.jpg)
My Saba (Israeli grandfather) likes to tell stories and parables. One of my favourites is about three men who all lived together in the same village, and wanted to find a mythical well in the midst of a deep, dark forest. They all set out separately, following their own specific route through the forest. Each man succeeded in reaching the well right in the heart of the forest. When they returned to the village, they all told the other villagers about the route which they had taken to get to the mythical well. And the three of them began to argue about whose route to the well was best. They kept arguing about their individual routes, convinced that their way was the only way. They never talked about the well, they only ever argued about the route to get there.
For my Saba this story is a critique of the three Abrahamic faiths. We all trace ourselves back to Abraham, and we all follow the same, one, true God. The problem is that we have, over centuries, been consumed by arguing about the right way to God, rather than talking about what we should be doing in the service of God.
I find it interesting to consider the way we Jews refer to Adonai in the different countries in which we live. Here in England, we call Adonai ‘God’ or ‘Lord’. These terms, or names, are equally fitting in a Church context, we pray to the same God and share the English name we use. In the Muslim countries of the Middle East, the Jewish communities did not use the term ‘God’ or ‘Lord’, they called Adonai, ‘Allah’ – the Arabic name for God. These names are a reminder that while the routes may be different, the destinations are the same.
In this week’s Torah portion, it is easy to get distracted by angels, talking donkeys, and the introduction of the line ‘Mah tovu ohalecha Yaakov, mishkenotecha Yisrael’ – ‘How good are your tents O Jacob, your dwelling places O Israel’ (Numbers 24:5). To do this is to miss the significance of Bilam.
The Israelites are no longer an anonymous mass; they have become a force in the area. And as a result of the Israelite’s military successes, the Moabites have become frightened. Balak, the king of the Moabites, fearing for his people, sends for Bilam to come and ‘curse this people’ (Numbers 22:6). In the ancient world curses were powerful things to be feared and it is no surprise that this is Balak’s first line of offence. What is surprising is the fact that Bilam was not a random, foreign prophet; he was a man who had a relationship, and connection, to Adonai.
Bilam asks God’s permission before agreeing to the Moabite request to curse the Israelites. He asks the Moabites to wait the night and ‘I will bring you word again, as Adonai shall speak to me’ (Numbers 22:8). This is not some random pagan deity, this is Adonai, the God of the Israelites. And Bilam has a conversation with God (Numbers 22:9-12), a conversation which continues throughout the Torah portion.
Ultimately, despite travelling to meet Balak, Bilam is unable to curse the Israelites. It is an interesting story, but the overall narrative is not particularly advanced. I like to think that Bilam, in the midst of our most sacred book, serves as an important reminder that there is more than one way to have a relationship with God. Bilam teaches us that there is more than one way to the source; we do not have a monopoly on the truth. We have our way, but there are others. And we should concentrate on the well, rather than the route to get there.
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Friday, June 18, 2010
World Zionist Congress - Ending with 2 Hatikvahs
So the World Zionist Congress is now over, and it seems that we managed to leave Jerusalem just as the city was being overrun and shut down (the journey to Tel Aviv still took an extra 40+ minutes).
The last day of the WZC is primarily about the resolutions, and the votes which are held on all of them. The resolutions which have passed through the committee stage tend to advance relatively easily through the whole Congress. However, according to the antiquated WZC rules, a person can call for a Votum Separatum, which means that a rejected motion will still be voted on in the whole Congress, with the proposer generally speaking on its behalf at the beginning.
For the group which I had been involved in, considering Zionist Education, there were 2 Votum Separatums on resolutions, which we had voted against. They were important items for us, and we had to make sure that they were defeated again, thankfully we were successful.
During the voting it was clear that the pluralist, liberal parties had a majority of the votes on virtually all matters. And as members of the Orthodox right grew frustrated, towards the end of the session, a number of them invaded the stage to stall proceedings, and to sing Hatikvah. I do not think this was the Zionist dream Herzl had wanted us to pursue. And it provided a very disappointing picture: our way or no way.
The disappointment of this spectacle, was tempered by two young Australian delegates, one from Habonim Dror, and one from Bnei Akiva. They took the stage and explained how they find ways to work together, even when they disagree; providing a wonderful model of pluralism. Hopefully it will be their voices leading our next generation.
This was a disappointing recitation of the Hatikvah - a moment when the song was used to divide, rather than unite. But at the very end of the Congress, when we all stood together to sing Hatikvah, I felt a link back to the first Zionist Congress when this song was adopted as our anthem. It was a powerful moment.
There were highs and lows during the course of the Congress. But despite all of that, there is something very inspiring about being a delegate at the same Congress, which Herzl founded in 1897. A lot has changed over the previous 113 years, much has been achieved and there is much left to do. We need to be worthy heirs to Herzl's vision; advancing the continued development of a pluralist, Jewish, democratic state.
The last day of the WZC is primarily about the resolutions, and the votes which are held on all of them. The resolutions which have passed through the committee stage tend to advance relatively easily through the whole Congress. However, according to the antiquated WZC rules, a person can call for a Votum Separatum, which means that a rejected motion will still be voted on in the whole Congress, with the proposer generally speaking on its behalf at the beginning.
For the group which I had been involved in, considering Zionist Education, there were 2 Votum Separatums on resolutions, which we had voted against. They were important items for us, and we had to make sure that they were defeated again, thankfully we were successful.
During the voting it was clear that the pluralist, liberal parties had a majority of the votes on virtually all matters. And as members of the Orthodox right grew frustrated, towards the end of the session, a number of them invaded the stage to stall proceedings, and to sing Hatikvah. I do not think this was the Zionist dream Herzl had wanted us to pursue. And it provided a very disappointing picture: our way or no way.
The disappointment of this spectacle, was tempered by two young Australian delegates, one from Habonim Dror, and one from Bnei Akiva. They took the stage and explained how they find ways to work together, even when they disagree; providing a wonderful model of pluralism. Hopefully it will be their voices leading our next generation.
This was a disappointing recitation of the Hatikvah - a moment when the song was used to divide, rather than unite. But at the very end of the Congress, when we all stood together to sing Hatikvah, I felt a link back to the first Zionist Congress when this song was adopted as our anthem. It was a powerful moment.
There were highs and lows during the course of the Congress. But despite all of that, there is something very inspiring about being a delegate at the same Congress, which Herzl founded in 1897. A lot has changed over the previous 113 years, much has been achieved and there is much left to do. We need to be worthy heirs to Herzl's vision; advancing the continued development of a pluralist, Jewish, democratic state.
