Height Speech

I was speaking with an opponent of the so-called “Ground Zero” mosque who told me that she wasn’t opposed to Islam, a hater of Muslims, or even an enemy of mosques in general. It was this mosque in particular that bothered her because it would cause needless pain to those affected by 9-11 by being located two blocks from Ground Zero; ground she considered hallowed.

Fair enough. I can understand and even respect that opinion, so I didn’t disagree, but simply asked her why a mosque was offensive while a strip club, bar, fast food restaurants, and an off-track betting parlor, all as far away from Ground Zero as the mosque, did not violate her sense of hallowed ground.

“Well, she said, ignoring my question, “I just don’t think people want to see this mosque from the new structure when it’s built.”

“That is an interesting point,” I said. “Since the new building will be a huge tower, when you say you don’t think people want to see this mosque from the new building, do you have a specific floor in mind? I mean, you won’t be able to see it from the first floor, so how many floors up should we go when deciding when the mosque would be offensive? Because if you count the entire building, all the floors, well you can see the entire city from the top floors, so if you are thinking of the feelings of those who might work on the top floors you’re really against this mosque entirely.”

“No, I’m not saying that,” she said. “I’m just saying that you shouldn’t be able to see a mosque from the new tower.”

“Even the top floors?”

“Of course. If you can see the mosque it is hurtful. So, yes, the top most floors as well.”

“So no mosque anywhere.”

“Not really. I just don’t think it should be seen from the tower. It isn’t my fault they want to build a tall tower. “

“You’re right,” I said. “So how about we help each other out. I will join you in your crusade to make sure the mosque isn’t built within view of the new tower, and you join me in a new effort to insure that the new tower is only two stories tall. Fair enough?”

She looked at me as if I was insane. Then she turned and walked away. I don’t fault her for this. I was looking at her the same way.

Nonbeliever or Different Believer?

I got an interesting piece of hate e-mail the other day. Most of it is too nasty to print, but the part that I found interesting was the claim that I am a nonbeliever. This in and of itself marked me for death and eternal damnation, and disqualified me from making any honest comments upon anything.

I’ve heard this many times. The God of Love seems to attract followers filled with hate no less so than does Allah, the All Compassionate and All Merciful. It is an irony not unique to Christianity or Islam, but one that Christians and Muslims must (but usually don’t) deal with in public. It is much easier to deny the authenticity of hate filled Christians and Muslims than to admit that one’s religion has a shadow side given to hate, death, and murder.

Anyway to the question at hand: Am I an unbeliever? The answer depends on what it is I am supposed not to believe in. If you are Christian who believes that Jesus is the only begotten Son of God, and expect me to believe the same, then I am a nonbeliever. If you are Muslim who believes that the Qur’an is the final word of God, and expect me to believe the same, then I am a nonbeliever. If you are a Jew who believes that Torah is the only revelation from God and the Jews are God’s Chosen, and expect me to believe the same, then I am a nonbeliever. If you are a Hindu who believes that Krishna is Lord, and expect me to believe the same, then I am a nonbeliever. But if you believe that the universe is a single system of intelligence evolving toward greater and greater levels of consciousness, and that it is possible to realize yourself as a manifestation of this intelligence, and that doing so makes you a vehicle for compassion and justice, then I am a believer after all.

In other words, a nonbeliever is simply a person who doesn’t believe as you believe. There is no absolute standard for belief or nonbelief, and labels such as believer and nonbeliever are relative to the particular standard held by the person doing the labeling. The only value such labeling has is to make the person doing the labeling feel a bit more secure in her position. It is totally self-serving and without any objective truth-value whatsoever.

The whole thing saddens me. I would like to retire the words believer and nonbeliever in favor of different believer. Everyone believes something. No one believes in nothing unless Nothing is what you believe in, which, of course, makes that person, too, a believer. It is not right to call atheists nonbelievers. They have beliefs. Just not ones at home with a supernatural Supreme Being.

So please lets begin to speak of one another and ourselves as different believers. Let us believe differently if we choose. And, if we must label (and I sense that we must) let that be the only label we toss around.

Is Obama a Muslim? Yes we can!

According the Pew Research Center there is widespread and spreading confusion over the religion of President Barack Obama. Eighteen per cent of Americans say Mr. Obama is a Muslim (up 7% from six months ago), while only 34% knew he was Christian (down from 48%). Now some of you may believe this is yet another example of the growing plague of stupidity that is rampaging through the United States, but I think it is due to the growing influence of Islam in America and the consequent decrease of the power of Christianity.

People want their president to be like them. The fact that more Americans think President Obama is a Muslim may simply reflect the fact that more Americans are converting to Islam. To find out just how crazy my idea is, I too turned to the Pew Research Center (www.pepelepewresearchcenter.org) to conduct another poll. Here are some of the findings:

• 63% of those polled believed that Rahm Emanuel is the unborn child referenced in Isaiah 7:14

• 87% identified the religion of Rush Limbaugh 87% Republican, while 3% answered Methodist

• 54% identified Sarah Palin’s religion as Assemblies of God (AG), while 11% said Assemblies of God (USA)

• 99% correctly identified Ronald McDonald as Irish Catholic

• 87% of Americans surveyed could not identify the religion of the Pope, though the same number did know that a bear shits in the woods, and

• while 97% of Americans could identify the religion of the Sephardic Chief Rabbi of Israel as Jewish, only 2% could further identify him as Sephardic.

What does this tell us? I asked the Pepe le Pew Research Center to ask this question also, and it turns out that 100% of Americans had no idea, while another 75% had no opinion, which leaves me free to make up whatever I want. And what I want is to scare the crap out of you over how stupid, bigoted, and xenophobic Americans are.

So let’s recap: President Obama was almost half Christian six months ago, while today he is only one third Christian. This on-going loss of Christ is of great comfort to American Muslims who are trying to impose Sharia on America in order to get the First Lady to stop going sleeveless and start wearing a chador in hopes of increasing chador imports into this country and thus help improve the economy of Chadoria.

America: love it or leave it, it really won’t help either way.

Su Casa Mi Casa

“I won’t support the building of any mosque anywhere in the United States unless and until the governments of Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Yemen allow me to build a church and a synagogue in their countries.”

This is one of the rallying cries of Americans who oppose the building of mosques in the U.S. I, for one, find it compelling. The logic is unassailable, and free from bias. If Saudi Arabia won’t allow me to build a synagogue in their country why should I allow them to build a mosque in mine? We are not saying there will not come a time when mosques will be welcome here. We are only saying that that time will come only when Muslim despots and dictators turn their countries into full-fledged democracies.

This logic is so compelling that I believe we should apply it to other areas of life as well. Here are just some of them:

I won’t support true democracy anywhere in the United States unless and until the governments of Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Yemen do so as well.

I won’t support the drinking of alcohol anywhere in the United States unless and until the governments of Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Yemen do so as well.

I won’t support the full equality of women anywhere in the United States unless and until the governments of Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Yemen do so as well.

I won’t support the State of Israel anywhere in the United States unless and until the governments of Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Yemen do so as well.

I won’t support the freedom of worship anywhere in the United States unless and until the governments of Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Yemen do so as well.

In fact, I won’t support the Constitution of the United States or the Bill of Rights unless and until the governments of Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Yemen do so as well.

My list could go on, but you get my point: Why should the United States be more moral, egalitarian, free, or democratic than Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Yemen? Why should we support democracy, liberty, human rights, civil rights, religious freedom, etc. when these and so many other nations around the globe do not? Why should we set the bar of human rights so high when other countries set them so low? I, for one, am sick of it. If theocracy and totalitarianism are good enough for Iranians, they are good enough for Americans as well.

I want to applaud our brave leaders in the anti-Islam movement for bringing this kind of thinking to my attention, and I want to urge all Americans to adopt it. The best way to affirm and support American values is to bring them in line with Saudi, Iranian, and Yemeni values. You just can’t argue with logic like this.

Burn a Koran Day

Next month on September 11th the Dove World Outreach Center, a church in Gainesville, FL, is sponsoring Burn a Koran Day. Now some will say that doing this is an offense to Muslims everywhere, and while that may be so, it is not the intent of these good Christians to offend anyone. They are burning the Koran to draw attention to the fact that it is not a holy book and is in fact keeping Muslims from eternal salvation under the loving grace of the one and only Jesus Christ.

The church gives ten reasons to burn a Koran. 1) The Koran says Jesus isn’t the Son of God and was not crucified; 2) The Koran is of human origin; 3) The Koran includes aspects of pre-Islamic religion; 4) Historical proof of Muhammad’s existence is lacking, and the earliest writings about him came 120 years after his death; 5) Muhammad had worldly ambitions, something God hates; 6) Islam does not promote the separation of church and state; 7) The Koran supports the second class status of women; 8) a Muslim is not free to convert to another religion; 9) Islam hates the West; 10) Islam is imperialistic and supports the suppression and persecution of Jews and Christians.

I have to hand to Dove World Outreach Center, this is a very compelling argument. My only question is this, why limit ourselves to burning Korans? Let’s burn every so-called holy book that disrespects Jesus, women, and democracy, denies the separation of church and state, is of human origin, and was written decades after the events its relates. Based on these criteria we could have one hell of a bonfire. In fact let’s pick a date, say, September 11th, and hold a nationwide Bonfire of the Inanities in which we burn every holy book ever written, since all of them, including the New Testament, meet many if not most of the reasons given for burning Korans.

But as cool as this sounds, will it really change hearts and minds? Even though they are inviting Muslims to join them at Burn a Koran Day, the good people at Dove World Outreach know that simply freeing people from their false holy books isn’t enough. Christians, they write on their blog, “are called to live and speak the truth, and to tear down the strongholds of the kingdom of darkness. Islam is of the devil and the Koran is a lie.”

This is more like it. We have to tear down the strongholds of Islam. It isn’t enough to burn their books; we have to burn their strongholds. Books are only the beginning. Our wars with Iraq and Afghanistan are only preludes to the bigger wars we are planning against Pakistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Dearborn, Michigan.

