Last summer, on my family’s trip to the US, I read Daniel Gordis’s latest book entitled Saving Israel: How the Jewish People Can Win a War That May Never End. At the time, I couldn’t resist collaring the Cap’n every few pages to read him a passage that seemed to me to nail the problems, challenges, and feelings Israelis face on a daily basis—things that the rest of the world increasingly appears not to understand.
Earlier this year, I reviewed an earlier book of Gordis’s, Does the World Need the Jews? In that book, Gordis seeks to answer the question that seemingly faces many young Jews in the United States, i.e. “Why be Jewish?” In this more recent book, Gordis sets out to answer a similar question, this one directed at both Israeli and Diaspora Jews, namely, “Why be Israeli?”
In his introductory chapter, Gordis acknowledges the plethora of books written which speculate about whether, given its manifold challenges from within and without, Israel can survive, but sets out in this book to answer a different question. “Of much greater importance than asking whether Israel can continue to exist is examining the question of why Israel’s survival might matter in the first place. What has Israel done for the Jewish people? How has Israel changed Jewish life not only inside the Jewish state, but around the world? Do the Jews really need a state? And if they do, what must they do to save it?” (author’s italics).
Gordis is a true intellectual, and while a fervent Zionist, also has the ability to scrutinize Israel’s many problems including poverty, corruption, and an educational system that does a poor job of preparing young Israelis to pick up the mantle of Jewishness and Zionism and continue the work of forging and defining the Jewish state. He spares no effort to take a balanced look at Israel’s many challenges, including the inequalities that exist for Israel’s Arab citizens, and the security threat posed by them; the divide between what the Palestinian Arab rank and file deserve from their governments, even as they themselves elected sworn terrorists to represent them; and the world of identity, intellectual, and cultural possibility opened up to world Jewry by Israel, even as 50% of Jewish Americans aged 35 and younger responded in a study that the destruction (“not its gradual disappearance, or the slow withering away of the state”) would not be a personal tragedy for them.
I relished Gordis’s discussion of the many benefits to Jews everywhere of having a Jewish state, including the restoration of hope of Jewish survival after the Shoah, the opportunity to fashion a state based on our own Jewish values, to solve problems with the unique tools of Jewish wisdom, and to fulfill the Biblical prophecy to gather in the exiles of the world. His chapter, “The First War, All Over Again,” charts the emotional roller-coaster that Israelis have been on since embarking on a series of attempts to make a lasting peace with the Arabs, all of which seem to end in betrayal and disappointment, recreating for them the feeling that they’re fighting the War of Independence over and over again. He addresses the combined threats of terrorism, Iran, the United Nations, Israeli Arabs, but concludes that while these threats are real, they are not the greatest threat to the survival of the Jewish state. The need for Israelis to be able to stay engaged in the work of defining their own identity as a Jewish and—at least in some measure—democratic state is crucial. Israel cannot be a Hebrew-speaking America without forsaking its goal as a refuge and homeland for Jews. He distinguishes the two thus: “While democracy may well be part of the purpose of American national life, the Jewish state was not created in order to be a democracy. It was founded in order to change the condition of the Jews” (author’s italics). As such, Gordis is prepared to admit (as was Rav Meir Kahane before him) that, in the words of Professor Ruth Gavison, “‘Non-Jews may not enjoy a feeling of full membership in the majority culture; this, however, is not a right but an interest—again, it is something which national or ethnic minorities almost by definition do not enjoy—and its absence does not undermine the legitimacy of Israeli democracy.’”
In order for Israel to function as the Jewish state, Gordis determines that there are several things Jews must address. One is the concept of the New Jew, created in the early days of Zionism and the State, which dispensed with what was seen by some influential intellectuals as the superstitious trappings of religious ritual. Prayer, study, and even belief in the God of Israel were dismissed as impediments to forging a new, non-European, non-victimized Jew. This has resulted in young Israelis today who don’t know the basic prayers (including the Shema) and rituals (including havdalah), who find religion in their trips to the Far East after army service, and who are beginning to feel that their cultural ties to the Jewish state are unraveling. Another thing Jews must address is the image popular among Jews for generations (and most popular now among Diaspora Jews) that Jews are pacifists, and that Jews as soldiers and fighters (even in self defense, even for survival) is somehow un-Jewish. Drawing on history, the Bible, and current events, Gordis shows how peace is the Jewish ideal, but that war is sometimes necessary, and failure or refusal to prosecute it to its end can carry with it lasting and devastating consequences. A third issue to be confronted is the increasing irrelevance of the Jewish rabbinical establishment in Israel (namely, the chief rabbinate) in the lives of ordinary Israelis. While it has the power to obstruct Israelis who wish to have non-Orthodox weddings and conversions, it has nothing to say to them about the morals and ethics of living as Jews in a beleaguered country, riddled with challenges and problems, in the 21st century.
