"He wants to avoid meeting with the non-Jewish in-laws. She can't live without it."

A Convert's Family Ties
by Rosie Einhorn, L.C.S.W. and Sherry Zimmerman, Esq.,

From: http://www.aish.com/dating/advice/Dating_Advice_141_-_A_Converts_Family_Ties.asp



Dear Rosie & Sherry,

A year ago I converted to Judaism, and four months ago I got married to a wonderful man, whom I do love with all my heart and who loves me. We are convinced that we were destined for each other from Heaven.

Nevertheless, we have had terrible fights and are now learning to get along with each other.

For the past three years I have been living in Israel, where my husband was born. I grew up in Switzerland, where my parents and siblings are living. In the last three years, I visited them a few times for about a week. Before I got married, I agreed to his wish "to minimize contact" from my family, since under Jewish law they are technically no longer my family.

My parents and siblings came to our wedding and spent a wonderful week with us. And since they were here, and left, something happened to me. I "reconnected" and feel incapable of going without seeing them for a few weeks in the year. But my husband is discouraging me from going to visit them and it has placed our marriage in danger. Do I have to choose between either my marriage or being able to see my family?

Sarah

Dear Sarah,

As you are learning, all newly married couples go through a long period of adjustment. It is a challenge to adjust to another person's rhythms, habits, and way of squeezing the toothpaste. New husbands and wives gradually discover which "buttons" can upset their partners or make them happy, how to improve communication and the many ways to resolve disagreements.

It is only natural to want to maintain a connection to the family members you care about, with whom you shared life experiences, and who had a great deal of impact on who you are today. And in our experience most converts to the Jewish faith have relationships with their families of origin.

We believe that you and your husband need the guidance of a third party to help in this instance. A sensitive rabbi will be able to help you reconcile the considerations of Jewish law with considerations of the heart.

It is our understanding that Jewish law takes two different approaches to a convert's relationship with her parents and family members. In one respect, after conversion a person is considered as if she has a new soul. Practically, this means that those aspects of Jewish law governing such areas as inheritance and mourning for a family member do not apply in her situation.

However, a convert is still required to follow many aspects of the commandment to honor her natural parents. The Code of Jewish Law clearly states that one who converts to Judaism must treat her parents at least as well as she did before she became a Jew, may not embarrass or offend them, and must treat them with respect. (YD 241:9)

Granted, one aspect of honoring parents is that they are a link to our heritage -- an aspect that doesn't apply when one's parents are not Jewish. But the other reason to honor parents is the tremendous debt of gratitude for all they have done for us. That of course applies to any biological parents. Interestingly, the Talmud cites the example of a non-Jew, Dama Ben Netina, to exemplify many of the most important aspects of honoring one's parents.

Your husband may not have been aware of this aspect of Jewish law at the time he asked you to agree to diminish contacts with your family. Similarly, he may not realize that after sharing the joy of your marriage with your parents, your feelings of gratitude, appreciation and love for them were renewed. He may not be able to realize that if you do not see them occasionally, you will also be deeply hurt and will come to resent him.

When someone comes to us with questions about a courtship that may be heading for marriage, we always ask if their dating partner seems flexible and willing to grow. These are very helpful qualities for a husband or wife to possess, because life always seems to toss us curve balls that throw our expectations into disarray. One partner loses a job... develops an illness... realizes that they cannot fulfill a promise.

This agreement to minimize contact may have been an underlying factor in your husband's decision to marry you. Though you now realize this will be virtually impossible for you to live with. The two of you have to be able to work together to adjust to the new situation.

Hopefully, you and your husband will be able to have a heart-to-heart talk. Of course, you will want to explain how you are torn between maintaining a connection to your family and continuing to strengthen your marriage to a man whom you care deeply for, but are actually only beginning to truly know. It is also important for your husband to explain why he wants you to minimize contact with your family.

Perhaps your husband is concerned that your situation (being Jewish and having non-Jewish blood relatives) will be confusing to the children you hope to have someday. It is also possible that he worries that if you continue to be close to your parents and other family members, you might be influenced to return to the non-Jewish religion you grew up with.

There may also be another reason behind your husband's request: He may feel a need to be in control. Sometimes, a partner who wants to have control in a marriage tries to minimize his spouse's contacts with her family and friends. This eventually leaves her with no support system, so that she gradually becomes totally dependent upon him. He then tries to take charge of other aspects of his wife's life -- her wardrobe, career, daily activities, financial decisions.

From how you have described your marriage, it doesn't appear that your situation is at such an extreme. For example, you've told us that you are working very hard at learning to compromise and adjust to each other -- a sign that you are trying to achieve a partnership, not a dictatorship. Nevertheless, if your husband does have controlling tendencies, this is a serious danger sign, and the help of a trained therapist may be needed to deal with this now, so that it does not interfere with your ability to build a happy, mutually supportive life together.

As newlyweds, you are still learning how to resolve minor disagreements, and a big issue such as this will be a challenge. We can see that you are worried that you will not be able to reach a compromise. This is a natural concern for someone who has only been married a few months. Yet look how far the two of you have come in just a few short months! Think of all of the ways you care for each other and are good for each other.

Rather than imagine that your marriage might end because of this disagreement, we encourage you to believe that you and your husband care enough about each other to find a solution that you both can live with, and that your marriage will not only survive this episode, but will become stronger because you learned how to resolve a difficult dilemma together.

Our Sages do offer a general guideline, a "middle road" to balance both of your wishes: A convert should visit his parents occasionally (Maimonides - Mamrim 5:11; "Igrot Moshe" by Rabbi M. Feinstein, Y.D. II 130).

It is important that you give your husband reassurance that occasional visits with your parents are not likely to cause the scenarios he worries about.

The reassurances can come from you, from other couples in which one of the partners has converted to Judaism, and from a rabbi who has a fair amount of experience with converts. Your can talk with your husband about your own love of the Jewish faith, about the fact that as the two of you develop a common history he will be able to see your spirituality more clearly and will be able to worry less, and about the fact that your love for your family is part of your character but does not interfere with your Jewishness.

We also suggest that you meet some happily married couples where one of the partners converted to Judaism. They can share their own experiences and describe how they have dealt with some of the concerns that worry your husband.

We believe that the two of you can resolve the dilemma you face., and that your marriage will become stronger in the process.

Rosie & Sherry

Author Biography:

Questions for Rosie & Sherry can be sent to
datingmaze@aish.com. Due to the large volume of questions received, they are unable to answer each one.

Rosie Einhorn (a psychotherapist) and Sherry Zimmerman (a family lawyer) are the authors of a brand-new book, "In The Beginning - How To Survive Your Engagement and Build a Great Marriage" (Targum Press), and of "Talking Tachlis - A Singles' Strategy for Marriage." They are founders of Sasson V'Simcha (www.jewishdatingandmarriage.com), a non- profit organization which provides programs and services to help Jewish singles. Rose & Sherry present seminars on effective dating throughout Israel and the U.S.

This article can also be read at: http://www.aish.com/dating/advice/Dating_Advice_141_-_A_Converts_Family_Ties.asp

Copyright © 1995 - 2003 Aish.com - http://www.aish.com
- posted by Izak @ 11:51 PM (0) comments

 
Question for Simshalom about nature of being "First Born" in Judaism.

Question:

Very good essay sim shalom.....these comparisons come to light and understanding considering our present state. The rabbis have done a find job, as you are trying also to bring about an understanding. I often meditate on the Torah....laws of conduct, as I meditate I too ask Why? So reading yer essay here something came to my mind that has been there for as long as I can remember....this being. The question of the first born and his inheritance. The significance of his additional portion. You have related within yer essay, of some sort of spiritual obligation a special blessing to the first born given by HaShem. I agree with this, but also see much misunderstanding surrounding it. If we take into consideration the responsibilities of the first born , as the leader of the family we then understand his greater portion. Thus allowing him to take the positon of his father and have the substance to do that task with. Now with Jacob and Essau we have two sons....and as you have related one son having the moral committment and takeing seriously his inheritance ( Jacob)....the other brother being Essau which by his nature would not follow in his fathers ways, but prone to murder and disobedience. Outwardly showing respect and honour to his father but inwardly a contempt for his birthright. Now I ask this, who would HaShem chose to be the leader of his fledgling group. By tradition we have been taught it is the first born, but NO it appears that it is the upright he seeks out. Thus the moral and ethical mind of Jacob wins over . As we also see the choice of the younger David ( whom HaShem used to unite all the children of Jacob in a later time)....We as Jews even though by birthright recieve a greater portion. if we do not have the moral and ethical heart of Jacob, what does that make us?....What value are we to our families or the family of human kind. Will our inheritance be stipped from us such as Essau's was.....finding the younger brother more fit for the task at hand? Yes we do have the promise!! But with that promise comes great responsibilities ( which by tradition is passed on to the first born) But we see here how that can be taken away...because of contempt for it. Sim Shalom thank yu for your essay , I promise to keep up with you in it...very needful things to reveal.

SIMSHALOM Responds:
Dear "XYZ",
Thanks for your response.
The subject of being "First Born" is extremely serious in Judaism, as it even ties in with the formation of the nation of Israel at the time of the Exodus over 3,300 years ago.
The Children of Israel are called God's FIRSTBORN and because the ancient Egyptians abused them their own first-born suffered direly:
"God said to Moses...You must say to Pharaoh, 'This is what God says: ISRAEL IS MY SON, MY F I R S T B O R N. I have told you to let My son go and serve Me. If you refuse to let him leave, I will ultimately kill your own FIRST-BORN son'." (Exodus 4, verses 21-23)
And then later: "Moses said to Pharaoh in God's name,...'Every FIRST-BORN in Egypt will die, from the FIRST-BORN of Pharaoh sitting on his throne, to the FIRST-BORN of the slave girl...every FIRST-BORN animal will also die...Never before has there been anything like it, and never again will there be the like...'." (Exodus 11, verses 4-6).
So the subject matter of being "First Born" in God's eyes, and hence in Judaism and the Torah as a whole, is a very, very serious and volatile and subject without which an understanding of the Torah is not possible.
Thanks for staying tuned.
Best wishes,
simshalom@att.net

And onother person says:

Dear SIm and "XYZ" and everyone

I like the point "XYZ" is making, I believe to, that Hashem did on
purpose, to show that one could be chosen by birth right, yet could loose
his rights by consequence of his attitude , very big lesson ,which hashem I
guess didn't want to miss, proofing for following generations, that, the
mitzvoth prevail on the birthright, that hashem could if we don't behave
spiritually remove his blessing and change it into a curse, like it was
describe by MOche before his passed on the command to JOshua,

..SIm thank you for bringing more holiness into this haven..

