A New Judaism

Out with the old...

Yesterday I approached a leading Orthodox rabbi about getting his organization to engage on the Hyatt campaign. The conversation took a surprising turn when the Orthodox rabbi mentioned the name of a well-known rabbi activist. This Orthodox rabbi said that his organization would not respond favorably if Rabbi X was involved in this initiative.

The scope of the  Jewish religion has always been characterized by divergent trends. On the one hand, the number of laws has a natural rate of expansion. In the Torah (Exodus 20), God speaks once and  this instantaneously becomes 10 commandments which themselves are immediately followed by a  host of new laws. Famously, Jewish tradition counts 613 Biblical commandments. Rabbinic literature multiplies these into tens of thousands.

Concurrently and consequently, in order to make sense of this mass of information, the authors of Judaism felt the need to define core values. In the 12th century Maimonides compiled the first encyclopedia of Jewish law, totalling 14 volumes and thousands of pages long. Alongside this exhaustive manual he proposed a one page "read-me-first" list of 13 Principles of the Faith.

Maimonides is part of a tradition of expansion alongside defining core values. The Biblical Book of Ecclesiastes concludes a long list of exhortations with one fundamental principle. The enormous Talmud similarly quotes a series Rabbis who reduced all of Judaism to one core principle. The most famous of all is Hillel. He reduced the whole of Judaism to the golden rule: do not do to others what you would not want them to do to you.


Orthodoxy sees itself, in practice and dogma, as the true heir to pre-modern Judaism.  Orthodoxy defined itself in the modern era when it rejected the drive to modernize Judaism. These watershed issues included the use of the vernacular in religious service and rejecting other innovations in ritual (early 19th century Hungary and elsewhere), observance of kosher laws (late 19th century, United States),  rejecting interfaith marriages (20th century). Movements, like individuals, define themselves most clearly not by what they declare they are but by what they reject.

Rabbi X, along with many Jewish leaders, does not preach the Orthodox practice with regard kosher food, Sabbath observance and officiating at interfaith marriages.Yet, he is welcome in the Orthodox world and other mainstream Jewish bodies. Where he crosses the line is in his open criticism of the State of Israel.

The largest Jewish organizations, along with Orthodoxy have declared a new core principle. This principle supplants values of social justice or learning, separation of church and state, study, and even (the recent principle of) Jewish continuity.

...in with the new

The Talmudic Rabbi Hillel, were he an Orthodox Jew today, would indeed say:
"Support the State of Israel, this is the whole Torah, all the rest is the commentary"

Israel vs. the Jews

In advance  of his trip to the States, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu laid out his new plan for peace. He spoke from the Knesset podium in Jerusalem.

First the soundbite:

Israel would be prepared to compromise and cede parts of our homeland for true peace with the Palestinians

 but:

A Palestinian government that comprises representatives of Hamas and refuses to recognize that Israel is the state of the Jewish People is not a partner for peace.

But Netanyahu's own government enforces as system that invalidates his own criterion. The State of Israel per Netanyahu's government is not the state of the Jewish People.

It is fair to day that the State of Israel is constituted as as the state of the Israeli Jewish people.
This state's laws and institutions grant superior privileges to Israeli Jews over, and at the expense of, non-Jewish Israeli citizens.
As an American Jew, my religious rights in the State of Israel are inferior to those of Israeli Jews.
The State's actions in the West Bank, Gaza and Lebanon are not recognizably Jewish to me.

As such, I do not recognize in the State  Israel the "State of the Jewish People" of the Israeli leader's statement. Whether you define Jewish as a set of morals or a tribe, the State of Israel does not fit the definition.

So why not meet with Hamas? Hamas in Gaza was democratically elected and enjoys the trust of their people. Now, they have agreed to share power with the Palestinian Authority on the West Bank.

This is a golden opportunity for Israel to reach an agreement with all the Palestinians.

But Netanyahu wants peace-and-quiet not peace and justice.

Israeli Cabinet Minister: No Democracy for Arabs Right Now

Events in Egypt are moving fast. U.S. and Israeli officials are trying to keep up. 


Only yesterday, State Department spokesman PJ Crowley  said that while the U.S. welcomed the Tunisian democratic uprising, Mubarak should be allowed to remain in power because of  the Egyptian peace treaty with Israel. The New York Times picked up the administration's line in its reporting today.
By this afternoon, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was already calling on the Egyptian government to refrain from violence and introduce reforms. 


Early this morning, an unnamed Israeli cabinet minister proclaimed:
"I'm not sure the time is right for the Arab region to go through the democratic process."
By the evening Prime Minister Netanyahu had instructed his government minsters and officials to stay mum on the subject of Egypt.


Will the Egyptian protesters forget that Mubarak's security police fired US-made tear gas canisters at them? (h/t Phil Weiss at mondoweiss.net)

Why I'm Anti-Zionist but Pro-Israel - Part I

I am pro-Israel but anti-Zionism.


First, three reasons why I oppose Zionism.

