Submission Season: Chukat & Korach

On Monday morning, Sheikh Ahmed, my team and I discussed submission and assertiveness with Western Sydney, Lebanese Muslim, teenage boys who were fasting as part of Ramadan. Just before this month of fasting began, I joined a priest on a panel with Soner Coruhlu, another sheikh, who explained the spiritual side of fasting. He put fasting in the context of the inner struggle between the ego and emotions, on the one hand, and submission to God and following higher callings on the other.

In Western culture, we seem to value asserting oneself rather than submission. In Australian culture, we celebrate egalitarianism and irreverence. At the same time, these boys, like everyone else, are expected to submit to the rule of law and the obligations of citizenship.  We talked about the Magna Carta - how even governments must submit to the authority of the courts, and rule in a way that respects the rights of the people.

On Monday night, a Muslim man, a self-confessed “idiot at times (1)”, asserted on national television that the government “just justified to many Australian Muslims in the community tonight to leave and go to Syria and join ISIL (2)”. This has predictably caused outrage in the Australian media, and inflamed tensions. Living with people with diverse needs and standards, it is necessary to consider carefully how and when we either assert ourselves or submit to the will of others. 

I have been thinking about the limits of a self-assertive approach. In the course of my work, I found myself confronted by a person who defied my guidance.  He told a personal story, with a political reference, to a group of students in a context in which this was inappropriate.  When I gently pointed out to him what I thought was his oversight, he asserted his own view and told me that the political aspect of his story was intentional.  The fact that I am a leader in the field of cross-cultural bridge-building, counted for nothing. Unfortunately, he saw no need to accept any guidance.  In contrast to this, I shared an anecdote with the boys about how I submitted to the guidance of an Aboriginal elder, which, although hard at the time, I am very happy about after the fact.

In the current Torah readings, there is a strong message about submission. Last week, we read an extreme story promoting the virtue of “followership”: a man, named Korach, who refused to submit to the authority of Moses, was swallowed up by the earth as punishment (3). 

This week, we read about a ritual involving the slaughter and burning of a red cow, as a means of purification, after contact with death (4).  Death can be interpreted as symbolic - being completely disconnected from God (5). The ritual of the red cow is seen as a commandment without any rational explanation that we are forbidden “to think about”, or question (6).

This red cow had to be one that had never borne a yoke (7). The yoke is a potent symbol representing submission to God’s demands, just as an ox would accept the burden placed on its shoulders and comply with the demand to pull a plough. This symbolism can be interpreted in two opposite ways. Firstly, it can be interpreted that the Jews had thrown off the yoke of the kingdom of heaven, so they needed atonement through an animal that was likewise without a yoke (8).  Alternatively, it could be interpreted as atonement by the Jews for their inappropriate submission to the golden calf (9) - they accepted its yoke, and would now be redeemed by a yoke-less and, perhaps, symbolically assertive cow.

One of the interesting questions raised by one of the boys during the discussion, was whether it should still be considered as submission if one wants to submit. The sheikh and I both thought the answer is yes.

In the process of the preparation of the red cow, there is a high level of intentionality. The burning must be done “before his eyes (10)”: the priest must not be involved in any other task (11), but continue to look until the animal is reduced to ashes (12). One could not perform the ritual with two cows simultaneously as this would divide the attention of the priest (13). If a high priest performed this ritual, he would have to remove his regular, elaborate garments, including the breast plate with the diamonds inscribed with the names of the tribes, and perform the ritual wearing simple, white garments.  His thoughts must be focused on this ritual (14). Submission is not about the self being absent, nor is it about being weak and just caving in or shutting down. Instead, we are called to submit mindfully.  This is what happens in loving relationships between parents and children, and husbands and wives. The Torah points to broader applications of this gracious way of being. 

There will be times when assertiveness is the correct stance. There are other times that call for some give and grace. A season for submission is an opportunity to highlight this.

1)    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/23/zaky-mallah-i-stand-by-what-i-said-on-qa-the-public-needs-to-hear-it
2)    http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/zaky-mallahs-qa-comments-a-wakeup-call-for-radicalisation-debate-20150623-ghv29p.html#ixzz3dvhW9SxY
3)    Numbers 16
4)    Numbers 19:1-14
5)      Schneerson, Rabbi MM, Likutei Sichos, Vol 4, p.1058
6)      Rashi
7)      Numbers 19:2
8)      Bamidbar Zuta, from a manuscript, cited in Kasher, R. Menachem, Torah Shlaima, vol. 11, p. 25
9)      Midrash Agadah cited in Kasher, R. Menachem, Torah Shlaima, vol. 11, p. 23
10)      Numbers 19:5
11)      Ralbag, p.97 Mosad Rav Kook edition
12)      Sifrei Zuta,
13)      Ralbag, based on Tosefta
14)      Ralbag

Messiah, Facts, & Hope: a Jew’s conversation with Shia Muslims. Shlach

Photos by Ahsan Nader Photography
https://www.facebook.com/AhsanNaderphotography

There is a difference between the presentation of ‘facts’ and the truth.