Years ago, my mother said she read an article which suggested that the Jews in Israel should pick up and leave the country. This would, of course, allow it to be overrun by Arabs who, through their incompetence, corruption, and apathy, would oversee its returning to its fallow, Ottoman-era state. Then, the article supposedly stated (somewhat fantastically), the world would beg the Israelis to return and rebuild what would then, once and for all, be recognized as their land alone. I was shocked by this notion, not only in light of the certain destruction of every last trace of Jewish presence here (modern and archeological) but the certainty that Jews would never be able to come back. Two of Gordis’s final paragraphs echo this bleak prognosis:
Were Israel just a state, the high cost it exacts might not be justified. But as we have seen throughout the book, Israel is not just a state. It breathed life into the Jewish people at precisely the moment when the Jews might have given up. It gives possibility and meaning to a Jewish future. It enables the Jews to reenter the stage of history.
That is why the calls for Israel’s demise must be resisted. For what is at stake is not just the Jewish state but the Jewish people as well. Statehood has revitalized the Jewish people, but the Jews are very unlikely to get another state should this one fail. Whether the calls are for the outright destruction of Israel, or for the gradual erosion of Jewish sovereignty through ideas like a shared binational state between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, the result would be the same. Jewish life as we know it would be lost. The regained optimism, vitality, and confidence of the Jewish world would disappear, probably within a generation.
Israel’s enemies understand that. It is time that the Jews did, too.
I’ve been a fan of Gordis’s for years. Like me, he once believed wholeheartedly in the possibility of leading a thriving Jewish existence in the Diaspora. And then, like me, he and his family heard the irresistible siren song of aliyah and came here to live. Gordis has spent his life since aliyah working tirelessly to increase the Diaspora world’s understanding of the daily challenges Israelis face in our shared homeland through his essays, and in his capacity as a vice president at Jerusalem’s Shalem Center, in creating a learning institution to help prepare the next generation of Israel’s leaders, who he hopes will be prepared to address the many quandaries and problems described in this book. I admire him for his Jewish learning, for his accessible writing, for his relentless pursuit of truth (even if it’s uncomfortable), and for his willingness to apply himself to the task of solving what he sees are some of the very serious problems that face Israel and Israelis. While it is possible he will not see the full benefit of the fruits of his labors, he has internalized the admonishment of Rabbi Tarfon not to refrain from trying.
Shimshonit 
“‘Non-Jews may not enjoy a feeling of full membership in the majority culture; this, however, is not a right but an interest—again, it is something which national or ethnic minorities almost by definition do not enjoy—and its absence does not undermine the legitimacy of Israeli democracy.’”
The devil is certainly in the details with respect to this saying. I don’t mind an Israel where a non-Jew feels somewhat alienated because there is a lengthy holiday season in September-October and Christmas or Ramadan pass unnoticed outside their home communities. That’s what we Jews have to endure in galut, and it is not an unreasonable burden. Being forced to sing Hatikva in school is more problematic, but few people take their national anthems literally anymore. But routinely having Arab villages receive 1/3rd the government funding Jewish villages do, or requiring Army service as a prerequisite for many jobs while not allowing people to join the army, or simply denying non-Jews the vote (as Moshe Feiglin advocates) would be examples that would undermine the legitimacy of Israeli democracy. A lack of civil marriage that would, for example, allow a Jew and a Hindu to marry is a serious flaw in Israeli democracy.
So could you expand a bit on what you perceive your quote above as implying?
I still haven’t read Does the World Need the Jews? . Now I have two books to read.