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Two Minutes of Torah: Parashat Chukat (Numbers 20:1-21) - Two strikes and you're out
Being the leader can often be a thankless task. If you are doing a good job no-one thanks you – it’s expected. But if things start going wrong everyone has a gripe and a complaint. One of the things I used to love about flying El Al to Tel Aviv was the spontaneous applause, which always broke out, when the plane touched down on the Israeli tarmac. The pilot and crew had done nothing more than their jobs required, but the passengers wanted to say thank you.
We never hear the Israelites thank Moses for his hard work leading them from slavery to freedom, and bringing God’s presence into the camp. But when something goes wrong they love to complain. Moses is generally a great leader, and he deals well with the people’s complaints, but this week he slips up. It is in the context of his mistake that he truly demonstrates his real greatness and the challenge of being a leader.
Our Torah portion begins with the death of Moses’ sister Miriam (Numbers 20:1). There is no explanation and no period of mourning for her brothers or the community. Instead the people complain (what’s new there?) They come to Moses to moan about the lack of water (the rabbinic Midrash suggests that a well followed Miriam throughout the Israelites’ wanderings in the wilderness). No-one offers Moses any sympathy, or condolences for his loss; he is expected to get on with his job and respond to another Israelite complaint.
Moses pointedly does not utter a single word. He simply goes with Aaron, his brother and fellow mourner, to fall before God at the Tabernacle. And God responds, as always, with a solution for Moses: ‘Take the rod … and speak to the rock before their eyes and it shall give forth water’ (Numbers 20:8).
It is understandable that Moses would be upset. Upset about his sister’s death, upset that he has been unable to mourn, and upset by another Israelite challenge. He voices his frustration calling the people ‘rebels’ (Numbers 20:10) and then he gives expression to his exasperation, striking the rock twice (Numbers 20:11), rather than talking to it. He could be forgiven for this little outburst, for this show of frustration.
He resisted the temptation to lash out at the people. He continued to fulfil his leadership role. He took his frustration out on an inanimate object, striking the rock to give expression to his hurt, anger and exasperation. God had told him to take the rod with him, placing temptation in his path. And significantly water flowed from the rock. But the punishment is immediate; as God tells Moses and Aaron: ‘you shall not bring this people into the land’ (Numbers 20:12).
The punishment appears excessive. Moses has been pushed and prodded by this people ever since Egypt. And although he was probably emotionally unstable after his sister’s death, there is no sympathy. Leaders are held to a higher, almost unattainable, standard, and they suffer when they fall short.
Moses would be forgiven for giving up and resigning on the spot; leaving God and the people alone together. Instead, it is at this moment that Moses marks himself apart as a truly outstanding leader. He does not appeal to God or the people. Instead he sends messengers to the king of Edom (Numbers 20:14) so that the Israelite journey can continue. It is a journey which Moses will not complete, but he puts his personal feelings aside and focuses solely on fulfilling his leadership role.
Although he will not reach the Promised Land, Moses puts the needs of the community above his own. He will not be the pilot who will land in Israel, but he certainly deserves applause.
People can be hungry for leadership, Korach provides our ancient example (Number 16:1-20) and there are too many contemporary ones to name. But Moses demonstrates the truth of the line in Spiderman: ‘with great power comes great responsibility’. In slipping up, Moses demonstrates his own greatness and his exemplary leadership. In his lifetime he never received the peoples’ thanks, but when he died the children of Israel wept for thirty days (Deuteronomy 34:8), and perhaps when he ascended to heaven the angels gave him the round of applause he so richly deserved.
We never hear the Israelites thank Moses for his hard work leading them from slavery to freedom, and bringing God’s presence into the camp. But when something goes wrong they love to complain. Moses is generally a great leader, and he deals well with the people’s complaints, but this week he slips up. It is in the context of his mistake that he truly demonstrates his real greatness and the challenge of being a leader.
Our Torah portion begins with the death of Moses’ sister Miriam (Numbers 20:1). There is no explanation and no period of mourning for her brothers or the community. Instead the people complain (what’s new there?) They come to Moses to moan about the lack of water (the rabbinic Midrash suggests that a well followed Miriam throughout the Israelites’ wanderings in the wilderness). No-one offers Moses any sympathy, or condolences for his loss; he is expected to get on with his job and respond to another Israelite complaint.
Moses pointedly does not utter a single word. He simply goes with Aaron, his brother and fellow mourner, to fall before God at the Tabernacle. And God responds, as always, with a solution for Moses: ‘Take the rod … and speak to the rock before their eyes and it shall give forth water’ (Numbers 20:8).
It is understandable that Moses would be upset. Upset about his sister’s death, upset that he has been unable to mourn, and upset by another Israelite challenge. He voices his frustration calling the people ‘rebels’ (Numbers 20:10) and then he gives expression to his exasperation, striking the rock twice (Numbers 20:11), rather than talking to it. He could be forgiven for this little outburst, for this show of frustration.
He resisted the temptation to lash out at the people. He continued to fulfil his leadership role. He took his frustration out on an inanimate object, striking the rock to give expression to his hurt, anger and exasperation. God had told him to take the rod with him, placing temptation in his path. And significantly water flowed from the rock. But the punishment is immediate; as God tells Moses and Aaron: ‘you shall not bring this people into the land’ (Numbers 20:12).
The punishment appears excessive. Moses has been pushed and prodded by this people ever since Egypt. And although he was probably emotionally unstable after his sister’s death, there is no sympathy. Leaders are held to a higher, almost unattainable, standard, and they suffer when they fall short.
Moses would be forgiven for giving up and resigning on the spot; leaving God and the people alone together. Instead, it is at this moment that Moses marks himself apart as a truly outstanding leader. He does not appeal to God or the people. Instead he sends messengers to the king of Edom (Numbers 20:14) so that the Israelite journey can continue. It is a journey which Moses will not complete, but he puts his personal feelings aside and focuses solely on fulfilling his leadership role.
Although he will not reach the Promised Land, Moses puts the needs of the community above his own. He will not be the pilot who will land in Israel, but he certainly deserves applause.
People can be hungry for leadership, Korach provides our ancient example (Number 16:1-20) and there are too many contemporary ones to name. But Moses demonstrates the truth of the line in Spiderman: ‘with great power comes great responsibility’. In slipping up, Moses demonstrates his own greatness and his exemplary leadership. In his lifetime he never received the peoples’ thanks, but when he died the children of Israel wept for thirty days (Deuteronomy 34:8), and perhaps when he ascended to heaven the angels gave him the round of applause he so richly deserved.
