Sources: 


 Deuteronomy 29:9- 11
  The connection between twelve steps and our Torah reading is made in this article: http://www.chabad.org/parshah/article_cdo/aid/744681/jewish/Unity-Is-Our-Strength.htm
  Deuteronomy 29:18
  Ibn Ezra
  Not sure about the science here, but this is the teaching
  Sefer Hachinuch
  Ramban
  Pirkey Avot (Ethics of the Fathers) 2:4
  Tanya 30, translation text taken from Lessons in Tanya http://www.chabad.org/library/tanya/tanya_cdo/aid/7909/jewish/Chapter-30.htm
  Deuteronomy 30:14
  Deuteronomy 31:16
  Deuteronomy 31:27
  Deuteronomy 31:29

Interaction between “the Certain”, the “Chosen” and the Text Ki Tavo

Photo copyright by Damien Begovic, Dialogue at the
Together for Humanity stall at the Multicultural Eid Festival
18 August 2013, Fairfield, Sydney Australia

Yesterday I was surrounded by a civil, well intentioned, confident group of bearded young Muslim males of Arabic and other backgrounds. I was in my element, I had been warmly welcomed by the organizer of this outreach event, I was offered dates and Arabic coffee, I had lovely conversations with several Muslims that I knew previously and we were talking religion. While on one level I enjoyed the next discussion, there was something a bit challenging with the rather robust dialogue I got into with this group, I felt like I was being targeted for conversion. When I reflected on it and my own reactions to this experience as well as other heart-warming experiences this week, it got me thinking about what works in interfaith interaction and on one of the topics we discussed, the notion of the Jews being God’s chosen people.

Ahmad  asked me about a verse in the Torah that he thinks predicted the rising of another prophet like Moses. The text states “I will set up a prophet for them from among their brothers like you, and I will put My words into his mouth ”. I had never thought of it as relating to a specific prophet and explained to him that the Torah has at least 70 different explanations. That was not good enough for him, there had to be one right answer, otherwise “there will be confusion”. So I explained that the verse refers not to one specific prophet, but to the concept of prophecy which applied to many men and women. I got the text on my smart phone and showed the context of the verse. It follows a warning not to seek superficial certainties through sorcery, but instead to seek guidance from God’s messengers. This made little impression on Ahmad and his friends, who continued to insist that I was wrong because the singular form of the word “prophet” proved that it was talking about one person.

Ahmad then posed a much more powerful challenge relating to the relationship between God and the Jews vs. God’s relationship to all people. Did I believe in a tribal God of Israel or a Universal God of all people and things? What did I think about the chosen people? These questions could have led to a thoughtful exchange that would have helped all of us gain greater understanding of each other’s’ faiths.  Unfortunately at this stage, my headspace was anything but thoughtful. Instead I was part of a game I never agreed to play, that of seeking to convince each other about truths. The absurdity of it, was that here I was being challenged about the meaning of my own sacred text by people who had limited knowledge of it and could not read it in its original language. This is always a bad move. We are on much safer ground when we speak about our own text and show openness to those who follow a text to tell us what it means to them.

In a more curious dialogue, I would have compared Jewish and Islamic texts relating to the way that Moses introduces God to Pharaoh (Firaon in Arabic). In the Torah, Moses states: "So said the Lord God of Israel, 'Send out My people’’ " and he also refers to the “God of the Hebrews ”. In the Quran we a significant difference in the way Moses (or Musa) refers to God. He states: “Oh Pharaoh! Lo! I am a messenger from the Lord of the worlds…I come to you with a clear proof from your Lord. So let the children of Israel go with me ”.  The Islamic text presents a universal God of the “worlds” who is even the Lord of Pharaoh himself.  Putting this in context, God is introduced as the creator of the universe, who is terribly concerned about injustice in the pagan society of Sodom.  I would argue that Jews clearly see God as universal rather than what I regard as the ridiculous notion of an exclusive Jewish God.  The idea of a God of Israel is more about the dedication of Israel to the one God than it is about ownership in the way that people talk of the sports team they are fans of as being “their team”.

The question of the Chosen people is often taken to mean that Jews have a sense of superiority. It is hard to argue with that interpretation when we consider the text in the reading Ki Tavo. “the Lord has selected you this day to be His treasured people, as He spoke to you, and so that you shall observe all His commandments, and to make you supreme (higher), above all the nations that He made… ”. I do not take this as a license to chauvinism or arrogance. I would broadly agree with the Muslim woman I enjoyed a most respectful conversation with at our Together For Humanity stall we had on Sunday at the Multicultural Eid festival. She understood choseness as reflecting the fact that the Jews had chosen to worship and believe in God. One commentator understands the key word האמירך (He-Eemircha) which some translate as chosen, to mean that He caused you to say and be willing to be a people for (eg. committed to) God because he did so many miracles (for the Jews) . The context clearly shows that the people were chosen to obey commandments.