Standing behind the Messiah’s cream and green birthday cake at a Shia Muslim Mosque in Sydney, University student, Ali Safdari, questioned the prospects for a redeemer being able to pull humanity out of the ‘unjust mess’ it is in. He cited several facts to support this bleak assessment, all of them true. He put a challenge to a range of speakers from different faith perspectives to explain the “promised redeemer” in this context.

One speaker, Shaykh Hamid Waqa, a Shia Muslim Sheikh with an American accent, a Christian father and Jewish mother who studied in Iran, explored the range of perspectives within Shia Islam toward the Madhi-Messiah. Some were content to do nothing more than pray for the redeemer. Others on the very fringe believed they could force the hand of God by increasing injustice in the world thereby hastening the Madhi’s arrival. A third group believed that increasing justice will hasten his coming. He also talked about the importance of being ready for the Mahdi and the risk of people simply not being prepared to follow the redeemer when he appeared.

The range of views about the Messiah or Moshiach in Judaism is interesting to consider alongside those of Shia Muslims. I was raised within the Chabad movement which has put a huge emphasis on hastening the coming of the Messiah and preparing for it, actively and urgently (1). Despite our tradition teaching that the Messiah might come in a generation that is completely guilty, I have never heard anyone suggest this was a good way to hurry things along. On the other hand, many Jews are certainly more comfortable with a passive stance toward the Messiah.
 
At my brother’s wedding on the Sunday prior to the interfaith panel, I chatted with my father’s cousin. He made the argument that the Torah’s complete silence on the Moshiach and  afterlife, both of which are not mentioned at all in the Torah itself, is tied to Judaism’s focus on justice in this world and our life on earth. We are not content to allow injustice to fester because we hope for a better world in the afterlife or when the redeemer comes. It is our task to make things right, here and now. 

The Talmud relates: When Rav Zeira happened upon scholars who were engaged [in calculating the date of Moshiach's arrival], he told them, "I beg you! Do not postpone it ... for it has been taught, 'Three things come when the mind is occupied otherwise: Moshiach ...(2)"  Being too focused on Moshiach, according to this teaching is not appropriate.

For me the Messiah is not just about the future but about living with hope right now that the world as it is at present is not final. That a world in which the strong does not harm the weak, represented by the image of the “lion lying with the lamb” (3) is possible. I suggested that although there is some value in young people “maintaining the rage” and being dissatisfied with the world as it is, it is important to see the half of the cup that is full. The relative freedom we enjoy to express whatever views we hold and follow our religious beliefs and the realization, at least in part, of Martin Luther King Jnr’s of dream with the US having a black president that was unimaginable only a half century ago.

Hope can be difficult. One of the great insights from the East is not to be too attached to one’s hopes and as a result one is seldom very disappointed. Yet, Judaism demands hope. The Spies Moses sent to report on the Promised Land to the freed slaves in the desert sinned with one dispiriting word, the word “but” (4). Although they brought back lots of accurate information, they also included one hope destroying word. “We came to the land to which you sent us, and it is flowing with milk and honey, and this is its fruit. But, the people who inhabit the land are mighty, and the cities are extremely huge and fortified, and there we saw even the offspring of the giant” (5). They also sequenced their “facts” in such a way that the positive part was first and out of the way so that the ‘bottom line’ appeared to be the hopelessness of the situation (6).

I concluded my talk at the Mosque with the following reflection: “The emphasis on the Moshiach motivated a lot of activism. I can confidently say that if not for the Jewish belief in the Moshiach, I would not be standing here today. I would not have gone out of my comfort zone in New York with my family to move to Australia. I certainly would not have founded an organization called Together For Humanity that brings together Muslims, Christians and Jews to teach young people about respect for differences. It is only because we were raised to hasten the coming of the Messiah. It is because I had learned to refuse to accept a flawed world that I was driven to meet all of you. For this I am very grateful”. 