World Zionist Congress – Catching up and the Voting
So for the last two days with all of the meetings (and the lack of a reliable free wireless source in the hotel or the convention center) and various other things which have been going on, it has been impossible to get onto the internet to update the blog – I am sorry.
To bring you up to speed, I have been in and out of meetings for the last two days. Some of them specifically relating to our Arzenu group (and the Reform movement), and in others which have been as a part of our combined faction with Labour and Meretz. It’s been exhausting, as our meetings have begun at 7:30, and we have been working through until the late hours.
It has been eye-opening to see the way that Zionist politics works, and it has been especially interesting to see the ways in which different groups vote together on some issues, and in opposition on other matters.
Last night we also had the opportunity to hear President Shimon Peres and the Mayor of Jerusalem Nir Barkat, as we celebrated 150 years since Herzl’s birth.
Right now, as I update the blog, we are voting in the resolution session, as the motions which were debated yesterday are being confirmed by a vote of all the delegates present at the World Zionist Congress. Right now a lot of the motions involve the rights of all streams of Judaism, and it is wonderful to watch as these motions, which we support, are being passed.
To bring you up to speed, I have been in and out of meetings for the last two days. Some of them specifically relating to our Arzenu group (and the Reform movement), and in others which have been as a part of our combined faction with Labour and Meretz. It’s been exhausting, as our meetings have begun at 7:30, and we have been working through until the late hours.
It has been eye-opening to see the way that Zionist politics works, and it has been especially interesting to see the ways in which different groups vote together on some issues, and in opposition on other matters.
Last night we also had the opportunity to hear President Shimon Peres and the Mayor of Jerusalem Nir Barkat, as we celebrated 150 years since Herzl’s birth.
Right now, as I update the blog, we are voting in the resolution session, as the motions which were debated yesterday are being confirmed by a vote of all the delegates present at the World Zionist Congress. Right now a lot of the motions involve the rights of all streams of Judaism, and it is wonderful to watch as these motions, which we support, are being passed.
World Zionist Congress – Catching up and the Voting
So for the last two days with all of the meetings (and the lack of a reliable free wireless source in the hotel or the convention center) and various other things which have been going on, it has been impossible to get onto the internet to update the blog – I am sorry.
To bring you up to speed, I have been in and out of meetings for the last two days. Some of them specifically relating to our Arzenu group (and the Reform movement), and in others which have been as a part of our combined faction with Labour and Meretz. It’s been exhausting, as our meetings have begun at 7:30, and we have been working through until the late hours.
It has been eye-opening to see the way that Zionist politics works, and it has been especially interesting to see the ways in which different groups vote together on some issues, and in opposition on other matters.
Last night we also had the opportunity to hear President Shimon Peres and the Mayor of Jerusalem Nir Barkat, as we celebrated 150 years since Herzl’s birth.
Right now, as I update the blog, we are voting in the resolution session, as the motions which were debated yesterday are being confirmed by a vote of all the delegates present at the World Zionist Congress. Right now a lot of the motions involve the rights of all streams of Judaism, and it is wonderful to watch as these motions, which we support, are being passed.
To bring you up to speed, I have been in and out of meetings for the last two days. Some of them specifically relating to our Arzenu group (and the Reform movement), and in others which have been as a part of our combined faction with Labour and Meretz. It’s been exhausting, as our meetings have begun at 7:30, and we have been working through until the late hours.
It has been eye-opening to see the way that Zionist politics works, and it has been especially interesting to see the ways in which different groups vote together on some issues, and in opposition on other matters.
Last night we also had the opportunity to hear President Shimon Peres and the Mayor of Jerusalem Nir Barkat, as we celebrated 150 years since Herzl’s birth.
Right now, as I update the blog, we are voting in the resolution session, as the motions which were debated yesterday are being confirmed by a vote of all the delegates present at the World Zionist Congress. Right now a lot of the motions involve the rights of all streams of Judaism, and it is wonderful to watch as these motions, which we support, are being passed.
Monday, June 14, 2010
The World Zionist Congress – Being part of a world movement
In our joint faction meeting with Labour we heard today from representatives of our groups from across the world.
In Britain we Reform Jews are a minority within a minority – it can be difficult and sometimes demoralising. Being part of the Arzenu delegation at the World Zionist Congress is a reminder that we are part of an international movement, with members spread across the world. We have allies and supporters around the globe, and we need to find ways to work more closely together and to strengthen our bonds and cooperation. It is always refreshing and inspiring to see Reform Jews from across the globe.
We all face a range of different challenges and problems as a result of our different national contexts. But there are some challenges and problems which we all face together. Through cooperation and the sharing of ideas we can face the future together, and continue to advance the international message of Reform Judaism and Reform Zionism.
In Britain we Reform Jews are a minority within a minority – it can be difficult and sometimes demoralising. Being part of the Arzenu delegation at the World Zionist Congress is a reminder that we are part of an international movement, with members spread across the world. We have allies and supporters around the globe, and we need to find ways to work more closely together and to strengthen our bonds and cooperation. It is always refreshing and inspiring to see Reform Jews from across the globe.
We all face a range of different challenges and problems as a result of our different national contexts. But there are some challenges and problems which we all face together. Through cooperation and the sharing of ideas we can face the future together, and continue to advance the international message of Reform Judaism and Reform Zionism.
The World Zionist Congress – Arzenu, Labour and Meretz
This afternoon we had the first meeting of our new faction for the Congress. Our Arzenu group have spent the last few years negotiating with Labour to form a coalition, and more recently Meretz have joined us. This means that we will together be the largest group at the Congress, and it will further increase the influence we have.
This will be important for the work of the Zionist institutions, however, it is equally, if not more important in relation to what it means for our place in Israeli society. We in the Reform movement remain a small percentage within Israeli society, but we are the largest international stream of Judaism, and it is important that our voice is heard within Israeli society. With Labour and Meretz we share a broad vision of a Jewish democratic state, at peace with her neighbours, and built on values of social justice and pluralism. It is a partnership which is built on strong ideological foundations.
We in Arzenu have to use our voice, and strength, within the World Zionist Congress to help our Israeli Reform movement. Through this agreement we now have a formal partnership with two parties within the Israeli Knesset, which can only help in the further establishment and legitimisation of our movement here in Israel.
This will be important for the work of the Zionist institutions, however, it is equally, if not more important in relation to what it means for our place in Israeli society. We in the Reform movement remain a small percentage within Israeli society, but we are the largest international stream of Judaism, and it is important that our voice is heard within Israeli society. With Labour and Meretz we share a broad vision of a Jewish democratic state, at peace with her neighbours, and built on values of social justice and pluralism. It is a partnership which is built on strong ideological foundations.
