March 2021

By Rabbi Josh Weinberg
April 2nd, 2021 – כ’ בניסן תשפ”א

Rabbi Meir said: When B’nei Yisrael stood by the Red Sea, the tribes strove with one another, each wishing to descend into the sea first. Then sprang forward the tribe of Binyamin and descended first into the sea; as it is said, … Thereupon the princes of Yehuda hurled stones at them; … For that reason, the righteous Binyamin was worthy to become the host of the All-Powerful (the Temple was erected on the territory of Binyamin, (Yoma 12a).

Rabbi  Yehuda said to [Rabbi Meir]: That is not what happened; each tribe was unwilling to be the first to enter the sea. Then sprang forward Nachshon the son of Amminadav (of the tribe of Yehuda) and descended first into the sea; … For that reason, Yehuda was worthy to be made the ruling power in Israel, as it is said, Yehuda became God’s sanctuary, Israel God’s dominion (the Temple was in the kingdom of Yehuda. ‘His dominion‘ is understood as Yehuda’s rule over Israel).  (Sotah 37a:1-6)

 Tomorrow morning, we will stand together to read the cathartic and climactic passage culminating our people’s narrative of leaving Egypt. As we passed through those narrow places fleeing from bondage on our way to freedom, we came to our first existential crisis as a people. Standing at the shores of the Reed Sea, its vastness posed a seemingly insurmountable obstacle. It’s hard to imagine that at the edge of the sea only one person went forward. According to legend, the Midrash tells of Nachshon ben Amminadav being the first to step forward and wade into the sea thus causing it to split moments before submerging.

This phenomenon, known as the “Nachshon Syndrome,” has been popularized in modern Israel. A unique attribute of Israeliness is when infantry officers say “Acharai!” (After me!) as they lead their troops into battle. Some say this is at the heart of the Israeli ethos dating to the days of Israel’s independence. It means leading by example – only when one takes the lead can one call on others to follow in step.

We learn from the midrash (Talmud, Sotah 37a) that Nachshon was not alone. There were others also who charged forward into the water, such as the tribe of Binyamin, and possibly more. Of course, with 12 tribes and close to 2 million souls (the number is probably far fewer), there had to be many who wanted to claim the leadership and have everyone follow them. After all, Moses was busy raising his staff, and others needed to step in. What happens when more than one person steps up and wants everyone to follow?

Well, in a democracy, majority wins. In an Israeli democracy, plurality plus the ability to entice others to join in coalition wins (in the short term).  Netanyahu and the Likud party, while losing mandates, still maintained a healthy plurality. Now he is trying to persuade others to follow him. His corruption trials and coddling of the extremists have been off-putting and alienated many voters with the result that Likud declined from 36 to 30 seats.

The real Nachshon test is for Yair Lapid, the head of Yesh Atid. As the distant runner-up with 17 mandates, he will need to work the hardest to repair relationships with old foes – namely Benny Gantz and Naftali Bennett – and make a compelling case for support.

As Lapid wades into the water – now above his knees – and looks to his right and to his left, he sees others trying themselves to be the Nachshon that history remembers. The anti-Netanyahu leaders on the right, Gideon Sa’ar and Naftali Bennett, as well as Benny Gantz and Islamic party leader Mansour Abbas are cluttering the field of “Nachshonim” and not making it easy for Lapid. The problem is that turning back is not an option. Going to a 5^th election, which the Prime Minister may be willing to do,  will be disastrous and the Israeli public may not take that sitting down.

It is the task of the leader to empower and delegate, but a leader must also inspire. No political achievement is without obstacles. Now the major challenge is to lead with inspiration, not just talk about what we are against but articulate a compelling vision for moving forward.

There were those who trudged through the dregs and mud of the Reed Sea maintaining their gaze downward at the muck around their feet. They missed seeing the majesty and the possibility of the moment and were, shall we say, uninspired.  A leader will lift their chins and remind them what the prophet said:

“Lift up your eyes on high and see who has created these stars, the One who leads forth their host by number, calls them all by name; because of the greatness of God’s might and the strength of God’s power, not one of them is missing.” (Isaiah 40:26)

In today’s world, every leader wants to be a Nachshon. Every leader is saying “Acharai.” But, just as it was for the Israelites standing at the sea, time is of the essence, and Israelis are facing political and democratic threats from within. Nachshon’s greatness was not merely that he took the plunge, but that he got everyone to follow him. It was for this reason that his tribe became “the ruling power in Israel.”

