Will We Ever Learn? A Thought for Parashat Korach

It always pains me, at least a little, to offer my thoughts on Parashat Korach (Numbers chapters 16-18).  It shouldn't.  The portion offers a narrative that that offers a - may I use this phrase, cliched by certain politicians? - Teaching Moment regarding dissent and conflict.  Moreover, it was my son Eyal's bar mitzvah portion, so it should - and does - bring forward many fond memories of an important family milestone.  But nevertheless it makes me look at the world around me, from the Jewish community moving outward to the greater world in ever-widening concentric circles, and realize that year after year, we learn nothing.  If a great national tragedy causes us to introspect and take a lesson that will make us wiser, stronger, and better, then that is ultimately for the good.  But if we keep engaging in the behaviors that led to the tragedy, then all the suffering that came with the tragedy is meaningless.  And unfortunately, that's where we are today.

Korach is a Levite who, with a group of 250 of his kinsmen, rebels against Moses' leadership.  Now I realize that, in my last blog installment, I asserted that Moses' leadership was on a downward trajectory to where Hashem would ultimately decide that Joshua Bin Nun must take over the reigns.  But that has not yet happened.  If Moses' leadership is faltering to the point that it would cause harm to the people Israel, there is not yet any indication thereof.  And remember, Moses is the leader whom G-d Himself chose despite Moses' not thinking he was up to the task.  Besides, Korach and his followers have not laid out a platform that indicates they have any better an idea of how to lead the people to success.  They simply want to be the ones in charge.

As I already pointed out, Korach and his followers are Levites.  That means they're not laymen.  Not rank-and-file.  They are members of the tribe which, as a whole, has been set apart from the people Israel to serve important functions in the cultus that serves as the nexus between Israel and Hashem.  They enjoy an exalted position.  But they want more.  They are drunk with the power they now wield, and it makes them want more.  And they want it so bad, that they are willing to push aside those specifically chosen by G-d for the highest positions:  Moses, his brother Aaron, and Aaron's sons.

Korach's only complaint against Moses is why do you lord it over to G-d's people?  But his only solution is to replace Moses with himself...so he, Korach, would then be in the position to lord it over to G-d's people.

Unfortunately, so much of the conflict we experience is of this nature.  We're ready to condemn leaders - at whatever level - for their failings, real or imagined.  But the conflict becomes about unseating the leader about whom we object, with little or no thought of a better way forward.

I'm not going to draw parallels to the national political situation in the USA, because they are all too obvious.  But I have seen this Korach Syndrome in effect at so many levels, in so many settings.  Seeing it operative over and over in Jewish religious life, drove me into retirement from the rabbinate years before I had planned.  It was just heartbreaking to see it tear at the fabric of the community, year after year with no end in sight.

I'm not suggesting we should not allow conflict, or that we should quash discussion of any issues that might lead us into conflict.  Rather, we should take heed to the Rabbis who used the conflict of Korach and his followers to teach us about conflict:  Conflict for the sake of Heaven (conflict for the purpose of finding a better way) as opposed to Conflict not for the sake of Heaven (conflict for conflict's sake, for usurping the current leadership).  The former is healthy - when carried on within certain constraints and parameters - and the latter is patently unhealthy.  As these important chapters come around once more, let's try to give Korach's rebellion a fresh look and really take the lessons it offers, to heart.  Shabbat shalom.

Unfit for Leadership?

Charlton Heston as Moses at his best in 'The Ten
Commandments'

My apologies in advance for not posting NEXT week; I'll be travelling and don't expect to be able to get to a computer.  But here's a thought for THIS week...



No, this isn't an essay about President Trump, please no!  It's about Moses!  But actually, there are parallels between Moses and Trump - as well as any flawed leader...and they're ALL flawed to one extent of another.