We in Arzenu have to use our voice, and strength, within the World Zionist Congress to help our Israeli Reform movement. Through this agreement we now have a formal partnership with two parties within the Israeli Knesset, which can only help in the further establishment and legitimisation of our movement here in Israel.
Sunday, June 13, 2010
The World Zionist Congress - It's complicated...
This afternoon we had a really interesting discussion about the different ways in which our national Reform Zionist bodies responded to the flotilla incident. Different countries had felt the need to respond in different ways, with different agendas determining that response. I was very aware that my response to the flotilla (see the sermon below) was very much a response to the British national context. It was not about speaking to a Reform Jewish community, it was about addressing the issue for a Reform Jewish community against the backdrop of the British media's negative portrayal of Israel.
The difficulty which we face revolves around what we do when we don't agree 100% with the position, or approach, of the Government of Israel. Do we voice complete support publicly out of a sense of responsibility? Or are we comfortable to stand up and criticise?
I think it is important to always remember that our movement is the heir to the prophetic tradition. When we see injustive we have an obligation to speak out against it. But in the case of the Israeli blockade of Gaza and the flotilla, the issue is far too complex to offer 100% support or to criticise.
For those of us who live in the Diaspora we have to recognise that our children are not drafted into the army, our families do not live in daily fear of Hamas rockets, and no world leader is calling for the destruction of the country in which we live. And therefore we can attempt to influence Israel, we can offer help and we can try to support her. But at the end of the day she has to pursue a just and safe path for her and her citizens - and when she falters, we have to be there to help pick her up.
I keep thinking about Herzl's words (appropriately as it is 150 years since his birth) 'Im tirtzu, ein zo agadah' - 'If you will it, it is no dream'. As Reform/Progressive/Liberal Zionists, we have a dream for the State of Israel - secure in its borders, at peace with her neighbours, a Jewish democratic state, and a country which serves as a shining light for the rest of the world. Our job is to help her citizens and Government to pursue that dream and vision.
The difficulty which we face revolves around what we do when we don't agree 100% with the position, or approach, of the Government of Israel. Do we voice complete support publicly out of a sense of responsibility? Or are we comfortable to stand up and criticise?
I think it is important to always remember that our movement is the heir to the prophetic tradition. When we see injustive we have an obligation to speak out against it. But in the case of the Israeli blockade of Gaza and the flotilla, the issue is far too complex to offer 100% support or to criticise.
For those of us who live in the Diaspora we have to recognise that our children are not drafted into the army, our families do not live in daily fear of Hamas rockets, and no world leader is calling for the destruction of the country in which we live. And therefore we can attempt to influence Israel, we can offer help and we can try to support her. But at the end of the day she has to pursue a just and safe path for her and her citizens - and when she falters, we have to be there to help pick her up.
I keep thinking about Herzl's words (appropriately as it is 150 years since his birth) 'Im tirtzu, ein zo agadah' - 'If you will it, it is no dream'. As Reform/Progressive/Liberal Zionists, we have a dream for the State of Israel - secure in its borders, at peace with her neighbours, a Jewish democratic state, and a country which serves as a shining light for the rest of the world. Our job is to help her citizens and Government to pursue that dream and vision.
Saturday, June 12, 2010
The World Zionist Congress - How does the Diaspora impact upon Israel
In the car to Jerusalem, an Israeli friend and I spent the journey discussing (arguing) about the relationship between the Diaspora and Israel. She just wanted us, in the Diaspora, to make the point that Israel has a right to exist. For me that did not go far enough; we in the Diaspora should be doing more than that. We need to be the front line of Israel's PR defence. We didn't agree on this issue, but we did agree it's complicated, and it left me once again thinking about the role of the Diaspora in relation to Israel.
It was a very appropriate conversation on the way to the Arzenu pre-WZC conference.
As I arrived at Beit Shmuel and saw the international group that had gathered together it was a reminder of the fact that Israel can serve as a source of unity for the Diaspora.
The first session I participated in was on the subject of the impact the Diaspora has on Israel and Israel on the Diaspora. Listening to the groups present their varied perspectives, it was clear to me that it is a two way street and it is important that we allow, and ensure, the traffic flows smoothly in both directions. We in the Diaspora are stronger for having a State of Israel and hopefully we in turn strengthen our shared Jewish homeland - and maybe that impact is enough.
It was a very appropriate conversation on the way to the Arzenu pre-WZC conference.
As I arrived at Beit Shmuel and saw the international group that had gathered together it was a reminder of the fact that Israel can serve as a source of unity for the Diaspora.
The first session I participated in was on the subject of the impact the Diaspora has on Israel and Israel on the Diaspora. Listening to the groups present their varied perspectives, it was clear to me that it is a two way street and it is important that we allow, and ensure, the traffic flows smoothly in both directions. We in the Diaspora are stronger for having a State of Israel and hopefully we in turn strengthen our shared Jewish homeland - and maybe that impact is enough.
Friday, June 11, 2010
Two Minutes of Torah: Parashat Korach (Numbers 16:1-19) - The art of complaining
When I was first flying back from Los Angeles to London I booked an American Airlines flight via New York. I was less than thrilled about the marathon journey which would get me home. At LAX airport everything appeared fine. We boarded the plane and waited, and waited … and waited. It was then that we were told to disembark due to an onboard problem. As we sat in the airport terminal it got later and later, and I realised I would miss the last connection to London. I ventured up to the American Airlines desk and called Micol to tell her about the situation. She was very clear to me about how I should complain; be polite, firm and fair (she’s seen me get upset before). I followed her advice and found myself reseated on a direct flight to London, in first class, and I was very happy.
This week Moses has to deal with another complaint. It might seem like the Israelites have been complaining ever since we crossed the Sea of Reeds (Exodus 14). At Marah the water was bitter (Exodus 15:23-27), at Sin they complained that there was no food (Exodus 16:1-4), and they’ve continued complaining almost every step of the way.
This week the complaint is not from the entire congregation; instead Korach, the man who gives his name to the Torah Portion, steps forward, together with a group of 250 Israelite leaders, to voice their dissatisfaction. The whole thing gets of to a bad start as ‘they rose up before Moses’ (Numbers 16:2). They did not ‘come before Moses’ or approach him, ‘they rose up’ as though preparing for a confrontation. It is the same verb which is used when the angels set of to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 18:16), a worrying precursor.
