Last Friday, our group focused most of its attention on three issues raised by Noah Feldman in chapters 2 and 3 of the second section of To Be A JewToday:
The first issue we discussed related to Palestinians living in the West Bank or Gaza who were not citizens of Israel. According to Feldman, such individuals “lived under Israeli authority but without political or legal equality [which] called into question Israel’s claim to be a liberal democratic state.” Feldman also called attention to the “1.6 million Palestinian Arab citizens of Israel [who have] civil and political rights but also face systematic discrimination not entirely dissimilar to the systemic racism that faces African Americans” (p. 172). Many of us were aware of and sympathetic toward Palestinians who were disenfranchised and discriminated against. We were encouraged, however, to contextualize our thoughts on this issue. No one in our group is Israeli; none of us lives in Eretz Yisrael (though we may have spent considerable time there and/or have friends and family living there).
The second issue Feldman addresses is related to the first: “Progressive Jewish belief can be reconciled with a Jewish and democratic state, provided the state aims to treat Jews and non-Jews equally. But to Progressive Jews, a state that denies equal treatment is neither democratic nor properly Jewish” (p. 179). Our group appreciated the conundrum posed by Feldman. But once again, our attitudes needed to be tempered by context. The “Jewish/democratic” values that we grew up with and assimilated in the U.S. are not identical to the “Jewish/democratic” values of those held by people who grew up in Israel. We must be cautious in viewing another culture through the lens of our values. It would be audacious to impose our values upon another culture. Even within our own culture, there are multiple interpretations regarding the oft repeated Torah dictum calling upon us to love the stranger/our neighbors.
Feldman’s third issue, raised in Chapter 3 (which deals with Religious Zionism in Israel), focus upon 1) “the direct, unapologetic claim that settling the whole land of Israel [is] the ineradicable essence of Zionism–commanded by God” and 2) “the Jew’s return to Zion is the divinely sanctioned fulfillment of the messianic vision of the prophets” (p. 188). These beliefs are engendered by Jewish texts wherein God commanded the Israelites to “enter, conquer, and settle the land, and to eliminate or subjugate its inhabitants” (p. 189). The ethics of such a philosophy certainly seem questionable, less so, perhaps, when seen in the context of our 19th-century concept of Manifest Destiny: A belief that God granted Americans the right and duty to spread across the continent with the conviction in the superiority of American democratic institutions, freedom, and way of life.
It should be understood that 1) our conversation about these issues was sincere and enlightening, and 2) none of the issues came to any resolution. Our group did note that some of Feldman’s text was difficult to follow, especially when he failed to adequately define such terms as “meta-halakhic.” On the other hand, we appreciated Feldman’s succinct explanation and history of Religious Zionism in Israel. Some of us were a bit wary of his apparent objectivity (he so far doesn’t offer his own moral assessment of the issues introduced above) and wondered whether an agenda would emerge in later chapters.
This Friday, we’ll take up any loose ends from last week’s discussion (namely, the impact of Religious Zionism on Modern Orthodoxy) and then consider Chapter 4 of the second part of Feldman’s book, “Israel Without Zionism” (pp. 212-241).
Our informal discussion group, which is currently in its 26th year, meets via Zoom every Friday from 12-1 (check CBI’s web site or weekly announcements for updates and a link). All are welcome to attend. Feldman’s book is available through a variety of internet book dealers. If you have questions, contact Jay Jacoby atjbjacoby@charlotte.edu.