The only problem I have with what Dove World Outreach is doing is their claim that they are doing what early Christians did in Acts 19:19. They are too modest. In Acts the converts to Christ who had been practicing magic didn’t burn books held sacred by others, but gathered and burned their own books as a sign of their love for Jesus. The people at Dove Outreach are far more bold and true to their Christian principles than those early Christians. They want to burn their enemy’s books, and more power to ‘em!

So let the burning begin: paper today, tomorrow the whole planet. Ain’t religion grand?

Voting Basil, Tennessee's Best Hope for Governor

Today my fellow Tennesseans and I go to the polls to determine whom among us will run for governor of the Volunteer State. My choice is Basil Marceaux. Let me share a few reasons why.

First, I like a man whose parents’ weren’t afraid to name him after an herb.

Second, Mr. Marceaux is going to make carrying guns mandatory for all Tennesseans. I know some liberals hate this, but why should only the most violent among us pack heat? Do you think Jesus would have let the Romans crucify him if he and his posse had AK-47s? Read the Book of Revelation: when God comes back to earth He comes loaded for bear (Russian Bear not Sister Sarah’s momma grizzlies). Who says there are no second chances?

Third, Mr. Marceaux promises that, should he win the election and become governor, anyone who votes for him will receive lifetime immunity from all criminal prosecution under state law.

Fourth, while in favor of universal health care, Mr. Marceaux promises to keep the size of one’s waistline out of any health considerations.

Fifth, Mr. Marceaux plans to remove all traffic lights believing that they make slaves out of those of us forced to abide by them.

I could go on, but you can find out more about my candidate by visiting his website, http://politics.freesitenow.com/basilmarceauxforgovernor/.

Mr. Marceaux isn’t the only Republican running for governor, but I can’t see myself voting for Mr. Ramsey who says that Islam is a cult out to subvert America, or Mr. Zack Wamp who, despite incredible name recognition among fans of the 1960s Batman television series, is building his campaign on the secession of Tennessee from the United States if Mr. Obama’s healthcare bill isn’t repealed.

Of course I could always vote Democratic, and maybe I will. I admit, however, that I have no idea who is running on the Democratic ticket, or what he or she may stand for, but given the candidates on the other side does it really matter?

ADL and Cordoba House

The Anti-Defamation League, a Jewish organization devoted to fighting bigotry, has come out against the building of Cordoba House, a proposed Muslim center, on a cite two blocks from Ground Zero. The ADL gave two reasons for its opposition, both of which deserve comment.

First, the ADL said that building a Muslim center so close to Ground Zero would unnecessarily hurt the feelings of those who lost loved ones there. I have two problems with this argument: 1) many among the 9/11 families support the center, so why side with one group and not the other? And, 2) this argument links all Muslims to the acts of extremists among them. Any mosque of any kind would be offense simply because it is Muslim. This is the kind of thinking that even President Bush warned us against, and this is the kind of libel against which the ADL fights; how sad that it would use it against Muslims.

Everyone should oppose any religious institution that supports terrorism and preaches hatred, but the Cordoba House is nothing of the kind, and deserves the support of progressives everywhere. Including the ADL.

The ADL’s second concern regarding Cordoba House’s funding is rooted in the fact is that Saudi Arabia funds Wahabi mosques around the globe, and these mosques do promote hatred, misogyny, and terror. The fact that the United States supports the Saudi dictatorship which in turn buys the support of Wahabists who agree not to topple the House of Saud as long as they fund Wahabist activities is just one of many geo-political absurdities that plague our world. And while the concern is genuine, it is also loaded.

Just asking the question, “Who funds Cordoba House” raises doubts in the minds of people. Who does fund Cordoba House? We don’t know. Why don’t they list their donors on their website? We don’t know. What have they got to hide? Well, it must be something…

But the same can be asked of the ADL. Who funds them? We don’t know. Maybe they get money from right wing extremist groups in Brooklyn or Jerusalem. We don’t know. And why don’t they list the names of their donors on their website? What have they got to hide?

I know Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf, the leader of Cordoba House. I have taught with him, dined with him (and his wife), and argued with him about the Middle East. And I am proud to call him a friend. I believe we need more ventures like Cordoba House, not less. I believe it is long past time for progressive clergy to come together and support one another, and condemn and actively oppose the work of those hate-mongers in all faiths. And I am saddened that the ADL lacked the guts to do so in this case.

My God Bless America

I want to hand it to Lt. Governor Ron Ramsey of the great state of Tennessee for finally telling us Tennesseans the truth about Islam—it isn’t a religion at all, it is a cult.

At a campaign stop in Chattanooga the Lt. Governor said that “he’s all about freedom of religion,” but one “could even argue whether that being a Muslim is actually a religion, or is it a nationality, way of life, cult or whatever you want to call it”. Damn straight! Islam isn’t a religion, and because it isn’t a religion it merits no protection under the First Amendment. Amen Brother Ramsey!

Of course by his definition Judaism isn’t a religion either. And neither is Evangelical Christianity or Catholicism, both of which want to convert the world and bring it under their respective life stytles and laws. A religion, the Lt. Governor seems to be saying, is a private affair between people and their god, and no religious institution should seek to bring the larger world under its influence or jurisdiction. Amen to that, too.

Like the Lt. Governor, I don’t want to live under Sharia (Islamic Law) or halachah (Jewish law). And I don’t want one Christian sect or another deciding for the rest of us what we can read, or learn in science or history classrooms. I certainly don’t want any religion deciding for nonbelievers and otherbelievers whom we can marry, or to restrict nonmembers from gaining access to medical services or contraceptives or morning after pills because such access violates that religion’s moral sensitivities. I don’t want some religious group determining what sciences to fund, what clothes we can wear, and what television shows we can watch. If they want to impose rules on their members, fine. But if I choose not to be a member, they should not be allowed to force me to live by their rules.

Honestly, Ron Ramsey’s got my vote. Anyone whose got the guts to deny religious status to any religion that seeks to impose its will on the rest of society has what it takes to be governor of one of the fattest and stupidest states in the Union. (Though as rival gubernatorial candidate Zach Wamp seems to have suggested—and when challenged ultimately denied ever suggesting it—we Tennesseans may well secede from the Union if Obama’s healthcare bill isn’t repealed.)

Don’t get me wrong: I don’t care what Muslims, Christians, Jews, Hindus, or Rastafarians do in the privacy of their religious institutions and homes, but when they walk on the streets of America they should dress and eat and act like Americans. Real Americans not those faux Americans in Boston, New York City, or San Francisco, but real overweight and undereducated Americans who never met a sausage we couldn’t eat; those Americans who know in their ever expanding guts that the greatest threat to the greatest nation that ever was is freedom and we ain’t gonna have no truck with that. My God bless America.

Two Jews Three Opinions One Theocracy

The theocratic madness that is Israeli domestic politics has once again pitted the Jewish Taliban against the rest of us over the issue of who is a Jew. In an effort to break the logjam of conversions to Judaism in Israel (primarily caused by Russian immigrants who cannot prove their Jewish status), the Israeli government is seeking to both broaden the number of rabbis empowered to perform conversions and to place the whole matter of conversion (and thus who is a Jew) under the control of the Chief Rabbinate.

The fact that largely liberal nonOrthodox Diaspora Jewry is upset over this should come as no surprise. The government is siding with the Orthodox and legalizing the disenfranchisement of nonOrthodox rabbis and religious institutions. This isn’t new. The Israeli government doesn’t fund nonOrthodox Judaisms even as it does fund Orthodox Judaism (and other religions). The difference is that this pending legislation makes law out of what is at the moment mere custom. If the law passes, nonOrthodox rabbis have no hope of getting their converts recognized as Jews.

Why does this matter? Because being able to convert a person to Judaism legitimizes one’s status as an authentic rabbinic authority. Reform and Conservative rabbis want the same status as their Orthodox counterparts. Why don’t they have it? Because Israel’s parliamentary system is so broken that it requires huge coalitions in order to govern, and hence tiny parties can hold the nation hostage. This is something the smaller rightest religious parties are very good at doing.

Solutions? Here’s one: Israel could try becoming a secular democracy and follow the American ideal (albeit forever threatened by the Christian Taliban) of separating church and state. It is not for the Israeli government to determine who is a Jew, only who is an Israeli, and these are not the same thing at all.

In the US Orthodox rabbis do not recognize as Jews, those Jews converted to Judaism by nonOrthodox rabbis. So what? People who convert to Reform Judaism have no desire to be part of an Orthodox community. And, if at some point in the future they do so desire, they can convert to Orthodoxy. What is the big deal? Let the same thing happen in Israel.

Of course since 90% of Jewish Israelis are nonOrthodox, opening up the Jewish marketplace would be bad for the Orthodox monopoly, and they would fight any such change. But that is life in a true democratic secular state.

The real threat is that the more theocratic Israel becomes, the less Jews around the world will identify with her. Do I really want to support a state that has bus lines that force women to sit in the back of the bus? Do I really want to support a state that lets theocratic bullies determine who can marry whom and how? The more “Jewish” Israel becomes, the less compelling the idea of a Jewish state becomes. This is not a problem that will go away soon.

Shocked. Just shocked.

Several posts ago (July 5, 2010) I spoke about my new venture 144KJews. This was a network of Jews who volunteer to fly to Israel in time to certify that it is indeed Jesus who is returning to earth at the end times. All I asked was that each of 144,000 Jews send me $10 to have their names put on the initial contact list.

Normally no one responds to my ideas. Especially when money is involved. I think you think I’m kidding, which I might be unless and until 144,000 Jews send me $10 each. But this time something very unusual happened. I actually got a check! Not for $10, but for $1,440,000!!!!

I’m serious. $1,440,000!!!!