Hopefully, we will come out of this liminal period with a strong coalition and avoid devolving into perpetual political paralysis.

Shabbat Shalom and Hag Sameach!

Josh

By Rabbi Josh Weinberg                                                                    March 26, 2021 – י”ג בניסן תשפ”א

Last year as we ended our Seder with “Next Year in Jerusalem,” many of us added “and Next Year in Person!” Of course, when we say “Next year in Jerusalem,” we imagine it symbolically. We don’t actually expect to be spending next year in Jerusalem (despite our Zionist inclinations). However, most of us did expect, this year, to be celebrating our holiday of freedom and liberation, free and liberated from the throes of the global pandemic. We thought we would be joining together with family and friends, with community and congregations, for in-person Seders. Some may be doing that this year with the vaccine becoming more available, but for most of us it will be a second round of Zoom, or smaller and more intimate Seders.

As we sit down to our Pesach Seders tomorrow evening, our Haggadah will pose two very different and conflicting messages.

The first says:

“בְּכָל דּוֹר וָדוֹר חַיָב אָדָם לִרְאוֹת אֶת עַצְמוֹ כְּאִלוּ הוּא יֶָָצֶָא מִמִּצְרַָים”

“In every generation every one of us is obligated to regard ourselves as though we had gone through Mitzrayim (Egypt, and literally meaning ‘from constricted places’) .”

We are obligated to remember that we were slaves and strangers in the land of Egypt. The message of that command is simple, as taught by Israeli journalist and author Yossi Klein Halevi:

“Don’t be brutal.”

The second says:

“…שֶׁלֹּא אֶחָד בִּלְבָד עָמַד עָלֵינוּ לְכַלּוֹתֵנוּ אֶלָּא שֶׁבְּכָל דּוֹר וָדוֹר עוֹמְדִים עָלֵינוּ לְכַלּוֹתֵנוּ:“

“For not only one (enemy) has risen up against us to destroy us, but in every generation, they rise up to destroy us.”

This message comes from the often-sung passage known as “והיא שעמדה – V’hi She’amdah.” It is a staunch reminder of when the tribe of Amalek attacked us without provocation while we were wandering in the desert. The message of that command is:

“Don’t be naive.”

The first message is motivated by empathy towards the oppressed. We were slaves in Egypt ourselves; therefore, we must not oppress the stranger, the “other,” the powerless, and the downtrodden. We must not abuse our power, not just because that is morally and ethically objectionable, but all the more so because we have firsthand experience of what it means to be persecuted.

The second message is motivated by alertness to threat. Every day the army prevents an attack, foils a plot, and is in constant readiness for the next attack – whether it comes from the region or from next door.

As we sit around the Seder table and tell the story of our past, we are also thinking about our future. For many Jews – in Israel and the Diaspora – thinking about our future and Israel’s future raises our anxiety. We have anxiety about Israel’s security: Hezbollah continues to build up its military strength and capability on Israel’s northern border; there is uncertainty about the future with Iran; and no one can say what will happen after the Palestinian elections this May.

We have anxiety about the nature of the soul and democratic character of the Jewish State: there is the increasing strength of the extremist anti-democratic camps in Israel; the emboldening of the nationalistic, racist, homophobic, xenophobic, and misogynistic right wing; and the Haredi camp’s monopoly on Jewish religious life.

For many Israelis, the injunction “Don’t be naive” is obvious and second nature. Sad to relate, the injunction “Don’t be brutal” is not readily apparent. Witness recent violent attacks from specific Jewish settler communities against Palestinians and Jewish activists alike (like our colleague Rabbi Arik Ascherman). These mounting number of incidents show Jews failing to live up to the teaching “don’t be brutal.” They forgot that we too must see ourselves as having left Egypt. The fact that in every generation some individuals and groups rise to try and destroy us, as we sing, does not give us carte blanche permission and justification to act brutally ourselves – as every Israeli soldier knows.

