an editorial from The Forward
Given the hysteria and defiance that characterized much of the American Jewish response to the provocative “conversion bill” now stalled somewhere in the Knesset, what we’re about to say may sound counter-intuitive. But bear with us. For it is possible that the high-stakes drama caused by an Israeli lawmaker’s ham-handed attempt to liberalize the conversion process could bring about just the sort of powerful shock to the system that relations between Israel and Diaspora Jewry desperately need.
Think of what’s been revealed: In the passionate outcry of Diaspora leaders, we’ve learned how deep is their fear that non-Orthodox Judaism lacks legitimacy in the eyes of the country they work hard to love and support. In the baffled response by many Israelis – who argue that the bill only puts in writing what’s been in practice for decades – we’ve learned of the enormous disconnect between those who are Jewish by virtue of where they live, and the rest of us who struggle to decide daily what kind of Jew to be.
And we’ve learned that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu can, when pushed, finally stand up to the reactionary elements in his governing coalition by opposing the bill in its current form and, we hope, doom its chances of final passage.
Like any good crisis, this has the potential for opportunity. Israel must assert its fealty to religious pluralism and recognize the absolute necessity for the Jewish state to act as a state for all Jews, to live up to its founding ideals and its contemporary promise. And it must do so out of real conviction, not just as a cynical response to placate wealthy Diaspora donors and politically powerful supporters who live a Jewish life that would scarcely be recognized by the ultra-Orthodox monopoly now in control.
Why herald Israel as the only true democracy in the Middle East when a woman is thrown in jail for holding a Torah? Never mind the hurt feelings of a few liberals; Israel has a strategic imperative to behave as a modern, pluralistic state if it is to maintain the high ground in the ongoing global struggle against religious fanaticism.
Diaspora Jewry can rightly claim victory in this latest standoff, but to what end? If this becomes merely a pretext for already disaffected Jews to walk further away from Israel, then the hysteria by American Jewish communal and religious leaders will have done more harm than good. The fury and anxiety unleashed during this drama has to be channeled into a positive commitment to genuinely engage with Israel.
Rabbi Donniel Hartman of the Shalom Hartman Institute, one of the saner voices during this emotional dispute, put it best: “It requires a commitment to Israel not as it is, but as it ought to be, and a willingness to invest in creating such an Israel.” And, he wrote recently, “it requires a deep caring.”
To care deeply doesn’t obligate us to swear blind loyalty and suppress disagreement. But it doesn’t allow us to turn our backs, either. With all the worried talk about the demise of “liberal Zionism,” here is a chance for Jews in Israel and the Diaspora to resurrect its future.
More than one Diaspora leader expressed fear that this conversion bill would eventually lead to a delegitimizing of non-Orthodox Judaism. Interesting choice of words, because the vocabulary of anxiety surrounding Israel often focuses on the efforts to “delegitimize” the Jewish state. Just as Israelis long to be legitimated by the world-at-large, so too do Diaspora Jews ache to be included in Israel’s definition of Judaism. And they should be.
This editorial originally appeared in The Jewish Daily Forward; reprinted with permission.
This conversion bill is OUR fault — meaning us Jews in the Diaspora. I can’t prove it, but it is an educated guess that almost all public criticism of Israel from Diaspora Jews comes from nontraditional (meaning everyone but Orthodox) Jews.
It is an educated guess that you can count the number of rabbis on the JStreet 400 list who are Orthodox on one hand.
It is an educated guess that the significant majority of American Jews who make aliyah are traditional Jews. And the examples go on and on.
So, why should any leader in Israel really care about what the nontraditional community says. The nontraditional community does not have a voice or any real clout in Israel—and deservedly so.
So, those of you who are complaining about this bill (and, by the way, I agree—it is a horrible bill), please understand that for the most part, no one is going to listen to you.
I agree that this is an opportunity for the Jewish State to affirm its commitment to Jewish pluralism, and also to send a message to the ultra-Orthodox that they do hold the ultimate power when making decisions about who is or is not Jewish. This bill also came at a terrible time not only in the relationship between Israel and the Diaspora community, but at one of great internal debate, angst and discord within the American Jewish community itself. I think we should take this as an opportunity begin a new conversation within North American Jewry about the role that Halachah can, does and perhaps should play in our communal lives. I say this not to provoke further distance or alienation between Israel and the Diaspora, but because I personally feel that we who live outside of Israel need to clarify our own thoughts and positions when it comes to Jewish identity. Only then will we be able to engage in a meaningful and productive dialogue with Israeli Jews, be they Haredi or secular.
None of the Judaisms of today is the same as that of Temple times, or Talmud times, or Rashi’s time, or the Baal Shem Tov’s time. Judaism evolves and changes to meet the changing needs of the Jews.
In today’s world, authentic religious Judaism is clearly what is preached in Reform and Conservative synagogues, even if it is not fully lived by all the members of those synagogues — nor by the adherents in many parts of the world of Orthodox synagogues either.
We have to stand up for the authenticiy of OUR Judaism, and question the authenticity of any fossilized practice or group of practitioners who are not ready to accept the idea that eilu v’eilu, these AND these are the words of the living God.
Larry, what has changed are outward appearances, i.e. shtreimel vs. fedora vs. knit yarmulke. What people who make your point never seem to get is that core Jewish practices have never changed. Things like Kashrut, Family Purity Laws and Shabbat Observance have been in their current form for thousands of years. So while many people love to make the “ultra” Orthodox the bad guys, the fact is: all traditional Jews practice the core elements of Judaism. Whether you wear a black coat or a t-shirt over your tzittzit is essentially superficial. The past 200 years (a small amount of time in Jewish history) has seen new “strains” of Judaism. But absent observance of the Mitzvot-what makes them Jewish? The pope wears a yarmulke-he still ain’t Jewish.
The trouble with Pete’s response to my prior post is that it’s just not true. There have been constant adaptations in the way all streams interpret the mitzvot — and who is to say that your stream’s interpretation of what Thou shalt not seethe the kid in its mother’s milk means is any more valid than my stream’s?
What people who make your point never seem to get is that core Jewish practices have always changed, and that efforts to build the fence around Torah have defied the injunction in D’varim 13:1 neither to add nor subtract from what Torah enjoins.
Halacha even as interpeted by mainstream “traditionalists” tells us that what makes people Jewish is not the style or even the presence of their head covering, but being born of a Jewish mother and not converting “out.” What makes the majority strains Jewish is that we take our marching orders from the sacred Jewish texts, which demonstrate an evolving way of understanding what is required of us. I am willing to understand Pete’s way of understanding as legitimate, albeit regressive. But I am not willing to be told that my progressive understanding is illegitimate.