You can imagine how surprised and happy I was to receive this. Or, if you can’t imagine this, invite me to your house, hand me a check for $1,440,000 and see for yourself how I surprised and happy I get.

Anyway, I took the check directly to my bank. The spaces provided on the deposit slip were insufficient for an amount this large, so I went to a teller for help. That’s when things got a bit dicey. It seems that check was bogus. Seriously. Somebody sent me a bogus check for $1,440,000.

You can imagine how shocked and unhappy I was to receive this news. Or, if you can’t imagine this, invite me to your house, hand me a bogus check for $1,440,000, accompany me to the bank, and see for yourself how shocked and unhappy I get when I try to deposit it.

I can’t imagine why anyone would do this. Here I was trying to help by recruiting 144K Jews to attest to the return of Christ, and someone does this. Well, it has ruined my faith in humanity, and now I have decided to let Jesus find his own 144K Jews. Really, Cousin, just do it your own damn self.

Of course, now that I think about it, having $1,440,000 without having 144,000 Jews wouldn’t have done Jesus any good. Sure, the money is nice, but the point was to help out with the Jewish witnesses. I mean what would I do with $1,440,000 anyway?

ARE YOU KIDDING ME? What would I do with $1,440,000? I’d spend it! That’s what I’d do. Oh, sure, I’d give a couple of bucks to save some starving kids in some godforsaken country where flies stuck to their faces as if their skin were made of flypaper, but mostly I’d spend it.

What would I spend it on? Ice cream. Ice cream and some starving kids. And the new MacAir when it comes out. So Ice cream and some starving kids and a computer. And I’d leave some left over to contact 144,000 Jews if they ever contact me. But ice cream for sure.

Imagine Torah

I was listening to "On Point with Tom Ashbrook" today as he interviewed Wendy Doniger and Arshia Sattar, two great scholars of Indian culture. The topic was the recent film interpretations of India's two national epics the Mahabharata and the Ramayana. What struck me was the sophisticated way these women could enter into and appreciate the text without for a moment insisting on their historicity. The genius of these epics has nothing to do with history. Their wisdom has noting to do with reading them literally. Why can't we read the Bible the same way?

Of course many people do, and universities that teach Bible as literature do this for sure. But the religious world that I live in--the world of Christian fundamentalism and Jewish historicism demand (each in its own way and for its own ends) that the Bible is at least representative of actual historical events.

This is easy to understand in the context of religious fundamentalism, Jewish and Christian: the Bible is the word of God. ‘Nuff said. But why do liberal and largely secular Jews, Jews who have no interest in keeping any of the commandments of God found in the Torah, insist that the Torah is history rather than epic and myth like the Mahabharata and the Ramayana?

My guess is that their sense of identity depends on the historical accuracy of these texts. After all if we Jews weren’t enslaved in and escape from Egypt, and if we didn’t conquer Canaan under the leadership of Joshua, then our claim to Israel is weakened, and our sense of identity brought into question. We have so tied ourselves to history and real estate that we have closed ourselves to the deeper spiritual wisdom that transcends both.

This is dangerous. First it is dangerous because it links our identity to a false view of history which will become harder and harder to maintain as the facts become more and more irrefutable. Second it is dangerous because when that history is debunked (as many Israeli archeologists and scholars are doing right now) we will have nothing on which to base our identity as a distinct people. If you don’t believe in the supernaturalism of the Torah—and most Jews don’t; and you don’t feel obligated to adhere to the commandments legislated by this God you don’t believe in—and most Jews don’t, all you have to cling to is a history that is slipping through our fingers like sand through an hourglass. Then what? Judaism dies, and Jews disappear.

But a Judaism rooted in brilliant myth, epic storytelling, and deep and on-going argument over what it means to be human and how to live justly and compassionately is dependent on nothing but the imaginative genius of its people.

The Torah is the Jews’ Mahabharata and Ramayana, the Jews’ Iliad and Odyssey. We should look to Torah for wisdom not law, for insight into the human condition not glimpses of God’s nature. Judaism will die when the imagination of the Jews die. And it is the death of the Jewish imagination that is the greatest crisis of Jewish life today. Judaism won’t die because Jews intermarry or reject halachic rulings and rabbinic authority. Judaism will die because Jews can no longer imagine Torah.

Mutant Judaism

My post on misogyny in some versions of Islam, Christianity, and Judaism generated a few comments that got me thinking about Reform Judaism as a model for religion in the 21st century.

Reform Judaism was the second mutation of Judaism in the past 3000 years. The first was the Judaism of the Two-Fold Law invented by the early rabbis. This Judaism argued that God gave two revelations to Moses on Sinai, the Written Torah and the Oral Torah that came to be known as the Talmud. While pure fiction, this new Judaism became THE Judaism for the next 2000 years. *

Reform Judaism was no less bold, replacing the authority of God, revelation, and rabbis with the autonomy of the individual. This shift was huge, and accounts for the freedom that Reform Jews have vis a vis Judaism. In Reform Judaism the individual Jew rather than God (Orthodoxy), Torah (Conservative), or community (Reconstructionist) decides for herself how to be a Jew. Of course this also accounts for the low level of traditional observance by Reform Jews, but this cannot be avoided. The failure of Reform Judaism is its unwillingness to radically and continually redefine Judaism (and by this I mean redefine the meaning of God, Torah, Israel, community, and mitzvot) in line with the humanism at its core.

Still, Reform’s focus on the sovereign self is enough for Orthodox Judaisms to claim that Reform isn’t Judaism at all. That is to say there is nothing in the history of Judaism prior to Reform Judaism that lends legitimacy to Reform Judaism. They are correct. That is why Reform is a mutation. Of course the same can be said of Rabbinic Judaism as well, as the adherents to the more ancient and authentic Torah Only school of Priestly Judaism argued right up to their demise at the hands of Rome. Mutations don’t have precedents. That is why they are called mutations.

Judaism is not the only religion to mutate, but it is among the very few that have done so with the sovereign self at the center. Most religions still seek to subjugate the individual to the will of others. Such mutations cannot be planned or staged. Revolutions that shift power from one group of leaders to another are not yet a sovereign self mutation. My own sense of things is that without such a mutation religions will continue to oppress the “other” (most often women) within their ranks and seek to dominate the other (the nonbeliever, heretic, etc.) outside their ranks. What do you think?


* Some argue that Zionism is the second mutation and Reform the third. I am ignoring Zionism here because it rejected religion while Reform did not.

Canary Feminism

I find it both ironic and fascinating that the anti-Muslim forces often cite the oppression of women as a cause for resisting Islam. Ironic because many branches of Christianity and the Orthodox branches of Judaism could be accused of the same thing. Fascinating because it suggests that the truth-value of any religion is linked to its treatment of women, something no biblical or Qur’anic text would suggest.

For example, the Catholic Church has just issued new rules that declare the ordination of women priests as a “grave crime,” and the Episcopal Church is caught up in an internal battle over whether or not to have women bishops. Should we resist Catholicism and Episcopalianism because of their treatment of women?

You can find similar issues of control in other Protestant denominations, some of which seek to control women’s dress, their position within the home and church, and their God-ordained submission to their husbands. So for Christians to decry Islam because it restricts women’s freedom is a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

In Israel the government has instituted a religious bus service that forces woman to ride in the back of the bus, so as to not entice Orthodox men to sexual thoughts (or worse) between stops. And then there is the ruling that prohibits women from becoming rabbis. And let us not forget the extreme Orthodox insistence that married women cover or better yet cut their hair short and wear wigs so as not to entice men. So if we are going to oppose Islam on feminist grounds lets take on Christianity and Judaism as well.

Buddhism and Hinduism fair no better, with many Buddhist nuns being forced to play second fiddle to monks, and some Hindu women being sold into virtual slavery to their in-laws, and Hindu female fetuses being aborted to avoid the expense of having to marry the fetus off when she comes of age.

Yes, you can argue that these are cultural problems not intrinsic to the religions themselves, but this is no less true of Islam. Nowhere does the Qur’an demand that women wear the same protective gear as beekeepers, and yet so many do.

But let’s not restrict our concern to religion. Western democratic secular societies are not exactly bastions of women’s freedom. So the more you look the more appealing the idea that women are the canaries in the religious/political/cultural mine. I think the status of women, i.e. the degree to which they are denied the same rights and privileges and status as men in their respective faiths, countries, ethnicities, etc. is an excellent barometer for gauging the morality of those faiths, countries, etc. And I would go even further and hold these religions and countries up to the standard of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

So if you are among those who pretend to some moral high ground by pointing out the oppression and exploitation of women in Islam, please broaden your gaze. Let all of us agree to reject any ideology that denies women the same freedoms it grants to men, and any that denies Universal Human Right to either gender or both.

Whew, I think I just freed myself from every ideology on the frigging planet.

Thanks, Glen Beck

Dear Glenn Beck,

I was watching your program last Tuesday when you reminded America that we Jews killed Jesus. It has been a long time since anyone dared to deny history so blatantly and resurrect that anti-Semitic canard. I really missed it.

Of course you did say that Jesus being Christ chose not to return to “make the Jews pay for what they did,” but that doesn’t excuse my people from murdering him. Let me tell you how we did it.

We just couldn’t do it outright. Jews in Jesus’ time didn’t have the power to kill people and crucifixion was strictly a Roman practice. So if we wanted to crucify Jesus we would first have to pass ourselves off as Romans. That took decades of planning.

First we forged Roman birth certificates and put fake birth announcements in Roman newspapers that made Jewish babies look like they were Roman citizens. Then as our people grew into adult Roman citizens we had them run for the Roman Senate and get themselves appointed as governors of various Roman provinces, Palestine being one of them.

Then when Jesus started to annoy us we worked with the High Priest and had Jesus turned over to us so we, pretending to be Romans but really being Jews, could crucify him. We thought this ruse would fool everyone, but clearly it didn’t. Christians started slaughtering Jews to avenge the murder of their God as soon as they could. To put a stop to this we had to infiltrate the Church so that we could get a Jewish Pope elected so he could officially deny that Jews killed Jesus. This took us centuries, and we didn’t pull it off until 1965. But even this failed to fool you.