This dichotomous notion appeared blatantly with the results of Israel’s elections on Tuesday. Enough Israelis chose to elect the top 6 members of the “Religious Zionism” party to the Knesset. Among the elected ranks of this seemingly unthreatening party lie two of the most radical and dangerous characters on the Israeli political scene – Itamar Ben Gvir and Avi Maoz. A proud disciple of the late Rabbi Meir Kahane, and admirer of the murdered Baruch Goldstein, Ben Gvir could potentially acquire a ministerial position – as their rise to prominence was championed by PM Netanyahu himself – and use that power to advocate for his racist and intolerant agenda.  Ben Gvir’s agenda aims to integrate Jewish law into Israel’s legal system, establish sovereignty over the Temple Mount, encourage settlement projects, engage in “total war” against the “enemies of Israel” and expel “Israel’s enemies” from the country.  Alongside him, Maoz, and his Noam faction have publicly campaigned against two great evils, in his eyes: single-sex relationships, and Reform Judaism.

And on the other hand, our Movement (while non-partisan) is elated at the election of the first Reform rabbi to the Knesset in Israel’s history. Not only is this reflective of the significant inroads made by the Israeli Reform Movement in society, but also about the message that Rabbi Gilad Kariv brings:

“We have made it into Israel’s Knesset, with our messages, with our values. We’re sounding a Jewish, egalitarian, democratic voice that strives for social justice, loves humanity, and strives for peace.”

This is not a well-balanced Knesset and those with universal values will have a very steep uphill battle to climb, which we are of course hoping that the final coalition will reflect the aforementioned values.

Pesach is a time to rejoice, to be with family, to recline, eat and drink, sing and talk, and most important to celebrate our freedom and hopes for a better, more just, and compassionate world. We can only do so when everyone is truly free.

Shabbat shalom,

Josh

By Rabbi Josh Weinberg                                                                             March 19, 2021 – ו’ בניסן תשפ”א

With 4 days left until Israel’s 4^th general election in two years we might ask: Is there a clever coalition calculus that will allow for regime change? Is there a way to avoid a democracy-on-steroids sinking us into a repetitive Groundhog Day-esque cycle of do-over elections until we get it right?

Of late, we’ve seen the formation of new parties. We’ve seen a few new players on the scene. And we’ve seen everyone carefully calculating whether to commit to coalition partners outright and wondering what declaration will be most popular with voters.

The declaration of “we’re not sitting with Bibi” does not necessarily define a specific ideological camp, but several camps. Entering politics to oust the record-setting, indicted incumbent doesn’t offer much by way of a movement. It’s not even the basis of a vision, a path forward, or an inspiring platform. Nonetheless, we might ask: Is it enough of a dangling thread to connect enough voters and non-Likud parties to reach the cherished Tetris-like amalgamation of 61 Knesset seats to form a ruling coalition? It could happen – if that was the only distinguishing factor.

We know that the Haredi parties, United Torah Judaism (which isn’t so united these days) and Shas (more than half of its voters are not Haredi;  generally Mizrachi – i.e. of Middle Eastern origin) have pledged loyalty to King Bibi. And we know that the Religious Zionist Party, which includes the extremist Kahanist Jewish Power Party (making it not your grandfather’s NRP) refused to swear loyalty to Netanyahu. But they did agree with Likud to an excess vote agreement (הסכם עודפים in Hebrew) in which parties agree before the election to combine their vote excess and thereby yield an additional mandate despite the party not independently reaching the minimum 3.5% required for standing in the Knesset. They did this with the hopes of cobbling together a coalition of Likud + ultra-Orthodox + fanatics. Hey, anything to stay in power, eh?

If we would just be satisfied with Bibi being the only one everyone wasn’t sitting with, we might be ok. But in today’s reality it seems like everyone has someone with whom they will not sit. Lieberman won’t sit with the Haredim. Lapid won’t sit with Haredim. Smotrich and his band of messianic meshuganers won’t sit with any Arab parties. Meretz won’t sit with Yamina. Yamina won’t sit with Meretz. UTJ won’t sit with Labor because of Reform Rabbi Gilad Kariv (despite Labor party head Merav Michaeli’s formidable relationship and unexpected alignment with MK Moshe Gafni on many issues). No one wants to sit with the extremist and racist Kahanist lawyer Itamar Ben Gvir. Gideon Sa’ar won’t be Lapid’s number two. Bennett hasn’t ruled anything out just yet. And Yair Golan of Meretz reminded everyone that he has more years in fatigues than everyone on the right combined, but still they see him as a “leftie” and won’t sit with him. Oh, and did I mention Ben Gvir and his radioactive toxicity?