And SIMSHALOM Responds:

Dear "ABC",
Thank you for your input.
One point never to lose sight of is that the JEWISH PEOPLE's, meaning the Children of Israel's, "First Born" Status as "God's First Born Son" is PERMANENT!
Christianity has claimed that it became the "new" Israel and so it thenit, or its founder, became the "new" "first born". This is totally against Judaism!
Judaism maintains that the Jewish People alone remain forever God's FIRSTBORN son, even though they may sometimes slip in observance of the Torah and mitzvot, nevertheless, they will never lose the status of : "THIS IS WHAT GOD SAYS ; ISRAEL IS MY FIRSTBORN" (Exodus Chapter 4, verse 22). No "ands, ifs or buts!"
Best wishes,
simshalom@att.net

- posted by Izak @ 9:58 PM (0) comments

 
Questions for SIMSHALOM: Do Esau and Jacob still "exist"? And Why write on the 'Net?

To: simshalom@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Ultimate Rivalry:Jacob&Esau:Part 2
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 03:58:21

Shalom Sim Shalom,
I wonder why you are wasting your excellent gifting in writing for
those on the net.

I know that some people might read it, but the net
is not the place for a truly effective and powerful piece of
writing. Because the true scholars are not found on the net, but
rather in schools, universities etc.

I like your comparison between the struggle between Esau and Jacob
with the struggle of the Jews against anti-semitism. But I know that
Esau's physical seed has long been anihilated, and that the hatred
that was found between Esau's seed--the Edomites--and Jacob's
seed--the Jews-- died when the Edomite were obliterated.
Just because a person is a Jew doesn't mean that they are any more
special than any of the goyim, because the Jew's main calling from
haShem was to be a light to the world by following His commands and
showing them the way in which they should go. It isn't all about
being Jewish, but it is all about obeying G-d and becoming praisers
of haShem. When we get to this point, we will be fulfilling the true
law of righteousness. I know that G-d created the Jewish race as a
means to impart salvation to hakol goyim. Ohr haolam.
Shalom.

SIMSHALOM RESPONDS:

Thank you for your thoughtful and kind Email.
Your feed-back is greatly appreciated.
I know that there are all sorts of reasons and challenges that brings people to write in various situations. Everybody has their "story" , and I am no exception.

At the present time, the Internet is an excellent forum to reach a very wide variety of people. The biggest proof for this is the phenomenal rise of WEB LOGS (BLOGS) whereby millions of people are writing to their hearts' content and a very few excellent, or shall I say "attention-getting" writers have readerships in the millions, without any exaggerations. Maybe I can become one of them? (-:

What I wrote about the 'Eternal Struggle' between Jacob and Esau is NOT derived from my "imagination" or based on my "personal opinions". In classical Judaism, which I have studied seriously for many years under the direction of some profound Masters of the Torah, the "Fight" between Jacob and Esau NEVER ended, and continues un-abated to the present!

The ancient 'Edomites' are no longer with us, and neither is the ancient Jewish Temple. But the spiritual core of both these entities continues to animate the struggles between the spiritual and physical heirs of both Jacob and Esau as their seed progresses through the passage of time down to the present!

Rome is considered the quintessence of Esau by the classical rabbinic sages, and after the old Roman Empire transmutated into the nations of the West primarily, its' laws and lores continue to be the basis of that same Western World. It was subsequently transformed into the Roman Catholic Church which classical Judaism considers to be the "Religion" of Esau as it incorporates strains of old Judaism with a new "messianic component" that seeks to totally displace the Jews as the bearers of the "Messianic Message" for the world. Very much something Esau always wanted to do, to "out-do" his brother Jacob in "redeeming" the world!

It's a very complicated topic at any rate.

Glad that it's thought-provoking enough to call for responses from you!
Best wishes,and I look forward to hearing from you again!
- posted by Izak @ 3:52 AM (0) comments

 
Some Questions about Judaism for SIMSHALOM.

[practical] Question 1: I'd like to use tallit but don't know how. Could you direct me to a source that explains HOW to use them, WHY and the prayers? Not knowing the prayers, do you think it is appropriate to pray freely to Hasem?

[provocative] Question 2: How do you explain that we accept not to observe 347 out of 613 mitzvot due to our failure to rebuild the Temple and the theocratic kingdom in Israel? As a consequence: just how "orthodox" an Orthodox (or any, for that matter) Jew can ever be?

SIMSHALOM'S REPLY:

Your "Practical Question 1" is actually a few questions:

i) Use of Talit. Two kinds:

There are two kinds of Talit.
There is the "Talit Kattan" (Small tallit) that is worn under your shirt, in between your shirt and the underwear T-shirt usually. It is easy. You go to a Judaica store and buy a "kosher made" tzitzit, or go online to a Judaica store that will ship it to you http://www.eichlers.com/ , or if you know a good rabbi he will help you buy it somewhere.
You put it on in the morning when you get dressed and say a simple blessing if you are able: "Blessed are You Hashem (God) our Lord, who has sanctified us with His commandments and instructed us in the commandment of Tzitzit".
The "strings" do NOT have to be worn hanging out (you are not so "haredi"...yet :-) ), so nobody has to know you are wearing them.And you wear it all day. When you get undressed at night, you take them off. Keep them clean and you can wear them again. Buy an extra pair, and do NOT wash in a washing machine as it will ruin the strings.

ii)Large Tallit
http://www.jewfaq.org/signs.htm#Tzitzit

Then there is the "Tallit Gadol" (Large Tallit) that is put on during morning prayers and on Saturday morning prayers in synagogue. You unfold it, and put it across your back like putting on a "sheet". It's really not complicated.

iii)Why Tzitzit?

It's because there is a commandment in the Torah that says if you wear a garment that has FOUR CORNERS or edges, like a robe or "poncho"-style clothing as you see many people in the Middle East wear, then only an a "four-cornered-garment" do you put on the Tzitzit and wear the garment with them.
The Tzitzit are supposed to be a "REMINDER" for the Jew of God's commandments, as well as a "protection" against evil desires and "lusts". See book of NUMBERS (Bamidbar), Chapter 15, verses 37 - 41:
"God spoke to Moses telling him to speak to the Israelites and have them make TZITZIT ('tassels' or 'strings') on the corners of their garments for all generations......when you see them you shall remember all of God's commandments so as to keep them. You will then not stray after your heart and eyes, which have led you to immorality. You will thus remember and keep all My commandments, and be holy to your God. I am the Lord your God who brought you out of Egypt to be your God. I am God your Lord."

And see Deuteronomy (DEVARIM) Chapter 22, verse 12: "Make yourself bound tassels -'gedilim'- ( 'tzitzit' are also called 'gedilim') on the four corners of the garment with which you cover yourself".

So the mitzvah of Tzitzit is very important, as it is directly commanded by God in the Torah and the reward for doing it is very great. It is a very easy mitzvah to observe.

iv)Prayer:

It is a great rule in Judaism that God ALWAYS wants our prayers. Even if a person is in the worst situation, and it seems "hopeless", prayer will definitely help. The great rabbis say that even a thief when he goes out to steal , prays for "success", so surely an honest person should be confident about praying to God.

Another principle is that God accepts prayers in ANY LANGUAGE and even listens to the SILENT PRAYER of our hearts and minds.The Torah was transmitted by God in SEVENTY LANGUAGES say the sages, so that God "understands" and can be "understood" in any language.
So all prayer is welcomed by God.

If you know Hebrew, then obviously it is better to pray in Hebrew because it is the "Lashon HaKodesh", "Holy Language (Tongue)" of God and it is on a higher spiritual level of holiness. But nevertheless all prayer is acceptable in ANY language. There is a famous story that once a young boy came to a synagogue and wanted to express himself so he WHISTLED, because he could not find, or did not know, the right words. They wanted to throw him out of the synagogue, but the Holy Baal Shem Tov, the Master of Hasidism was there, and he told them to leave the boy alone because his whistle was so pure that it went all the way and was well-received by God as a holy prayer.

Sometimes even a "groan" or and a heart-felt expression of "OY!" is better than just "words" with no feelings behind them...so go ahead and pray in any language you are comfortable in and in any way that you can ( just don't pray in the bathroom , because that is considered an unclean place not fit for such a high thing like prayers.)

"Provocative Question 2"

a) The great rabbis at the time the Temple was destroyed 2,000 years ago, and even after that, discussed this subject of how we can properly observe the Torah without a Temple and the sacrifices and without the whole system of government that was destroyed by the Romans.

The rabbis of the Talmud concluded a long time ago that because we did actually physically survive, due to God's mercies, and survived with freedom in many cases to be Jews and because are still Jews, we therefore must observe AS MUCH OF THE TORAH AS POSSIBLE, only limited to circumstance beyond our present control. It is as if we are "prisoners" of circumstances beyond our control, but if the circumstance would change, and we could do something about it as a united Torah nation, then of course we would instantly return to fulfill the Torah to the maximum in our Holy Land with all our power. But that has not been possible for 2,000 years due to the fact that we live under the world domination of the "Roman Exile" that has still not ended,( meaning the non-Jewish world powers still have a "veto" over the Jewish people, even though now when we have the State of Israel, the Jews still do NOT have complete autonomy internationally).