Korach’s complaint may have had some underlying legitimacy: ‘You take too much upon you, seeing all the congregation are holy, every one of them, and the Lord is among them. Why then do you lift up yourselves above the congregation of the Lord?’ (Numbers 16:3). After all, it is not the first time we have heard that Moses was overworked and overburdened.
The last person to have a Torah portion named after himself was Yitro, who came before Moses and said to him: ‘The thing that you do is not good. You will certainly wear away, both you, and this people who are with you; for this thing is too heavy for you; you are not able to perform it yourself alone’ (Exodus 18:17-18). The sentiment is not so far removed from Korach’s, however, its delivery and the intention behind it is completely different.
Yitro offered Moses critical feedback so that he would be able to do his job better, and serve the Israelite community more effectively. Korach rose up before Moses out of self-interest, and with an agenda for his personal aggrandisement. While his message that Moses was overburdened may still have been correct, he delivered it as an aggressive criticism, rather than a piece of constructive feedback. Korach allowed his personal agenda to overshadow his point and permitted his anger to silence the core message.
Korach’s reward for his insubordination was to be swallowed up by the earth (Numbers 16:32). A new punishment was devised for this man, who challenged Moses’ right to leadership. He may well have been correct that Moses was overburdened, but he shared his complaint in such a way as to deny himself any legitimacy. In contrast Yitro’s feedback leads to an entire reorganisation of the judicial system.
I don’t think I would have been swallowed up by the earth if I had complained more aggressively or more vehemently to the American Airlines assistant, but I am sure I would not have been upgraded to first class. There is a way to complain and there is a way not to complain. Korach was unfortunate not to have Micol whispering in his ear, before he brought his challenge to Moses, things might have turned out very differently.
This week Moses has to deal with another complaint. It might seem like the Israelites have been complaining ever since we crossed the Sea of Reeds (Exodus 14). At Marah the water was bitter (Exodus 15:23-27), at Sin they complained that there was no food (Exodus 16:1-4), and they’ve continued complaining almost every step of the way.
This week the complaint is not from the entire congregation; instead Korach, the man who gives his name to the Torah Portion, steps forward, together with a group of 250 Israelite leaders, to voice their dissatisfaction. The whole thing gets of to a bad start as ‘they rose up before Moses’ (Numbers 16:2). They did not ‘come before Moses’ or approach him, ‘they rose up’ as though preparing for a confrontation. It is the same verb which is used when the angels set of to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 18:16), a worrying precursor.
Korach’s complaint may have had some underlying legitimacy: ‘You take too much upon you, seeing all the congregation are holy, every one of them, and the Lord is among them. Why then do you lift up yourselves above the congregation of the Lord?’ (Numbers 16:3). After all, it is not the first time we have heard that Moses was overworked and overburdened.
The last person to have a Torah portion named after himself was Yitro, who came before Moses and said to him: ‘The thing that you do is not good. You will certainly wear away, both you, and this people who are with you; for this thing is too heavy for you; you are not able to perform it yourself alone’ (Exodus 18:17-18). The sentiment is not so far removed from Korach’s, however, its delivery and the intention behind it is completely different.
Yitro offered Moses critical feedback so that he would be able to do his job better, and serve the Israelite community more effectively. Korach rose up before Moses out of self-interest, and with an agenda for his personal aggrandisement. While his message that Moses was overburdened may still have been correct, he delivered it as an aggressive criticism, rather than a piece of constructive feedback. Korach allowed his personal agenda to overshadow his point and permitted his anger to silence the core message.
Korach’s reward for his insubordination was to be swallowed up by the earth (Numbers 16:32). A new punishment was devised for this man, who challenged Moses’ right to leadership. He may well have been correct that Moses was overburdened, but he shared his complaint in such a way as to deny himself any legitimacy. In contrast Yitro’s feedback leads to an entire reorganisation of the judicial system.
I don’t think I would have been swallowed up by the earth if I had complained more aggressively or more vehemently to the American Airlines assistant, but I am sure I would not have been upgraded to first class. There is a way to complain and there is a way not to complain. Korach was unfortunate not to have Micol whispering in his ear, before he brought his challenge to Moses, things might have turned out very differently.
Sunday, June 6, 2010
My Sermon - 5th June - The Real Peace Activist (A response to the Gaza Flotilla)
I remember the moment like it was yesterday. The place: A Halloween party in Stanmore. The date: The 4th of November, 1995.
We were standing on the street outside when someone said that the Prime Minister of Israel had been killed. As a friend and I talked about it, we assumed that it must have been an Arab terrorist who had murdered Yitzhak Rabin. He was the man pursuing peace, so it was only logical that the forces of violence and hatred would have tried to stop him. It did not even enter our minds to consider the possibility that it would have been another Jew. We were so used to looking for the enemy on the outside, that we never thought to consider the enemy amongst us, or even the enemy within.
How different the world might be today if Yitzhak Rabin, the warrior for peace, the man who signed the Oslo accords with the Palestinians and made peace with Jordan, had not been murdered on the streets of Tel Aviv almost 15 years ago.
Yitzhak Rabin is my hero; for the man he was, for the man he became and for the dream he envisioned and sacrificed his life pursuing.
Yitzhak Rabin wanted to be a water engineer, but at the age of 16, he was handed a gun and called upon to defend his family, his people and the fledgling state of Israel. In 1967, he was the army Chief of Staff when Israel achieved its miraculous victory in the Six Day War. He was a member of the Government when the Yom Kippur War was waged. He embodied the Israel Defence Force and the military struggle to create and protect the State of Israel.
And yet, when the opportunity for peace presented itself, he rushed to put down his gun. In the words of the Prophets he was ready to beat his sword into a ploughshare and turn his spear into a pruning hook. He was ready to become a soldier for peace. He twice stood on the White House lawn to shake the hands of his former enemies; first with Yasser Arafat in 1993 and then with King Hussein of Jordan in 1994.
On November the 4th, at that fatal peace rally in Tel Aviv he addressed the gathered masses:
I was a military man for 27 years. I fought so long as there was no chance for peace. I believe that there is now a chance for peace, a great chance. We must take advantage of it for the sake of those standing here, and for those who are not here - and they are many.
I have always believed that the majority of the people want peace and are ready to take risks for peace. In coming here today, you demonstrate, together with many others who did not come, that the people truly desire peace and oppose violence. Violence erodes the basis of Israeli democracy. It must be condemned and isolated. This is not the way of the State of Israel.