Notes:
(1) The Talmud (Shabbat 31a), states that one of the four questions a soul is asked when facing the Heavenly Court is: "Did you yearn for the Salvation?" The Talmud states: When they bring a person for judgment, they will ask: "Did you deal faithfully in business? Did you set aside fixed times for Torah? Did you try to have children? Did you anticipate the redemption?"
(2) Talmud, Sanhedrin 97a
(3) Isaiah 11:6
(4) Rabbi Yitzchak Arama, in Akedat Yitzchak, cited in Lebovitz, N., New Studies in Bamidbar, Abarbanel goes further in his analysis of the Hebrew word, “Efes” אפס that can be translated as “but”, but can also be translated as “nothing” and indicating lack or cancelation such as “is there no more, a man?” in Samuel II 9:3, or “there is no more money” in Genesis 47:15. The spies are therefore saying that everything good they said about the land “is as it if as never been, it is all nothing and emptiness because the nation is strong”
(5) Numbers 13: 27-28
(6) Abarbanel, he points out that the sequence was the opposite of their terms of reference given to them by Moses, in which the first two questions were about the people of the land and only then did he ask two questions about the produce of the land (numbers 13:18-20), but in the answer these are reversed for effect. 


 

Speech to my brother and his bride at their wedding, Intra-faith diversity shining together Bahalotecha

My brother Sam got married last Sunday. I was privileged to be the officiating Rabbi. Sam has chosen an alternative path to the Hasidic and orthodox one followed by our parents and his siblings. Sam’s wedding was a blend of orthodox tradition, light even irreverent humour, Hasidic and more contemporary music and dances, gender-segregated and mixed seating tables. Here is an edited version of my speech to my brother.

Sometime in the 1970s before Dora or Sam were born, an angel thought about these two wonderful souls and paired them, Dora for Sam and Sam for Dora (1). Clever little angel, that one, I think.  I am sure anyone who has had the joy of seeing both of you together would agree. 

Today you stand here, as two half souls separated before birth only to be reunited today.

Here is some inspiration from the Torah reading this week. A candelabra with 7 branches representing diversity spread out in many different directions, but the light all shines in one direction toward the holy ark(2) that contained the tablets with the ten commandments and was covered by two cherubs looking lovingly at each other. Dora and Sam, you are very different people in perhaps somewhat superficial ways. Dora was raised in a home with a lot of music and song. I was delighted to meet your parents and to learn that caring is evident in both your parents working lives. Your dad showed caring for his staff’s happiness and wellbeing at work and your mom for her little clients’ motivation and development. Good, grounded people who have given you a firm foundation for the caring, warm, loving, sensible person that you are. I could say a lot about you Dora, but perhaps my little niece S. articulated it better than I can with her tight hug when she saw you on Thursday.

Sam was raised in the Kastel household, a world away. Yet, you can scratch beneath the surface, look beyond the long black coat and the particular Niggun-combinations our father would sing at the Shabbat table. What we got was a compelling sense of right and wrong from our mother that continues to resonate in your life as an individual, a comforter of the dying and Rabbi of your conservative Staten Island congregation. Like your father, every day of your life is dedicated to service.

Together, both of you, as your parents before you are essentially glowing with similar compassionate loving light. And yet, neither of you are your parents and as much as they are all worthy of admiration, that is still a good thing. You are also not each other. Challenging and supporting each other because you are different.

When the first man and first woman were created, our sages tell us they were created back to back (3). Eve was not Adam’s rib, but one side of this double human. Only as two separate people could they look into each other’s eyes, see each other’s faces and as the primary Kabbalistic text, Zohar puts it, “to receive light in light, face in face” (4).       

There is another aspect in this as well.  In the Torah it states that Eve would be an Ezer Knegdo, a Help Opposite. According to Rabbi Shlomo Riskin, this means that you will need to allow each other to occasionally stand opposite, to feel opposite, to think opposite. A life’s partner must be able to say no if that is necessary—the ‘kenegdo’ part—moreover, the lips may be moving one way, but the heart may be saying no silently until the heart breaks from the weight of the "nos." The couple must be able to correct each other, complement each other.  You are good at this. This is a great strength.

I wish you abundance of happiness together, everything you need and a lot of what you want. I love both of you as do so many of the people privileged to know you. Keep being you, imperfect, but beautiful in your distinct ways. It is wonderful to see you fulfilling your destiny. Mazal Tov!

This blog post is dedicated to another young man with the same Hebrew name as my brother, Shmuel Ben Rina, who died this week and to his loving partner C, and their two young children. He was planning his wedding too. May the memories of his distinct light and spirit bring some comfort to his Mother, father, partner and children.