Thus, what we cannot observe due to not having a Temple and being in Exile ("Galut") is beyond our power for the time being. When the Temple will be rebuilt with the coming of the Jewish Mashiach (obviously he is NOT Jesus who is considered a false leader by Judaism), then we will return to fulfill all the commandments again.

In fact there is a discussion among the great rabbis if it is correct to observe the practical mitzvot (commandments) for Jews living outside of Israel. Except for the Mitzvah to believe in Hashem(GOD) almost all commandments are "practical" like the commandments that are connected to living in the Land of Israel, so if some commandments cannot be observed, like tithes, sacrifices, having a king, a Sanhedrin with judges, how can we keep some as we ignore others?

The answer that is given is that, it is the rabbis who command us to keep as many of the commandments until such time as when we, the Jewish People can return to our land, remove the power of the "Roman Exile" once and for all, and the temple we be re-established, and it will be the Jewish King, the Mashiach who will have world power as the symbol of Hashem's (God's) power returning to rule the world through a Torah observing Jewish People.

Another philosophical view, is that by actually STUDYING and LEARNING about ANY mitzvah in the Torah and Talmud it is considered AS IF we actually observed that mitzvah , because there is a principle in Judaism that God considers the INTENTION to do something as if we actually did it. ("Machshava Tovah Mitztarfa LeMaaseh"). So by studying inside the Torah all the laws about the Temple and all the laws about living in Israel according to the directions of the Torah, we are rewarded as if we actually did do them in practice, and they are considered to be still "active" and "alive".

b) How "Orthodox"?:

There is no limit to how God-fearing, or how righteous, or how spiritual a person can be.That is logical. It's like asking how "good" can a person be to be "very good"? There is NO limit to how "good" or "Orthodox" you can be....the sky is the limit....

The idea of being "Orthodox" on the one hand has NO limit, as you can be as Orthodox as far as you can go with it, being infinite to the "nth" degree.

On the other hand being "Orthodox" is also VERY SIMPLE.

All it means to be "Orthodox" is to believe with all your heart, mind, and soul, that for 100% it was none other than God Himself Who actually HIMSELF appeared and gave the ENTIRE Torah at Mount Sinai to Moses and the entire Nation of Israel over 3,300 years ago, and that it has never been changed or altered in a way whatsoever.


This is very clearly described and stated in the Torah in SHEMOT (Exodus) Chapters 19 and 20.:

"God said to Moses, I will come to you in thick cloud, so that all the people will hear when I speak to you...on the third day God will descend on Mount Sinai in the sight of all the people...Mount Sinai was all in smoke because of God's Presence that had come down on it. God was in the fire...Moses spoke and God replied with a Voice...God came down to Mount Sinai, to the peak of the mountain...God spoke all these words saying: (The Ten Commandments): I am your God, who brought you out of Egypt, from the place of slavery. Do not have any other gods before Me...Do not take the name of God your Lord in vain...Remember the Sabbath (seventh day) to keep it holy...All the people saw the sounds, the flames, the blast of the ram's horn,and the mountain smoking...God said to Moses: This is what you must tell the Israelites: You have seen that I spoke to you from heaven...do not make silver or gold gods for yourselves...Wherever I allow My name to be mentioned, I will come to you and bless you..."

This concept is called "TORAH MIN HASHAMAYIM" = "TORAH FROM HEAVEN" , and it is the sine qua non and only DEFINITION of "Orthodoxy", meaning those who believe that the ENTIRE TORAH, both the WRITTEN and ORAL (such as the TALMUD) are DIVINE and comes DIRECTLY from God and cannot be "changed" or "simplified" by ANYONE later on, not even the greatest rabbi has the authority to go against this idea. And that is why Reform and other non-Orthodox groups do not "believe" this.

In fact many Reform rabbis and people do not even believe in "God", they make an ethnic "culture" out of Judaism.

By the way, it was the Reformers in Germany about 200 years ago who "invented" the label "Orthodox" because they wanted to smear the name of Jews who wanted to keep on believing in the Torah and God as they always had for 3,000 years, and so the Reformers wanted to make the loyal Torah Jews look like archaic musty "old-fashioned" Orthodox "Christians". Even though the word "orthodox" means the "TRUE BELIEF" in Greek. It's a funny irony, but anyhow, it has been the Reformers have been the ones who have always brought the Jews a few steps closer to European Christianity. Starting in Germany and now in America especially.
You know the joke, "What do you call a third generation Reform Jew? Answer: A Christian". :-{

Anyhow, so your questions are obviously excellent. Keep on thinking of more.
Here is a very practical web site about Jewish religious questions:
http://www.jewfaq.org/
See:
http://www.jewfaq.org/signs.htm#Tzitzit

Be well and Shabbat Shalom!!!

- posted by Izak @ 2:37 AM (0) comments

 
The Ultimate Rivalry:
Jacob and Esau Compete Forever.

Written by me, SIMSHALOM.

(Related to the Torah portion of Toldot, read in synagogue on Saturday 29 November ’03.)

People love to compete.
Whether it’s real life Olympic competitions between nations or sportsmen, battlefield encounters or economic contests, or cerebral matching of wits by chess masters and Nobel laureates, or the vicarious thrills of watching others play games or losing oneself in the challenge of a video game. Not to mention that unique spectacle of beauty pageants with nubile women looking to outperform their rivals. Gambling (ugh). Or, the terror of watching men compete with beasts in bullfights or rodeos, and boxing :-( .

The competitive instinct is deeply ingrained.
Most parents and cultures further develop and inculcate the values that they aspire to in their children. Maybe that’s why people like the idea of belonging to a human “race”, be it racing to the end of a day, drag racing on a highway, the mystique of horse racing, or just surviving the rat race. Could that perhaps be the root of “racism”, the beliefs that pit one type of people against another, measuring artificial quotas of human qualities in different types of people? And of course, a tough by- product of chasing to become the top honcho, is the win-lose ratio. In any “race”, “rivalry’, or “competition”, there have to be winners and losers. The higher the stakes, the greater the danger and potential shame or harm for the losing side. Winners like to think that they “take all”, and losers…well… they are just “loooosers”.

In classical Judaism, the race to beat all races is the pre-ordained rivalry between the world’s most famous twins: Jacob and Esau.

The sole children of Isaac and Rebecca, they start a potentially murderous struggle while yet in their mother’s womb. The one born first is called Esau, from the Hebrew root “asa”, meaning done or complete, because he arrived with signs of physical “completion”, hair, teeth (which he used to chew his mother’s guts to the point of her subsequent infertility, say the rabbis), strong body, the “complete man”. His brother is called Jacob, from the Hebrew root “ekev”, meaning “heel”, because he arrived determinedly clutching on to the heel of his twin brother Esau. And endowed with the foreknowledge that he has the power to bring about the submission of his recalcitrant brother Esau by pulling him down via a veritable “Achilles heel” when the time will arrive for Esau’s downfall.

Esau is described is a HUNTER verbally and physically, whereas Jacob is a DWELLER in tents. Ok, so they were different, radically different, which makes them NO different to billions of other siblings, so what makes them so unique?

Who exactly are these two primal rivals? Why is their birth so significant that it needs to be described in the Torah? What does it mean for Jewish and world destiny?

Suffering excruciating pregnancy pains and fearing her own death from the unbearable turmoil in her womb, Rebecca begs of God for an explanation. In one fateful verse, the destiny of her sons and of all mankind till the end of time is revealed:
“…Two nations (“geim/goyim”) are in your womb, and two races/governments/regimes (“le-umim”) will separate from your bowels; and one race/government/regime shall be more powerful than the other (“ule-om mi-leom ye-amutz”) ; and the greater one will serve the younger (“ve-rav ya-avod tzair”)” (Genesis 25, v. 23)

Who are these “nations” exactly?

The rabbis teach that these are nations that will grow out of Jacob and Esau, and will take center stage on the world’s longest running greatest historical geopolitical and ideological, spiritual and religious, claims to ultimate vindication, legitimacy, and triumph of Judaism over all its arch-rivals. It becomes clearer whom they are referring to when they make specific mention that it will ultimately be descendants of Jacob such as the Children of Israel (Jacob is renamed Israel) and King Solomon, Queen Esther, and Rabbi Judah the Prince, Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai, and the Jewish Messiah, who will face the descendants of Esau such as the Amalekites, Edomites, and Rome, Haman and the Roman Emperor Hadrian, and Anthony, the Caesars, Vespasian, Titus, and Gog and Magog and their War (“Armageddon”) in the End of Days.

The great rabbinic commentator Rashi points out that when it says that when one “shall be more powerful that the other” (“ule-om mi-leom ye-amutz”), it is deliberately vague and equivocal since it could be either power that is dominant. This is precisely so, because an awesome principle is derived from this verse that indeed, either brother’s power has the potential to dominate the other, but never simultaneously. Only one can predominate at any given time. “They will never be equal in domination, because WHEN THE ONE RISES, THE OTHER FALLS” (“ke-she-zeh kam, zeh nofel”).

The Artscroll commentary on Genesis (Breishis), records the classic sources on the these fateful words:
“The two of them will never be mighty simultaneously: when one regime falls, the other will rise. The TALMUD in Tractate Megillah 6a, citing our verse, derives from Ezekial 26:2, in which Tyre colonized by the descendants of Esau, says of Jerusalem: I SHALL BE FILLED, SHE IS LAID WASTE (Rashi). This means that Tyre’s rise DEPENDED UPON THE DOWNFALL OF JERUSALEM. Thus the war between them is inevitable for the rise of one is contingent on the fall of the other. This condition began when each conquered its own land and will continue until the coming of the Messiah, (as cited by the commentator Malbim).

Thus according to the commentator Mizrachi’s interpretation of Rashi, the prepositional prefix “mi” of “mi-leom”, means “FROM the regime”: one regime will derive might FROM the other. That is, the “victorious” power will draw “wealth and strength” FROM the “vanquished”. Thus in no time in history were Jacob’s heirs, Israel, and Esau’s heirs, “Edom”= Rome, both equally and proportionately mighty at the same point in history.