Another commentator sees a strong universatlist agenda in all this. The purpose of the Jews special status is not for their benefit but for God to achieve through them what he wanted to achieve with the human species. The elevation is for the purpose of understanding and teaching monotheism .  I prefer these explanations to the one that suggest that even if another nation (Umma in Hebrew) will come and will do good, and will try to attach to the Divine presence they will not be able to acheve the level of Israel  . Not all interpretation is convenient, and I need to present a balanced view.

The discussion with Ahmad and friends continued to confront me. I explained that in Judaism there is no need for others to convert as long as they obey 7 key principals (laws for all children of Noah), one of which is establishment of law and justice which I interpret as including participation in the democratic process. I got an argument against democracy in favour of theocracy.

After this exchange, I talked to three other Muslim men one of whom was concerned about how I might have felt after the unofficial debate/conversion effort. Another walked me to my car and engaged me in a real open minded and open hearted conversation reflecting genuine curiosity and true gentleness of spirit. In my short conversation with him I learned some interesting similarities between Islam and Judaism as we understand Satan/Shaytan as an agent of God whose role is to tempt us. I put the more challenging (but not “bad” experience in context of all these much more pleasant conversations this week and indeed even at the same generally enjoyable event.  This little confrontation pales into significance when I compare it with the highlight of my week when Jewish students from the Emanuel School recited the blessing after meals among mostly Arabic Muslim students at Punchbowl Boys High School, followed by a dozen Muslim students doing the afternoon prayer in unison. Both groups of teenagers silently showed the greatest respect for each other, followed by genuinely curious questions, seeking understanding.

Certainties and claims to Choseness present challenges as well as opportunities for learning about each other and how to get along.

Good Intentions Good Works

Yesterday I heard a simply dressed woman stand up in the audience of a large room describe the way she and others in Tamworth help refugees and new arrivals in Tamworth, a country town. There is no money, no grants, no questions of accountability, just people simply working together to help newcomers, driving them in their own vehicle to inspect an apartment, helping with needed furniture and other practical needs. There was something really wholesome and inspiring in this great example where pure intention meets good works, with no other motives. Unfortunately, this is not always practical, for example in my case I do good work, based on positive intentions, but we have chosen to professionalise the work, which means I am paid for the work and there are questions of interests, power and authority over people that report to me.

Other-Focused

Monday: My step is light. My mood is upbeat. I’m walking down quiet tree lined streets to a trail that takes me into a little forest. The leaves are so many shades of red, brown and green. I’m not happy because I am noticing the trees. The opposite is true. I’m noticing the trees because of an inner joy.  It’s the joy of freeing myself from stress about funding for the organisation I lead by moving my focus to the people I have the privilege to serve.  This morning, I turned my attention back to lobbying the government for funding but my intention is not to keep afloat but on maximizing the benefit to children across this country. Thinking about how to ensure the impact is greater. I am experiencing the joy of being focused on my intentions to help others.

I feel inspired by Martin Luther King jnr’s “mountain top speech” and its focus away from self to the needs of the people he was committed to help. I used to read Moses’ speech about not getting to the Promised Land as a lament. “I pleaded with God at that time, saying. Lord, God, you have begun to show your servant your greatness…please let me pass (over the river) and see the good land…[i]”. Alas Moses’ plea is refused and he is merely allowed to see the Promised Land from the top of a mountain. In King’s speech shortly before he is assassinated he sees it differently. King tells his audience that “It doesn’t matter about me now”, he is not afraid to die because he has “been to the mountain top, and seen the Promised Land” he can see the realisation of his dream of an equal society. This is the head space I think we need to operate in, if we can. Thinking not about our own wishes or needs but of those we serve.

Intentions

Wednesday: I hear a speech by Mrs. Maha Abdo, a leader of the Muslim Women’s association. I am sitting next to her on the panel at a diversity conference. She begins by asking us to close our eyes and focus on our intention for being in that room at that moment. I close my eyes and think about the networking I came to do, promoting my organisation and decide that a better intention would be to focus on really hearing what others are saying and being here for the people in this room in the discussion. Maha says that in her recent trip to a village in Yemen the normal practice before doing anything is to stop and think about intention. I love it.

Impact

Alongside good intentions is the obligation to judge whether our efforts are having an impact, sometimes using “hard” instruments, such as demands for data, accountability and giving harsh criticism to ensure this is being achieved. This is particularly true when public or charitable funds are being used.