Larry: I’m not sure Gordis (or Gavison) meant more than your initial interpretation in this quotation. However, since you requested that I expand on it myself, let me ask a few questions to provoke a little more thought:
What national anthems were Jews expected to sing in Arab lands (before they were expelled, that is)? Granted, none of those lands was a democracy, but did singing (or not) someone else’s national anthem really make them feel like they were second class citizens? Weren’t there other things that probably reminded them even more of their dhimmi status?
I would need to know a little more about the nature of the funding discrepancies before I could comment. Are schools in Arab villages considered state schools? Or are they private, in order to be able to choose their own curriculum (and teach the Nakba instead of the War of Independence, for example)? They don’t need mikvaot, or chief rabbis, or local kashrut supervision. What are the factors that go into less funding? I’m prepared to accept that there is simple discrimination, but I’d like to see some evidence of that, as well as any other evidence you could provide of why Arab villages receive less.
Army service is not the only way of serving the country, and indeed national service has been made available to Arabs (allowing them to work for the benefit of the Israeli Arab community). This is increasing in popularity despite the vociferous opposition from Israeli Arab leadership that wants to brand it as exploitation.
As for not drafting Arabs, I think you’re smart enough to recognize that if Arabs were without doubt loyal citizens of Israel and wouldn’t feel terribly awkward having to fight their fellow Arabs to protect the Jewish state, they’d be drafted. But I think the decision by both Jews and Arabs to let that issue alone is the only way to address it.
You may not agree with Feiglin’s politics, but they don’t come out of nowhere. With most Arab political parties calling for an end to the Jewish nature of Israel and advocating instead a one-state solution–which would ultimately become another Arab state, and Israeli Arabs (including but not limited to Azmi Bishara) being indicted for aiding Hizbullah, carrying out terrorist attacks in Jerusalem (both the Mercaz HaRav massacre and the series of three bulldozer attacks on the streets were carried out by Israeli Arabs), and celebrating the destruction of Jews and others in the Second Lebanon War (and 9/11), one sometimes has to wonder why 76% of Israeli Arabs say they’d rather live here than anywhere else. But Arab life is full of contradictions, and it wouldn’t surprise me if at the same time they say they appreciate the quality of life here, they’d be just as happy to trade that for another Arab state.
I can’t say I’m a big fan of Jews marrying Hindus, but I take your point. I wouldn’t mind seeing the rabbinate knocked down a few pegs, and if Jews want to be able to marry whom they please, I’m not sure it’s up to any government–even that of the Jewish state–to prohibit them. I say that while thinking more of Reform Jews marrying in their own way than Jews and people of other religions.
Perhaps it was not obvious from my review, but Gordis does NOT think that Israel should attempt to emulate America’s model of democracy down to the last detail. If Israel’s purpose is to transform the Jewish people, it must necessarily be a limited democracy. He has compassion for Israel’s Arabs, as well as those kept in a perpetual state of refugee-dom by the UNRWA and used by the rest of the Arab world as a political stick with which to beat Israel. But (and I digress from Gordis here for a moment) the Arabs who call themselves Palestinians have had choices all along. They could make peace (which admittedly goes completely against the grain of their culture and character) or they could go somewhere else. Jordan (once called Transjordan) was set aside as an Arab state for the Arabs living under the British Mandate. The fact that the Arabs who remained in Palestine threw their backs into trying to prevent the Jews from getting anything at all was their own lookout, as was the fact that they have failed repeatedly in these efforts. I understand that their presence here constitutes facts on the ground that must be dealt with practically, but history does not make me particularly well-disposed toward them as a group and my compassion for them falls somewhat short of Gordis’s.
I highly recommend reading the book. He’s a great thinker and writer and I think anyone struggling to understand Israel and the current pessimism about peace here would learn a lot from it.
Ilana-Davita: I’m sure you would enjoy both of them. Let me know what you think when you finally do read them.
“50% of Jewish Americans aged 35 and younger responded in a study that the destruction (“not its gradual disappearance, or the slow withering away of the state”) would not be a personal tragedy for them.”