Other commentators render the “mi” as the “COMPARATIVE THAN”. They render it as: One will always be mightier THAN the other. One will always be “braver” THAN the other. One will always COMPETE WITH the other.

Rabbi Hirsch renders: “One form of government will be mightier THAN the other”, explaining that Rebecca was prophetically informed that the two nations whose forebears she carried represented conflicting philosophies of government. One would base its greatness on the humane instincts of human beings, on their spiritual and moral greatness. The other would build on cunning and strength. One form of government would always be more powerful than the other. History is the story of the struggle between the spirit and the sword. Or, in the metaphor of the rabbinic sages, between Jacob’s (named Israel) Jerusalem representing “right”, and Esau’s Rome (of the Caesars) representing “might”.

Finally, the verse states; “And the elder (greater one) shall serve the younger” (“ve-rav ya-avod tzair”). Meaning that in the end, the younger will prevail, particularly as represented by the two nations they represent: Jerusalem/Israel versus Edom/Rome.
According to the Midrash this is a prophecy that will be fulfilled in the days of the Jewish Messiah at the end of time. The commentator Malbim, cites a verse in the prophet Obadiah 1:21 which describes the Messianic times when “Deliverers shall go up to Mount Zion to rule the hill country of Esau and dominion shall be God’s.”
Another factor in the conflict is that submission by the “greater” to the “younger” is against the laws of nature and it cannot take place without struggle and war.
According to the commentator Rashbam, this prophecy explains why Rebecca loved Jacob (v.28) as Jacob is portrayed by the prophets as the beloved of God, as in the prophet Malachi 1:2 “I –God- Loved Jacob”.

According to Rabbi Hirsch, the word “rav”, means “GREATER IN NUMBER AND POWER”. Although Esau’s forces will be mightier and emerge “triumphant” in his quest for material strength, ultimately it will be seen that Esau’s victories will have “paved the way” for Jacob’s FINAL TRIUMPH. The representative of “strength” will NOT Be destroyed, but will SUBMIT TO A NEW REALIZATION THAT SPIRITUAL PRINCIPLES ARE SUPERIOR.” [*1]

What is interesting here, is that Judaism does NOT desire a Pyrrhic victory over Esau’s ways and it does NOT want him or his many descendants “dead”. On the contrary, it anticipates the time when Esau’s dangerous “impulses” and “negative” character traits can be “sublimated”, “transferred” and “channeled” into positive directions, which is what happened at many times in history as when Rome built the infrastructure of roads, laws, and government upon which the entire Western World still relies on to the present. Additionally, many famous converts to Judaism came from Esau’s descendants.

Looking even deeper into this subject, the Jewish mystical sources consider the rivalry between Jacob and Esau to be a rivalry between an ADAM and an “ANTI-ADAM”. Jacob is the reconstituted original innocent Adam facing off yet again against the cunning Serpentine “Anti-Adam”, who like Esau specializes in bringing death and misery into the world. From Isaac’s seed and Rebecca’s womb, paralleling God’s primal incubator in Eden, spring these two antagonistic yet at the same time “symbiotic” beings, embodying two opposing forces and drives in the universe. One, Jacob, seeks to unite with the source of ‘Eternal Life’ of the Torah, “Give Truth To Jacob”, and the other, Esau, is there to block, harass, and short circuit him as he is called ‘Esau the Wicked’. Two opposing energy forces, a “positive” Jacob, and a “negative” Esau who can only achieve their own oppositional objectives by somehow co-opting the other into doing “their” bidding. The ultimate hand-wrestling match.

In ultimate terms it is the struggle between Good and Evil. Evil needs to be identified, its deceitful manipulations outed, and it takes a mother like Rebecca to do this tough job of “knowing her child”, and ultimately submit to and be harnessed by the Good, through the workings of a Divine Fate, in order to bring the world into a balanced state of Harmony, which is what the eventual Messianic age will be. Evil, the ‘SWORD OF ESAU’, can only exist and function if Good fumbles and stumbles, when the kind Jacob the Jew stalls in Torah observance, and then in a Dracula-like act of vampirism Evil uses the “blood” of the Good victim for evil purposes. It is no coincidence that Esau’s people enjoy tagging Jacob’s family with absurd “blood libel” monstrosities, the very evil that Esau commits he “projects” onto his defenseless victims. What a sadist! Good needs to be on constant guard not to fall “victim” to the lurking vampires waiting to pull off their distorted symbiotic stunts.

In our Torah portion, the great rivalry between Jacob and Esau is focused upon their attitudes to the great patriarchal BLESSING that will come from their father Isaac.
The notion of that special sort of “sibling rivalry” between the oldest and youngest children is manifested in the attitudes and interpretations each gives to his “status”.
In Torah law, a “first born” is entitled to an extra portion of their parents’ inheritance due to the unique nature of being “number one” to be born which is endowed with a greater holiness. Ultimately all “first born”, or “first fruits” are consecrated to a higher sanctity in Temple times.
Thus Esau, by dint of his chronological first come status, was entitled to the special blessings that went with this position. In his case it went even further, because he may have inherited the Divinely connected spiritual legacy of Abraham and Isaac. But it was not to be, because he “despised” his first born birthright, which is manifested in his cavalier attitude to it when Jacob “barters” it away from him for a bowl of lentil soup on a day when Esau was famished for something to eat. There are great hidden meanings in all of this that go beyond the scope of this essay.

One observation though, that whereas it was the ‘First Born Adam’ who was God’s ultimate creation, who succumbs to the wiles of a late appearing Serpent when Genesis commences, things will now reverse themselves when it will be the first born Esau who falls victim to his latterly born younger brother Jacob, reversing the damage to the world as it was meant to be. Whereas initially it is the wily Serpent who makes light of God’s command NOT to eat from a sublime Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil and “tricks” Eve into eating from the forbidden, the situation is reversed when Jacob “tricks” Esau into eating a bowl of simple innocuous lentils in exchange for the sublime birthright treasure rooted in Abraham and Isaac’s Divine Mission on Earth. Two “meals” with world shattering “indigestion” repercussions. This is an act of delectable Divine Tragedy-Comedy marking Esau as an Apostate and Heretic worthy of the first Serpent. A complete turning around of the cosmic turntable.

What is of particular interest to us is the way this gets inserted into the nature of the Blessings that Isaac transmits to Jacob first, assuming him to be Esau since Rebecca camouflages Jacob:
“May God grant you the dew of heaven and the fat of the earth, much grain and wine. Nations will serve you; governments will bow down to you. You shall be like a lord over your brother; your mother’s children shall prostrate themselves to you. Those who curse you are cursed, and those who bless you are blessed.” Genesis, Chapter 27 verses 28-29. [*2]
These words are directly based on the blessings God had vouchsafed Abraham and now Isaac transfers them onto Jacob. There is now an unbreakable bond between Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and they become the one and only PATRIARCHS of the Jewish People.
Clearly, the element of what is called “NITS-CHIUT”, meaning ‘ETERNAL TRIUMPH’, “Victory Forevermore” is now entrenched and insolubly embedded into the spiritual and physical genetic make-up of Jacob and his Children of Israel the Jewish People.
The original prenatal “ambiguous” prediction to Rebecca is now clarified and given over to Jacob ensuring that he will triumph at the end of time provided that his progeny will act as a Torah Nation till the end of time. The race is theirs to lose, no-one else can win this competition, they can only DELAY the outcome, even if it means a delay of two millennia! Jacob holds onto the “heel” of Esau in order to bring him “down to Earth” when the time will be right to do so.

And from where, you may ask, does Esau obtain his ability to mount and sustain a challenge even though he has long ago “conceded’ the race by exhibiting a reckless disregard for his birthright and the precious and holy blessings of Abraham and Isaac, and the obligations it once placed on him?

Esau so disregarded his parents’ wishes that he married undesirable Hittite women that were “beneath himself”, and it was Rebecca, say the sages, who figured out that his “specialty” was seducing married women with his “wondrous ways with words”, and if ever their husbands would complain he would murder them using his abnormal physical physique to “bounce” them out of this world.

The man was extremely dangerous, and yet he did have some redeeming features…

Firstly,
it must be acknowledged that Esau is a power to be reckoned with. The Torah sages teach that during their formative years Esau and Jacob were indistinguishable. They were both model students of their sagely grandfather Abraham, each absorbing his profound Godly wisdom. Esau in particular excelled in the commandment of Honor Your Father. Intellectually he knew that Isaac wanted only the best from him. Isaac was basically ready to grant him the primal family Blessings as due to his birthright, were it not for the intervention of Rebecca and Fate, as God would have it. He would after all one day give forth to the glories of Rome and everything it taught the world, both as a military and governmental power and subsequently as a Roman Catholic Church (again, a subject for another time). And then, being “second best” to Jacob is not something to be trifled with…a great honor in itself…but of course there is always that constant rivalry and competition factor that is so ingrained and rears its ugly head.

Secondly,
one of the greatest “counter-strikes” against Jacob and long-lasting merits that Esau gains, is when he hears that Jacob has preemptively “tricked” him by obtaining the Blessings first, Esau lets out a tearful heart-rending and even heartfelt scream of anguish and remorse:
“ Isaac had finished blessing Jacob…when his brother came back from his hunt… ‘Let my father get up and eat his son’s venison,’ he said, ‘so that your soul may bless me.’ ‘Who are you?’ asked his father Isaac. ‘I am your first born, Esau,’ he replied. Isaac was seized with a violent fit of trembling. ‘Who, where, is the one who trapped game and just served it to me? I ate it all before you came and I blessed him. The blessing will remain his.’ When Esau heard his father’s words, HE LET OUT A MOST LOUD AND BITTER SCREAM. ‘BLESS ME TOO FATHER,’ HE PLEADED.” Genesis 27, verses 30-34. … “Esau said to his father, ‘Is there only one blessing that you have my father? Bless me too!’ Esau raised his voice and began to WEEP.” Genesis 27, v. 38. [*3]
It was with that WEEPING, the shedding of bitter heart rending tears, and “LOUD AND BITTER SCREAM” that Esau revealed a level of remorse and awareness for what had transpired. He felt genuine anguish and remorse for his major faux pas of “selling” his birthright status to Jacob for a trifle, and the rabbinic sages note that it was duly noted by God who would take it into consideration as a great merit to counterbalance all the evil Esau and his line were bound to perpetrate in revenge against his tricky brother Jacob:
“Esau was furious at Jacob because of the blessing that his father had given him. He said to himself, ‘The days of mourning for my father will be here soon. I will then be able to KILL MY BOTHER JACOB’.” Genesis 27, v. 41.

