Rabbi Landsberg's Blog

Mon Dieu!

Though I am quick to say that the Jerusalem and Babylon of today are Israel and North America, I was fascinated to read this article in Ha'aretz reviewing the impact in French Jewish circles of Nicolas Sarkozy's election as President.  The article relates how many French Jews (though not the inimitable Bernard-Henri Levy) have re-assessed their traditional relationship with the left in France and have opted instead for Sarkozy.  One of the driving reasons has been Sarkozy's strong response to the rioting in the banlieus (the drab outer suburbs where many North African Muslim immigrants live - see this article here for background on the riots).  French Jews' fears over rising antisemitism proved tragically not unfounded after the murder of Ilan Halimi. 

Subscribe!

Subscribe, originally uploaded by hiOakie.

I got my inhouse technical support (thanks, Adam!) to add a feature to my blog which allows you to receive new posts by email. Just enter your email address in the subscription box on the top right hand corner, press "Subscribe" and follow the instructions. You will receive new posts in your mailbox.

Interfaith or Intercitizen Dialogue? Redux

The week before last I was quite honoured to receive a comment on my post Interfaith or Intercitizen Dialogue by Daniel Septimus, the editor of the invaluable resource MyJewishLearning.com. For those of you who read my blog regularly, you will know that I am an enormous fan of this site. Daniel was recently interviewed in Haaretz newspaper. (Read it here).

To do credit to his comment I am going to place it here for those who may not get to the comments section.

First off, Rabbi Landsberg, thank you for reading Mixed Multitudes and contributing to this conversation.

But I'd like to clarify my view: Unfortunately, my position on interfaith (and interdenominational) relations derives from my encounter with the negative ramifications of triumphalist theologies.

That is, I've seen how the devaluation of other people's beliefs leads to the devaluation of them as people. Similarly, as I mentioned in my blog post, Yitz Greenberg's interfaith work arose out of his confrontation with the Holocaust and the ways in which Christian theology facilitated it.

My theology isn't so complicated. It's rooted in a desire to have people be nice to each other, respect each other, or at least not kill each other. I have such a problem with Soloveichik's approach because I think when we insist that we have a better truth, we eventually believe we are better people.

In times of crisis or stress, this can lead to scary things.

I gave  much thought to Daniel's words. Here is my response:

Dear Daniel,

First of all I want to thank you for your comment and to tell you how much I am enjoying your guest post on Rosner's blog over at Haaretz.

I understand your deep concerns about the ramifications of triumphal theologies.  However, I believe that the theological aspect is--almost counter-intuitively--not the essential element of the issues you raise as being of concern; a glance at modern history (even one account of the gulag) can attest to the ravages of secular triumphalism as well.  Nazism and fascism thrived for more than religious reasons.  There are those who have argued (quite compellingly, I think) that it was the lack of classical religious restraint--expressed even within a traditional Christian triumphalism--that was a necessary element in allowing the Shoah to occur.

You recommend a prescription to end the willful destruction of the physical and spiritual existence of others whose beliefs we either dispute or vehemently oppose:  that of "defanging" triumphal religious belief structures.  The mysteries of human beings, however, are such that a person's religious beliefs--no less the Hindu than the Evangelical--do not define his/her willingness to participate in the desecration of another.  It was often the Catholic who protected the Jew--not due to a recognition of an ultimate truth held only by the Jew--but out of a strong, internally coherent religious conviction that does not excuse murder.  I need not grant any validity whatsoever to unique truths claimed by others; my Jewish understanding is that I am not allowed to murder, even the idolater.

Therefore, I begin at a different starting place than you, though we are striving toward the same goal of a less destructive world.  I begin with the public square; it is here (rather than in the realm of theology) that triumphalism is the most fundamentally threatening.  A society with a strong liberal political culture (such as the U.S.) is the best safeguard against unrestrained excesses of dangerous religious beliefs.  I do not see a necessary correlation between political and religious liberalism, and thus my relationship with my fellow citizen is not defined by any particular religious belief they may hold (or by their professing no religious belief at all).

My interaction with another Jew, here or in Israel, is determined by a willing adherence to the tenets of liberal society (in a classic political sense, not in contradistinction to a political conservative).  I would be closer to Meir Soloveitchik if he would support a liberal democratic Israel over a theocratic one, than I would be to a secular Israeli who supported Avigdor Lieberman (read this if you are skeptical).