Notes:

(1)    The Talmud Sota 2a states: "...forty days before the creation of a child, a heavenly voice calls forth and proclaims; 'So and so's daughter for so and so's son bride and groom'...."(2)    Ralbag(3)    Rashi: quoting Midrash. The word usually translated as a rib צלע, can also be translated a “a side”, as in God made of Eve out of one of Adam’s sides.(4)    Zohar part 3, 44b

Disability Dignity and Judaism - Emor

 Sara Hendren and Brian Glenney co-founded the
Accessible Icon project, designing the new icon
 to display an active, engaged image with focus
 on the person with disability.
http://www.accessibleicon.org/

"If someone is blind, has a sunken nose, long eyebrows, or crushed testicles among other “blemishes”, the Torah states that they are disqualified from certain religious worship (1)in the temple’. We have not had a temple for 2000 years so this particular law is theoretical, but I still felt uncomfortable when I read this in the Torah portion last week. In this post I explore how Judaism deals with disability.

The Torah is explicit about overt disrespect toward and unfair treatment of the blind and deaf. “Do not curse the deaf” and “do not put a stumbling block before the blind (2)”. The Torah, more generally, forbids discrimination against anyone with less power than others, such as the stranger (3), and this surely should apply to many people with disabilities. Included in the commandment to love others like ourselves is the requirement that we must treat others as we would want to be treated, that is to be included, and to have one’s dignity and wishes considered by others.

We must avoid hurtful speculation about links between physical conditions and virtue. Unfortunately, one commentator suggests that Aaron could not possibly have any physical blemishes at any time in his life because “he was holy to God, all of him beautiful, there will not be a blemish in him (4)”. What does that imply about people with disabilities?! Another commentary states that “One who accepts bribes will eventually become blind… one that has an “arrogant foot” will eventually come to have a broken leg… (5)” However, our tradition insists that we cannot understand why things happen in this world, e.g. neither the “suffering of the righteous, nor the tranquillity of the wicked (6)” because the ways of God are a mystery.  In the Torah at least three of our heroes had imperfections.  Both Isaac and Jacob were affected by degrees of blindness late in their lives, while Moses had a speech impediment. None of these conditions are presented as punishment!

Representations (7) are an important part of positioning people in terms how others relate to them. Dr. Ruth Calderon offers an insightful analysis of the contrasting attitudes toward disability in the Babylonian and Jerusalem Talmuds (8). Calderon discusses the representations of blind people in the Jerusalem Talmud. In a story, the blind person is anonymous and his character remains static rather than develops. He is not the hero of the story. He is merely there to support the main sighted character whose name we are told, Rabbi Hoshia the great. This Rabbi Hoshia would normally have a daily meal with his child’s blind teacher, but one day he fails to invite the blind man because “he didn’t want to embarrass him(9)”. He apologises to the blind man who prays for him.  The blind person is the weak party who the sighted person must be careful not to hurt.  

Calderon contrasts this kind of representation with the powerful vibrant characters we encounter in the Babylonian Talmud.  One of these is Rav Sheshes. “Rav Sheshes was blind. Everyone was going to see the king. He went with them. He met up with a Sadducee, who said "we take intact vessels to draw water” (and not broken vessels! Why did you come? You will not see anything’(10)). Rav Sheshes replied: You will see that I know more than you do. A throng passed. When it became noisy, the Sadducee said "the king is coming!" Rav Sheshes said, he is not coming [yet]. A second throng passed. When it became noisy, the Sadducee said "the king is coming!" Rav Sheshes said, he is not coming. A third throng passed. When it became quiet, Rav Sheshes said "surely, now the king is coming!" The Sadducee: How do you know? Rav Sheshes replied: Earthly kings are a semblance of the Heavenly King… When the king came, Rav Sheshes blessed him. The Sadducee (continued to mock him): Do you bless someone you do not see?!  What happened to the Sadducee?... Rav Sheshes put his eyes on him and he became a pile of bones (11)”.

These differences in the kinds of stories that are told are consistent with approaches to participation. While in the Babylonian Talmud Rav Sheshes is a full participant in many debates and is regarded as a significant authority, his very credibility is questioned in the Jerusalem Talmud. The argument put forward is that for someone’s teachings to be credible they need to be a sighted person so that they can see the person from whom they hear the tradition(12)”.

