Oh Jerusalem!

This comes not only as valuable comment but also by way of introducing Rabbi Michael Lerner - to the blog, and into Australia as another Jewish voice to the One so often heard as commentator on and commentary about Israel.

(monday, february 19 2007 @ 11:22 am pst)
Tikkun Editor Rabbi Michael Lerner argues that by seeking to discredit critics of Israel as "anti-Semitic" or "self-hating Jews," Israel's blind supporters in the Jewish world only succeed in emptying the charge of anti-Semitism of any meaning.

There is no New Anti-Semitism
Rabbi Michael Lerner The San Jose Mercury 2/7/07

The N.Y. Times reported on January 31 about the most recent attempt by the American Jewish Community to conflate intense criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism. In a neat little example of slippery slope, the report on “Progressive Jewish Thought and the New Anti-Semitism” written by Alvin H. Rosenfeld moves from exposing the actual anti-Semitism of those who deny Israel’s right to exist—and hence deny to the Jewish people the same right to national self-determination that they grant to every other people on the planet (the anti-war group International Answer is a good example of that, though Rosenfeld doesn’t cite them)—to those who powerfully and consistently attack Israel’s policies toward Palestinians, see Israel as racist the way that it treats Israeli-Arabs (or even Sephardic Jews), or who analogise Israel’s policies to those of apartheid as instituted by South Africa.
The Anti-Defamation League sponsored a conference on this same topic in San Francisco on Jan.28, conspicuously failing to invite Tikkun, Jewish Voices for Peace and Brit Tzedeck ve Shalom, the three major Jewish voices critiquing Israeli policy yet also strong supporters of Israel’s security.
Meanwhile, the media has been abuzz with stories of Jews denouncing former President Jimmy Carter for his book Palestine: Peace or Apartheid. The same charges of anti-Semitism that have consistently been launched against anyone who criticises Israeli policy is now being launched against the one American leader who managed to create a lasting (albeit cold) peace between Israel and a major Arab state (Egypt).
Yet there is nothing “new” about this or about this alleged anti-Semitism that these mainstream Jewish voices seek to reveal. From the moment I started Tikkun Magazine twenty years ago as “the liberal alternative to Commentary and the voices of Jewish conservatism and spiritual deadness in the organised Jewish community” our magazine has been attacked in much of the organised Jewish community as “self-hating Jews” (though our editorial advisory board contains some of the most creative Jewish theologians, rabbis, Israeli peace activist and committed fighters for social justice). The reason? We believe that Israeli policy toward Palestinians, manifested most dramatically in the Occupation of the West Bank for what will soon be forty years and in the refusal of Israel to take any moral responsibility for its part in the creation of the Arab refugee problem, is immoral, irrational, self-destructive, a violation of the highest values of the Jewish people, and a serious impediment to world peace.
What the Jewish establishment organisations have done is to make invisible the strong roots in Judaism for a different kind of policy. The most frequently repeated injunction in Torah are variations of the following command: “Do not oppress the stranger (the ‘other’). Remember that you were strangers in the land of Egypt.” Instead, the Jewish establishment has turned Judaism into a cheer-leading religion for a particular national state that has a lot of Jews, but has seriously lost site of the Jewish values which early Zionists hoped would find realisation there.
The impact of the silencing of debate about Israeli policy on Jewish life has been devastating. We at Tikkun are constantly encountering young Jews who say that they can no longer identify with their Jewishness, because they have been told that their own intuitive revulsion at watching the Israeli settlers with IDF support violate the human rights of Palestinian civilians in the West Bank or their own questioning of Israel’s right to occupy the West Bank are proof that they are “self-hating Jews.” The Jewish world is driving away its own young.
But the most destructive impact of this new Jewish Political Correctness is on American foreign policy debates. We at Tikkun have been involved in trying to create a liberal alternative to AIPAC and the other Israel-can-do-no-wrong voices in American politics. When we talk to Congressional representatives who are liberal or even extremely progressive on every other issue, they tell us privately that they are afraid to speak out about the way Israeli policies are destructive to the best interests of the United States or the best interests of world peace—lest they too be labelled anti-Semitic and anti-Israel. If it can happen to Jimmy Carter, some of them told me recently, a man with impeccable moral credentials, then no one is really politically safe.
When this bubble of repression of dialogue explodes into open resentment at the way Jewish Political correctness has been imposed, it may really yield a “new” anti-Semitism. To prevent that, the voices of dissent on Israeli policy must be given the same national exposure in the media and American politics that the voices of the Jewish establishment have been given.

the humiliation of the Word

Mystery of SILENCE

Now we are coming to the last characteristic to keep in mind about the word : it is mystery. The most explicit and the best explained word still brings me inevitably back to mystery. This mystery has to do with the other person, whom I cannot fathom, and whose word provides me with an echo of his person, but only an echo. I perceive this echo, knowing that there is something more. This is the mystery I feel as I recognise spontaneously that I do not understand well or completely what the other person says. There is a mystery for me in my own lack of comprehension, as I become aware of it. How am I going to react ? How can I respond ? I sense a whole area of mystery in the fact that I am not very sure I understand correctly. I am not very sure about answering. I am not very sure of what I am answering.

There is always a margin around our conversation. More precisely, conversation is like this printed page, framed on all sides by white margins, without words, but which can be filled in with any word at all. The margins situate a conversation and give it the possibility of rebounding and beginning again. They allow the other person to participate with his marginal comments. I am aware of this possibility, but I do not know what marginal comments are going to appear beside what I say, changing it. Here again we are dealing with the unexpected. And we come up against the mystery of silence.

The mystery of silence as a break in discourse, not silence in the sense of something that discourse fills up! The enigmatic, disturbing, saddening silence of the other person is an inconvenience as I wait. I expect a response, an explanation, or a statement from him. He falls silent, and I no longer know where or how to take my place in relation to him. More precisely, I no longer know how to be as I face him. I find myself faced with a mystery which eludes me when there is a lull in the conversation. I expect words, but this silence constitutes a chasm in the word, which continues unspoken. It is unheard, but it cannot be eliminated. Thus in all sorts of ways the word is related to mystery. It expresses and engulfs us in mystery. There is a reason why mythos and logos go together.
- from “The Humiliation of the Word” Jacques Ellul pp 25 - 26 1985 ISBN 0-8028-0069-6

Aesthetics in context

My first posting introduced by way of a statement recaste as question the role of aesthetics came from Bishop N.T. Wright of Durham. The following sermon provides useful starting point. His reference to artists and aesthetes was affirmed at both his Sydney and Brisbane conferences at Easter 2006. Such folk were given voice at question time.

Read it here: Apocalyptic and the Beauty of God (Isaiah 65. 17–25; Revelation 21.9–27), a sermon at Harvard Memorial Chapel, October 22 2006 by the William Belden Noble Lecturer, Bishop N. T. Wright(Bishop of Durham.