Hope this clarifies where I stand.  I appreciate any further comments you might wish to share.

Kol tuv,

Debra

Happy Yom Yerushalayim (Jerusalem Day)

The market on Friday, originally uploaded by ellla.

The Jerusalem Market before Shabbat....

It was said that everything that Shammai the Elder ate during his entire life was eaten in honor of Shabbat. If he came across a good piece of meat, he would say: "This will be for Shabbat." If he then came across a better piece of meat, he would set it aside for Shabbat and use the inferior piece to satisfy his weekday hunger. In this manner, even the food that Shammai ate during the week was eaten in honor of Shabbat!

-Talmud, Tractate Beitza

The Emperor asked Rabbi Joshua b. Hananniah: “ What gives your Sabbath meat such an aroma?” He replied: “We have a spice called Shabbat, which is put in the cooking of the meat, and this gives it its aroma. The Emperor said: “ Give me some of this spice.” He replied: “ For him who keeps Shabbat the spice works; for him who does not keep it, it does not work.”

-Talmud, Shabbat 119a

Hatikva goes Hip Hop

I caught this a little late for Yom Ha'atzmaut, nonetheless, here is the hip hop version of Hatikva by Dudu Fischer and the Israeli duo the Human Beat Box. Generally I find anthems a tad bombastic, but this doesn't prevent me from pausing and taking stock when I hear this one.  Samuel Johnson says that patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel, yet there are coarser and more dishonest emotions then a non chauvnistic patriotism.  Scroll down the page and press play. Find if here.

Someone To Run With

Adam and I rarely get to the movies since the children were born, but yesterday we had the distinct pleasure of catching a movie at the Toronto Jewish Film Festival .  It was the adaption of David Grossman's novel, Someone to Run With.  Not having read the original novel, I relished the absence of any portentous allusions to "The Conflict" in the screen version.   It was simply a story--a dark, compelling teenage fairy tale. 

Coincidentally, in yesterday's New York Times, Grossman writes about the narrowing space between private and public in Israel and elsewhere.  This has an added poignancy in that he buried his son Uri in last summer's second Lebanon war (you can read the eulogy here).

David Grossman writes

And I write the life of my land, Israel. The land that is tortured, frantic, drugged by an overdose of history, excessive emotions that cannot be contained by any human capacity, extreme events and tragedies, enormous anxiety and paralyzing sobriety, too much memory, failed hopes and the circumstances of a fate unique among all nations: an existence that sometimes appears to be a story of mythical proportions, a story that is “larger than life” to the point that something seems to have gone wrong with the relation it bears to life itself. A country that has become tired of the possibility of ever leading the standard, normal life of a country among countries, a nation among nations.

He writes with beauty and pain, yet is able to conclude with a nechemta, a word of consolation.  Read his essay here.

Interfaith or Intercitizen Dialogue?

Mixed Multitudes (written by Daniel Septimus) is the house blog of MyJewishLearning.com.  It currently carries a series of posts on the issue of interfaith dialogue. You can read the posts in the order they were posted here and then here.  Rabbi Meir Soloveichik (the great nephew of Rav Soloveichik the esteemed Modern Orthodox theologian) makes his case here (subscription required though you can borrow the edition from the synagogue office) in Commentary magazine.  For those who want the condensed version, I will try to summarize:

Soloveichik argues that in the search for ecumenical understanding, Judaism too readily effaces its claim for ultimate truth relative to other traditions.  Septimus responds that a Jewish theology that does not recognize the truth in other traditions is not grounded in the reality of day to day existence. How can one be respectful to one's neighbors if one does not think that their faith has ultimate value?

I would sidestep both these positions and suggest that my respect for a fellow citizen is grounded in a liberal politics that may be informed by my particular Jewish milieu but ultimately is rooted in the shared compact that all citizen make in liberal democracies.  Put another way, I respect my neighbor not from any belief that his or her religious faith possesses truth, but through the insights of what is necessary to make a civil society function. I accord this respect to people of all faiths or those of none.

The advantage of such a position is that people who hold their faiths dearly do not need to inspect each other's traditions and give it a kind of hekhsher. We live together in mutual respect and tolerance because we want to and need to.  I would be greatly interested in your comments on this.