Associations made between physical perfection or ‘blemishes’ and degrees of worth are of concern to me. One approach locates the problem with the blemished priest, in the man himself. The exclusion of a blemished priest is justified by comparing it to the situation in which someone would not dare to offer damaged goods as a gift to a political figure one was seeking to ingratiate oneself with (13).  Another approach locates the problem in the (flawed) inclination of people who see the priest in his service to react with “disgust” toward the worship itself if it is carried out by someone with a deformity (14). The former approach I think devalues the person with a physical variation; the latter is a concession to human superficiality. The subjective approach is used to create a dispensation that would permit a priest who is blind in one eye whose community is familiar with him to perform the priestly blessings because they are unlikely to be distracted by his condition (15).

While text is important, the most important question is what is happening in practice. At a conference to grapple with challenges of people with disabilities relating to Judaism (16), questions were raised about access to places of worship and support for people with disabilities who wish to perform rituals. One of my most cherished moment of my Rabbinical career was the Bat Mitzvah of someone I will call Cara. She was the first person with cerebral palsy I ever met. Her mother approached me about Cara having the opportunity to participate in a Bat Mitzvah ceremony just as her twin sister was planning to. I said yes, we would do it. Thanks to a young teacher whose name I don’t remember and Rebbetzin Fruma Schapiro of Chabad House North Shore, Cara was able to celebrate and feel no less than her twin. Cara’s demeanour communicated “Dignity and pride”. As Jews, commanded to treat others as we wish for ourselves, we dare not settle for anything less.

For further discussion of this issue, See https://jewishdisabilityunite.wordpress.com/2010/01/28/disability-and-judaism-societys-influence-on-halacha-rabbi-dr-benjamin-lau/ which discusses changes in the reality of deaf people for example and how this impacts Halacha about their status and degree of inclusion, the inclusion of blind people in being called to the Torah by overcoming technical/legal concerns,  and more.

Notes:

1)       Leviticus 21:17-23

2)       Leviticus 19:14

3)       This commandment is repeated several times in the Torah, the link to power is made by Ibn Ezra on Exodus, Sidra Mishpatim

4)       Ramban on Leviticus 21:17

5)        Klei Yakar, on Leviticus 21:17

6)       Pirkey Avot 4:15

7)       Hall, S. (1979)  in Representation: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices

8)       Calderon, R, Doctoral Thesis, send to me in a private message via Facebook 1/05/2014

9)       , ירושלמי פאה פ"ח ה"חJerusalem Talmud, Peah, Chapter 8, Halacha 8, cited in Calderon, 

10)    Translation and explanation mostly from http://www.dafyomi.co.il/berachos/points/br-ps-058.htm

11)    Babylonian Talmud, Berachot, 58a, בבלי ברכות פרק ט' נח' ע"א

12)    ירושלמי שבת פ"א ה"ב ג"א Jerusalem Talmud, Shabbat Chapter 1, Halacha 2, cited in Calderon

13)    Rashi, referring to Malachi 1

14)    Abarbanel

15)    Maimonides, Yad Hachazakah, book of Love, Laws of Prayers and Lifting the Hands 15:2, Furthermore, based on the custom today is for the community not to look at the Cohanim/Priests as they perform the blessings there is no risk of distraction based on blemishes and therefore blemishes should not be a reason to exclude anyone according to Shulchan Aruch Orach Chayim 128. See also, Lau, Rabbi https://jewishdisabilityunite.wordpress.com/2010/01/28/disability-and-judaism-societys-influence-on-halacha-rabbi-dr-benjamin-lau/ who brings further sources regarding this law and others regarding the blind and deaf

16)    http://forward.com/news/170300/what-happens-when-jewish-law-hampers-the-disabled/

Thou Shalt Not Hate…! Emotions on command? Kedoshim

Photo by Anita Sarkeesian, https://www.flickr.com/photos/puenteaz/4839483755/
reprinted under Creative Commons License Attribution-NoDerivs 2.0 Generic
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/2.0/

I feel unmotivated, resentment, anger and even despair sometimes.  ‘I shouldn’t feel like this’ is one thought that appears in my mind. I should be positive and forgiving (toward everyone other than me) is one approach.  But surely that is unreasonable. I feel how I feel and I can’t change it. 

The Torah’s prohibition against hate (1) suggests otherwise.  Clearly, ‘to hate is a choice!’ is implied.

Perhaps, it is not. One scholar reinterpreted the commandment against hate to mean something more concrete, “do not speak smoothly with your mouth” while you hate them in your hearts (2). This fits a pattern of mundane applications of emotional commandments. Love your fellow like yourself is applied as an instruction about not marrying without first seeing your prospective spouse because of the risk that eventually the husband might see something ugly and this would cause her to be despised  (3). Another application is not to do to your fellow what you dislike (4). I think there is great wisdom in this approach because it recognises that in a sense our emotions are involuntary responses to the world around us and that sometimes we cannot be instructed what to feel. Similarly, many would argue that people cannot be told what they are allowed to think. 