All leaders are flawed, because all PEOPLE, whether they aspire to leadership or not, are flawed.  But when one aspires to leadership, one's flaws become visible for all the world to see.  And they become more critical.  Say I have a 'locker room sense of humor,' such as Trump is popularly seen to possess.  If I'm just Don Levy, an individual, then if my humor offends you, you can just decide not to admit me into your circle of individuals who matter to you.  To put it more plainly, you can decide that my friendship is not worth having to listen to my jokes.  BUT...if I have insinuated myself into your life somehow, say by being elected your president, then you can't just ignore or avoid me.  I'm in your life whether you want me there or not.  That's why, if you particularly take exception to my expression of humor or whatever, you are likely to constantly question my fitness for whatever office I have managed to acquire.  This is why we are unforgiving of the foibles of presidents, congressmen, generals, or (much lower down the hierarchy) rabbis.

Moses, while being a giant of a man, is flawed.  He begins developing a short temper and loses his ability to deal rationally with the people Israel and even with G-d at times.  This causes his downfall.  It isn't that he should be an object of scorn.  Rather that his fitness for continuing to lead the people Israel comes into question.  Here, at the point in the Torah's narrative that we are reading these weeks (this week's reading, Beha'alotecha, begins with the eighth chapter of Numbers), he is starting to lose it.

Of course it is only human - and Moses is, if anything, human - to be reluctant to step down from leadership.  It is difficult after a time, to separate oneself from the entity one leads, and to see its continuance after one's pulling out.

Fortunately for Moses - and for the people Israel - G-d sees and recognizes Moses' developing unfitness, and ultimately decrees that the mantle be passed to Joshua bin Nun.  That doesn't happen this week (in the cyclical reading of the Torah), but the events we read about now definitely lead to it.

But the Jewish tradition fortunately does not develop a contempt for Moses just because his time as a leader ultimately passes.  Rather, we revere him.  The Rambam (Maimonides) called Moses the chiefest of the prophets, and I don't know of a Jew who would disagree with that assessment.

Leadership is an elusive quality.  It is rarely possessed, and it is rarely possessed permanently.  When it presents itself to us, it is our task to recognize it and to follow it.  Sometimes, it takes a powerful discernment to recognize it.  And to know when it is time to move on.

The Virtues of a Crowd

A Crowd, South Korean-style

This Sunday evening, we had a special program in Ashqelon.  A troupe of a couple hundred South Koreans came to mingle with the locals and put on a spectacular show.  Actually, two shows:  the first was a sing-along of Hebrew songs of praise to Hashem, which got the Israelis dancing and smiling; the second was a bigger production, a celebration of Korean culture and the world-view that Israel sits at the center of significance for Koreans of the Christian faith.

Many of Ashqelon's residents who attended the show, were overwhelmed.  While I heard only praise for it, some wondered if it had been over-done.  But I was thinking about it afterwards.  Koreans, and Asians in general, respond positively to the big spectacle.  Their cultures do not celebrate the individual as Western culture does, rather the virtue of the collective.  But Israel is, in that respect, very Western.

Dukhanen - the Priests offering the Blessing - at
the Western Wall

But, wait!  Tomorrow (Wednesday), there will be a huge gathering at the Western Wall in Jerusalem, where dozens - perhaps hundreds - of Cohanim will together bless the nation.  Thousands will be on hand to witness the spectacle.

And then of course, there's the original mass spectacle which we celebrate with this festival of Shavuot:  the giving of the Torah.  That was also an occasion when the entire people Israel - by some counts perhaps 2.5 million souls - was assembled.  This factor is the reason why, not only to religious authorities but to historians as well - all agree that something of great significance happened at Sinai, and that it is burned into the collective Jewish conscience forever.

In that spirit, despite that it did seem a bit overdone, I would submit that the spectacle of Sunday night's show should be taken as evidence of the sincerity of the Korean people in their ahavat Yisrael - their love of Israel.

A joyous Shavuot to all!