Itamar Ben Gvir is in a particularly precarious position. Depending on the polls on any given day, he could be the 61^st MK rounding out Netanyahu’s narrow coalition.  Being MK #61 (like being a 10^th to complete a minyan) positions him, a person with 53 indictments against him, to have disproportional power such as a ministerial portfolio.

At the end of the day with everyone refusing to sit with someone and nobody willing to sit with everyone, the Knesset could look like an uncomfortable standing-room-only affair. Rather than the elections and subsequent coalition negotiations being about accommodating and compromising competing platforms, visions, and ideas, we see a war of real hatred among contenders – each one labeling the other with Judaism’s most vile attribution of טומאה – “impurity” (which we will cover in following weeks).

Is there any room for optimism that a reasonably stable government without extremist members will result after the election?

We will, of course, know more in the coming days and weeks. There may be opportunities for change. While the electoral gridlock does not offer much hope of bringing us to a different place than where we were after the three previous elections, we could see a few interesting things happen:

1. We will likely see the ascendance of Reform Rabbi Gilad Kariv (#4 on the Labor Party list) to hallowed halls of legislature. Of course, lest we think that the messiah has arrived, his influence will be somewhat limited, especially if his party is relegated to the Knesset Opposition. However, let us not be disheartened. A Reform rabbi as a member of the 120-representative body of the Jewish State was previously unthinkable. Despite Rabbi Kariv’s junior status and being on the back bench, the relationships he can forge and the influence he can exert with his election could indeed be significant for our movement and the cause of religious pluralism.

2. If an ‘anyone-but-Bibi’ coalition is cobbled together it will also mean the diminished power of the Haredi parties. As pluralists, we welcome the participation of the Haredi parties and respect their commitments to live as they choose. But, we believe they should only have proportional power and not be in a position to dictate religious observance and policy over the public sphere and towards non-Orthodox Israelis thereby showing Israeli society that there are many paths to holiness and many entries into religious life that includes Reform Judaism.

3. The Arab parties have now split, with three parties of the Joint List remaining together. Ironically, the fourth party, Ra’am led by Mansour Abbas, has been courted by Netanyahu (in stark contrast to previous elections), and who has also been in contact with Gideon Sa’ar’s New Hope party (the anti-Netanyahu camp). If by some weird chance of fate Ra’am becomes the party that enables Netanyahu to form a coalition (and puts his group over the edge), would that change the situation for Israel’s Palestinian citizens? As the law of unintended consequences would have it, we could see, however unlikely, Netanyahu’s toting and coddling the extremist right resulting in more power and benefit to the Arab minority.

We are not going to solve the puzzle before all the pieces are laid out. And don’t hold your breath because even after the elections we still may not know for a while what will be the composition of the new ruling coalition. Even now, after several months of protests; after the beginning of a criminal trial for a sitting Prime Minister; after a massive vaccination campaign; and after the beginning of a re-opening (for real this time, or so we hope); we may end up right back where we started. But, maybe, just maybe, a change is going to come.

Shabbat shalom,

Josh

By Rabbi Josh Weinberg                                                                                                     March 12th, 2021

There we were all in one place, a generation lost in space, and we were not sure what to do. Every Israelite together at one moment; all of us; at once; standing there in the middle of the desert with nowhere to go; waiting for instructions.

In the beginning of this week’s parasha VaYakhel-Pikudei (Exodus 35:1), Moses convenes the entire Israelite community and says to them: “These are the things that Adonai has commanded you to do: Sanctify your time – create a day of no work – Shabbat, and sanctify your space – create a Tabernacle. ”

Moses understood the necessity of liberating the Israelites from their previous slave mentality by giving them a day of rest. He also sought to unite the people, who were members of different tribes, under one common building project that would be the fruit of everyone’s labor and would be situated in the center of the camp. Before modern philosophy, Moses internalized the critical importance of sacred time and space. Immanuel Kant states that both are elements of a systematic framework we use to structure our experience.

While we may be comfortable using the term pluralism, it doesn’t translate well to “Israeli” (a direct translation into Hebrew does not exist).

So, let’s look at an example of how this plays out in Israeli society and use Shabbat as a case study:

Ahad Ha’am famously said: “More than Jews have kept Shabbat, Shabbat has kept the Jews.” We would not be who we are without Shabbat, and the ritual and importance of Shabbat has preserved us as a people over time.

