Orthodoxy and Ancient Prejudice
I traveled to America for my silver wedding anniversary. My previous visit to the USA ended in
1983 and was equally successful. I make
no apologies for being unadvisedly pro-American, pro-Jewish and pro-Zionist. Still, I was scared that this time, once I
reached the customs hall at Dulles
International Airport
“they” would not allow me in. Since 9/11 it
is not easy getting into the USA
for a holiday – I have heard far too many anecdotes of traumatic experiences
from innocent people! My knowledge of
customs officials are that they tend to be humorless, capricious and
apparently, randomly hostile towards foreign visitors.
I suspect that Islamic terrorists intent on
committing carnage are more likely to appear mild mannered, fawning; in-fact
intolerably kiss-ass in order to pass through the customs checks. There has to
be a better way!
But this is not why I am writing today. I confirmed my flight just prior to flying out
during Passover and so I ordered kosher meals.
In mid-flight the flight attendant asked me if I wanted to open my meal
myself or was it OK for them to open it for me?
So the first thing I must do is to put the question into historical
context.
Excepting for a major hiccup during the second
century BCE when the Maccabees forcibly converted a large number of people, the
Jewish people have been very conflicted about conversion since biblical times,
often warning against it. One major universal aspect of Judaism posits that
following the Noahide commandments are sufficient for non-Jews to have an equal
place in the afterlife with Jews. (The Noahide laws prohibit murder, theft,
adultery, incest and the eating of live flesh and require communities to
establish a legal system and courts of law). At the time of Christ, Judaism was a radical,
revolutionary faith – which stood many Jews in opposition to the Roman Empire. At least in principle, Judaism freed the
slaves and gave a measure of dignity to all human beings and that could never
be accepted or comfortably tolerated, at the very least, for economic reasons, by
either Greeks or Romans. Judaism gifted
the Western World universal education almost 3,000 years before any other
nation embraced it, the Decalogue, and a Sabbath day that was universally applicable.
Judea was geographically, strategically
important to Rome
and intermittently restive. By displaying an alternative to the Roman economic
model it potentially compromised Roman control over its colonial empire. Eventually Rome responded with a bloodbath that to
paraphrase the 2009 film, Avatar, would sear a memory into the Jewish psyche
that would scar the Jews for millennia.
The early Christians were Jews but their
leaders soon realized that if they were to become something bigger they would
need to discard their toxic Jewish heritage.
The Romans feared revolution and they feared dissent. The apostles distanced themselves and their
followers from the narrative of Jewish revolt in order to establish their new
faith and in doing so they planted the seeds of persecution that have plagued
Christian-Jewish interfaith relations ever since.
When Jews were threatened with annihilation
they responded by not simply discouraging proselytizing but more pro-actively,
they periodically banned it. Justinian
Christianity increased the restrictions on Jewish civil rights and centuries
later with the foundation of Islam the practice of belittling that which was
different and creating a separation between the holiness of the believer and
the unclean nature of the non-believer was taken to the logically next and final
step. The Koran provides a guide for persecuting and killing any doubters
including Muslim ones. By declaring
Islam to be the perfection of human faith it closes the door on criticism or
improvement and it supersedes everything that came before it.
Today there are many people including the
President of the United States of America excusing the inhumanity and ethnic
cleansing practiced by Muslim fundamentalists throughout the Near-East. President Obama has said that Christians “did
it first” (with the Crusades). What
bothers me most about this is that it is a childish argument, philosophically and
temperamentally immature. And it has no basis in ethics or fact. For the most powerful man in the world to be
saying this is beyond logical comprehension.
We live in the 21st Century, not the 7th
and not the 10th. In order to possess any relevance, every case is
unique.
The brutal killers of the so-called Islamic
State would like to harmonize the modern world with 7th Century
Islam, so they crucify children to create fear and demonstrate their superior
purpose. The Crusades started out as a
desire to restore Christian access to the holy places around Jerusalem
something that current Palestinian and anti-Semitic followers of the Arab cause
would cynically deny to Jews!
By the 17th Century of the Common Era, Jews had
been a persecuted people for so long that few of us alive today can appreciate
the despair and sporadic dread they must have lived with. Out of all that squalor Baruch de Spinoza
appeared on the scene; the man many people regard as the patriarch of the
Enlightenment. In the Western World the
intellectual darkness was starting to abate. In that 18th Century
intellectual soup Gotthold Lessing, Immanuel Kant and Moses Mendelssohn argued
for a rational intellectual landscape that afforded the individual freedom,
equality and tolerance. The Haskalah, the 18th Century Jewish
Enlightenment was also experiencing its birth pangs.
The Hasidim had a different approach. They did
not preach the final coming of the messiah as millenarian cults did nor did they
ascribe holiness to charismatic charlatans and theocratic psychopaths. Instead, out of the abyss of gloom and
despair they called out to the heavens, they screamed out to God in Heaven for
deliverance from their earthly suffering. They did so by encouraging the
faithful to pray even harder, but with a twist.
Their prayers would be filled with energy and joyful supplication to the
almighty. They claimed that if, through
their song, they could burst open the gates of heaven then God would hear their
cries for help. And they claimed that a
holy leader could intercede with God on behalf of the community. This adoption
of charismatic leadership was a radical step away from the scholarly approach
to prayer and community as practiced by previous generations.
The Hasidim rejected the legalistic, dry
Yeshiva approach of mainstream Western Orthodoxy. We could claim they were the
original happy-clappie gospel singers; eighteenth century evangelicals whose
promotion of spiritualism sought to normalize mysticism as intrinsic to Jewish
faith. In this way perhaps they thought that the misery of their lives could be
set aside? They raised the hopes of the
oppressed, perhaps they were delusional, but fear had taxed their spirits for
so long that surely any way must have been better than the present. Fear led them to view prayer as their only
salvation. Until that is, the new faith of Secularism began to supersede the
old religious faith in the late 19th Century.
And this is where I reconnect with my
contemporary story. How does this all relate to that flight attendants question?
Ideas around ritual purity can be spiritually uplifting. However, the idea that the touch of a non-Jew
might pollute the physical nutrients that sustain our bodies is an ancient fear
and it is time to set it aside.
We do have legitimate terrors. We need to focus our fears in the direction
of truly deadly contemporary existential enemies whether they are old-new
anti-Jewish boycotters, antisemitic regimes posing as carriers of anti-Zionist
radical chic or the deniers who are attempting to rewrite our history in
universities and journals across the globe.
When I was questioned by the
Virgin Atlantic flight attendant I was flustered by the question, and then the
rage I felt I could never direct at an airline that was only respecting the
archaic practices of a far too long and dark an age in our history. Some of those orthodox traditions remain as
fears, to which too many of us blindly cling. Those fears preclude taking the
first steps towards religious healing.
I understand that intimidation
and the reluctance to move on are fears’ unholy descendants. I understand that a
return to a Judaic theology based on moderation and reasonable doubt is not in
the interests of current ultra-orthodox communities. Compromise might actually
dissolve some of the barriers that exist between many of the sects and
sub-sects of Hasidism.
But no one should have to ask me
whether I am offended by the touch of another human being – no one should have
to offer me the choice of opening up my own food parcel.
It is a question that debases and
degrades both of us.
interesting....quite a take to an obligatory question by a service provider doing his job. I'm sure the hostess didn't even know why she was supposed to ask that, but good on her anyway. I hope you didn't show anger in her direction....
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely not. I just fumed at the ethical ramifications! Btw the guy who packed the food parcel was named Mohammed. Anyone for irony?
ReplyDelete