Yitzhak Rabin was prepared to fight to defend the Jewish people and the State of Israel when fighting was necessary. And he was ready to transform that struggle into one for peace when the opportunity presented itself. He was a true rodef shalom, a pursuer of peace – a real peace activist.
This week has been a difficult one for those of us who love Israel. It’s been a difficult week for those of us who truly pray for peace and pursue it. And it has been a difficult week to be Jewish.
The media like to see things in black and white, with an oppressor and a victim, with a right and a wrong. The conflict is described as being between Israelis and Arabs, or Israelis and Palestinians. And when one listens to the radio phone-ins, this quickly descends into a conflict labelled as one between Jews and Muslims. Make no mistake, as Dr. Martin Luther King warned us, anti-Zionism quickly descends into anti-Semitism; and as anti-Zionist rhetoric reaches new heights, we have to be cautious about the threat to our own community.
But the media are mistaken; they are wrong and I would go so far as to say they are fanning the flames of conflict. The Middle East dispute is not between Jews and Muslims, or even Israelis and Palestinians. It is a conflict between those who want peace and those who want war; between those who accept Israel’s right to exist, and those who wish her wiped of the map; between activists for peace and enemies of peace.
Yitzhak Rabin pursued peace with both his words and his actions, clearly placing himself on one side of the divide. Unfortunately, this week we have seen the forces of violence and hatred portraying themselves as champions of peace. The members of the IHH, who led the flotilla, have been labelled by the media as peace activists. It grates every time I hear it, but then why should I be surprised when the members of Hamas and Hezbollah are called fanatics, rather than terrorists.
The Turkish based IHH, is also known as the ‘Foundation for Human Rights and Freedoms and Humanitarian Relief’. With such a name, one would assume that it would be filled with lovers and pursuers of peace. These were the people who set sail for Gaza to bring aid and relief to the Palestinians who are in a very real sense suffering. Before even considering the events of earlier this week, it is important to realise that the IHH have long been suspected and accused of having very real links with extremist terrorists. If the aim was really to bring much needed aid and supplies to the people of Gaza, surely the offer of taking them via Ashdod should have been acceptable – and we should not forget that for 5 of the 6 boats, it was. If the aim was really peaceful protest, then a convoy of ships stranded several miles from the coast of Gaza could have created a very powerful picture for the international media.
The aims of the members of this boat were never peaceful.
Now, I will be the first to admit that Israel could have, and should have, dealt with the situation better. Israel should have recognised the public relations trap into which they were walking. Israel needed to find another way to deal with the flotilla.
But in five out of six boats, a peaceful solution was found. In five out of six boats, the passage of the aid was prioritised over PR. In five out of six boats, the forces of peace triumphed. In one boat, violence erupted. Had the Israel Defence Force wanted to really attack this boat, there would have been many more than nine dead. Israel naively boarded this boat looking for a peaceful solution, and they were hijacked by the forces of war and violence.
This was not a boat of peace activists. It is an insult to the great peace activists of the 20th century to label these people as peace activists. Mahatma Ghandi, Vaclav Havel, Martin Luther King Jr, Anwar Sadat, Desmond Tutu, Yitzhak Rabin - these were peace activists. They could be judged by their words and their actions, as both spoke their truth. These people’s actions betrayed their true nature and their true intentions.
Israel made mistakes and Israel is not completely blameless; but the media’s oversimplification is upsetting, negligent and dangerous.
Today, Israel is vulnerable and isolated as she faces an existential threat from the unholy trinity of Hamas, Hezbollah and Ahmadinejad. The Iranian regime continues its pursuit of nuclear weapons while their leader publicly declares that Israel is a stain which must be wiped of the map. Hezbollah, which has labelled Israel a cancerous entity, continues to amass weapons on Israel’s northern border, preparing for another conflict. And Hamas develops its weapons capabilities to strike deeper and further into Israeli territory.
These groups are the enemies of Israel. These groups are the enemies of peace. These groups spread violence and bloodshed. And most significantly, these groups are also the enemies of the Palestinian people.
In recent years, the contrast between the Hamas-controlled Gaza strip and the Fatah-controlled West Bank is striking. Mahmoud Abbas and his Fatah faction have rejected violence as a way to reach a solution to this conflict, and they have prospered. Over the last three years, the West Bank has flourished as a result of international aid, improved Palestinian security and the resulting reduction in Israeli restrictions. While the people of Gaza continue to suffer under the oppressive Hamas regime, which would rather score PR points than actually help its people.
This week, with all that has happened, peace may seem to be a very distant, almost unattainable dream. But we must remember what Yitzhak Rabin, the real peace activist, told us when he signed the Israeli-Palestinian declaration of Principles.
Our inner strength, our high moral values, have been derived for thousands of years from the Book of Books, in one of which, Koheleth, we read:
To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under heaven:
A time to be born, and a time to die;
A time to kill, and a time to heal;
A time to weep and a time to laugh;
A time to love, and a time to hate;
A time of war, and a time of peace.
We must recognize our enemies; exposing the opponents of peace, the proponents of war, and the activists of violence. And they exist among both the Israelis and the Palestinians. But at the same time, we must find the real peace activists from across the political and religious spectrum. We must unite with them and we must work with them to fulfil Rabin’s vision, to achieve peace and security for Israel, for the Palestinians and for the entire Middle East, so that one day we can finally turn our swords into ploughshares, our spears into pruning hooks.
As Dr. Martin Luther King Jr preached:
We must come to see that peace is not merely a distant goal we seek, but that it is a means by which we arrive at that goal. We must pursue peaceful ends through peaceful means.
May we all be true peace activists, pursuing a just and lasting peace for our peoples and for all the world. Ken yehi ratzon – may it be God’s will.
We were standing on the street outside when someone said that the Prime Minister of Israel had been killed. As a friend and I talked about it, we assumed that it must have been an Arab terrorist who had murdered Yitzhak Rabin. He was the man pursuing peace, so it was only logical that the forces of violence and hatred would have tried to stop him. It did not even enter our minds to consider the possibility that it would have been another Jew. We were so used to looking for the enemy on the outside, that we never thought to consider the enemy amongst us, or even the enemy within.
How different the world might be today if Yitzhak Rabin, the warrior for peace, the man who signed the Oslo accords with the Palestinians and made peace with Jordan, had not been murdered on the streets of Tel Aviv almost 15 years ago.
Yitzhak Rabin is my hero; for the man he was, for the man he became and for the dream he envisioned and sacrificed his life pursuing.