I’m sorry, but whenever some study quotes “Jewish Americans”, it merits an automatic dismissal. “Jewish Americans” includes Reform Jews – if you actually look into what Reform Jews believe on a theological level and on a day-to-day basis, you find a religion that boasts more commonalities with the basic theology of Christianity than the basic theology of Orthodox Judaism; in fact, the only real similarities that Reform Judaism has with Orthodox Judaism is the claim of celebrating the same Jewish holidays and a claim that Saturday is the Sabbath. Studies asking “American Jews” if they observe basic Jewish beliefs such as the Sabbath, Kashrut, or even a belief in God, would find similarly disturbingly high numbers.
The existence of a Jewish state is the beginning of the last answer in the fight against assimilation. For centuries, Jews were able to fight assimilation into Christian (later “secular”) and Muslim countries by forming small rural Jewish communities, where the norm was a Jewish norm. But the move in the 19th century onwards to urban centers as a result of Industrial Revolutions forced Jews to mingle within larger Goyish communities. The subsequently large number of Jews assimilating caused the creation of Reform-type movements – whereas before, assimilating Jews would simply convert to Christianity, they could now simply bind together under a Reform or Conservative banner. Historically speaking, there’s no real difference.
That’s why the reality of Jewish life in Israel is so disturbingly secular. Whereas before the creation of Israel, Orthodox Jewish communities stayed small and kept to themselves, they are increasingly required to mingle with secular life in the market and in their jobs. Indeed, Jewish life in the Holy Land faces almost as great a threat from assimilation – now into secular life instead of Christian life – than ever in history.
That’s why politicians like Moshe Feiglin are so refreshing. They understand that a strong Israel requires a strong Judaism, that the two are inextricably linked, because without true and proper Judaism, Jews lose their connection to Israel – in the same way that “American Jews” have lost their connection to Israel. Without a Jewish connection to Israel, there is no Jewish state, merely a secular construct that is Jewish in name and use of Hebrew language only. It truly is Biblical, because only when Jews were in God’s favor were they successful in Israel.
The correct course of action here is not “politically correct” options like allowing civil marriages between Jews and Hindus. Who defines “politically correct”? The secular world majority? They’re goys! Real “political correctness” is one that strengthens society as a whole, and the only way to do that is to increase Judaism in the presumably Jewish state of Israel. Give the Rabbinate MORE power, not less, unless you believe that the Rabbinate forces people to become more Jewish instead of encouraging them to become more Jewish for their own sakes. If the Rabbinate is forcing people, then there is no hope, for you cannot force Judaism on someone – they have to accept it. But they can encourage people by, for instance, requiring more Jewish education in public schools, so that people at least have the knowledge of why Jewish life is a stronger, happier life so that they can make a decision for themselves what to believe. That is the one of the first steps of action to take.
Sol: You have a lot to contribute to the discussion. Some I think is sound (and jibes with Gordis) and some I strongly disagree with.
Despite the fact that I think Orthodoxy is a true, good expression of the Torah in one’s daily life, I can’t sanction forcing it on anyone. I too think there should be more Jewish content in Israeli secular education, but that’s a job for the Ministry of Education, not for the rabbinate, which most people see as trying to force a stifling brand of haredi Judaism down the country’s throat.
I also don’t feel good about Jews putting themselves into ghettoes of frumkeit or writing off Reform Jews as Christian-wannabes. As a modern Orthodox Jew, I think Jews can and should participate in the wider world, where they have much to receive and much to offer, and I think the Torah can withstand the challenge of existing within a secular framework. While Reform Judaism has dispensed with much of what Orthodox Jewry considers essential ritual, as someone who did not grow up around traditional Judaism, I believe it’s not for everyone. I think Orthodoxy has greater staying power through the generations, but you can only lead a horse to water, as it were, and each generation must make its choice about how it wants to live its Judaism (or not).
What both Gordis and I would like to see happen in Israel is for the wider population, including secular Jews, to reconnect with Jewish tradition to give them a greater sense of why Israel is so important. As for Jews in America (only a third of whom have ever seen Israel) and elsewhere, for them to come to Israel and see first-hand what life here is like, in all its complexity and vibrancy, would establish a closer connection both to Israel and, God willing, Judaism. Birthright has been successful in this goal, and I hope it continues to be so.
[…] 29, 2011 by Shimshonit Daniel Gordis, author of Saving Israel (which I reviewed last year) and able spokesman for Israel (even if you don’t agree with everything he says) spoke to a […]