The Torah commands the people to put judges and “police” (Shortim שוטרים) in all their gates[ii]. This has been interpreted metaphorically as a requirement for making judgements about the words that come out of our mouths as well as what and how we choose to see things with our eyes and hear with our ears. I suggest that the priority be placed on wise judgement with any harshness being carefully employed only in accordance with this wisdom.

 The Hebrew word shoter שוטר , that I translated as police, has more than one interpretation. One scholar translated it as “rulers[iii]”. In his model there is a separation of powers,  there is the judiciary who make judgements and the rulers who ensure that the ruling of the judges is imposed. In this model there appears to be no ambivalence about the combination of coercive power and authority. An alternative and more prevalent view is that the “Shoter” has no authority of his own and refers to “the lads” who are given very specific instructions by the judges to enforce their judgements[iv]. In the second model, force or harshness is rightfully positioned in its proper subservient role.

I hope in my life I get it right, at the level of motives, intentions and impact on others. More broadly, the Australian government’s harsh treatment of asylum seekers, and the policies advocated by both major parties during our current election campaign needs to be challenged both at the level of intention and impact. May compassion prevail and all force and harshness humbly serve justice as determined by wise judgment.

---

[i] Deuteronomy 3:24-26

[ii] Deuteronomy 16:18

[iii] Ibn Ezra

[iv] Mizrahi based on Rashi commentary on Deuteronomy 16:18 and Rambam Sefer Hamitzvos. In one version of Rashi he used the word “Gularion” which Marcus Jastrow explains to be a “soldiers boy”, or the most junior soldiers who typically are sent ahead in harm’s way but the credit it given to the more senior soldiers.  

Words/Devarim - too much in your head?

Used under Creative Commons license, original photo from
http://www.flickr.com/photos/earthraceconservation/

‘Dedicated to my father who accomplished more with silence than I ever have with words and noise[i]’ or words to that effect, writes one author. As a Jew with many Muslim friends I wonder about the value of words and introspection in general, and particularly at this time of year when Muslim observe Ramadan and Jews observe “the nine days” of mourning relating to the destruction of our temple in Jerusalem over two thousand years ago. Intention and awareness is surely essential, mindless ritual cannot be right. Still, I wonder, can introspection lead me to be “inside my head” rather than engaged with my fellow man and God?

I have been reading the classic book Zen & Motorcycle Maintenance. I was struck by the narrator spending almost the entire book inside his head, thinking about himself as he was prior to a period of mental illness and electric shock treatment. He talks about the way that he was prior to his breakdown and treatment, eccentric, and recklessly idealistic, as if this was a different person who he even gives another name. The narrator’s son who is travelling with him on his motorcycle trip tries to connect with him but the father is preoccupied. It is only at the end of the book that the father’s earlier self asserts itself that he is fully there for his son, there is a lightness and joy and real presence. The story aspect of the book suggests two things to me. One is about the risk of filling my head with ‘too many words’, the other is about completely accepting myself as I am rather than wishing certain aspects of my personality or temperament didn’t exist.

Words and their limits

The name of fifth book of the Torah known in English as Deuteronomy is called Devarim in Hebrew, meaning words. The reading/portion this week[ii] is almost entirely a parting speech by Moses to the people shortly before his death. Moses refers to himself more in the section than in any other up to this point, 36 times. Yet, he is hardly introspective. Moses mentions once that he agreed with a plan to send spies that eventually went bad[iii]. He does not tell us if he feels responsible for his view or justified in it. Commentary suggests that he agreed with the plan because of the overwhelming consensus in favor of the plan by the people[iv], essentially blaming them despite his acquiescence. He also blamed the people for the fact that he will not be allowed to enter the Promised Land. “God also became angry with me because of you[v]”. Perhaps even more telling is that in comparison to the 36 references to his own role in the story, Moses uses words like you or direct references to the people 132 times, and references to “us” 75 times, so we have a ratio of 207-36 that tells us who is the focus in this speech.

This absence of public introspection in this reading can’t be taken as precluding private self-criticism. At least one commentary about Moses’ reaction to the rebellion against him by Korach, when he falls on his face is to examine his own heart whether he is at fault. Surely the point of our nine days of mourning this week and next is not just to remember what happened in the past but also to consider how we can behave more lovingly to merit a restoration of God’s grace and presence, the loss of which is represented by the physical destruction of a temple. The juxtaposition of the reading with the time of morning is intentional[vi] and calls us to reflect on a whole generation in the desert that falls from God’s grace and is excluded from the Promised Land just as our generation has failed to realize the rebuilding of the temple and through improving ourselves may yet merit the coming of the Messiah. More broadly, the process of Cheshbon Hanefesh, an accounting of the soul is  seen as a key tool for self-improvement.    