Yitzhak Rabin wanted to be a water engineer, but at the age of 16, he was handed a gun and called upon to defend his family, his people and the fledgling state of Israel. In 1967, he was the army Chief of Staff when Israel achieved its miraculous victory in the Six Day War. He was a member of the Government when the Yom Kippur War was waged. He embodied the Israel Defence Force and the military struggle to create and protect the State of Israel.
And yet, when the opportunity for peace presented itself, he rushed to put down his gun. In the words of the Prophets he was ready to beat his sword into a ploughshare and turn his spear into a pruning hook. He was ready to become a soldier for peace. He twice stood on the White House lawn to shake the hands of his former enemies; first with Yasser Arafat in 1993 and then with King Hussein of Jordan in 1994.
On November the 4th, at that fatal peace rally in Tel Aviv he addressed the gathered masses:
I was a military man for 27 years. I fought so long as there was no chance for peace. I believe that there is now a chance for peace, a great chance. We must take advantage of it for the sake of those standing here, and for those who are not here - and they are many.
I have always believed that the majority of the people want peace and are ready to take risks for peace. In coming here today, you demonstrate, together with many others who did not come, that the people truly desire peace and oppose violence. Violence erodes the basis of Israeli democracy. It must be condemned and isolated. This is not the way of the State of Israel.
Yitzhak Rabin was prepared to fight to defend the Jewish people and the State of Israel when fighting was necessary. And he was ready to transform that struggle into one for peace when the opportunity presented itself. He was a true rodef shalom, a pursuer of peace – a real peace activist.
This week has been a difficult one for those of us who love Israel. It’s been a difficult week for those of us who truly pray for peace and pursue it. And it has been a difficult week to be Jewish.
The media like to see things in black and white, with an oppressor and a victim, with a right and a wrong. The conflict is described as being between Israelis and Arabs, or Israelis and Palestinians. And when one listens to the radio phone-ins, this quickly descends into a conflict labelled as one between Jews and Muslims. Make no mistake, as Dr. Martin Luther King warned us, anti-Zionism quickly descends into anti-Semitism; and as anti-Zionist rhetoric reaches new heights, we have to be cautious about the threat to our own community.
But the media are mistaken; they are wrong and I would go so far as to say they are fanning the flames of conflict. The Middle East dispute is not between Jews and Muslims, or even Israelis and Palestinians. It is a conflict between those who want peace and those who want war; between those who accept Israel’s right to exist, and those who wish her wiped of the map; between activists for peace and enemies of peace.
Yitzhak Rabin pursued peace with both his words and his actions, clearly placing himself on one side of the divide. Unfortunately, this week we have seen the forces of violence and hatred portraying themselves as champions of peace. The members of the IHH, who led the flotilla, have been labelled by the media as peace activists. It grates every time I hear it, but then why should I be surprised when the members of Hamas and Hezbollah are called fanatics, rather than terrorists.
The Turkish based IHH, is also known as the ‘Foundation for Human Rights and Freedoms and Humanitarian Relief’. With such a name, one would assume that it would be filled with lovers and pursuers of peace. These were the people who set sail for Gaza to bring aid and relief to the Palestinians who are in a very real sense suffering. Before even considering the events of earlier this week, it is important to realise that the IHH have long been suspected and accused of having very real links with extremist terrorists. If the aim was really to bring much needed aid and supplies to the people of Gaza, surely the offer of taking them via Ashdod should have been acceptable – and we should not forget that for 5 of the 6 boats, it was. If the aim was really peaceful protest, then a convoy of ships stranded several miles from the coast of Gaza could have created a very powerful picture for the international media.
The aims of the members of this boat were never peaceful.
Now, I will be the first to admit that Israel could have, and should have, dealt with the situation better. Israel should have recognised the public relations trap into which they were walking. Israel needed to find another way to deal with the flotilla.
But in five out of six boats, a peaceful solution was found. In five out of six boats, the passage of the aid was prioritised over PR. In five out of six boats, the forces of peace triumphed. In one boat, violence erupted. Had the Israel Defence Force wanted to really attack this boat, there would have been many more than nine dead. Israel naively boarded this boat looking for a peaceful solution, and they were hijacked by the forces of war and violence.
This was not a boat of peace activists. It is an insult to the great peace activists of the 20th century to label these people as peace activists. Mahatma Ghandi, Vaclav Havel, Martin Luther King Jr, Anwar Sadat, Desmond Tutu, Yitzhak Rabin - these were peace activists. They could be judged by their words and their actions, as both spoke their truth. These people’s actions betrayed their true nature and their true intentions.
Israel made mistakes and Israel is not completely blameless; but the media’s oversimplification is upsetting, negligent and dangerous.
Today, Israel is vulnerable and isolated as she faces an existential threat from the unholy trinity of Hamas, Hezbollah and Ahmadinejad. The Iranian regime continues its pursuit of nuclear weapons while their leader publicly declares that Israel is a stain which must be wiped of the map. Hezbollah, which has labelled Israel a cancerous entity, continues to amass weapons on Israel’s northern border, preparing for another conflict. And Hamas develops its weapons capabilities to strike deeper and further into Israeli territory.
These groups are the enemies of Israel. These groups are the enemies of peace. These groups spread violence and bloodshed. And most significantly, these groups are also the enemies of the Palestinian people.
In recent years, the contrast between the Hamas-controlled Gaza strip and the Fatah-controlled West Bank is striking. Mahmoud Abbas and his Fatah faction have rejected violence as a way to reach a solution to this conflict, and they have prospered. Over the last three years, the West Bank has flourished as a result of international aid, improved Palestinian security and the resulting reduction in Israeli restrictions. While the people of Gaza continue to suffer under the oppressive Hamas regime, which would rather score PR points than actually help its people.
This week, with all that has happened, peace may seem to be a very distant, almost unattainable dream. But we must remember what Yitzhak Rabin, the real peace activist, told us when he signed the Israeli-Palestinian declaration of Principles.
Our inner strength, our high moral values, have been derived for thousands of years from the Book of Books, in one of which, Koheleth, we read:
To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under heaven:
A time to be born, and a time to die;
A time to kill, and a time to heal;
A time to weep and a time to laugh;
A time to love, and a time to hate;
A time of war, and a time of peace.
We must recognize our enemies; exposing the opponents of peace, the proponents of war, and the activists of violence. And they exist among both the Israelis and the Palestinians. But at the same time, we must find the real peace activists from across the political and religious spectrum. We must unite with them and we must work with them to fulfil Rabin’s vision, to achieve peace and security for Israel, for the Palestinians and for the entire Middle East, so that one day we can finally turn our swords into ploughshares, our spears into pruning hooks.