You are one dogged genius, Mr. Beck. And I can’t thank Fox enough for giving you a pulpit.

Burqas Law

There is nothing so sexy as a woman in a burqa. Sorry, not sexy, seditious. There is nothing so seditious as a woman in a burqa, unless of course it is a woman wearing a nigab.

I know what you’re thinking: “B-u-r-q-a? I thought the letter ‘q’ was always followed by the letter ‘u’.” That’s why you suck at SCRABBLE. But never mind that, the issue at hand is the banning of the burqa (a full body cloak that covers the entire face, with a mesh screen for the eyes), and the nigab (a veil with a slit for the eyes). The ban the burqa movement started in Belgium and spread to France. The ideas behind the ban are three: first, if we cannot see a person’s face they are a threat to national security; second, going around with your face covered is anti-social; and third, burqa wearing women are being forced to dress this way by men, and thus banning it is a matter of women’s liberation.

Now I do think there are times when burqas and other head coverings must be removed. When getting a driver’s license, passport, or other photo ID a full-face photo makes sense. While I don’t oppose Muslim women driving cars (I’m not a Saudi prince after all), I do oppose them doing so in a burqa or nigab on the grounds these head coverings restrict one’s ability to see. If they must cover their faces, and they want to drive, let them drive motorcycles and wear full-face helmets. For you Muslim entrepreneurs out there, here is a great business opportunity: Muslim themed helmets and motorcycles. Very cool.

When boarding an airplane people must be identified and burqas and nigabs make this impossible, so they must be removed. But once we get full body scanners at all airports we might be able to ID people without removing anything.

If I were a Muslim woman I wouldn’t normally wear either a burqa or nigab. But, with the passing of these laws, I would do so as an act of protest. And if this law comes to America I plan to pull a Scooby-Do and wear multiple layers of what will be illegal religious garb from different religions so that as the authorities pull of one layer they will confronted by another and then another. Ultimately they will get down to my foreskin–free Jewish penis. Let them take that from me if they can!

———————
PS: I recently learned that the full body airport scanners actually cause penises to fall off, so there goes my last line of protest.

Gods Bless America

I was proud of my Murfreesboro community yesterday when hundreds of citizens turned out 98 degree heat to silently (mostly) support the expansion of our local mosque and the right of Muslims to worship as they choose. True there were three hundred or so marchers trekking from a local church to the town square to oppose both the mosque and Islam, but still this was civil democracy at its best: Two opposing groups staring each other down, chanting clever slogans at one another, and joining in a USA USA chanting contest that just brought us all together as one big unhappy family.

So many of us on both sides carried cool signs. All but one we hand made. The one exception was mine. I took my banner idea--an American flag with the words of the 1st amendment replacing the stripes and symbols of the world's religions replacing the stars- to a graphics design company and had them make me a full color banner complete with brass grommets. My banner won “Best In Protest” or it would have if there was such a contest. Runner-up was a sign from the other side that read, “Muslims Kill Converts! Tell it.” I love subtlety.

Anyway the pro-freedom of religion people gathered at the town square about thirty minutes before the anti-Islamic folks arrived. We were asked to meet them with silence, and we did. As they came onto the square they were greater with peace signs, posters that read, “All You Need Is Love,” and silence. Fearing for their lives the leader of the anti-freedom of religion marchers called to his followers to “Ignore the hate.” Maybe he meant to say, “Ignore the heat,” which was either a comment on the weather or on LeBron James’ decision to play basketball in Miami.

In any case the only thing that troubled me was the use of Israeli flags and references to Jews by the anti-Islam crowd. There is a sense that being pro-Israel is somehow being anti-Muslim despite the fact that there are hundreds of thousands of Muslim Israelis. We Americans are supposed to support Israel because she is a democracy like us. But the definition of democracy so many on the right use is closer to a Christian theocracy than anything Tom Jefferson or James Madison envisioned.

One anti-Muslim protester challenged us to think about how many Jews Muslims had killed. I don’t know why this idea was supposed to move us one way or another since I could identify only two Jews among the 1000 people at the dual and dueling protests (me and my son; I’m so proud). And, if Jewish body count is a concern, it should be noted that Christians have slaughtered more Jews then have Muslims, that Christianity has promoted Jew-hatred for 2000 years paving the way for genocide against the Jews by the Nazis and post-Nazi pogroms in Christian Europe, and that there are millions of Christians who hope to see the entirety of my people wiped out when Jesus returns (may it not be speedily in our day). So, if I have to choose between Islam and Christianity, I’d go with Islam.

All in all though it was a great day. No one really talked with one another. No one learned anything about the other. And we all got to chant USA USA. Gods bless America.

Daughters of Wisdom

As those who have read my book The Divine Feminine know I have been a devotee of the Divine Mother for many years. I speak with Her almost daily as part of my regular spiritual practice. I did not seek out this spiritual path, it was thrust upon me, but I find it deeply moving, comforting, and rich with wisdom and insight. My understanding of the Mother comes through the Hebrew and Greek Wisdom Literature written by Jews over several centuries. Books like Proverbs, especially chapters 1-9, Ecclesiastes, Job, Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach, Pirke Avot, and the Gospel of Thomas.

Each year for the past few years I have had the honor of spending time at Wisdom House in Litchfield, CT. Wisdom House is the spiritual retreat center of the Daughters of Wisdom, an order of nuns founded in the 1700s. In between my teaching duties, I spend time reading, walking the center's labyrinth, and sitting in the chapel and gazing upon the most astounding statues of Mother Mary I have ever seen. I recite the Hail Mary for a while and then simply settle into quite. Her love for me (and the world) is palpable.

Of course this is not the usual confession a rabbi makes, but then I haven't been a usual rabbi for a long time. For me Mary is one of many incarnations (Western and Eastern) of Lady Wisdom (Proverbs Cht. 8). I don't believe She is God in any dualistic sense. God is Reality, embracing and transcending all things, so She is no less God than you and I are God. Indeed Proverbs tells us Wisdom is the Daughter of God, and not God in the absolute sense. I understand Wisdom (Chochma in Hebrew, Sophia in Greek) as the equivalent of the Tao, the way God is God in the world of form. Knowing Her is knowing the way of things and how to live in harmony with them.

Anyway, I have just returned from Wisdom House, and want to thank the sisters for making me feel welcome. I also want to encourage you to check out their website (www.wisdomhouse.org) and their order, and consider attending one or more of their programs. I will be back at Wisdom House in August of 2011 to offer a series of talks on Jesus as a Jewish Wisdom Sage.

An Open Letter to My Neighbors

I am a lover of God and a student of religion. I do my best to understand the nature of religion, and how it justifies the worst of which we are capable, as well as call us to the best.

There are people of faith on all sides of an issue. Religion is what we interpret it to be, even as we deny we are interpreting; and God says what we choose God to say, even as we deny we are choosing. This denial makes us vulnerable to those among us, both religious and political, who hope to rise to power on a wave of fear. Their current target is Islam.

I, too, am afraid of Islam, but no more than I am afraid of Judaism and Christianity. All three religions are steeped in blood, and follow a God prone to anger, violence, and hate even as He calls for compassion, justice, love, and peace. Worse still, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are mutually exclusive faiths; only one of them can be true, and each measures truth in body counts. Read our holy books, read our histories, read the daily news. But none of this excuses the demonization of Islam and our Muslim neighbors.

If you want to keep yourself, your family, and your country free from theocracy don’t opt for muscular, xenophobic, fear-based, and hate-filled rhetoric disguised as Christianity and draped in the American flag, but stand up for the First Amendment. It is freedom of religion that has kept us free from theocracy. Repressing religion only empowers it. Welcome Islam to our community, and demand transparency from every faith.

I challenge all believers to take up the hard work of cleansing their respective faiths of the hatred and violence embedded in them. I call all believers and especially the clergy to an Abrahamic Reformation, one that helps us deal with and heal from the shadow side of monotheism by cleansing ourselves and our religions of fear, hatred, and violence, and find ways of disempowering the fear, hatred, and violence in our sacred texts, customs, and institutions.

Let us encourage our clergy to gather together and produce guidelines for interpreting our respective religions that make compassion and justice our primary concern. Let us state unequivocally our opposition to terror, violence, and oppression of peoples, persons, and the planet; let us state unequivocally our support for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; and let us measure our religions against those rights, boldly changing what we teach and what we practice whenever they come into conflict with those rights.

Let us show the world a new way of being religiously diverse, one not rooted in fear or kumbaya, but in humility, honest dialogue, and the First Amendment as the best antidote to theocracy and political demagoguery.

144KJews

I’m looking for a few good Jews; 144,000 of them in fact. These Jews are to be “bond–servants of God” (Revelation 7:3) and will evangelize the world in the Name of Jesus Christ when He returns to earth sometime in the next few decades. We will gather on Mt. Zion in Jerusalem to welcome Jesus upon His return, and to sing a song heard from heaven that only we Jews can sing (Revelation 14:2-3). What is that song? Read on.

God needs 144,000 Jews, “children of Israel,” (Revelation 7:4) to evangelize the world when His Son returns. Jews, not Christians; odd isn’t it? But then we are His Chosen, and Jesus is one of us, so maybe it isn’t so odd after all. If this is what God needs, I for one am more than willing to help. And so too, I hope, are you.

I know this may be challenging for some Jews. After all we Jews don’t believe Jesus is the Messiah. But that is why our testimony to the contrary is so necessary. People who see Jesus in a rust stain or slice of pizza are hardly credible witnesses. And, honestly, if Jesus does return, descending upon Mount Zion from the heavens accompanied by an angelic host, would you still have a problem proclaiming Him Messiah? So keep your Judaism, hold to your doubts and skepticism, but come on board just in case. God needs you.