Hence the famous bitter rabbinic dictum: “It is a known law (“halachah”) that Esau HATES Jacob !”.

What kind of “law” (“halachah”) is this? Isn’t it very bizarre to refer to Esau’s murderous Thanatos impulses as a “law”? The answer that’s given, is that Esau’s compulsive murderous hatred for his brother Jacob, and here “Jacob” means all Jews, is that it can be assumed that it has the same “fixity” and “predictability” of a “law”. It’s so to speak “on the books”, or “written in stone”, that “bottom line”, no matter how things seem to be on the surface, contrary to any other appearances and assumptions, that Esau the prototype of an Apostate and Heretic, has one objective: The elimination of his hated brother and arch-rival, Jacob the Loyal Jew.

Thirdly,
Esau does indeed obtain blessings from Isaac that will rock the world down through the ages, the power of the “MIGHT IS RIGHT” of the “SWORD” and world conquest that comes with it:
“His father Isaac then replied and said, ‘The fat places of the earth can still be your dwelling, and you can still have the dew of heaven. BUT YOU SHALL LIVE BY YOUR SWORD. You may have to serve your brother, but when your complaints mount up, you will throw his yoke off your neck’.” Genesis 27, verses 39-40. [*4]

Very ominous and portentous words indeed, laden with the blood of millions of Jewish victims of the Roman “SWORD” that has occurred over the past 2,000 years. Not just Jewish, the sages say that no war is ever won without either the application of Esau’s ‘Power of the Sword’, or Jacob’s ‘Power of Prayer’. Rome’s might and its strategies of warfare govern the outcome of history’s major wars, and its influence is far from fleeting. When the Jews of Judea stumbled and fumbled in the eyes of their God, it was Rome’s Legions that descended and, after horrendous battles and bloodshed, put the Judeans/Jews to the sword, burned the Temple to ashes, and hurled them into a two thousand year hellhole of repetitive Destruction and Exile. From Rome and its Caesars to the German Reich and its “Kaisers” it has been thus.

The greatest rivalry ever know to humankind is thus defined and brought onto focus. It should not be a mystery why primarily it’s the nations of the West, Esau’s heirs, that have always been the prime “haters” of Jacob’s heirs… “It is a known law that Esau hates Jacob!” Esau is described as “ruddy” at birth. He is known as Edom, the Hebrew word for Rome. Edom is related to the Hebrew word “adom”, which means “red”, and to “dam”, which means “blood”. To “adama” which means earth and to “Adam”, the primal first man, and to “damim” which is another name for “money”. All key foundational “pillars” of life in the world as we know it, and to which Esau lays critical claim. The RED in the colors of Rome, and most Western nations who follow it, is the “living symbol” of Esau’s militant and militaristic vibrancy. It is also always laden with the threat of the spilling of “blood” which follows the application of the SWORD. A very frightening picture indeed.

There is no greater durable struggle and rivalry than the constant state of siege and war between Rome and Jerusalem from time immemorial. When Jerusalem in Zion, Jacob’s dwelling, breaks with its Godly mission of being the Light Unto The Nations, then it opens itself to the long-standing “complaints” of Esau who raises the heat with that oldest of mankind’s hatreds: Anti-Semitism. Esau rivals Jacob in his ability to come up with ever novel “solutions” to the Jewish-Jacob-Israel “Question”. It behooves Jacob and his Children the Jews to come up with the “answers” that are needed and that only the Torah provides.

The Torah is compared to Light, and it takes only a Little of the Light to Banish the Darkness. Then with one Jewish tug at the “heels” of Esau, he will, and must, come crashing down and be revealed for the straw man he really is. A tug-of war competition that Jews are assured they will ultimately win.

A good point to conclude at, as we enter the Hebrew month of Kislev and the upcoming holiday of Hanukkah, with its message of how an invincible little Jewish light DID AND DOES shine bright for a long, long time…until Jacob will triumph over Esau completely.

Wishing you a Shabbat Shalom, Chodesh Tov, and may you be blessed with the powers of Jacob!
Let me know what you think!

[*1] Artscroll Tanach Series, Genesis-Breishis, Hebrew with English commentary, Volume 1(a), pp. 1054-1057.
[*2] The Living Torah, English Translation by Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, p. 127.
[*3] Ibid.
[*4] Ibid. p.129.

- posted by Izak @ 1:00 AM (0) comments

 
Answering the New Anti-Zionists

by Dore Gold and Jeff Helmreich

http://www.aish.com/jewishissues/middleeast/Answering_the_New_Anti-Zionists.asp


Reprinted with permission from the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.

Although Israel won its existence more than 50 years ago, a new and insidious critique has begun to spread, attacking anew the legitimacy of Israel's very establishment as a Jewish state.

The new line does not come from Tehran or Riyadh but, surprisingly from largely European intellectuals and certain voices on the fringe American Left, surfacing recently in The Guardian and The New York Review of Books. It proposes the elimination of Israel and is generally accompanied by calls to establish a bi-national Palestinian-Jewish state in its place.1 The new anti-Zionists invariably start with the claim that there are no Jewish rights to sovereignty in Israel, or that, in any case, Jewish nationalism is inherently unjust.

Curiously, this campaign is accompanied by no corresponding questions about the validity of any other of the more than 190 states that belong to the UN, whether they resemble Israel or not.

There is no such scrutiny of the mini-states of Europe -- from Liechtenstein to the Vatican -- or the multi-tribal states of Africa, many of which are breaking down. Nor is there any questioning of the rights of expressly Catholic, Protestant, or Muslim states to exist. The exclusive focus on Israel raises troubling questions about the real motives of these commentators. As Michael Gove, assistant editor of the Times of London, recently noted: "I do not know how newspapers can get away with it. You can have criticism of the State of Israel but it is entirely different to say it shouldn't exist. It is applying to the Jew a different standard than you apply to anyone else."2

Equally remarkable, for all the singular focus on Israel, the attack on Jewish statehood avoids even the slightest consideration of the specifics of Israel's case. The attackers fail to examine the legal or political consequences of Israel's national expression as a Jewish state

(perhaps because they find none) with regard to its non-Jews, religious and racial equality, or the civil and political equality of all citizens. They also ignore the specific historical circumstances and perils that gave rise to the need for Israel to identify Jewishly. In short, it is an attack on Israel without regard to the cost, benefit, or uniqueness of Jewish statehood -- indeed, without any grounding at all. That becomes clear after a brief examination of the history, the law, and the facts surrounding Israel's existence as a Jewish state.

The Rights of States and the Rights of Israel

International law has traditionally held that in order to be defined as a state, political communities must meet four qualifications:

First, there must be a people;

second, there must be a territory;

third, there must be a government; and

fourth, there must be a capacity to enter into relations with other states.

In advocating Israel's admission to the UN in 1948, the U.S. representative to the UN Security Council argued that Israel fulfilled these conditions. In fact, the new attacks on Israel's rights are particularly ironic since Jewish nationhood preceded the emergence of most modern nation-states by thousands of years. Still, today's discourse has created doubts about the basis of Jewish peoplehood and the connection of the Jewish people to Israel's territory. Whether the new assault on Israel is a byproduct of the radical secularization of certain intellectual circles who have no understanding of Jewish history, or whether it emanates from a more insidious anti-Semitism that has been re-born, its handmaiden is the general ignorance that is rampant about Israel's unique roots.

The Jewish claim to a right of sovereignty in the Land of Israel (Eretz Israel; Palestine) emerged in the last century for three essential reasons:

·First, it was not a new claim, but rather a reassertion of a historic right that had never been conceded or forgotten.

Even after the destruction of the last Jewish commonwealth in the first century, the Jewish people maintained their own autonomous political and legal institutions: the Davidic dynasty was preserved in Baghdad until the thirteenth century through the rule of the Exilarch (Resh Galuta), while the return to Zion was incorporated into the most widely practiced Jewish traditions, including the end of the Yom Kippur service and the Passover Seder, as well as in everyday prayers. Thus, Jewish historic rights were kept alive in Jewish historical consciousness.


·Second, the security of the Jewish people in the diaspora became completely untenable as the threat from anti-Semitic persecution and assault was replaced in the twentieth century with the threat of actual annihilation -- or genocide -- as demonstrated by the Holocaust.

While this threat initially was focused in Europe, it soon extended to the Middle East, as newly independent Arab states came to view their ancient Jewish communities as European foreigners and systematically violated their basic human rights, either by denying them protection or by confiscating their properties. From the 1840 Damascus blood libel to the 1941 farhud (pogrom) against the Jews of Baghdad, an uneasy Arab-Jewish coexistence that existed earlier collapsed even before the rise of the State of Israel. Far from receding, the danger of rabid anti-Semitism persists, thereby necessitating a strong Jewish state that can serve as an ultimate refuge for Jews under threat, anywhere. The Jewish people have learned that they must not return to a state of powerlessness.


·Third, the steady growth of assimilation threatened to eliminate Jewish communities worldwide.

The existence of a Jewish state, whose public culture is based on the unique practices of the Jewish people, is the best guarantor for Jewish continuity -- both religious and non-religious -- and the birth of a new Jewish civilization that can continue to contribute to the world community.3

Israel's Historic Basis: The Unbroken Jewish Connection with the Land of Israel

Israel is the only state that was created in the last century whose legitimacy was recognized by both the League of Nations and the United Nations.4

The League of Nations Mandate that was issued by the victorious powers of World War I did not create the rights of the Jewish people to a national home in Palestine, but rather recognized a pre-existing right, for the links of the Jewish people to their historic land were well-known and accepted in the previous century by world leaders from President John Adams to Napoleon Bonaparte to British Foreign Secretary Lord Palmerston.5 These rights were preserved by the successor organization to the League of Nations, the United Nations, under Article 80 of the UN Charter. The ancient, even biblical, association of the Jewish people with the Land of Israel was accepted in the Judeo-Christian tradition as a historical axiom.