As Dr. Martin Luther King Jr preached:
We must come to see that peace is not merely a distant goal we seek, but that it is a means by which we arrive at that goal. We must pursue peaceful ends through peaceful means.
May we all be true peace activists, pursuing a just and lasting peace for our peoples and for all the world. Ken yehi ratzon – may it be God’s will.
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
Two Minutes of Torah: Shelach Lecha (Numbers 13:25-14:10) - Fear of the Unknown
I find making decisions quite difficult; so much so that I have a reputation as a bit of a procrastinator (possibly even indecisive) amongst my friends. The place where this is most clearly exhibited is when I have to book a plane ticket. I will do almost anything possible to avoid finally clicking the button which confirms my booking. I make excuses about the price, the time, anything and everything just to delay the inevitable. And frequently it ends up costing me money, as prices rise while I dither and delay.
This irrational behaviour does not come from a fear of flying, or any specific concern relating to booking a holiday. My paralysing fear is of the unknown. How can I book a flight for several months from now, and know that nothing is going to come up which is going to make this booking a mistake. Maybe I should be flying earlier, perhaps the next day would be better, and how can I know any of this so far in advance of the event?
Fear can be a paralysing emotion. Concern about the unknown and the unpredictable consequences can stop people making any progress or moving forward. It is for this reason that Franklin D Roosevelt famously said: ‘we have nothing to fear but fear itself’. He may well have been right, but it can be difficult to put his advice into action.
This week the spies bring back their report about the Land of Israel; and the people are offered two conflicting accounts. Calev assures them: ‘Let us by all means go up, and we shall gain possession of it, for we shall surely overcome it’ (Numbers 13:30). In contrast the other spies (except for Joshua) warn: ‘We cannot attack that people, for it is stronger than we … The country that we traversed and scouted is one that devours its settlers’ (Numbers 13:31-32). The people follow the majority report and yearn to return to Egypt, rather than venturing forward to the Land of Israel.
The Israelites are often condemned for their lack of faith. After experiencing the Exodus from Egypt, and having witnessed the giving of Torah at Sinai; surely they should have recognised that nothing was too difficult for God. They should have trusted God and Calev’s report.
But why is it so surprising that they are frightened? Why should we be shocked at the fact that the Israelites are anxious about conquering the Land of Israel? They were scared by the report they received, they were frightened by the prospect of war and they feared what lay ahead. They knew the land of Egypt, they had grown used to life in the wilderness and they were simply afraid of the unknown. When the people say: ‘If only we had died in the land of Egypt’ (Numbers 14:2), this is not a literal request. Instead they are asking for the certainty and security of a life without changes, without a journey into an unknown land.
I would love to think that I would have been a dissenting Israelite, cheering for Calev and Joshua (the other spy to offer a positive report), looking forward to the fulfilment of God’s promise. But I am honest if enough to admit that as someone who is paralysed with fear about booking an airline ticket, I would probably have been happier with the certainty of the wilderness than the mysterious Land of Israel. This would not have been due to a lack of faith; instead it would have been because of fear.
At the Pesach Seder one of the central messages is that WE were slaves in Egypt, and WE were freed by God. We share in the Exodus experience of our ancestors, and perhaps we should also say that WE were among the generation who were too scared to advance upon the Land of Israel. In stating this out loud we acknowledge the fact that we too were once paralysed by fear, and may be again. But we have the benefit of hindsight, and the ability to know that it was truly a land flowing with milk and honey, a land which we were able to conquer and settle.
From this experience we can acknowledge that Roosevelt was correct and that there really is nothing to fear but fear itself. We can learn the lesson of our wilderness experience and try to subdue our fears of the unknown in the future so that we can all reach our own promised land.
This irrational behaviour does not come from a fear of flying, or any specific concern relating to booking a holiday. My paralysing fear is of the unknown. How can I book a flight for several months from now, and know that nothing is going to come up which is going to make this booking a mistake. Maybe I should be flying earlier, perhaps the next day would be better, and how can I know any of this so far in advance of the event?
Fear can be a paralysing emotion. Concern about the unknown and the unpredictable consequences can stop people making any progress or moving forward. It is for this reason that Franklin D Roosevelt famously said: ‘we have nothing to fear but fear itself’. He may well have been right, but it can be difficult to put his advice into action.
This week the spies bring back their report about the Land of Israel; and the people are offered two conflicting accounts. Calev assures them: ‘Let us by all means go up, and we shall gain possession of it, for we shall surely overcome it’ (Numbers 13:30). In contrast the other spies (except for Joshua) warn: ‘We cannot attack that people, for it is stronger than we … The country that we traversed and scouted is one that devours its settlers’ (Numbers 13:31-32). The people follow the majority report and yearn to return to Egypt, rather than venturing forward to the Land of Israel.
The Israelites are often condemned for their lack of faith. After experiencing the Exodus from Egypt, and having witnessed the giving of Torah at Sinai; surely they should have recognised that nothing was too difficult for God. They should have trusted God and Calev’s report.
But why is it so surprising that they are frightened? Why should we be shocked at the fact that the Israelites are anxious about conquering the Land of Israel? They were scared by the report they received, they were frightened by the prospect of war and they feared what lay ahead. They knew the land of Egypt, they had grown used to life in the wilderness and they were simply afraid of the unknown. When the people say: ‘If only we had died in the land of Egypt’ (Numbers 14:2), this is not a literal request. Instead they are asking for the certainty and security of a life without changes, without a journey into an unknown land.
I would love to think that I would have been a dissenting Israelite, cheering for Calev and Joshua (the other spy to offer a positive report), looking forward to the fulfilment of God’s promise. But I am honest if enough to admit that as someone who is paralysed with fear about booking an airline ticket, I would probably have been happier with the certainty of the wilderness than the mysterious Land of Israel. This would not have been due to a lack of faith; instead it would have been because of fear.
At the Pesach Seder one of the central messages is that WE were slaves in Egypt, and WE were freed by God. We share in the Exodus experience of our ancestors, and perhaps we should also say that WE were among the generation who were too scared to advance upon the Land of Israel. In stating this out loud we acknowledge the fact that we too were once paralysed by fear, and may be again. But we have the benefit of hindsight, and the ability to know that it was truly a land flowing with milk and honey, a land which we were able to conquer and settle.
From this experience we can acknowledge that Roosevelt was correct and that there really is nothing to fear but fear itself. We can learn the lesson of our wilderness experience and try to subdue our fears of the unknown in the future so that we can all reach our own promised land.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