The challenge is knowing when to gather in Jerusalem to welcome Cousin Jesus. This is where I come in. I am creating a new foundation called 144KJews. Our mission is to gather together 144,000 Jews willing to welcome the Messiah when He comes.

Membership in the foundation is limited to Jews, and dues are $1 annually. Members will receive monthly updates on the coming of the Messiah, access to our Clock of the Second Coming which will visually depict how soon the return can be expected, and the opportunity to purchase a variety of cool 144KJew stuff—lapel pins, bags, tee-shirts, hats, etc. I will work with various airlines to help members get the lowest airfares and hotel rates, and for those who wish to travel the country, I will run two-week tours prior to the Second Coming.

But wait! That’s not all! Members of 144KJews will also be taught the song that only Jews can sing when Jesus returns. (Hint: it’s in a minor key.)

Because some of my best friends are Christians, I will also create Friends of the 144KJews. Membership in this supporting organization will receive the same updates and access to the Clock of the Second Coming, but they will not be taught the song nor be allowed to stand with us on Mount Zion. Membership in Friends of the 144KJews is $10 per year.

Before I invest too heavily in this venture, I would like to hear from you as to your interest in this foundation. Specifically: If you are a Jew, would you join and send me a dollar? If you are not Jewish, would you join Friends and send me ten dollars?

If some of you have Jewish friends, please pass the word on to them and see if they are interested.

Thanks, and see you on Mount Zion!

Flags are Flying

Flags are flying today. I like that. I believe the United States is a glorious experiment that has not yet failed, though I worry it may. Not all of my neighbors agree. One fellow is flying his flag upside down as a sign that the country is in grave trouble.

Section 8a of the United States Flag Code states, "The flag should never be displayed with the union down, except as a signal of dire distress in instances of extreme danger to life or property."

We are in danger, but not yet in extreme danger. Our democracy still functions, albeit with Congressional votes going to the highest corporate bidder. A majority of Americans elected President Obama in a fair democratic election in 2008, and a majority will either re-elect or reject him in 2012. This, alone, demands that the flag should be flown right side up.

I suspect my neighbor doesn’t agree. If an election doesn’t go his way, he feels he has lost his country, and may march with placards reading, “We want our country back.” Losing an election is not the same as losing your country. Indeed, holding elections where one party or another can lose is what democracy is all about. What these supposedly freedom loving people want is a single party country like Communist China. How ironic.

But I may be naïve. Is there any real difference between Republicans and Democratics? Aren’t they both in the pockets of their respective corporate overlords? Isn’t this what the Bank Bailout and the BP disaster show us? Isn’t this what the rehiring of Xe (Blackwater) mercs means? Private companies and private armies have far more power than I do, even with my vaunted freedoms and democratic vote. So maybe my neighbor is right. Maybe the experiment has failed. Maybe I am just too slow to see it.

Religion True and False

It is so refreshing to read an honest, straightforward, defense of religion. Case in point, Fr. Thomas Crean’s essay in the April/May 2010 issue of Philosophy Now magazine.

Fr. Crean begins with the assumption that judging a religion good or bad depends on whether or not that religion is true or false. For example, the Catholic Inquisition, which tortured and killed thousands in the name of doctrinal purity, is good if the doctrine of the Church is true, and bad if it is false. This makes perfect sense.

Thousands of Jews, among thousands of others, died at the hands of the Inquisition. Their crime? Not being Catholic, or, in the case of those Jews forced to convert to Catholicism before being tortured by the Inquisition, not being Catholic enough. Now if Catholicism is merely a figment of the imagination of Catholics, and hence false, murdering people for not adhering to it is wrong. But if Catholicism is true then those who deny it or pollute its teachings are a danger to the salvation of all humanity, and their murder is justified. How can you argue with this?

According to Fr. Crean, religion is powerful and morally neutral. Good people of faith will use their faith to do good in the world, evil people of faith will use that same faith to do evil in the world. If so, what good is religion at all?

What do you think? How do you know if your religion is true? What does the truth of your religion allow you to do vis a vis the false religions demanding equal standing in the community of human religions?

Fat and Fatter but Not Yet the Fattest

I feel a lot thinner today. Not that I've lost any weight, but I read in this morning's newspaper that Tennessee is tied with Alabama for the second fattest nation in the country. Whoo-hoo! Mississippians are still fatter, but not by much. The cool thing about being a citizen of Tennesseehowmuchyoucaneat is that you have to be really obese to feel fat at all. I mean your fellow citizens are at least as fat as you are, and most of them more so. The trick to feel thin is to stay in-state.

Which leads me to my new business idea: The Tennessee State Diet. You can eat all the butter-soaked grits and lard-flavored pork products you want. There is no calorie counting or measuring or portioning. All you have to do is move to Tennessee. I plan to partner with the Tennessee Chamber of Commerce and realtors across the state to promote people moving here. And I will work with fast food franchisees to create special welcome meals for people who make the move.

Once you move here all you have to do is walk (Walk! Who am I kidding. Drive, don't walk.) around and notice how much fatter most people are than you. Sure you're fat, too, but after awhile you start to feel thin. It's all relative. When I look at guys who wear size 32 jeans I feel really fat in my size 36 jeans. But when I see that most guys around here are wearing size 44 and above, I feel thin. Or, even better, when I see guys with 44 inch waists wearing size 32 inch pants with 12 inches of stomach hanging over their belts, I feel both thin and fit. So thin and fit that I just might drop by Burger King and Dairy Queen, our town's culinary royalty, for a snack.

Of course for the diet to work, you have to stay in-state. My frequent business trips to LA where everyone is starving her/himself to get into the movies will have to stop. And there is always the chance that I will eat so much that I will start to match or exceed the obese around me. But I have a solution for that--move to Mississippi.

The Mosque of Sorrow

Murfreesboro has become an epicenter for Islamophobia. This allows us to see close up just what kind of thinking goes into turning people against one another. The following is taken from a letter to the editor in today’s The Daily News Journal.

“When making decisions,” the author of this letter tells us, “we all have been taught to make decisions based on facts.” The implication is that there is nothing emotional or biased in her thinking. Her remarks are logical and hence in her mind irrefutable.

She begins with a fact: “911 did happen.” True, but the only way 9/11 would be relevant to the building of a new mosque in the Boro is if she could link M’boro Muslims to Al Qaeda. She can’t. The invocation of 9/11 is all about emotion, not fact.

“It is a fact how Muslim men treat their wives.” First, this is not a meaningful sentence, let alone a fact. It cannot be proven or disproven because it doesn’t say anything. It is as meaningless as “how Christian men treat their wives.” OK, how? Some Christian men honor their wives, others beat the crap out of them. The same can be said of Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, and secular men as well. If she wants us to believe that all married Muslim men in the Boro mistreat their wives, then say so and back it up with facts. She can’t because they don’t.

“It is a fact how Muslims are hostile toward anyone who is not a Muslim.” This is a better statement. It can be proven or disproven. If any of you who are not Muslims have a Muslim friend, you have just disproven her point. Of course there are some Muslims who despise nonMuslims and will have nothing to do with them, just as there are some Christians who feel the same way about Jews. Should I condemn all Christians because of the anti-Semites among them?

“We all know about their training centers.” True, but so what? We all know about Christian militias as well, but are we to assume all churches are militia camps?

“Do you think if we were in their country they would allow us to build a Baptist Church?” What is “their country”? Many of the people I know from the mosque were born in America, and most if not all of the rest are American citizens. The Imam’s kids are Texans, and Texas is, at least for the moment, still part of the United States of America. Yes, the chances of getting a permit to build a Baptist church in Saudi Arabia are nil, but since when do we Americans look to the Saudis for our moral standards?

Her solution? Let the people vote. Not all the people of course, only “[t]he people that have worked hard to build Murfreesboro for what it is today should have a right to deny this Islamic Center.” Poor grammar aside (Tennessee public education ranks 42nd in the nation), the author of this letter wants to limit voting rights only to those who will deny Muslims a place to worship in Murfreesboro! In other words the only people who can vote are those who will vote her way! Which makes her closing sentence all the more poignant: “Have we forgotten what America was built on?”

I think she has. And, sadly, she is not alone.

Open House, Open Hearts

I attended the open house at the Murfreesboro mosque last evening. There was, as so many in this town have been saying, a level of intolerance that I had not anticipated. But, unlike what so many are saying, it was gluten intolerance rather than religious intolerance. And it was my intolerance, not theirs. They served this fabulous buffet and everything had flour in it! As the only yarmulke wearing visitor I took this as an act of anti-Jewish feeling, but I suspect I was being a bit over sensitive.

The room was filled--crammed really--with members of the Muslim community and nonMuslim well-wishers. There was no talk of terrorism, though I was personally terrorized by this little old man from Syria who singled me out as The Jew, and who had to come over, grab my arm, and regale me with stories of his youth in Syria and his Jewish mentors. He would not let go. And he insisted I eat something. The bastard! I tried to explain I had celiac disease, but he didn't care (or maybe he didn't have a clue what I was saying). He just insisted that I eat with him. He was going to be personally insulted if I refused. Damn these Arabs and their hospitality! I lied and told him I had already eaten, but it didn't matter. So I ate. Just a spoonful of hummus. He must have thought that a strange choice with all the other fabulous items on the table, but he was satisfied. He let me go.

There are old men like this in every group. Last week I was speaking about the conflict over the mosque in Murfreesboro at a Unitarian Church in Nashville. After the service an equally old man came over to talk to me. He wanted me to understand that all the problems in Murfreesboro, indeed all the problems in the world, were the fault of Zionists. He had read the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, he told me, and knew what was what with Jews. I told him he sounded like a Nazi, and he proudly told me that Hitler was right. He was serious. I'd met this man at this church before. A died in the swastika Nazi anti-Semite at a Unitarian Church. Talk about odd. But at least he didn't try to feed me. He likes his Jews starved and gassed.