One hundred years ago the founder of cultural Zionism, Asher Ginzberg bemoaned the anti-diaspora stance within the Zionist camp. Ginzberg, better known by his nom de plume, Ahad Ha'am, penned "Negation of the Diaspora" in 1909. The article criticizes the so-called "true Zionists" for declaring the Land of Israel as the only option for Jews. Ahad Ha'am deemed that plan as unrealistic. The Jews will not migrate to the Land of Israel in an realistic time frame; the "Diaspora" will not disappear. Instead, he advocated a gradual migration of Jews to the Land of Israel focussing on rebuilding Jewish culture. He presciently recognized that most Jews would prefer to stay in the Diaspora. The Talmud (Tractate Kiddushin) tells us that very few - those at the bottom of the social order - migrated from Babylon to Ezra at the foundation of the Second commonwealth. The Third Commonwealth would not be substantially different.

Ahad Ha'am lost this ideological battle to the political Zionists led by Theodor Herzl's camp. Nearly forty years later, David Ben Gurion laid out his detailed manifesto for the State of Israel in which he unapologetically "negated the Diaspora." If you listen to any official representatives of the State of Israel speak on the topic, nothing, essentially has changed. A few years ago I heard the senior Israeli diplomat in the Midwest end his address to a group of American Jews with this:

As Jews, Israel is the stage and you are in the audience. We invite you to step on to the stage and become part of the action.

So, for the 130 years of political Zionism, negating the Diaspora has been a constant component. In other words Zionism is constituted as anti-Diaspora. As a Jew who chose to live as a Jew outside Israel I have to reject Zionism on those grounds.

The second aspect of Zionism which I reject is the settler movement. Idith Zertal and Akiva Eldar in Lords of the Land documented the moment in the 1970s when the establishment Zionist camp, led by the late Yigal Allon and Yizhak Rabin along with President Shimon Peres, conferred legitimacy on the nascent settler movement. The repeated attempts of the settlers to establish a base at Sebastaya succeeded. The stand-off with the IDF ended in an embrace. That moment established the protocol of collaboration between the military and the settlers. This protocol is in force to this day. The Israeli military builds roads, provides arms, training, employment and security on behalf of the West Bank settlers. According to Zertal and Eldar, the Labor Zionist leadership came to the conclusion that the mantle of Zionist vanguard had passed from the kibbutzim to the settlements. Two years later, the Likud rose to power and, under Ariel Sharon, the West Bank settlements became the largest and most expensive national project of the State of Israel.

I reject Labor and Likud's Zionism. I reject the State of Israel's Zionism.

The third aspect of Zionism which I reject is the system of laws, Basic Laws (the building blocks of a future Israeli constitution) and national institutions that are governed by these laws that discriminate against non-Jews because of their religion and ethnicity.

Why am I pro-Israel?
I am an Israeli. I relate to the Land of Israel not only as a Jew, but as an Israeli. I love the creations of modern Hebrew culture. I am deeply connected to events, music. I could not reject Israel without rejecting part of  myself - and I have no need or desire to do so.

I care deeply about the future of Israelis: my family, friends and the people I am a part of. I am an activist on their behalf, largely, because I care about them. I am working for future coexistence between Israeli Jews and Palestinians. Zionism created a new people, of which I am a part.

As an Israeli and a Jew, I call on Israel to dismantle the settlement project and to undo its discriminatory laws and institutions. As a Diaspora Jew I call on Israel to abandon its anti-Diaspora position.

(In Part 2, I will look at other formulations of the Israel-Diaspora relationship that are mutually supportive)

Chicago Mock Hearing on U.S. Policy in Israel/Palestine

This week, the American Friends Service Committee in Chicago released its final 28 page report from the Chicago Hearing of April 18, 2010.
I had the privilege in participating the the Hearing as a clergy panelist along with Father Cotton Fite. The academic panelists included Israeli professor Yali Amit and University of Chicago Professor John Mearshheimer, author of the groundbreaking work, The Israel Lobby (2006).
The Chicago Hearing brought together an impressive panel of expert witnesses to consider the question: "does U.S. policy in the Middle East reflect our values?"
American-Israeli activist Jeff Halper unleashed a tour-de-force. With his booming voice he marshalled his detailed knowledge of life in Israel/Palestine and showed his passionate indignation at the ongoing injustices that the Palestinians are suffering.
Jeff Ruebner of the US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation showed convincingly how misplaced is the US funding of the Israeli occupation.

Cindy Corrie and Amer Shurrab were compelling moral voices. They spoke with great humanity from the deep grief they share for the loss of their loved ones at the hands of Israeli military violence. Cindy Corrie's daughter Rachel was killed by an Israeli military bulldozer as she protested Israeli violence against Gazans. I was inspired by Cindy Corrie's courage in continuing to speak up in the face of indifference and hostile reactions.

You can see all the testimonies through these links . If you have time just for one, I recommend Cindy Corrie's moving testimony.



I saw my job as a panelist mostly in representing a Jewish voice. We need to bring these conversations into the Jewish community. What does it mean to be a Jew and to know that Israel is guilty of this ongoing violence?
As an Israeli and former IDF soldier I found the testimonies to be completely credible. This information is readily available in the mainstream Israeli media through writers such Gideon Levy and Amira Hass. It is time for American Jews to become aware of the reality of the Israeli military's violent campaign against the Palestinians.