On Realpolitick and Peace

President Obama's reception in Saudi Arabia, 2014

The week before last, I was on a flight from London to Denver and seated next to a young man who seemed pleasant, but until the end of the flight we had almost no interaction.  Not surprising:  nowadays passengers on especially long flights tend to bury themselves in their in-seat media - or their own electronic devices that they've brought on board - and interact with one another far less than passengers tended to a generation or so ago.  But in the last hour of the flight, when the I-94's (customs and immigration declaration) were passed out, the young man turned to me for help.  He was Saudi Arabian, a high school student coming to the USA to stay with an American family for half a year as an exchange student.  His English was very basic, too basic for him to fill out the I-94 without assistance.  So I helped him, responding in kind to his pleasantness.  Even though I'm no fan of his country, especially given its intractable stance towards Israel, I tried to see the kid as just a human being who was feeling some anxiety over the relative-minor challenge of filling out a US government form.

President Trump's Reception in Saudi Arabia, 2017

I was thinking of the encounter this weekend, when President Trump went calling on the Saudis.  In addition to the very real (and I think, valid) gripes I have concerning the Saudis' behavior vis-a-vis Israel, I have a hard time seeing the Saudis as anything more than opportunists, wanting to hide behind American power while holding values that are anathema to us.

All this aside, it was hard for me not to take delight in the sort of reception that the Saudis gave the US President, not to mention his entourage which included his Jewish daughter and son-in-law (the latter especially, Jared Kushner, being well-known for his pro-Israel views.)  As we remember, Trump's detractors frequently call him an Islamophobe, and accuse him of sowing hatred towards Muslims and the Islamic world.

Well, either his Saudi hosts didn't read those opinion pieces, or they are too smart to take them seriously - and I suspect it's the latter.  It is very telling that the 81-year-old Saudi monarch, King Salman bin Abdulaziz, endured triple-digit temperatures (fahrenheit) to greet President Trump and his entourage on the tarmac at King Khalid International Airport.

The Right Wing media is awash in pictorial contrasts between the grandiose and extremely warm reception accorded POTUS 45, and the decidedly tepid greeting given President Obama, his immediate predecessor.  This, despite that Obama was seen as being extremely sympathetic and deferential towards the Islamic world - so much so that many reasonable people have wondered if he's a 'closet' Muslim - while Trump is seen by some as an Islamphobe who supposedly wants to rid America of all Muslims.  Although I generally have no taste for political statements via meme, I think the contrast is important and telling.   

And let's not forget also, the reception accorded Trump when he spoke to the conference of leaders from Arab and Islamic countries, on Sunday night.  Did any of them turn their backs, or walk out when Trump spoke?  Of course not.  If Trump is a Muslim-hater, that information somehow didn't reach this crowd either.

Instead, the leaders at the conference in Riyadh listened respectfully to what Trump had to say, because he was addressing an issue of mutual concern:  Radical Islamic Terror of the kind fomented by Iran, which country scares the bejeezus out of them.

(I experienced this myself years back, when I spent five months in Qatar in 2006.  I wondered why the tiny Gulf Emirate, sponsor of the anti-western cable network Al Jazeera, allowed the US and allies to use their country as an operational base for running Operation Iraqi Freedom, including the launching of strike missions from their soil.  Well, I got an earful of why, on the few occasions when I managed to have a conversation with a Qatari:  whether they agreed with our Iraq policies or not, they wanted us in the neighborhood to keep Iran in check.  Iran, not the US, is the enemy they fear.)

This illustrates a great paradox of statecraft.  A leader who is seen as strong, proud of his own country, and forthright even if that means that he says things that uncomfortable to others, is respected and is far more able to engage than a weak leader who is seen as fawning and/or insincere.  Trump is clearly seen in other world capitals as the former, while POTUS 44 was the latter.  Whether we particularly like the Saudis, or they us, or not, it doesn't especially matter as long as we respect one another and can work together towards our common interests.