The reporter from our local newspaper was at the mosque last night as well. He informed me that I had misquoted him. You might remember my suggestion that he visit area churches, mosques, etc. to see what is being preached vis-a-vis hate and fear. I said he declined. My bad. What he said was it isn't up to him what he covers. He is assigned stories. So I want to apologize to him. (I am deliberately not naming him, so as to not get him into trouble. Though we only have one daily paper and one religion editor. So, sorry, Doug.)

I spoke with the imam for a short while. I had met him before. I lovely Egyptian man who was himself terrorized. No, not by the Muslim Brotherhood, but by his little daughter who desperately wanted to help but wasn't tall enough to see over the top of the buffet table.

Look, I'm not naive. There are evil people in the world, and many if not most of them mask their evil in the name of God and religion. I am certain that there were people in that room last night who wanted me and all Jews dead or converted. Some of them Muslim, some of them Christian. I understand that there are Islamic movements that are evil, just as there are Jewish and Christian movements that are evil. My position is simply this: if you want to know what your neighbor believes, talk with her/him, don't defame and yell at her/him. If people are truly spreading lies and evil, oppose them. But if they aren't, leave them alone. So far all I am hearing is generic anti-Muslim half truths and hate speech. We need open dialogue. Let those who fear Islam speak openly, respectfully, and in a public forum with leaders of the Islamic community so that we the people can decide for ourselves. Let's hear the facts not the slander.

You can catch a lot more flies with honey than with vinegar. Unless of course that honey is in baklava and the other person is gluten intolerant.

Fair Weather Activist

This morning I discovered I am a fair-weather activist. Last night a peace vigil against the hate being spewed by some Murfreesboro Christians against all Murfreesboro Muslims was held at the town square. I planned to attend. I really did. There is little that is more important that standing up for religious freedom. I mean as a professor of Comparative Religion my entire life is devoted to educating young people in the intricacies of religious systems in hopes of making them knowledgeable and respectful citizens of a religious diverse country dedicated to freedom of assembly, speech, and religion. Then it started to rain.

I thought, “Geez, do I want to get wet for the cause of religious freedom? Nah.” In my defense, it was a big storm. Thunder and lightening and everything. This was the kind of storm that Doc Emmet Brown could have used to power his time traveling DeLorean in “Back to the Future.” This was the kind of storm you could use to tap electricity if Ben Franklin hadn’t already done that. So not wanting to get wet was a serious matter.

It never occurred to me that the vigil would be moved indoors.

The group gathered in the courthouse and sang, “Let there be peace on earth and let it begin with me.” My own version is “Let there be peace on earth and let it begin with them.” So sad.

All the more sad as the voices of fear become ever more powerful in my neighborhood. Republican Congressional candidate Lou Ann Zelenik says the Islamic Center planned for Murfreesboro is “designed to fracture the moral and political foundation of Middle Tennessee. “ If by moral and political foundation she means the hate filled rhetoric that passes for political discourse at the Republican sponsored Tea Party rallies I have attended, then I hope she is right.

Lori Roberts, a local citizen, said she is against the Islamic Center because she “heard these comments they are looking at making this a national Muslim center. It would make Muslims from all over the world and country come into Murfreesboro to go to meetings at the center.” This center, she said, will be a “threat to this country.”

She’s right. There is nothing more threatening to America than people having meetings. That is why the Constitution condemns the right of free assembly. Doesn’t it?

The scary thing is that Ms. Roberts doesn’t know this is true. She simply heard comments. Comments from people who hate Muslims and fear Islam. Ignorance is rampant in this town, and with it fear, and from that hate.

Tomorrow night our local mosque is holding an open house in an attempt to answer people’s questions and quell their fears. I doubt it will help, though I do plan to attend. Even if it rains.

Perspicuity

I learned a new word today: perspicuity. It means clarity. Ah, the irony. Anyway, I learned the word in the context of a Protestant idea called “Perspicuity of Scripture.” This means that the meaning of the Bible is clear to the ordinary person and does not require any interpretive intermediary. The intermediary the Protestants have in mind is, of course, the Catholic Church, which argues that you cannot understand the Bible unless you read it through the filter of the Church.

While Catholics and Protestants will argue this as an “either/or” (either the Bible is perspicuous or inperspicuous), Jews will take it as “both/and,” the Bible is clear and in need of interpretation.

The Jewish view is simple: The Bible is the Word of God. God writes perspicuously, but what is perspicuous to God may be inperspicuous to humans. Hence the need to read and reread and interpret and reinterpret the perspicuous Word of God.

Now if I were God I’d make my Word truly perspicuous: See Eve. See Eve eat the fruit. Eat, Eve, eat. See Adam eat. Sin, Adam, sin. But even this clearly perspicuous text may be inperspicuous to some. After all, what does “sin” mean? And did it mean the same thing when I wrote it as it does when you read it? So even my perspicuous text may need interpretation.

The fact is you can’t escape interpretation. If the Word of God were really as perspicuous as Protestants claim, we wouldn’t have over 33,000 denominations of Protestant Christianity. The Catholic Church doesn’t have all these divisions because they admit the Bible is inperspicuous and given to many interpretations, which is why they invented the Inquisition to keep the number of interpretations down to one—their’s.

For my money, I prefer inperspicuousness to perspicuousness. The Bible is a nasty book in many ways, and if we can’t interpret it in ways that allow it to say what it perspicuously does not say we might find ourselves killing one another in the Name of God, and who would want to do that?

Melting Jesus

Can we make anything of an act of God that melts a statue of Jesus? Damn right we can!

Solid Rock Church in Monroe, OH, is famous for its 62’ statue of Jesus with his face and arms raised heavenward. Erected by the church’s founders, Lawrence and Darlene Bishop, at a cost of $250,000, the King of Kings statue (called by locals, “Touchdown Jesus”) was made of plastic foam and fiberglass over a steel frame. Lightening struck the statue last week, and when the flames subsided nothing was left but the frame.

Lightening strikes are of course an act of God, and have been since the time of Zeus. So we can’t help but ask ourselves why God would do such a thing? Wasn’t there a synagogue or mosque or Catholic Church He could have hit? Did He have to blast an evangelical church? And worse, did He have to melt a statue of His Son? What will the unbelievers think?

I can only speak for this unbeliever, and I think God has a wicked sense of humor. And yet is this destruction of the statue of Jesus all that new? I mean didn’t God permit the death of His actual Son in the flesh some 2000 years ago? He did. But then he resurrected Him three days later, so what’s the harm?

As Darlene Bishop said of the statue, “It will be back.” Was she expecting God to resurrect the statue after three days? I don’t know, but if so she was sorely disappointed. If the statue is coming back it will only do so if she and her husband raise another quarter of million dollars to rebuild it. But should they?

I think they should. They should rebuild the statue and then some. The old King of Kings only depicted Jesus from the sternum up. Why not a full body this time? Sixty-two feet? Hell, lets make it 186 feet! And while I think Lady Bishop is wise to say they will make it flame resistant this time, I think a lighting rod on top of Jesus’ head couldn’t hurt.

Why am I so in favor of this? Because I love religious kitsch. Really. The only problem I have with Islam, for example, is that you can’t make statues of Muhammad (PBUH). I want a Muhammad bobble-head doll to stand next to my Jesus bobble-head and my Moses with the Ten Commandments action figure. So, come on, Solid Rock Church, let’s get to rebuilding Touchdown Jesus. And maybe this time make Him out of solid rock.

Hate-Preach

What can we do about religious violence and hatred? What can we do about clergy and laity who insist on spreading lies, hatred, and fear? These are not academic questions. Especially in my town. Especially this week.

There has been an Islamic Center in Murfreesboro, TN for years. It was small, and stayed pretty much under the radar. Now things are different. The Center wants to build a 52,000 square foot community center and mosque. The county commission said yes, the people say no. Not all the people, of course. May be not even most of the people. But enough to make me fear not only for the welfare of my Muslim neighbors, and for any who support them and their right to freedom of religion.

The position of my Christian neighbors is simple: Muslims support Sharia (Islamic law), Sharia is globalist, Muslims want to rule the world, and the center in Murfreesboro will be a training camp for terrorists bent on turning Middle Tennessee into a Taliban stronghold like Afghanistan without the trillion dollars worth of minerals.

Let’s not be naïve. There are Muslims who wish to spread Islam around the world just as there are Christians who wish to spread Christianity around the world. Christianity and Islam are the only religions bent on global domination, and both have a long history of using warfare to do so. It isn’t surprising that these two faiths have been and continue to be at odds, and often at war. It may not be politically correct to say so, but without Christianity and Islam we wouldn’t be fighting in Iraq, Afghanistan, and (coming soon to a theater of war near you) Iran. You can argue that these wars are not religious, but remove religion from the equation and the wars cease to be fought at all.

So I understand why so many of my neighbors believe we are at war with Islam and that all Muslims are suspect. But what shall we do about it?

There are the obvious suggestions: The mosque could open its doors for “Learn About Islam” evenings. They did that. I could teach a multi-week class on Islam. I did that. Christian churches could invite Muslims to speak to their members about Islam. Some have done that. Education is necessary but clearly not sufficient.

So, when asked by the local newspaper for a suggestion I offered this: We should all begin attending each other’s worship services. Just go and sit and listen to what is being preached. And if and when they hear hate-preach, fear mongering, and calls for action that violate the Constitution or suggest violence, they should loudly stand up, denounce it in the Name of Whatever God they are praying to, and walk out. I urged the newspaper reporter to go to religious services throughout the city and report on what is being preached. Expose hate-preach if there is any. And if there isn’t any, tell us that as well.

The reporter declined. So that leaves matters in your hands. Visit churches, synagogues, and mosques regularly and listen carefully to what is being read, taught, and preached. Take a stand against evil when you find it, and let people know if you don’t. It is the least we can do.