From a legal standpoint, an opportunity arose to assert these historically recognized rights.

Since 1517, Eretz Israel had been under the sovereignty of the Ottoman Empire; when the Ottomans lost to the British in 1918, in the Treaty of Sevres they surrendered sovereignty over their Asiatic territories outside of Turkey. A vacuum of sovereignty was created in which the historic claim of the Jewish people could be raised. Yet the Jewish people themselves had begun raising it much earlier.

Since the loss of the Second Jewish Commonwealth to Roman legions in 70 CE, and the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem, the Jewish people never lost their connection to the Land of Israel (Palestine). The land, in fact, was never claimed to be the unique home of another nation, but rather was a province of other larger empires. As the renowned historian of the Middle East, Bernard Lewis, has written:

From the end of the Jewish state in antiquity to the beginning of British rule, the area now designated by the name Palestine was not a country and had no frontiers, only administrative boundaries; it was a group of provincial subdivisions, by no means always the same, within a larger entity.6

In the interim, the Jewish people never stopped exercising their claim to the land.

Lewis, in fact, notes "there had been a steady movement of Jews to the Holy Land throughout the centuries."7

In 135 CE Jews took part in the Bar Kochba revolt against imperial Rome and even re-established their capital in Jerusalem. Defeated by the most brutal of the Roman legions under the command of the emperor Hadrian, Jews were forbidden to reside in Jerusalem for nearly five hundred years. Once a year on the ninth of the Hebrew month of Av, they were allowed to weep at the remains of their destroyed Temple at a spot that came to be called "the Wailing Wall." In the meantime, the Roman authorities renamed Judea as Palestina in order to obliterate the memory of Jewish nationhood.

During this period, the Jewish national center shifted from Judea to the Galilee,

where hundreds of synagogues were erected from the Mediterranean to the Golan Heights. Jewish law was then codified in the Mishnah by Judah Ha-Nasi. Despite the catastrophic losses in Jewish lives during the wars against the Romans, Jews still constituted the majority of the population of the Galilee in the fourth century. In the Upper Galilee village of Pek'in there remained a continuous Jewish presence from the Roman era to the rise of the State of Israel.

With the defeat of the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantine) by Persian armies in 614, the Jewish people recaptured Jerusalem and made it again their capital briefly. Yet Byzantine rule was soon restored and Jews were forced again to vacate Jerusalem until the defeat of the Byzantines in 638 by the Islamic armies of Caliph Omar, who again opened the city for Jewish resettlement. Eretz Israel became a part of successive Muslim empires -- the Rashidun (the immediate followers of the Prophet Muhammad, who ruled from Medina), the Umayyads (who ruled from Damascus), the Abbasids (who ruled from Baghdad), and the Fatimids (who ruled from Cairo).

Under Islam, Jews were to be protected as a "people of the book," but were nonetheless forced to pay discriminatory taxes like the jizya (poll tax) and the kharaj (land tax).

The crushing burden of these land taxes led to a loss of Jewish land control in the Galilee during the first several centuries of Islamic rule.

During the Crusader occupation of Eretz Israel, many Jews were physically slaughtered, especially in Jerusalem. Nevertheless, the great Jewish scholar and poet Rabbi Yehuda Halevi (1075-1141) still called for the mass immigration of Jews to the Land of Israel.8

The beginnings of Jewish recovery in Eretz Israel started with the defeat and expulsion of the Crusaders in 1187 by the Kurdish Muslim warrior Salah ad-Din

who, like Caliph Omar, allowed the Jews to resettle in Jerusalem. For example, between 1209 and 1211, three hundred rabbis made their way from France and southern England to settle in Jerusalem, once it was safe again to do so. They were joined by rabbis from North Africa and Egypt. The great Jewish scholar Nachmanides (Ramban) erected a synagogue in Jerusalem in 1267 that still stands in the Old City.

In the 13th century, Jewish families restored the community of Safed, which would become the international center for the study of Jewish mysticism by the sixteenth century. Reinforced by their rising numbers, Jews became assertive again about their claim in Jerusalem, so that the pope forbade sea captains from transporting Jews to Palestine in 1428.9 Despite the hardships, Jews continued to return. The great commentator of the Mishnah, Ovadia Bartinura, left Italy to settle in Jerusalem in 1488; his tomb is at the foot of the Mt. of Olives.

The influx of Jewish refugees from the Spanish Inquisition in 1492 into the Ottoman Empire, which took control of Eretz Israel in 1517, led to a substantial expansion of the Jewish presence in Safed, Hebron, and Tiberias, where Sultan Sulaiman the Magnificent allotted his Portuguese Jewish advisor, Don Joseph Nasi, land grants for Jewish resettlement. Even before the rise of modern political Zionism, Jews continued to stream into the land from Yemen and Lithuania, whose numbers included the students of the halachic scholar the Vilna Gaon in 1809-1811. By 1864, a clear-cut Jewish majority emerged in Jerusalem, more than half a century before the arrival of the British Empire, the issuing of the Balfour Declaration, and the establishment of the League of Nations Mandate.

The Palestinian Arabs Include Waves of Arab Immigrants

During the restoration of the Jewish presence in the Land of Israel, the overwhelming impression of Western visitors in the 19th century was that there were few Arab inhabitants.

The British Consul General, James Finn, wrote in 1857 that "the country is in a considerable degree empty of inhabitants." He added that the land's "greatest need is that of a body of population."10 Mark Twain visited Eretz Israel in 1867, traveled through the Jezreel Valley, and related, "there is not a solitary village throughout its whole extent."11 Arthur Penrhyn Stanley, the great British cartographer, reached similar conclusions in 1881: "In Judea it is hardly an exaggeration to say that for miles and miles there was no appearance of life or habitation."12

Geographers had long concluded that it was improbable "that any but a small part of the present Arab population of Palestine is descended from the ancient inhabitants of the land"; indeed, according to their analysis, Palestine was "peopled by the drifting populations of Arabia, and to some extent by the backwash of its harbors."13

Additionally, the Ottomans settled Muslim populations as a buffer against Bedouin attacks; Ibrahim Pasha, the Egyptian ruler, brought Egyptian colonists with his army in the 1830s. It is noteworthy that the common Palestinian name al-Masri, used by a clan in Nablus, literally means "the Egyptian."14

Yet the Palestine Liberation Organization has perpetuated a myth, put forward on the world stage by Yasser Arafat at the United Nations in 1974, that "the Jewish invasion [of Palestine] began in 1881."

Moreover, he asserted that there was already a large indigenous Arab population when the Jews arrived. His implicit message was that there was a well-entrenched Palestinian society in place before Israel's rebirth, a society that had rights superior to those of the returning Jews.

Yet it is now clear that during the years that the Jewish presence in Eretz Israel was restored, a huge Arab population influx transpired from neighboring countries as Arab immigrants sought to take advantage of higher wages and economic opportunities that resulted from Jewish settlement in the land. Indeed, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt concluded in 1939 that "Arab immigration into Palestine since 1921 has vastly exceeded the total Jewish immigration during the whole period."15

The Restoration of Israel Was Not a Product of European Imperialism

Another common argument put forward by the PLO is that Israel is really the product of European imperialism and hence it does not represent a legitimate national movement of its own.

As a result, Zionism came to be portrayed in the Arab world as "a hyper-aggressive variant of colonialism."16 This perception has also penetrated the discourse of Israel's European detractors. Initially, it is true that the idea of a restored Jewish homeland received its greatest push from the declaration in 1917 of the British Foreign Secretary, Lord Balfour, who called for its establishment after the British defeat of the Ottoman Empire.

Yet, ironically, during the subsequent years of the British Mandate over Palestine, European (and especially British) imperial policies actually obstructed the emergence of the Jewish national home.

First, the territory of Transjordan was cut off from the Palestine Mandate and granted by the British to the Hashemite dynasty from Arabia, who had lost their ancestral homeland, the Hijaz, to the Saudi clan of eastern Arabia.

Second, the British sought to further partition the remaining territory of western Palestine into Jewish and Arab states, reducing the area for Jewish settlement even more.

Finally, with the 1939 White Paper, the British restricted Jewish immigration into Palestine just as Nazi Germany began its conquest of Europe and its Holocaust against European Jewry.

In this context, it is not surprising that Jewish underground movements waged an anti-colonial war in the 1940s against continuing British rule. In other words, Israel was anti-imperialist when it first emerged.

By contrast, the Arab states at the time were aligned with the imperial powers. The Arab states that invaded the nascent State of Israel fielded armies that were trained and supplied by the French and British Empires. During Israel's War of Independence, British officers commanded the Arab Legion of Transjordan, while the Royal Air Force, defending Egyptian airspace, fought the Israeli Air Force over the Sinai Peninsula in 1949.

And the nations of the world did not lift a finger when the Jews of Jerusalem were surrounded and faced annihilation, even though the UN had called for internationalization of the city.

Only the Israel Defense Forces broke Jerusalem's siege and saved its Jewish residents. In short, Jewish independence in Israel was won by a native and indigenous community acting in its own defense with little help from outside.

Is Jewish Statehood Discriminatory?

Today, some argue that Israel's very establishment as a Jewish state discriminates against non-Jewish Israelis, even, as a recent article claimed, rendering them second-class citizens.17 Such a claim is not only utterly false,

as any student of Israeli law or politics knows; it also seriously distorts the harmless -- and quite beautiful -- ways in which states can reflect the identity of their majority communities, or pay tribute to their founding histories, without infringing the rights of individual citizens. Israel's critics go too far when they seek to cloak Israel's mere communal expression in the inflammatory garb of religious discrimination.