One of those common interests is, of course, the realization of peace between Israel and her Palestinian neighbors.  As long as the US President was seen as the local policeman, forcing Israel to conform to his particular vision of how to make peace with no clear indication that it would get the Palestinian leadership to make any kind of confidence-building moves themselves, he was an impediment to peace - far more than the 'illegal' Israeli 'settlements.'  Perhaps President Trump, despite all the scorn heaped upon him by his detractors who see him as in way above his head, DOES have a real chance to make a difference in helping this festering part of the world to solve its problems.  Given the spectacular welcomes he received this week, first in Saudi Arabia and then in Israel, perhaps he isn't as clueless and without substance as some think him.  At least, let's give him a chance and see.

On Plagues and Bonfires

Allow me to apologize in advance for next week.  I will be on vacation and will probably not be able to post in this blog.

There's never a dull moment in Israel; there's always something special going on!  Last week we had the consecutive-day observances of Yom Hazikaron (Memorial Day) and Yom Ha'atzama'ut (Independence Day) keeping us busy.  This week, once Shabbat had ended, I noticed bonfires being lit every evening, all over Ashqelon.  What's the occasion?  The minor holiday of Lag Ba'omer will be this coming Sunday, and apparently many of the locals don't wish to wait.

(I call Lag Ba'omer a 'minor holiday' not to say it isn't important.  That designation refers to there being no prohibitions on work on that day, as there are on the 'major' holidays.)

Lag Ba'omer refers to the 33rd day of the Omer.  The latter is a counting of the days from the second day of Pesach, through the day before Shavu'ot: 49 days total, or a 'week' of weeks.  Strictly speaking, the Omer originated in a daily grain offering brought to the temple during the seven weeks leading up to the festival of Shavu'ot (which name means 'weeks.')  Since we don't have a Temple to which to bring offerings today, we remember the practice with the 'offering' of counting the days.  Many contemporary spiritual leaders use the Counting of the Omer as an opportunity to offer daily lessons for spiritual growth for their followers.  In the last two years, I responded to a challenge from a member of my congregation in Australia, to post a daily challenging thought for the period of the Omer; you can find the postings on my old blog, rabbidoninoz.blogspot.com.  Since I'm in retirement (or at least, a semi-retirement) I decided not to continue the practice this year.

Another aspect of the period of the Counting of the Omer, is that it is a period of semi-mourning.  In antiquity, 24,000 of the students of the great sage, Rabbi Akiva, died of a plague during the first 32 days of the Omer.  The plague ceased on the 33rd day, leaving Akiva with five surviving students.  One of those was Shim'on Bar Yochai, who in traditional circles is credited as the author of the Zohar, the most important book of Jewish mysticism.  Lag Ba'omer (Lamed Gimel is the equivalent of 33 in Jewish Gematria) was ultimately the Hilula (Yahrzeit, or death-day) of Bar Yochai.  In Jewish tradition, the death-day of great figures is actually celebrated after a time:  a celebration of that person's contributions.  Since Bar Yochai is credited with the Zohar, you can understand why his Yahrzeit is a particularly joyous occasion.  Anyway, many traditionalist Jews observe the various customs of mourning during the Counting of the Omer.  For example, they will not play joyous music, dance, shave, cut their hair, or get married.  But on Lag Ba'omer, a big party is called for and all mourning is stopped.  But why are bonfires lit?  Because Bar Yochai's legacy left a great light to illuminate the path of righteousness for Jews throughout eternity.

Contemporary Israelis are as impatient as any other people!  Therefore, bonfires are popping up all over, in advance of the holiday.  Perhaps they're for my benefit, since I won't be here in Israel on Sunday.  Hey, you never know!    

The I-Thou Relationship and Bridging Political (and other) Gaps

Martin Buber

Many of us have a special friend with whom we meet regularly, and with whom we spend time "solving the world's problems...even though nobody asked us."  I quote that expression from Stan Lacey, z"l, a member of my congregation in Australia.  He had such a friend, whom he called 'Doctor George.'  I've got such a friend here in Israel, Alan, a fellow oleh from the USA but who has been here many years, and is considerably older than me.  We meet every Friday; sometimes we go for a walk and sit at a cafe, sometimes we just sit in one of our homes, and we solve the world's problems...even though nobody asked us.