On the other hand, the Torah suggests, that our feelings are significantly influenced by our thoughts (5).  We are therefore legitimately called to guide our thoughts to be loving rather than hateful. 

Here is an example. I flew on a fairly empty flight from Dallas to Sydney recently. There was a devout Arabic Muslim couple with a baby seated in the row of four seats in front of me.  They sat on either end of the row. I heard a baby crying for a while and I noticed that the husband/father remained sitting comfortably in his seat, presumably leaving his wife to deal with the baby by herself. I had heard from women in the Arabic Muslim community about some men who are sexist. Immediately a judgmental thought popped into my mind. What is wrong with this man? Why is he so selfish and chauvinistic? Then I noticed the thoughts in my mind and asked myself if I was stereotyping? “I don’t know this man!”. I then checked and found that his baby was actually sleeping soundly on the seats between them and the crying was coming from someone else’s baby. 

A great rationalist commentator on the Torah, Ibn Ezra, states that there are three types of commandments including one that governs what people think in their minds (6). He argues that through our thinking, we can control the impulse to covet another man’s wife. He argues that just as a villager would not covet a princess regardless of how beautiful she is because he knows this is not realistic. Surely then what God has forbidden to one person because it is the possession of another should be even less likely to arouse envy. A great theory, but if this was the case pedophilia would never involve religious people, tragically it does.  

Both approaches reflect part of the truth. It is true that we are commanded to love and think good thoughts and we can some of the time. It is equally true that this is impractical at least some of the time. Self-compassion is in order, accepting that some circumstances will reasonably elicit emotions like anger, or fear and this is ok. Yet we aspire to comply with the commands not to hate but to love instead, by being aware of our thoughts (7) and choosing to think other thoughts, sometimes.

1)    Leviticus 19:17, I acknowledge that this law is specifically when the potential hatred is directed against “your brother, which is disappointing for me because I would love to see a broader directive against all hate
2)    Targum Yonatan Ben Uziel
3)    Talmud, Kidushin 41a
4)    Lekach Tov, cited in Torah Shlaima on Leviticus 1918, p.69
5)    Maimonides, Yad Hachazah, Laws of Teshuva 10:6, Tanya
6)    Ibn Ezra on Exodus 20:2, also cited in Lebovitz, N. New Studies in Vayikra, p. 344
7)    My coleauge Donna Jacobs Sife has taught be that to counter prejudice in ourselves requires vigilance to our thoughts. Thank you Donna for this valuable insight.

Managing Lust and Shaking a woman’s hand/a Cross-Cultural/Interfaith Perspective – Tazria

Julie Bishop in Iran, image from news.com.au

Julie Bishop is Australia’s tough talking foreign minister and a conservative politician who had personally taken on Putin and got what she wanted (1).  She disappointed some of her fans this week when she arguably ‘caved in to the religious demands of the Iranians’ by covering her head. Different ways of dealing with lust certainly stir the passions. In this post I explore my traditions’ teachings on this issue and explore how one might deal ethically with these differences. 

Judaism is quite concerned with managing lust. Jewish men are commanded to place strings on the corners of our garments to prevent us straying after “our eyes and hearts” (2).  Jewish women as well as men are instructed to avoid physical contact between people of opposite genders except close family members.  A woman putting out her hand to shake the hand of a strict Jew or Muslim might find her hand left awkwardly hanging because of these kinds of laws.  Should she? Shouldn’t a man living in the west just shake her hand?

From a cross-cultural ethical perspective, a useful question is whether the requirement from either party is a preference or a need. For some religious Jewish men and women, the prohibition against physical contact with the opposite gender is an absolute prohibition (3). To insist that he or she violate their divine law is to demand an act against their conscience.  On the other hand the religious person needs to be aware that their reality is meaningless to someone outside their own religious culture. Their refusal to shake hands will be experienced as sexist and hurtful and as unreal as the monsters children see under their beds,  and in the case of a black man and a Jewish woman, even as  racist.

One approach within Jewish law is to consider the context of the original prohibition: the avoidance of sexual touch or at least affectionate touch (4), which is completely different to the meaning of a modern handshake. A second argument is that to avoid causing embarrassment to someone who puts out their hand and it is left hanging should be the main consideration (5).  This second argument is one I have also heard from Muslim Imams who would choose to shake hands with a woman for this reason.