Nearly every country in the world boasts one majority community, and nearly all reflect the cultural identity of that community in one way or another. The United States officially celebrates only Christian holidays; many European countries openly identify as either Catholic or Protestant; and many Muslim countries uncontroversially refer to themselves as an "Islamic Republic," whether they are democratic or not. For some, such identification is simply a sign of the spiritual persuasion of the majority; for others, it is homage to the story of the country's founding. There is nothing obviously wrong with such expression.

Indeed, in today's multi-culturalist environment, with a renaissance in public appreciation of communal identity, it is anachronistic to suggest that in the case of Israel, alone, communal identification is problematic. One can only wonder why Jewish national expression, with no discriminatory effect, is so uniquely hard to bear.18 Perhaps the reason stems from the history of opposition to Jewish statehood: it was first raised by Arab nationalists and religious Islamic radicals, who opposed Jewish rule on what they had deemed "Arab" soil. This opposition, though prominent in the rhetoric of Palestinian groups like Hamas today,19 is largely unacceptable in Western political discourse. That forces its proponents to reformulate their anti-Israel animus in the more universal language of rights and equality. Still, as convenient a target as it seems, Israel's self-expression as a Jewish state, like the communal identification of any state, has little bearing on questions of rights and equality.

The important point is not whether a state adopts some communal theme but whether it in fact discriminates: Are minority citizens equal under the law? Can they express their own heritage publicly and communally? Do they have the same opportunities for power and representation in the system, even the ability to become the majority? In short, are they first-class citizens?

For non-Jewish citizens of Israel, the answer to all these questions is "Yes. Unequivocally." Israeli Arab citizens are by law equal to Jewish citizens; they enjoy the same rights and are legally protected from discrimination.

Non-Jews enjoy every freedom that democracies recognize, including freedom of worship, the free expression and exercise of religion, equality of financial, material, and employment opportunity, political power, and all legal rights. Indeed, Israel's Declaration of Independence demands nothing less.

According to the Declaration, the Jewish state "will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture; it will safeguard the Holy Places of all religions." Israel's Arab citizens have, in fact, reached positions on Israel's Supreme Court and have elected powerful parties in the Israeli Knesset that fully participate in Israeli political life.

Some critics of Israel, often with questionable motives, exploit the nature of Israel's parliamentary political system to falsely depict Arab citizens as a vulnerable minority.

Indeed they are -- but only inasmuch as all minorities in a parliamentary government that are outside the ruling coalition suffer some disadvantages. Israel contains a lively system of distinct communities living side-by-side, often vying for the same limited supply of the largely socialized national welfare and aid programs. Israeli Arabs, for example, compete with other minorities that do not typically reach the top -- ultra-Orthodox Jews, Russian immigrants, and religious Sephardim. That some of these groups sometimes do better than others does not show discrimination; it simply shows the system at work.

Most important, however, the disadvantages of political minorities in Israel have nothing to do with Israel's ceremonious identification as a Jewish state.

Their situation will change if and when Israel transforms itself from a system of proportional representation, with each minority having a party to call its own, into a district-based election system. Many Israelis support such a change, though it has shortcomings, too. But even under the current, imperfect, political reality, Jewish and Arab citizens are equal under the law.

All this is not to deny that Israel has one special mission as a Jewish state -- albeit one that does not affect the rights of its non-Jewish citizens. Israel was built as a haven for Jewish refugees fleeing persecution.

The legendary Israeli statesman Abba Eban referred to this aspect of Israel as a case of "international affirmative action," because it was designed to correct an inherent disadvantage suffered by a particular group throughout history, which has deprived them of a level playing field.

Unfortunately, Jews still need a place of refuge from persecution. For that reason, diaspora Jews deserve the special treatment they receive in this one respect.

When the Jewish community of Ethiopia stood defenseless against the onslaught of armed partisans in the 1991 civil war, or when Argentina's Jews became the target of scape-goating and attacks during the recent economic depression, or when Soviet Jews fled Communism, Israel alone opened its doors unconditionally.

For Jews seeking refuge in Israel, the state grants immediate citizenship. Nevertheless, a non-Jew enjoys the same right and opportunity to become a citizen of Israel as any other country offers, including the United States.

And once a citizen, he or she enjoys all the rights and privileges granted by Israel's laws and government to the majority of its people, based on a principle of equality now enshrined in the basic law of the country and the fabric of its political culture.

Israeli Rights Versus Palestinian Rights

Still, regardless of the rights that Israel has granted its non-Jewish citizens, critics malign it on different grounds: that Palestinians boast a stronger claim for national sovereignty over the same land. This claim needs to be examined separately. In particular, was there, prior to Israel's establishment, a distinct Palestinian nationalism vying for its own separate place in the land?

The Palestinian Arabs originally saw themselves in the early 20th century as part of a greater Arab national movement. For much of the first half of the last century Arab states sought to unify as they supported various schemes for Arab unity. In Arabic there are, in fact, two terms for nationalism: qawmiyah -- loyalty to the Arab nation as a whole, and wataniyah -- loyalty to the local country in which one resides. For decades, qawmiyah was far more predominant for Palestinian Arabs.

For example, Bernard Lewis has written that while the Palestinian Arabs had a growing sense of identity with their struggle against Jewish immigration in the 1930s, still "their basic sense of corporate historic identity was, at different levels, Muslim or Arab or -- for some -- Syrian; it is significant that even by the end of the Mandate in 1948, after 30 years of separate Palestinian political existence, there were virtually no books in Arabic on the history of Palestine."20

Moreover, the 1947 Partition Plan still described the Palestinians as "Arabs" and called for an "Arab state" in Palestine alongside of a Jewish state. In May 1956, Ahmad Shuqairy, who would found the PLO eight years later, stated before the UN Security Council: "it is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but southern Syria."21

In the early 1960s, many Palestinians looked to Egypt's Gamal Abdul Nasser as their leader as much as to any Palestinian. And there was no active movement of the Palestinians to separate the West Bank from Jordan or the Gaza Strip from Egypt to form a unique Palestinian state prior to 1967. Today, a third source of loyalty is emerging among Palestinian Arabs connected to Hamas or Islamic Jihad -- loyalty to the Islamic nation or umma. Hamas, after all, is the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, an organization with pan-Islamic ambitions.

Still, Israel recognizes that a unique Palestinian national identity exists today. But given its historical background, it is impossible to show that Palestinian nationalism has a claim to the Land of Israel superior to that of the Jews.

In the future, whatever Palestinian political entity emerges from part of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, it very well might decide to federate with the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan in 10 or 20 years, where a Palestinian majority already exists.

In the Balkans, for example, it is difficult for Europeans to predict the future of Bosnia or Kosovo. Will their populations seek to unify with states containing the same ethnic makeup, so that Croats in Bosnia will merge with Croatia, while Kosovars will seek to unite with Albania? The same long-term question applies to the Palestinian territories after Arafat.

The Continuing Need for Jewish Statehood

Regardless, a uniquely Jewish democratic society will continue to exist in Israel, where it will serve as a vital refuge for Jews facing anti-Semitism from France, Russia, South America, or Yemen. Israel remains the only country that allows unconditional Jewish immigration. In a few years Israel will comprise the largest Jewish community in the world. Only the army of the Jewish people, the Israel Defense Forces, can protect that community.

Some now argue that Jews no longer face the existential threats that anti-Semitism once posed. It is even suggested that today's anti-Semitism is caused, not counteracted, by Israeli policy.

But the recent experiences of Jews in Ethiopia, Argentina, and across Europe, along with the vile slurs about world Jewry on the part of Islamic leaders like Malaysia's Mohammed Mahathir, give lie to such euphoria. Anti-Semitism has existed for centuries, well before the rise of the State of Israel. Indeed, it could be argued that it is not the reality of Israeli policy that is causing the new anti-Semitism, but rather the prejudices of European editors who feature difficult anti-Israeli photographs, out of context, as lead news items, while downgrading serious cases of massacre, such as on the continent of Africa.

Today, world leaders are willing to admit that the harsh critique that Israel receives can be traced to older, anti-Semitic roots.

For example, the president of the European Commission, Roman Prodi -- commenting on a new opinion poll showing that Israel is the country regarded by most ordinary Europeans as a threat to world peace -- said the results "point to the continued existence of a bias that must be condemned out of hand," and "to the extent that this may indicate a deeper, more general prejudice against the Jewish world, our repugnance is even more radical."22

There is even a new strain of anti-Semitism that has emerged in the radical opposition to globalization, which now targets Jews as a kind of transnational economic force and, in chillingly familiar terms, blames them for economic upheaval. The anti-Semitic threat, unfortunately, is alive and well.

Not only is Jewish security at stake but so is Jewish continuity.

Throughout Jewish history, national independence was perceived as a condition for Jewish self-fulfillment.23 Redemption was tied to the idea of return.

For that reason, the re-birth of Israel strengthened Jewish identity. A reversal of Jewish independence would clearly have the opposite effect. As things stand, Jewish creativity in the future will come increasingly out of Israel, as the Jewish state emerges as the primary center of Jewish life. Just as the Jewish people of the diaspora once contributed to the growth of modern civilization in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, it will be Jewish civilization in Israel that will be the key source of the Jewish contribution to world society in the twenty-first century.

A strong Jewish state is essential for protecting the continuity of Jewish identity and its place in world affairs.
* * *

Notes

1. Tony Judt, "Israel: The Alternative," New York Review of Books, vol. 50, no. 16, October 23, 2003.

2. Lawrence Marzouk, "UK Media Blasted Over Israel," Barnet & Potters Bar Times (UK), October 29, 2003; http://www.barnettimes.co.uk/features/newsfeatures/display.var.427956.0.uk_media_blasted_over_israel.php

3. Ruth Gavison, "On the Jewish Right to Sovereignty," Azure, Summer 2003.

4. Address by Prime Minister Netanyahu to the United Nations General Assembly, September 24, 1998, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH0h3f0

5. Benjamin Netanyahu, A Place Among the Nations: Israel and the World (New York: Bantam, 1993), pp. 14-15. For the sake of historical perspective, one would do well to consider Ben-Gurion's first premise, the title deeds of the Jews to this land, which he presented on January 7, 1937, to the Peel Commission:


"I say on behalf of the Jews that the Bible is our Mandate, the Bible which was written by us, in our own language, in Hebrew, in this very country. That is our Mandate. It was only recognition of this right which was expressed in the Balfour Declaration."

