On Pluralism in the Jewish Community

CONVERSATION GUIDELINES FOR THE JEWISH COMMUNITY

EILU V EILU DIVREI ELOHIM CHAYYIM

The Gemara (Eruvin 13b)

D’var Torah - JCRC of Southern New Jersey Annual Meeting

Tuesday, May 22, 2018

This evening we are entering into the second day after the great festival of Shavuot according to the traditional custom of celebrating holidays in the galut / diaspora. For our fellow Jews who live in the Land of Israel and for those who follow the Israeli custom, it is the beginning of the third day. Second or third really does not matter because we should all still be shinning from our re-enactment of the events at Sinai known as Matan Torah – the “Gifting of the Torah.” And if our appreciation of the great events of the Jewish year is predominately culinary, then we can still taste the blintzes and cheesecake we eat or should have eaten in honor of the holiday. In any case, our Shavuot celebration should have renewed within us the common memories, experiences, values, and traditions that hold us together as Jews.

For me, the operative word in our organization’s name – the Jewish Community Relations Commission – is “Jewish”. We are here because we are committed to the Jewish people in our Jewish community. This commitment appears in the time and effort each one of us makes in support of our community, particularly here, in those areas in which Jews, as individuals and as a collective, interact with other groups in southern New Jersey, in our state and nation and around the world. We are here because we are passionate about moving the Jewish people and Jewish tradition forward.

Yet our passion, our greatest strength, can also be our greatest weakness. For all our love for things Jewish, we hold a wide range of views on what this Jewish thing is and what we need to do to keep it going. The passion that we bring to this fundamental concern often makes it hard for us to talk to each other.

To aid us in this fundamental task, talking with each other, I would like to share an understanding of “Judaism” that I find helpful.

So what is Judaism? For me it is not a religion, at least in the Western European sense of the word. Judaism does entail involvement in the spiritual traditions of the Jewish people, but also in other aspects of Jewish life.

For me, Judaism, is not civilization. That is both too broad and too narrow a concept. There have been a number of Jewish civilizations over our long history. Sometimes it is hard to see what connects them.

For me, Judaism is a conversation, the longest-running continuous conversation in human history. We just celebrated its legendary beginning on Shavuot as we heard the most famous conversation starter in the world, the Decalogue. Judaism is a conversation on the great topics of life – all of them, and a series of experiments putting the ideas raised in our discussions to the test in real life.

For this conversation to have lasted so long, we, the Jewish people, have put forth a number of ground rules. At this moment in American and World history, in which dialogue has become so difficult, it is worthwhile to review some of the Jewish guidelines to the discussion, the wisdom from our sages that ensure our conservations, discussion, and deliberations, which enable us to reinforce the bonds that bring us together.

One:

וֶהֱוֵי דָן אֶת כָּל הָאָדָם לְכַף זְכוּת

Judge everyone favorably (Pirkei Avot 1:6)

This concept is one of the three teachings attributed to the sage, Yeshoshua ben Perachia, in Pirkei Avot (1:6). It admonishes us to assume the sincerity of our conversation partner. Its immediate locus was in the study halls of early rabbinic Judaism. Yeshoshua ben Perachia informs us that when we engage in the Jewish conversation, we need to find a teacher to guide us, acquire a friend to share ideas, and, in the heated debates that took place when the sages would gather, we need to assume that the other people in the conversation are expressing their truth honestly and sincerely. There can be no progress, no learning, no community of ideas and action, without mutual trust. The person who disagrees with you, is not your enemy. In fact, that person can be your best teacher.

Rabbinic literature presents a number of stories that describe the troubles brought to the community of the sages and to the Jews when this good advice was ignored.

Two:

כָּל מַחֲלֹקֶת שֶׁהִיא לְשֵׁם שָׁמַיִם, סוֹפָהּ לְהִתְקַיֵּם. וְשֶׁאֵינָהּ לְשֵׁם שָׁמַיִם, אֵין סוֹפָהּ לְהִתְקַיֵּם.

Every argument that is for the sake of heaven, it is destined to endure.