Yet, for the very religious Jew who follows the view that the cross-gender handshake is forbidden, the Torah is the primary context. While sex within marriage is a considered a virtuous deed in the Torah, there is a concern about the corrupting potential of lust and the call for men to “sanctify themselves” during sex (6). Judaism is also concerned that a man might focus on satisfying himself rather than on his wife’s pleasure. To address this, although not politically correct, the Talmud promises men who ensure that their wives climax first, the reward of male sons (7).   This promise is based on the verse in the Torah: “a woman, when she “seeds”, she will give birth to a male (8)”.  Loving appropriate sex that is “sanctified and tempered by mutual respect”, is contrasted with self-centred and dominant sexuality. The quest for the former and negation of the latter is linked to the symbolism of Circumcision (9).  

Of course there are various ways in which to love and have respectful sexual practices. Strict religion has no monopoly on ethical sex. On the other hand, the strict orthodox Jewish approach does have some benefits. Young men and women are free from being pressured into having sex and all that can come with it (10), before they are ready. Some even escape body image preoccupations until they are in their 20s and are ready to marry. Fidelity in marriage is high, adultery and sexual harassment is low.

Ultimately, what is required is cross-cultural respect. Shaking a woman’s hand when it is offered is one way some religious people show respect by prioritising her dignity. A non-religious man showing understanding for a religious woman who won’t shake his hand is another. Julie Bishop putting on a head scarf also showed respect for people with a different way of being. That is a strength.

Notes
1)     http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/foreign-minister-julie-bishop-secures-guarantee-from-russian-president-vladimir-putin-to-allow-investigators-to-visit-mh17-crash-site-again/story-fni0cx12-1227094454333
2)    Numbers 15:39
3)    http://revach.net/halacha/tshuvos/Rav-Menashe-Klein-Shaking-Hands-With-Women-Permissible-on-the-Grounds-of-Malbim-Pnei-Chaveiro-and-Derech-Chiba/2443 “In Mishneh Halachos (6:223)  Rav Menashe Klein is asked about shaking hands with a woman who offers her hand and it would be embarrassing to her if rebuffed.  Rav Menashe Klein states: “that this is absolutely not a heter” (excemption, or grounds for special dispensation).  “Not embarrassing someone is not a sufficient reason to transgress "Abizrahu D'Giluy Arayos"; an ancillary prohibition to illicit relationships…”
4)    This distinction is discussed in various contexts. The Shach (Sifsei Cohen – Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah 157:10 states that Maimonides only stated (in a discussion of the prohibition of contact between the sexes) “when one does hugging and kissing, in a way that is sexually affectionate”. However the counter argument by Rav Menashe Klein is that the case of the Shach is a Doctor taking the pulse of a woman.  Since it is in the course of carrying out a professional duty the Shach is lenient. This might not apply to social gestures where there isn’t that hyper focus of the professional such as a doctor with a patient. A question was asked of Rabbi Moshe Feinstein about travelling on the New York subway in which men and women come into contact with each other on the crowded trains. He explains that the prohibition of physical contact discussed by Maimonides is “only in the way of desire/lust”. (Igros Moshe, Even Haezer, vol. 2, 14). Rabbi Feinstein does not apply that distinction to handshaking, which he suggests is forbidden although he acknowledges that Rabbi Yaakov Gershon Burstein (in Igros Moshe, Even Ezer, vol 1, 56) “who said that he saw God fearing (people) that are lenient about this, one can judge favourably that they rely on the principle that if she puts out her hand to them that they would not be doing it in a way of affection and lust, but it is difficult to rely on this… this is not a contradiction to what I permitted for people to travel on buses, because in that case there is not, for anyone, any situation of affection” (Igros Moshe, Even Haezer, vol. 4, 32:9). A detailed argument to permit handshaking is made by Henkin, Rabbi Y, http://www.hakirah.org/Vol%204%20Henkin.pdf
5)    Sherlo, Rabbi, Y., http://www.ypt.co.il/show.asp?id=40541 http://matzav.com/hesder-rabbi-men-may-shake-womens-hand  Rabbi Cherlow is Rosh Yeshiva of Yeshivat Hesder Petach Tikva. One blogger claimed that “Among many, Rav Yaakov Kaminetsky has been quoted as saying that one should shake hands and not embarrass others at the expense of one’s Chumros (stringencies)”.  http://haemtza.blogspot.com.au/2008/02/platonic-touch-between-sexes.html a second hand account stated: “Rav Schachter - conflicting reports. A friend of mine saw him shake a woman's hand in the bank, and on being asked about it he explained that it wasn't possible to explain and wasn't derech chiba and he'll probably never even see her again. I have heard similar statements from him. I have also heard from him that it should be avoided if possible to do so in a polite way, which seems fair…(in terms of the first story) I can vouch to its authenticity, since my chavrusa was there, although that doesn't help the rest of you” http://www.hashkafah.com/index.php?/topic/6410-shaking-hands/page-4
6)    Talmud Shavuot 18b, this is also related to the verse in Leviticus 12:2, but linked to its proximity to a the commandments about sanctifying oneself “you shall sanctify yourselves and you should be holy because I am holy” found 4 verses earlier in Leviticus 11:44
7)    Talmud Nida 31a
8)    Leviticus 12:2
9)    Sacks Bris Millah, http://www.rabbisacks.org/the-circumcision-of-desire-tazria-metsora-5775/, circumcision is also discussed at the beginning of our Torah reading this week, Tazria, Leviticus 12:3
10)    http://www.smh.com.au/comment/how-online-porn-is-warping-the-behaviour-of-boys-with-girls-20150424-1ms7jw.html