According to traditional sources (i.e. Tanakh and the siddur), Shabbat has three purposes each of which serves to unite us as a people. In Genesis, observing Shabbat is a way to commemorate God’s creation of the universe on the seventh day when God rested from (or ceased) God’s creative work. In Exodus, Shabbat commemorates God’s redemption of the Israelites from slavery in ancient Egypt and differentiates us from slaves; and in later Jewish texts, Shabbat is a “taste” of Olam Haba (the Messianic Age).

In contemporary Israel, Shabbat is at the crux of a politicized world. Since the days leading to the establishment of the State of Israel, a vague Shabbat observance was instituted as part of the “Status Quo” agreement between David Ben Gurion, chairman of the Jewish Agency Executive, and the ultra-Orthodox Agudat Yisrael Party. The agreement sought to present a united policy to the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP)

In the letter, dated 19 June 1947, Ben-Gurion stated that neither the Jewish Agency Executive nor any other body in the country was authorized to determine in advance the constitution of the emerging Jewish state or its secular character. The letter stipulated policy principles in four main areas that are considered fundamental to Orthodox Judaism:

“Shabbat— the Jewish state’s day of rest would be that of Judaism, between sunset on Friday and sunset on Saturday.”

[The other three are Kashrut, Family laws (marriage, etc.), and Education]

Shabbat will be the day of rest. Simple, isn’t it? Since then, it has been anything but.

On the one hand, Shabbat has the potential to be the great unifier. It’s something that everyone in the country marks in some way. Shabbat is Shabbat. It’s what makes us ‘us.’ And it is a universal concept that offers hope for humanity – one of the Jewish people’s greatest gifts to the world.

What challenges the limits of pluralism is the question of what should be the public policy around Shabbat? In the interest of pluralism, should the state respect every citizen’s interpretation of the “day of rest?” Or, should the State impose a set of standards/expectations for behavior in public on Shabbat? Should the State support those who prefer to use public transportation, or who don’t have a choice, to who wish to enjoy nature, visit family, and access entertainment?  Or should the Jewish State ban public transportation altogether and insist that places of business remain closed to maintain a sense of “public sanctity” and respect those who want to maintain the traditional tranquility of and laws pertaining to the day of rest?

Shabbat observance has nearly brought down the government as construction work on Israel’s main thoroughfare sent the Haredi Parties into a frenzy a few years ago. Now the issue of transportation on Shabbat has become a social justice issue as Israelis without private cars have no other way of getting around on Shabbat except on public buses. Even during the past few electoral campaigns the liberal parties have rallied around Shabbat as a day off (or ‘day of freedom’ in Hebrew) where one’s options are not limited on Shabbat.

Pluralism challenges us to ask: “Are we meant to tolerate everything?” How far we can push our lines until they are no longer recognizable as Jewish? As Reform Jews, are there things that we should insist on doing on Shabbat and prohibit doing on Shabbat? In arguably one of the best scenes in all of film history ever, John Goodman’s character Walter (in the Coen bros epic 1998 film “The Big Lebowski”) refuses to “roll on Shabbes” (go bowling) because he’s “Shomer f#$%^& Shabbes!” Despite the humor, irony (Walter wasn’t actually Jewish), and silliness of the scene, it ought to challenge us to reflect on our own red lines? The question is what our red lines as a people are, and what are yours as individuals?

As Israel approaches elections in 11 days, we know that the Haredi and right-wing parties are campaigning on being the only ones who will preserve Judaism for the future. If they get their way there will be strict enforcement of Shabbat laws in public. Some have campaigned in favor of shutting down the “sacred cow” of Israeli sports – Shabbat afternoon soccer matches attended “religiously” by thousands. Public transportation on Shabbat (an issue that our Israeli Reform Movement has fought for) will remain a pipe dream. But even as we oppose the attempts of the Haredim to control public Shabbat observance, there are ways in which we could benefit from ‘powering off on Shabbat’ and taking a 24-hour break from our devices and technology.

Shabbat can elevate us, as Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel beautifully wrote: “It is one of life’s highest rewards, a source of strength and inspiration to endure tribulation, to live nobly . . . The Sabbath is the inspirer, the other days the inspired” (A.J. Heschel, The Sabbath, 22).

And so, as we strive to build a society in Israel struggling within the limits of pluralism, but also preserving our core as Jews and ensuring that we will  endure as a people, may this Shabbat be truly a Shabbat of Shalom, and of evaluation of who we are as individuals and as a people.

Shabbat shalom,

Josh