Are you a conservative or a liberal? Fox News or CNN? Whom do you follow on Twitter? Are our leaders giants or goats? For better or worse, most of us have passionate feelings about who is right and who is wrong, and we look for affirmation of our opinion.
In the Jewish world, perhaps no issue invites such polarization more than the future of the State of Israel: One state? Two states? What of our ancient stake in Judea and Sumaria? What rights and future do Arabs, Palestinians, or others have? What do we feel about multiple claims on the land? On Jerusalem? Where do you stand, and what role do American Jews have in this discussion? Even asking such questions invites finger pointing and invective. We are accustomed to taking a position, defending it, and often dismissing opponents as ignorant, morally bankrupt, and even self-hating.
This year a group at TE has been learning together, taking a course from the Shalom Hartman Institute centered in Israel, entitled iEngage. Led by Rabbi Farbman, this series includes scholarly lectures and roundtable discussions from Israelis of different political backgrounds. We have examined Israel’s milestones and their meaning, from the Balfour Declaration describing a homeland for the Jewish people, the United Nations partition plan, the Six Day war, the Jubilee Year, and beyond. We have examined texts from biblical sources, historical documents, charters, and modern speeches such as one delivered months ago by Senator John McCain.
When we considered the question of Israel’s future, entitled “One State, Two States: Moral Red Lines,” we examined the proposition that we might come to the discussion from a different position: leave behind what you “know” to be right, suspend identifying with which pole of the debate you stand on. Instead, consider seeking agreement on the moral principles that should undergird any solution. We considered five moral values: the value of human life, the right to property, the obligation of reciprocity, the “right” to collective rights, and the obligation to pursue peace. We were urged to discuss and consider each of these principles, through the writings from biblical times to the present, which might guide a best solution – be it a one state, two state, or other best solution to Israel’s future.
This has been a wonderful challenge: we have much to learn from our Jewish texts and heritage that inform our moral foundation. What principles can we agree to, whatever our political orientation? What can we imagine or create together when we can establish a common moral base? And beyond Israel: imagine the power of possibility if conservatives and liberals and proponents of all stripes could first listen to one another, agree to a set of moral principles, and then discuss how this informs the future.