Building relationships or “bridges” with other communities — through education, dialogue and cultural experiences — has long been a strategy to address hatred toward Jews, not only for the benefit of the Jewish community but for the good of all communities and our country.

But over the past year, as antisemitism has skyrocketed, and as Jews have at times felt lonely and misunderstood by partners who do not hold their identity, many have wondered whether our efforts to build these bridges are working — and what it takes to create stronger, more effective ones.

GETTY IMAGES

How might we ensure our efforts to form partnerships are more successful, not only in fostering greater understanding about Jews and Judaism, but in advancing our collective goals as partners? I recently found some inspiration for how we might do all of this in one of the most unlikely of places: Jewish law regarding loan finances.

Many of us are familiar with the following commandment from the Torah: “You shall not deduct interest from loans to your fellow Israelites.” In layman’s terms: Jews are not supposed to charge each other interest. This commandment actually shows up three times throughout the Torah, highlighting its importance. Yet what you might not know, as I didn’t, is that there is actually a work-around for this law. (Did you ever wonder how banks in Israel operate?) In traditional communities that closely observe Jewish law, instead of a standard loan agreement, it is common practice to sign a “heter iska” — translated literally as a business permit — which transforms a loan into an investment partnership.

While the structure of the heter iska is complicated, its intent and impact are simple: It transfers risk from being solely on the borrower to being shared by two investors. Under a heter iska, there is no lender or borrower. Instead, there are two investors who both stand to lose their initial investment. This captures the notion that Jews are responsible for one another and, therefore, should take joint ownership of successes and failures.

So what would this level of mutual ownership look like in the context of bridge building? If we applied the spirit of these laws meant for relations between Jews to partnerships beyond the Jewish community, here are three potential guidelines for developing better, stronger partnerships:

1. Shared Goals, Shared Bottom Line. In a heter iska, the goals related to investment returns are clear, and both investors are responsible for profits and losses. Similarly, partners should share in outcomes together, whether they succeed or fail. Such is the case for participants in Rekindle, a program focused on Black-Jewish dialogue that has graduated 179 fellows since 2022. Following five sessions discussing diverse readings by Black and Jewish authors, fellows initiate a series of action projects to advance social justice within their community, such as joint walking tours discussing local Black and Jewish history or a healing circle for women to share challenges and opportunities with one another. These projects not only strengthen relationships but also lay the groundwork for longer-term collaboration. In this way, the fellows’ shared investment of time and commitment leads to shared outcomes.

2. Clarity About Each Partner’s Responsibilities. It’s not enough to say that all investors are responsible. A heter iska specifically states the percentages that each partner is responsible for if losses happen. We should get similarly clear in our partnerships about our goals, expectations, and commitments to one another. Rekindle, for example, requires its fellowship participants to make a set of commitments from the outset that are posted proudly on its website, including full participation, confidentiality, and a commitment to action. In the wise words of Rav Brené Brown, “Clear is kind.”

3. No Snakes Bites. In explaining the prohibition against charging interest, Rashi, an influential Jewish commentator, points out that the word used in the Torah for interest is neshech, literally translated as “biting.” Like a snake bite, which causes a small wound at first but quickly swells and expands, even minimal interest payments can turn into significant debts if not managed properly. In the same way, small everyday behaviors can have a big impact on partnerships, including the language we use (and don’t use). We must seek understanding of terms important to our partners, clarify definitions that can vary widely, and potentially avoid language that unknowingly can cause a snake bite that ultimately poisons the relationship.

While bridge-building efforts aim to create partnerships, we must also acknowledge the rare instances when this is not possible. The Torah refers to the prohibition against charging interest by saying “if you lend money,” not “when.” In other words, one is not required to give a loan, nor should one be required to enter, or stay in, a partnership if the above guidelines are not met.

This should be in the rarest of cases because the stakes of building bridges are high. If we resort to the loan-based model without mutual responsibility for success and failure, we will sink each other into debt. But if we pursue the investment partnership model with shared goals and outcomes, setting clear terms, and treating our partners with integrity, we will yield high returns — and reap the profits — this 5785 and in the years to come.

Jon Hornstein is a program director at The Harry and Jeanette Weinberg Foundation, where he leads grantmaking focused on the U.S. Jewish community, including efforts to address Jewish poverty, strengthen Jewish nonprofits and combat antisemitism.