Pound of Flesh

“Pound of flesh.” It is an ugly phrase originating with Shakespeare in his 1596 play, Merchant of Venice. Shylock, the Jewish money lender, has made a deal with Antonio that allows Shylock to cut off a pound of Antonio's flesh if Antonio defaults on a loan he took from Shylock. Jews have been linked to Shylock every since.

Given the popularity of liposuction today, extracting a pound of flesh (or, if I could afford the procedure, 50 pounds) may not be such a big deal, but the phrase isn’t meant to be anything but ugly. And, whether intended or not, it carries with it more than a patina of anti-Semitism. So it shocked and bothered me this morning when I heard Savannah Guthrie, co-host of MSNBC’s morning news show “The Daily Rundown,” use the phrase in regard to the Congressional hearings features BP CEO Tony Hayward.

I am NOT implying that Ms. Guthrie is by any stretch of the imagination an anti-Semite. This may have been a Freudian slip based on the fact that Tony and Antonio are the same name, albeit in different languages. I am simply wondering what it means that this wicked phrase is so deeply ingrained in our language. Does it still conjure up pictures of Jews as Shylock?

I know this was NOT on Ms. Guthrie’s mind. In fact, I wonder if she even thought about the meaning or implication of the phrase. Did she really mean to cast Congress as Shylock? Is BP really Antonio who is being asked to do more than is just when President Obama demands BP pay for the disaster in the Gulf? Is BP the victim of this drama, as many see Antonio as the victim of Shylock in Shakespeare’s play?

I don’t know the answer to these questions, and would love to hear from you regarding them. Do you use the phrase? What do you understand it to mean?

Bupkis mit Kuduchas

There are approximately 22,700 references to me on Google. That is 66 pages of links. Of course simply by googling one’s name one cannot be certain that all these references are to you. There could be other Rabbi Rami Shapiros on the Internet. So I checked, page after page. And it turns out that there are in fact 22,700 references to me on the Internet. Is that cool or what?

Answering that question will determine my worth as a human being. And answering requires an objective standard against with to measure my numbers. So I chose to measure myself against my father. I googled his name and came up with…wait for it…948,000 references. My dad has 41.76211453 more references than me on Google. Damn!

But wait a second, maybe all those references aren’t to my dad, but are just triggered by his name, Archie. As it turns out as long as my dad Archie isn’t a bigamist married to my mom, Sally and some broad named Veronica, then the actual number of Internet references to my father is…NONE! Ha! None, nada, zip, zero, notaonedo!

That means a lot to a Jewish boy in never ending competition with his dad. And I won. At least I think I won. There seems to be something called Archie’s Law that deals with the scale dependency of the effective matrix diffusion coefficient. I don’t know what this law is, but the words “scale” and “dependency” say it all: Yes, Dad, I got on the scale this morning and I am still fat. And, no, Dad, I still haven’t overcome my dependency on your approval.

So with 22,700 Google references to my dad’s zero Google references, why do I still feel inadequate? Maybe I should compare myself to someone else? How about Wayne Dyer? How many Google references does he have? One million, six hundred and sixty thousand! That is more than all the Archies combined!

I don’t get it. I’ve written at least as many books as Wayne. We are both members of National Public Television. We both do lots of public speaking. What has he got that I don’t, besides 1,637,300 more Google references?

Now I’m not saying 22,700 Google references is bupkis. I am grateful that I have made some mark on the digital world, but in a world where even “dog turd” has 135,000 references on Google, you have to wonder. Does my life matter even less than bupkis mit Kuduchas? (Google it!)

Does Obama Hate Jews?

Barack Hussein Obama hates Jews, and is more than willing to sacrifice us and Israel on the altar of improved relations with Muslim countries around the world. At least that is the impression I got after reading the June 2010 issue of Commentary Magazine.

The magazine features 31 responses to the notion that “American Jews are facing an unprecedented political challenge, and at a crucial moment, with the need to address the existential threat to Israel—and by extension to the future of the Jewish people as a whole—from a potentially nuclear Iran. How will American Jews handle this challenge?”

Not so well, as it turns out. Most of the essays in Commentary exhibit a clear distain for the majority of American Jews, most of whom the writers claim are liberal, secular, Democratic fools who have no real love of Judaism or Israel and who (therefore?) voted for Obama in 2008.

No point in arguing with this assessment. Besides, it might even be true. My question is this: what would be different if George W. Bush were suddenly back in control?

Would W reverse Obama’s ending the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and blockade of Gaza? Would he put a stop to Obama’s forced moratorium on expanding Jewish settlements in the West Bank or building apartments for Jews in Arab East Jerusalem? Would he undo Obama’s peace plan, and dismantle the Palestinian State Obama helped establish? But wait a minute: Obama didn’t do any of these things. In fact, he hasn’t done anything at all. So what is the challenge here?

It seems to me that Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu does just what he wants to do, regardless of what President Obama might want him to do. The only thing Obama has done is show the world just how powerless the US is when it comes to imposing its will on Israel (or Korea, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Venezuela, Mexico, BP, etc). President Obama’s only “sin” is airing his disagreements with Israel in public. His actual policies seem to be an extension of the previous administration’s policies.

But what I really don’t understand after reading the June issue of Commentary is just what the Unites States should be doing. Should we go to war with Iran? Should we use Israel as a surrogate military and have her go to war with Iran? Do we have the military capacity for a third front in the forever war against political Islam (the new catch-phrase of the day)? Just what would the commentators in Commentary have us do that we are not doing?

I don’t see any real difference in the actual policies of Presidents Bush and Obama. The United States is still addicted to oil and debt, still run by the rich for the rich, and still caught up in the madness of empire building.

Can somebody help me out here?

Buddha's Bones

Lots of people think I am a Buddhist. No Buddhist would make that mistake, however. I used to consider myself a part of the Zen world, and I keep up my reading in Zen (which proves I am no longer part of the Zen world and never really was), and I admit that every few days, usually after reading some article about the inane behavior of my coreligionists, I think about becoming a Buddhist. I admire the religion’s rationality, its clarity, and its lack of superstition. And then I read today’s China.org.cn. D’oh! (T’ao!)

It seems that when the Buddha was cremated some 2500 years ago he left behind “one skull bone, two scapulas, four teeth and 84,000 pearl–like sariras,” one of which is being unveiled for the first time in a thousand years in Qixia Temple in Jiangsu province’s capital Nanjing.

I know what you’re thinking: “Can I use Qixia as a word in Scrabble?” The answer is ‘no.’ That was what you were thinking. I was thinking, “what’s a sarira?” It turns out that a sarira is a crystalline structure formed when bone is cremated. According to some Buddhist traditions seeing a relic of the Buddha is like seeing the Buddha himself, and automatically creates happiness and virtue. If venerated, sariras can grow and multiply over time, so there is no need to worry about them being scarce.

This particular sarira at the Qixia (21 points) Temple will be unveiled tomorrow, which is why the Chinese government is talking about it today. This leaves me no time to fly to Nanjing to see it and become happy. That, I suspect, is what the ChiComs (Rush Limbaugh speak for Chinese Communists) want after all: to dangle happiness in front of my nose (7452 miles in front of my nose, to be exact) and then to deny me access to it. This just sounds like Mao, doesn’t it? Remember Mao? The guy who said, “Happiness comes from the barrel of a gun.” Or was that Snoopy? Anyway, I can’t get to Qixia Temple to see this bone ball of the Buddha and that just isn’t fair.

On the other hand it just doesn’t seem all that Buddhist to me,either. At least not the Buddhism I know; the Buddhism with all the Jewish psychologists in it.

On the other hand (I’m also into Hinduism, and we have gods with lots of hands), as an avid reader of all things Zen, I am fond of the Zen saying, “If you meet the Buddha, kill the Buddha.” Seeing a sarira is like meeting the Buddha, so if I did get to the Qixia Temple and I did see the sarira I’d have to kill it. But it is already dead, and has been for 2500 years. So how do I kill what is already dead?

Whoa! Wait a minute. This isn’t a ChiCom plot to rob me of happiness, this is a Zen koan to bring me to enlightenment. I love Buddhism after all!

Bottom line: if Buddhism is about enlightenment, cool. If it is about relics, and the power of bone to make me happy, then I guess I’ll just stick with Judaism and be miserable. Judaism has its own relics, anyway. Take my parents, for example. You know they never owned a stereo? Hell, they never owned a record player at all! Talk about growing up deprived! (Go head, talk about growing up deprived, I’ll wait. OK? Done? Great, now back to me.)

So I guess Buddhism is just a religion like all the rest. It got its good points, its bad points and it’s burnt up balls of Buddha bone. I think I’ll call my parents and wish them a good Shabbos.

What Does It Mean to be a Jew Today?

What does it mean to be a Jew today? What do Jews bring to the world? These are the questions asked of rabbis in the May/June issue of Moment Magazine. As I read the responses I found myself getting more and more frustrated. Something was bothering me about what the Independent, Humanist, Renewal, Reconstructionist and Reform rabbis had to say. Even the Conservative Rabbi, my parents’ rabbi, Amy Katz, whose essay spoke to me powerfully, left me wanting something. But what?

I realized what was missing when I read the comments of the Modern Orthodox, Sephardi, and Chabad rabbis—God. None of the other rabbis even mentioned God. Or, as in the case of the Reconstructionist rabbi who spoke of Jews as Yisrael, God-Wrestlers, God was reduced to nothing more than “today’s weightiest issues.” That’s what we Jews are about: wrestling with today’s weightiest issues. Its also what the Daily Show is about, and the Daily Show is more fun.