6. Bernard Lewis, "The Palestinians and the PLO, A Historical Approach," Commentary, January 1975: 32.

7. Bernard Lewis, Semites and Anti-Semites: An Inquiry into Conflict and Prejudice (New York: Norton, 1999), p. 164.

8. Arie Morgenstern, "Dispersion and the Longing for Zion, 1240-1840," Azure, Winter 2002.

9. Ibid.

10. Alan Dershowitz, The Case for Israel (Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons) p. 26.

11. Mark Twain, The Innocents Abroad (New York: Oxford University Press, 1996), p. 349.

12. Netanyahu, A Place Among the Nations, pp. 38-40.

13. Palestine: A Study of Jewish, Arab, and British Policies (New Haven: Yale University Press and Esco Foundation for Palestine, Inc., 1947), v. 1, pp. 463-464.

14. Joseph Alpher, "Israel and the Palestinians: What Everyone Should Know About the Conflict," Reform Judaism, Fall 2002, vol. 31, no. 1.

15. Netanyahu, A Place Among the Nations, p. 36.

16. Mortimer B. Zuckerman, "Graffiti on History's Walls," U.S. News & World Report, November 3, 2003.

17. Judt, "Israel: The Alternative."

18. Dennis Prager and Joseph Telushkin, Why the Jews? (New York: Touchstone, 2003), p. 170.

19. "Hamas Leaders Vow to Press Fight Against Israel," Washington Post, Briefs (December 27, 1999), p. A16.

20. Bernard Lewis, Semites and Anti-Semite, p. 186.

21. Harris O. Schoenberg, Mandate for Terror: The United Nations and the PLO (New York: Shapolsky Publishers, 1989), p. 59.

22. Ed O'Loughlin, "Europe Apologizes to Israel for Poll, The Age (Australia), November 5, 2003.

23. Marvin Fox, "Jewish Power and Jewish Responsibility," in Daniel J. Elazar, ed., Jewish Education and Jewish Statesmanship (Jerusalem: Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, 1996), p. 60.

Author Biography:
Dore Gold is President of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. Previously, he served as Israel's Ambassador to the United Nations (1997-1999). He is the author of Hatred's Kingdom: How Saudi Arabia Supports the New Global Terrorism (Regnery, 2003).
Jeffrey S. Helmreich is the author of numerous articles on Israel for American newspapers and journals. His most recent Jerusalem Viewpoints include: "Beyond Political Terrorism: The New Challenge of Transcendent Terror" (November 2001); "The Israel Swing Factor: How the American Jewish Vote Influences U.S. Elections" (January 2001); and "Journalistic License: Professional Standards in the Print Media's Coverage of Israel" (August 2001).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This article can also be read at: http://www.aish.com/jewishissues/middleeast/Answering_the_New_Anti-Zionists.asp

Copyright © 1995 - 2003 Aish.com - http://www.aish.com
- posted by Izak @ 4:06 AM (0) comments

 
Perfecting Male and Female through Marriage:
Primal Lessons of the Jewish Forefathers and Mothers.

Written by SIMSHALOM.

Relating to the Weekly Torah Portion “Chayei Sarah” read in Synagogue this Saturday
22 November, 2003.

A lot of space is devoted to the saga of a search for a good wife for Isaac.
Abraham sends his emissary Eliezer back to his old homeland on a mission to find a suitable spouse for his son. After a long journey, he amazingly meets Rebecca at a watering hole (where else? – but this one is for thirsty camels). After some negotiation with her family, she agrees to go back to the house of Abraham and marry Isaac.

Why does the Torah devote so much footage to the details of a how an ancient couple was matched up, you may ask? Not only in this case, but why are we given details about the original state and dynamics of Abraham and Sarah’s marriage? Why does it matter when we later read about how Jacob marries? And all the little details about these couples’ struggles to produce the right children, and how they escaped from outside threats to their unions?

Some may comment and say, well these are all nice ancient moral tales that have little to do with modern everyday realities. But any knowledgeable observer of the contemporary dating and social scene knows that many millions (hundreds of millions?) of people today are bereft of meaningful relationships, and are desperate to find their right partner in life. So there is actually a lot of turmoil both on and below the surface as people struggle to make sense of the true nature and need of men for women, and women for men, that goes beyond just casual relationships, and begs for some answers and solutions.

Many people don’t realize that the Torah is actually extremely “scientific”. It has a logical, almost mathematical, structure. Its very beginning, the narrative of the Creation of the world is the axiomatic premise for all that follows. To argue that Creation is “myth” is to expunge THE “Mission Statement”. The grand premise of all premises is compacted into the descriptions and circumstance surrounding the creation of Adam and Eve. They are not two mythical Adonis-like beings frolicking around nude in a divine zoological park. They are the axiomatic prototypes of all subsequent HUMAN men and women and their relationships to follow:

Adam, representing all mankind stands at the apex of the Universe, God’s ultimate creation.
Adam was created alone, but also diverges into male and female.
It was not good for Adam to be alone, so a spouse, Eve, is created for him.
They are told to be fruitful and multiply and fill the Earth.
They are described as “one flesh” which is primarily manifested in their sexual union and procreation of children
So far, so good.
But when they eat from some mysterious Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil (Question: What’s wrong with “knowledge”? Answer: Some other time…), they have stumbled over a fatal trip-wire and somehow trigger the onset of a dark fatal notion called “death”, since God had told them, on the day you eat of it you shall surely die.

Now, no normal person wants to die, and everyone is always searching for someone special to share their life with, and to raise a nice family with them that will live on and on through its own having of children.

The premise and axiom of the Torah was that God wanted harmonious and perfected unions of male and female. Adam and Eve exemplify this, but they do not fulfill its potential.
The blueprint remains on the planning boards until such time as better candidates appear on the stage of human development. Humankind must give rise to an extraordinary species of giants of the human and divine spirit, who will propel the world on a trajectory of Eternal Life…

It is Abraham and Sarah, Isaac and Rebecca, Jacob and Rachel and Leah who are selected as the primary model couples who will lay down the kind of foundation for humanity that should have been done by the First Couple of human history, Adam and Eve.
The purpose and destiny of a male and female coupling is not just another act in the animal kingdom, but has to involve a literal higher calling.

Judaism teaches that when a couple is brought together and produce children they are not just emulating the Divine, they are actually partnering with God to produce Godly human beings. The physical parents provide the body, and God provides the inner life force, the soul (“nefesh” or “neshama”), and thus the human beings that are born become vessels capable of connecting not just with each other, but also with the Divine.

Hidden within all the minutia of how the marital matches for Abraham, Isaac and Jacob were discovered, established, and consummated, are “secret recipes” and ingredients for that entity which will be created called The Children Of Israel, the forefathers of the Jewish people. Evil influences are intolerable in this formulation of a unique people, and that is why Ishmael and Esau, because of their cruelty, are excluded from its foundations.

When Eliezer was at a loss who to pick as Isaac’s wife from a field of strangers, he came up with a formulation that is rooted in premises of Abraham’s life. Compassion and kindness for the stranger was Abraham’s hallmark. It was also a unique embodiment of the Divine trait of Mercy, without which there can be no justice and no moral society. It would take history a long time to learn this. Ancient civilizations based on slavery and serfdom would eventually crumble completely as the force of Abraham’s teachings marched on inexorably, as the values of ancient Israel triumphed over ancient Egypt and Rome and other cruel empires.

So when Eliezer comes up with the litmus test for who would meet the perfect profile of a suitable spouse for Isaac, it is axiomatic that he will look for the one who most expresses the Abraham’s quality of Loving-Kindness. When Rebecca offered water to both Eliezer AND his animals, he knows that he has struck gold. THIS is THE girl who will be Isaac’s wife. It’s not just a case of trite do-goodism, but rather a glimpse of an absolute Divine quality: Mercy, without which no person can hope to avoid Divine Justice.

Whereas Eve enacted a life-reducing act by reaching for the forbidden and inducing expulsion, Rebecca on the other hand performs a life-sustaining act with qualities of Revival.

Whereas Eve opened herself to the influence of an evil advisor, Rebecca follows the lead of a kind emissary.

Whereas Eve is tempted into an unknown that breaks with her husband’s will, Rebecca goes into the unknown relying on her faith and is united with her destined husband.

Whereas Eve is seduced by a serpent and falls into his trap, Rebecca is able to overpower the machinations of her wicked brother and escape his grip.

Whereas Eve has children, Cain and Abel, who kill each other, Rebecca will be wise enough to help avoid this when she helps Jacob escape from Esau.

And in perhaps one of the most dramatic differences between the two, it is Eve who lures her husband into her own fallen condition, whereas it is however Rebecca who will guide her son Jacob to “trick” his father Isaac into giving him the Godly patriarchal blessings and outfox the scheming Esau.

There are many other instances and examples that show conclusively how the Jewish patriarchs and matriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel, and Leah, through their deeds and actions set the foundation and provided the role models for their descendants till the end of time.

A neat lesson in a nutshell that we can all come away with is that the main quality to look for in a spouse is KINDNESS. In a society so focused on external appearances it’s tough to come up with a formula that really works. But if someone really cares for you, and they will exhibit it either through their lives or their actions that they base their lives on living kindly, then you can be sure that they have the qualities for the ingredients that really make marriages work.

The Jewish word for LOVE is “AHAVA”, which is derived from the root “hav”, meaning “to give” in Aramaic. To love someone means to give of yourself unconditionally, which is what a true marriage is all about.

Have a great Shabbat!
Let me know what you think!




- posted by Izak @ 9:26 PM (0) comments