Last time we met, Alan asked me if there were any particular books I've read, that were especially memorable.  I answered, without hesitation, that I and Thou by Martin Buber was not only memorable, but life-changing.  And Alan agreed; he allowed as how Martin Buber's little epistle had been formative for him, too.

I want to write about two things today:  the affect of I and Thou and the way to bridge political gaps.  And in reality, they're both related.

I and Thou, once you get past Buber's use of the specific language of philosophy, challenges us in all our relationships, to see the relationship as an end in itself.  Most of us, if we're honest, are rather utilitarian about most of our relationships; we enter them, and stay in them, because we believe the Other will provide us with something.  In the way that, when we enter a store, a sales associate whom we encounter, will provide us with a means to find and buy the product we went in for.  That associate becomes, in effect, an object for our desire/need to acquire that item.  This type of relationship, as usually played out, is what Buber calls I-It, where the associate is an it, no more than an object.

A relationship between a sales associate and a customer, is generally a most superficial and short-lived relationship.  But we tend to approach even our most potentially enduring relationships as I-It.  Not that we think about it much, if at all.  But we tend to go through life, looking for individuals who have something we want, and build relationships, the premise of which is that we might get that which we seek.

The way that we deepen our relationships is to transform them to Buber's I-Thou model, where the Other becomes an entity which needs no justification of utilitarian purpose.  Under this model, we don't seek out partners in relationships who have something specific to offer.  Rather, we form relationships naturally with whomever we encounter as each person is an entity needing no justification for their existence or their presence in our lives.

If this sounds like just a lot of mumbo-jumbo, I recommend you spend the next few weeks trying it.  Every time you encounter someone else, even in the most superficial of circumstances, think of them as a subject, not an object.  Look into their eyes and allow yourself to feel empathy - identification - with that person and whatever their circumstances are.  And see how much more meaningful and satisfying your relationships become.  When I first read I and Thou years ago, I took its message to heart and worked to put it into effect in my life.  And it was transformative.

What was interesting was that, after discussing I and Thou with Alan, I realized that our relationship was special precisely because it is an I-Thou relationship.  And out of this realization comes my second lesson of the day, which is really a result of the first.

When we pursue I-It relationships, a profound difference between the two principles will usually lead to an effort to 'proselytize' the Other, to bring him or her over to your side on whatever divides you.  If that fails - as it generally does - then that relationship is easily disposable.  Of course, the word 'proselytize' comes from religion, but we proselytize in other areas as well.  Like politics.  People often say that they keep religion and politics out of conversations, and thus keep their conversations pleasant.  And yet, it seems unnatural to build a fence around some subject just to avoid disagreement.  What they aught to try, is to keep proselytizing about religion, politics, or whatever out of their conversations.  Because someone to whom you proselytize, in effect becomes an object, and your relationship with him or her becomes I-It.  So, when the proselytization fails, there's nothing left of the relationship.  And you might miss out on a very meaningful relationship, simply because you and that person disagreed on something.

That's how it is with my friend Alan, the conversation with whom reminded me of I and Thou, and of the I-Thou relationship.  There's a wide gulf between us in one area:  in this case politics, in that Alan is a man of the Left and I'm more Right-of-Center.  And yet, when we met one another, instead of seeing that gulf immediately as something to 'work on' in the sense of convincing the Other over to my side, each of us realized that we have far more in common.  Because neither of us sees the other as an object, our conversations - and yes, we do talk about politics regularly! - do not take on the quality of proselytizing.  Instead, we share our ideas without any thought of changing the Other's mind.  And it works.

I offer this, because I think it is very timely.  Right now, in both the countries that mean so much to me, there are particularly deep divisions that tend to alienate one citizen from another, based solely on one's particular stance on one issue.  We caricature others based on some ideological test.  And as a result, we miss out on seeing things that we have in common.  And we miss out on potential relationships that could be deep and satisfying and life-changing.    