Closing the Empathy Gap with the “unlike”

Last night I had a powerful experience that relates to the issues of discrimination and compassion for people who seem different to “us”.

At a skilfully facilitated session (1) led by Shoshana Faire and Chantelle Ogilvie-Eliss (and initiated by the recently departed social justice champion, Elizabeth Ban) we were asked to tell as personal story that relates to one of four values themes.

 I told a story about something that didn’t happen. I didn’t show up at a birthday party on a boat for my non-Jewish friend Ray. Ray had been a good friend, he helped me when I had car trouble, he was loving and generous in his attitudes and words about me personally and he also volunteered huge amounts of time for a project we did together. Yet, I didn’t attend his special celebration. Perhaps I didn’t forget. It might have never fully registered in the first place. I am ashamed to say it, but at that early stage of my cross-cultural interfaith journey, I think I had a deep mental block about personal friendship with a “goy”. 

The six men and women I sat with shared anecdotes about freedom and cross cultural acceptance. Then we heard from a Hazara boy who recently finished school and a Tamil schoolgirl of 17 about their values, like charity, compassion, caring for others, independent thinking, fun playing volley ball and education. We really connected! I certainly care more now about the plight of asylums seekers subjected to cruel policies in Australia, than I cared yesterday before this session.

I think the power of the experience last night relates to two ideas discussed in the academic literature. One is that “research indicates a strong inverse relationship between levels of prejudice and empathy (2) and suggests that “invoking empathy can reduce racism levels (3) ”. This research found that empathy is more significant than information in countering prejudice. Yet, another scholar argues “We have more empathy for those we see as (being) like us”. In one research experiment “when viewing pictures of faces, people showed more empathetic responses, as measured by physiology and self report, for members of the same ethnic group” and that”empathy leads to helping only in cases when the  person in need is a member of the in‐group (4)”. This sounds like a ‘catch 22’, empathy is key to countering prejudice, yet empathy is least likely in cross-cultural situations, unless of course one can come to see “them” as one of “us”. This was certainly achieved last night. 

It is appropriate that the Torah reading this week deals with the un-kosher bird, called the stork in English but “Hasida” in Hebrew. There is a belief in Judaism that non-Kosher animals have bad characteristics, yet the name of the stork, “Hasida” is related to the word “Hesed” which means kindness. Yet our traditions teaches us that the stork is only “kind to its friends”, or its “own kind” (5). My prayer is that more Australians can extend our tradition of mateship to our fellow humans seeking safety and a better life on our shores. Let us all realise that “they” are “us”.

Notes:
1)    The event was hosted by the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies in collaboration with the Sydney Alliance
2)    Batterham, D. (2001). Modern racism, reconciliation and attributions for disadvantage: A role for empathy and false beliefs? cited Pedersen, A., Walker, I., & Wise, M. (2005). Talk Does Not Cook Rice: Beyond anti-racism rhetoric to strategies for social action. Australian Psychologist, 40, 20-30.
3)    Finlay & Stephan, 2000 Finlay, K. A., & Stephan, W. G. (2000). Improving intergroup relations: The effects of empathy on racial attitudes, cited in Pedersen
4)    Prinz, J, Is Empathy Necessary For Morality, http://subcortex.com/IsEmpathyNecessaryForMoralityPrinz.pdf accessed 14.04.2015
5)    This theme is further developed in my post http://torahforsociallyawarehasid.blogspot.com.au/2012/04/flawed-idealists-hasidim-prejudice.html