Self-Improvement and Self-acceptance

In seeking to improve ourselves, I think it is important that the starting point is a measure of self-acceptance. It is noble to try to develop better habits and to be alert or vigilant as my wise colleague Donna Jacobs Sife teacher to the darker thoughts and feelings that is common to almost all people. But we are taught that it is foolish and delusional for most people to think they can eradicate desires for evil, instead most of us need to accept that what God wants of us is to control ourselves rather than complete  eradication of aspects of our nature ()[vii].  I don’t know ,  I think transformation is possible in acceptance……

The Talmudic sage Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai told his students just before he died “I don’t know on which path they will lead me[viii]. This uncertainty about what awaited him in the afterlife is explained as resulting from such a great preoccupation with serving God “every day, every hour and every moment” rather than being aware of what was happening in inner emotional and intellectual world or ranking[ix]. I think this example highlights one extreme end of the spectrum perhaps. I think we can find the right balance between a helpful amount and form of introspection while still being in the world rather than preoccupied with words in our head about ourselves.

 

Beyond Words

Associate Professor John Bradley tells a lovely story about coming out to the Northern Territory as a PhD student and tells an Aboriginal uncle that he knows everything there is to know about dugongs. The uncle says, “uh huh”, and leaves it at that. Some days later they are up a creek somewhere and John is in the water checking out these animals when a dugong breaks his arm. He returns to the canoe in absolute agony. They are hours away from the nearest doctor. Then the uncle turns to him and says, “now, you know dugong!”  

---

[i] Abehsera, M. (1992) The Possible Man, Swan House

[ii] Deuteronomy/ Devarim 1:1-3:22

[iii] Deuteronomy/ Devarim 1:23

[iv] Ibn Ezra

[v] Deuteronomy/ Devarim 1:37, if not for the people’s lack of faith in the case of the spies Moses would not have been required to try to strengthen their faith by the planned miracle of talking to the rock and eventually hitting it instead for which he was punished (Panim Yafos). An alternative interpretation is that Moses says he did not go into the Promised land being buried in the desert instead, so that at the time of the resurrection those who died in the desert will join Moses and in his merit also rise from the dead. This interpretation translates the word בגללכם as for the sake of the people (Rosh). Another interpretation relates the word בגללכם to rolling or cause and effect, if not for the sin of the spies Moses would have already been in the land and build the holy temple that would have never been destroyed, as a result of their sin Moses did not enter and the temples were eventually destroyed (Ohr Hachayim)

[vi] Biur Halacha (528:4) as explained by Rabbi Avrohom Gordimer – in http://www.ou.org/torah/gordimer/5763/devarim63.htm

[vii] Tanya

[viii] Talmud Berachos 28b.

[ix] The Lubavitcher Rebbe as translated by Eli Touger, retrieved from  www.chabad.org/therebbe/article_cdo/aid/1217591/jewish/Sec-10-Preventing-Self-Satisfaction.htm

Morsi and Gillard, democracy and diversity

Millions of Egyptians are celebrating this week, including Coptic Christians who have suffered persecution and insecurity on Morsi’s watch and others concerned about what they regards as private freedoms. For quite a few families it is a time for mourning those who died for the crime of expressing a political opinion at a rally. I cannot imagine what it is like for the women who were raped or threatened for the same reason.  Then there are the Egyptians who voted for Morsi in a democratic election, who have just had their democratic victory snatched out of their hands.  A less significant event is the political demise of Australia’s first female prime minister due not to demonstrations in the streets but responses to pollsters gauging her popularity. As this is a Torah based blog, I need to seek some inspiration in our Torah readings.

Failure to protect grounds for renouncing an election?

The process of the Egyptian intervention based on force by the military and shutting down media stations is a serious concern. Yet, the essential question of removing a democratically elected leader bothers me less. I heard a second hand account from a Coptic woman, who escaped to Australia after her people were brutally attacked by a mob in Cairo, a kindergarten was torched, an elderly church caretaker was set alight. Unfortunately, religious intolerance has a long history. For example,  our Torah reading this week encourages destruction of pagan houses of worship[i]. Still Morsi’s government’s failure to prevent religious-based violence is a failure in fulfilling the first responsibility of government to protect the citizens. We are instructed to pray for our government because without them people would swallow each other alive[ii]. Unfortunately in Egypt the government failed in that responsibility. An election is a social contract. If events show that a dreadful mistake was made there is a need for a mechanism to correct it just as the Torah allows for vows to be annulled if circumstances change[iii]. The question is about the best process for correction and what the longer term implications will be of the military taking control and the backlash from Morsi supporters.