What Sort of Country?

Here in Israel this week, preparations for Yom Ha'atzma'ut - Independence Day - are in full swing.  Blue-and-white bunting is in evidence all over.  The onset of the holiday will be Monday evening, immediately following Yom Hazikaron, Memorial Day, which will be Sunday evening through Monday evening.  We just had a Memorial Day Monday of this week, but that was the Memorial Day for the victims and resistors of the Shoah, the Nazi Holocaust of 1933-1945.  The Memorial Day that happens immediately before Independence Day, is to memorialize the soldiers and civilians who fell in Israel's wars and the reign of terror against the state.

I like the idea of placing Memorial Day immediately before Independence Day.  It serves as a reminder that independence comes only with a high price - not just for Israel, but for many nations on the earth.  Memorial Day here is quite somber.  The radio stations play minor-key music, the TV is full of programs about battles and their casualties, and there's a national moment of silence as there was for the Shoah this week.  The juxtaposition does not temper the celebrations - which here in Israel can be quite raucous - but reminds the populace of the cost to be able to celebrate.  In the USA, with Memorial Day occurring on the last Monday in May and Independence Day on the Fourth of July, it's no surprise that we don't have that level of clarity.

The State of Israel is about to turn 69 years old.  Being such a young state, it is not surprising that there is still much argument over what sort of country it is.  It is, strictly speaking, a secular state but it is the most religious secular state I've ever seen.  Some secularists here see the influence of religion - specifically, Orthodox Jewish religion - as being coercive at times.  That influence is often inconvenient for those not inclined towards religious observance.  Just to take one example, the way that all public transport shuts down considerably before sundown Fridays and the eve of religious holidays.  And doesn't start up until after sundown on the next day.  This makes travel quite chaotic before and after the Sabbath and festivals.

Being a religious guy myself, and retired (at least for now), I don't mind the inconveniences.  They force me to accomplish everything I need to before the chaos starts, so that I can observe the coming holy day in its fullness.  But I understand why, for secular Jews, the government-mandated Shabbat and festival observances grate on them.

My only wish is that religious teachings other than specific ritual observances would get more play in the marketplace of ideas.  There seems to be little to no conversation about the lofty traditions of mutual respect, the worth of the human being, and the value of peace.  Since the 'Peace Camp,' of the Left, collapsed as a political force after the start of Intifada II in 2001, the nationalist camp seems to have set aside the teaching of ethics and humanity.  An example:  not long ago, a soldier in the IDF shot and killed a Palestinian Arab who had attacked a group of soldiers, but was that the time wounded and restrained.  From the aforementioned nationalists, there was an outcry and a raft of political protest when the soldier was convicted by a military court, even though the sentence was fairly light.  The outcry that the soldier should have been acquitted of any crime, as opposed to being given a light sentence because of the circumstances of the transgression, represents turning away - at least for some - of the principles of Tohar Haneshek, meaning 'Purity of Arms' or ethics in warfare, that have been the guiding principle of the IDF since its inception.  But the religious/nationalists have turned their focus, to an unfortunate degree, on ways to force the populace to 'act religious.'  In my mind, this only trivializes religion.

(By the way, I find my own civic home more in the nationalist camp, but I think it's important to have a robust and self-confident Left as well; it makes for a acknowledgement of different ideas, different options, different visions of society.  If only one side of the philosophical coin can express itself confidently, it's to everybody's loss.)

It's not unique to Israel that there are conflicting ideas as to the nature of the country.  In the USA, 240 years after her founding, there are still deep divisions over the kind of society that should be created.  I saw such conflict in Australia also.  So the kulturkampf underway in Israel today makes an important statement, not so much about the influence of religion or the uniqueness of Israel, as about the free and open forum of ideas that exists here.  Hopefully it will stay that way!