But if it is not for the sake of heaven – it is not destined to endure. (Pirkei Avot 5:17)

The quality and durability of our conversation depends on the sincerity of those involved. The really good and important questions that focus our attention on the meaning and purpose of Jewish life will never be answered. The circumstances will change depending on what happens in the world around us and how we try to implement suggested resolutions, but the questions remain open and the conversation will continue. However whenever we bring our fear, our anger, our desire, our need to be right, to win the debate – ideas and feelings that are not heavenly – to the conversation, the conversation is quickly derailed and our community suffers.

Pirke Avot illustrates this proverb by comparing the vigorous discussions between the disciples of Hillel and those of Hillel’s colleague, Shammai, over points of law that described and defined the boundaries of the Jewish community and the debate between Korah and Moses over Moses’ legitimacy as leader of the Israelite nation. The conversation between the two schools is a continuing conversation in which the wisdom of the Shammai and his students is cherished even though the rulings of Hillel and his students were generally followed by subsequent generations of Jews for the practical purpose of maintaining community unity. Korah’s controversy with Moses, however, was a power struggle motivated by Korah’s greed, jealousy, anger, and disappointment.

Three:

אלו ואלו דברי אלהים חיים הן

Both opinions express the words of the living God. (Eruvim 13b)

The Talmud (Eruvim 13b) broadens the understanding of spirited but respectful discussion seen in the passage from Pirke Avot (5:17) which I have just mentioned.

Here we read:

א"ר אבא אמר שמואל שלש שנים נחלקו ב"ש וב"ה הללו אומרים הלכה כמותנו והללו אומרים הלכה כמותנו יצאה בת קול ואמרה אלו ואלו דברי אלהים חיים הן.

Rabbi Abba said that Shmuel said: For three years Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel disagreed. These said: The halakha is in accordance with our opinion, and these said: The halakha is in accordance with our opinion. Ultimately, a Divine Voice emerged and proclaimed: Both these and those are the words of the living God. (Steinsaltz translation from Sefaria.com)

In the Gemara’s exposition of the discussions and disagreements between the disciples of Shammai and the disciples of Hillel, the emphasis moves from the intention behind their debate to the significance of their words and opinions. The focus shifts from the human to the divine plan. Here the opposing opinions gain their vitality and validity not from the commitment of the disputants to discuss and debate meaning matters of enduring value, but from Heaven itself. The ideas expressed, even though they may be contradictory, refuting each other, have the status of Divine revelation. Both opinions express the living word of the living God.

The ideas of those we disagree with can be of ultimate value. They are part of the Torah – the teaching the lies at the heart of the enduring Jewish conversation. We can learn from them. They help us grow in wisdom and understanding. They draw us out of our comfort zone, provide us with a broader vision of the world and provide us with the information we need to evaluate and re-evaluate our own participation in the life of the Jewish people and in our interactions with the greater world. If we enter into the conversation assuming the sincerity of our partner, if we keep our attention aimed at the higher purposes that call us together, then we will speak and hear God’s own words.

But we are not a mere debating society. There needs to be an action component of what we do together. So whose opinion guides our action?

The Gemara continues by informing us that halakha, the action plan of rabbinic Judaism, followed the opinions of the disciples of Hillel. It is not because Hillelites had better arguments that those of Shammai’s disciples nor that they were better articulated. The acceptance of the opinions Hillel’s followers rests upon the manner in which they approached the discussion. The disciples of Hillel were agreeable and forbearing over the course of the debate and showed upmost respect for their interlocutors, the disciples of Shammai, and for their opinions.

Although all the words, ideas, and positions put forth in our discussions can reflect the will and words of God, what ultimately matters is not the strength of our arguments but of our character.

Or as Shammai taught (Avot 1:15)

שַׁמַּאי אוֹמֵר, עֲשֵׂה תוֹרָתְךָ קֶבַע. אֱמֹר מְעַט וַעֲשֵׂה הַרְבֵּה, וֶהֱוֵי מְקַבֵּל אֶת כָּל הָאָדָם בְּסֵבֶר פָּנִים יָפוֹת:

Shammai says, “(1) Make your Torah fixed – make sure that one studies Torah, the Jewish tradition, on a regular basis; (2) say little and do much – how one behaves is far more important than one’s words and opinions;

and (3) receive every person with a pleasant countenance – remember that whenever we interact with another person, we have the opportunity to hear the living words of our living God.