A leadership change In Australia

We are fortunate in Australia to have other mechanisms for removing an elected leader.

On Wednesday afternoon last week, I was busy preparing two proposals for the Australian Government and the presumed in-coming Government, the present opposition that all the polls were predicting would win in a landslide. The proposals related to the need for rigorous policies about diversity that go beyond platitudes and tokenism and also sought funding for the work we do.  Several hours later we found out that the prime minister had been removed by a party room ballot. The usurper, who had been deposed himself by the person he replaced, claimed to be answering the call of the Australian people. Putting aside judgements about the truth of the claim, it is a noble view of leadership echoed in our Torah reading two days later in which Moses is instructed to “take” or persuade Joshua to take on the leadership[iv].

Representative government and resistance to multiculturalism

I arrived in Canberra on the Thursday morning after the switch. There was an uneasy and subdued vibe in the parliament building. At my first meeting I made a robust argument for Multiculturalism to a conservative MP who argued against the word. He explained that to many of his constituents the word Multiculturalism represents license for minorities to self-segregate and the word would alienate them rather than bring them along. This approach to leadership is consistent with Moses’ asking “God of spirits of all flesh (to replace him with) a leader for the people[v]” “which is understood to mean that the leader should be the type of person “who will tolerate every person according to their distinctive spirit[vi]”. An alternative view in our tradition is that while a leader must be privately tolerant, the public persona must be forceful and fearless[vii]. I think political leadership can set a tone for the people by being a few steps ahead of them, but not too far ahead, especially in a democracy.

Cohesive society

In Australia, we generally have a consensus that racism is wrong. Historically Multiculturalism in Australia is “a construction of the state[viii]” which, despite wide acceptance by the population, has not been universally embraced - concerns have been raised about this policy being divisive. These voices have been louder in Europe where a champion of diversity, the UK chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, wrote that “Multiculturalism has run its course and it is time to move on”; “Multiculturalism has led not to integration but to segregation. It has allowed groups to live separately with no incentive to integrate[ix]”. The situation in Australia is significantly different with a far greater degree of successful integration, yet segregation is a problem here too, with some young Muslims I have worked with not feeling Australian or connected to Australia at all. As the conservative MP correctly pointed out, integration is made harder due to the discrimination many young Muslims face. This level of discrimination was on display this week when an Australian MP of Bosnian Muslim heritage, despite his complete cultural integration, was attacked simply for taking an oath of office on a Koran. 

A way forward

This week we have seen the limits of which leaders need to be aware. Yet leaders still have great sway in terms of their influence. When a group of people talk to Moses and mention their sheep before their children he sets them straight and they correct the order in their next statement[x]. Teachers can challenge unhelpful ideas such as an inspiring Muslim woman educator I met recently who tells her Lebanese Muslim students that they are not victims and demands that they take responsibility for their future. A sheikh who ran a workshop with me explained to young men of Lebanese Muslim heritage that the Prophet Mohamed felt great loyalty to the Meccan pagan state because he was a citizen. He also argues that Australia with its rule of law and welfare policies is very consistent with Islamic principles. This needs to be combined with a decrease in the level of prejudice in the community as a whole against Muslims. More people need to have positive first hand experiences of interacting with the “other”. They also need to develop critical thinking skills to help process negative experiences with individuals to ensure they can still see the big picture and humanity beyond the problems.

I was in the Parliament last week at the historic question-time session with the old-new Prime Minister. It was a fascinating experience and while it was painful for the former Prime Minister, I take heart from a comment on Facebook, “in Australia we changed Prime Ministers, without an election but with no tanks in the streets”. Let us ensure we can all enjoy this blessed land free from discrimination, with the protection of benign responsible governments who enable us all to feel that we belong together. My prayers are also with the people of Egypt that justice and freedom prevail.

---

[i] Numbers 33:52

[ii] Pirkey Avot

[iii] Numbers 30

[iv] Numbers 27:18 as interpreted by Rashi

[v] Numbers 27:16

[vi] Rashi

[vii] Ramban

[viii] Taylor, S., Rizvi, F., Lingard, B., Henry, M., (1997). Education Policy and the Politics of Change. Oxon, Routledge

[ix] Sacks, J, (2007) The Home we build together. Continuum. London. p.3

[x] Numbers 32 compare verses 16 first sheep then children, 24 where Moses reverses the order and 26 where the people follow his cue.