The problem with the liberals is that they offered us no mission, no meaning. The Humanist rabbi said that “being Jewish was about choice and personal discovery.” So is psychotherapy. The Renewal rabbi said, “being Jewish means being ourselves.” That is simply a nonsequitor. The Reform rabbi said, “to be Jewish is about understanding one’s place in the world.” Not even “the Jew’s place,” but simply “one’s place,” my place. Do I need religion for that? The Reconstructionist rabbi said, “we Jews, collectively, share a few things,” but so what? The guys at my gym share a few things too. At least Rabbi Amy wrote about our unique pedagogy rooted in argument and doubt, and embracing inconsistancy and paradox. But this is a means. What is the end? What is the point of being Jewish?

There was nothing in the remarks of the liberal rabbis that would make me want to be a Jew or even remain a Jew. Whereas the Sephardi rabbi spoke compellingly of “proclaiming a message of monotheism, rationality, justice and compassion to the entire world," or, as the Chabad rabbi put it, “A Jew is here for one reason alone: To change the world.”

Talk about tag lines! “Be a Jew. Change the world.” You want to get young Jews engaged in Judaism? You want to attract new people to the tribe? Let that be the mission of American Judaism!

Of course when I think of changing the world I think in terms of liberal democratic changes rooted in universalism, humanism, iconoclasm, feminism, global literacy, and social and ecological justice. But these values are not antithetical to Judaism. Indeed, it would be easy to articulate a Judaism and a body of Jewish practices rooted in these values that would indeed change the world.

Tag lines aside, however, I am too liberal to return to Orthodoxy. But if anyone wants to know why liberal Judaism is fading while Orthodoxy is thriving, just read this month’s Moment.

Thank You, Helen Thomas

Thank you, Helen Thomas. Your hate filled anti-Semitism was refreshingly candid, and allows those of us who support Israel (if not Israeli policy) an opportunity to be equally candid in return. Not only did Ms Thomas call for the withdrawal of Israel from the West Bank and Gaza, something lots of Jews and Israelis support, but she demanded that all Jews living in Israel go back to wherever they came from.

Where might that be? Helen’s history extends only back to the mid-twentieth century and is decided Eurocentric. She wants Israeli Jews to go back to Germany and Poland. She wants them to go back to the death camps. But what about the hundreds of thousands who came from Arab lands? And why stop with the 20th century? Go back far enough and the Jews came from the very land that Helen wants them to leave. They can’t go home, Helen, they are home.

Enter former Bush Press Secretary Ari Fleischer. In his attack on Helen Thomas’ remarks he linked Jews in Israel to African Americans in America. Should they go home too?

Bad analogy. African Americans came here as slaves not colonizers. It isn’t African Americans who should go home, but European Americans. And I imagine there are many Native Americans (though not necessarily those in the casino business) who would be happy to see them do just that.

Ari Fleischer didn’t link Jews settling in Palestine with Europeans settling the Americas because that analogy reveals an ugly truth: rights are only rights when you can defend them. If Palestinians have a right to all of Palestine (including the State of Israel), then Native Americans have the right to all of America. Did Native Americans have a right to live unmolested in the Americas? Yes they did, but only until the Europeans could massacre them at will. Did the Palestinians living in Palestine have a right to live there unmolested? Yes they did, but only as long as they and their allies could defend that right successfully.

Native Americans killed as many Europeans as they could. It just wasn’t enough to stop them from taking their land. Arabs killed as many Jews as they could, but it just wasn’t enough to stop them from establishing their state. Welcome to the real world. Just as it is foolish to demand that European Americans return to Europe, so it is foolish to demand that Israeli Jews return to the countries from which they came. But it is only foolish because the people making the demands lack the military might to enforce their demands. Chances are Native Americans will never have the power to through out the Europeans. The word is still out on the Palestinians.

The treatment of Native Americans and African Americans is the shadow side of American exceptionalism; the treatment of Palestinians is the shadow side of Zionism. How these peoples deal with their respective shadows will determine the moral quality of their respective civilizations. So far neither is doing very well.

As for Helen Thomas? She should go home to Lebanon and give her house to the Native Americans who lived their first.

Burger King Spirituality

CNN posted an essay by John Blake called, “Are there dangers in being ‘spiritual but not religious’? Mr. Blake seems to think so, and relies on Jesuit priest James Martin for support. Being SBNR, Fr. Martin says leads to complacency and self-centeredness. “If it’s just you and God in your room,” Father Martin says, “and a religious community makes no demands on you, why help the poor?” An odd thing for a Catholic priest to say, perhaps, given the Church’s rich tradition of monks and nuns in monastic cells, but a good question nonetheless. Here’s the answer:

The deeper your connection with God becomes, the greater your concern for the welfare of others. The closer you are to the Source of Life, the more compassion and concern you have for all that lives. Besides, if organized religion really wanted to end poverty it would have done so long ago. It seems to me that organized religion is more about pushing camels through needle eyes and getting rich men into heaven (Matthew 19:24; Mark 10:25; Luke 18:25), then about selling what we have and giving to the poor (Luke 12:33; 18:22; Acts 2:45). Jesus, anyone?

I’m not suggesting SBNR folks are saints, but neither are they any more selfish then their church going neighbors.

Borrowing from Huffington Post blogger BJ Gallagher, Mr. Blocks calls SBNR “Burger King Spirituality;” you know: have it your way. Fair enough, but is this any different than Jews choosing among the various brands of Judaism, or Protestants moving from church to church until they find one where the pastor says what they want to hear? Even Catholics have it their way by ignoring those teachings of the Church they find inconvenient or just plain wrong.

Gallagher goes on to praise Twelve-Step followers as the epitome of SBNR. I agree. As my book Recovery, the sacred art points out, the 12-Steps are a powerful spiritual practice free from religious politics and prejudice. And 12-Step meetings are wonderful examples of healing communities.

Mr. Block’s major complaint, again borrowing from Father Martin, is that SBNR people are lazy. We would rather sample many religions than devote ourselves to digging deeply into just one. Amen! Religions are like the proverbial blind men and the elephant. Each has a piece of the whole, but none has a true sense of the elephant itself. So, yes, if you want to climb deep up the elephant’s ass by all means do so, but just don’t imagine that you know what an elephant is just because you are an expert in its intestines.

The truth is that the truth is greater than anything any religion can imagine. Serious SBNR people explore the entirety of human religiosity, and even then we know that we cannot know. That is why we devote ourselves to spiritual practice rather than organizational conformity. Through meditation, prayer, chanting, etc. we seek to move beyond the ego to realize the One manifest as the many. The greater our experience of the One, the greater our love of the other. This is why Jesus urged us to follow two commandments: Love God and love your neighbor. That’s the difference between religion and SBNR. The spiritual teacher tells us to love God, while organized religion tells us to love religion.

[To read Mr. Block’s posting, go to http://edition.cnn.com/2010/LIVING/personal/06/03/spiritual.but.not.religious/index.html]

Tefillin and Teheran

Tefillin ("phylacteries") are two small black leather boxes housing four biblical passages that observant Jews wear during the weekday morning prayers. The commandment to wear tefillin is found in four places in the Torah: Ex. 13:1-10, 11-16; Deut. 6:4-9; 13-21. While there is no prohibition against women wearing tefillin, custom has long limited the practice to men. Today, however, more and more women choose to pray with tefillin as well. And with this shift in practice comes the predictable resistance to it.

Case in point: Noa Raz, a Conservative Jew living in Israel. Ms. Raz was attacked and beaten by a Haredi (ultra-Orthodox) Jewish man at a bus stop in Beersheva. The man noticed the strap marks tefillin often leave in one’s arm. Outraged, the man grabbed Ms. Raz and beat her, all the while screaming, “Woman, abomination, desecration.”

Ms. Raz got away, filed a complaint with the police, and wrote about her ordeal: “We live in a country where the strong dominate and where women are humiliated. As our society becomes more ultra-Orthodox, more extreme, these boundaries become clearer and more frightening. We can protest against the Haredim every day, but they are not the only guilty ones. They are Haredi; this is how they believe and they have the right to believe this way. It is the State that is also guilty of violence, for authorizing their every rampage; and we just carry on and keep quiet. If we don’t wake up to what is happening around us, we will very soon find ourselves living on the corner of Meah Shearim [an ultra-Orthodox neighborhood in Jerusalem] and Tehran.”

She is right. And the problem isn’t restricted to Israel. While we focus our attention on global civilizational clashes, there are intra-civilizational clashes that are no less important. This clash is between religious extremists and religious moderates. True, you may find both to be steeped in ignorance and wish to see today’s gods go the way of Zeus and Thor, but that isn’t going to happen. If religion is to further rather than hinder human progress the ultra-Orthodox of every religion must be dethroned. There is still a sense among too many (even too many liberals) that being fanatical for your god is a good thing; that liberal religionists are weak willed and inauthentic; and that only the extremists are true to their faith. Liberals need to speak up more loudly; they need to affirm the legitimacy of their faith more powerfully; and challenge the haredi of every religion whenever their faith spills over into abuse. The alternative is to surrender faith to the fanatics and allow whatever good religion can do to get lost in the fog of fear that is the haredi mindset.

Mavi Marmara: A Turkish Love Boat?

The recent class between Israeli commandos and Muslim and other activists aboard the Turkish flagged ship the Mavi Marmara seeking to break the Israeli blockade of Gaza and bring humanitarian aid to the over one million Gazans trapped in the madness of Hamas hatred and Israeli fear is yet another example of how painful and confusing the situation in the Middle East is.

Let me very clear: First, Israel has every right to exist, and any organization that seeks to undermine that right is an enemy not only of Israel and the Jewish people, but of all people devoted to justice anywhere.

Second, to be pro-Israel doesn’t require you to be anti-Palestinian, and to be pro-Palestinian doesn’t require you to be anti-Israel. Support of the two-state solution requires you to be in favor of the liberation and self-determination of both Israelis and Palestinians. Only when both sides win, can either side win.

Third, while I understand the reason for the three-year-old Israeli blockade, I do not think it is effective. And allowing herself to be the face of oppression in the eyes of millions of Muslims in Gaza, Palestine, and around the Islamic world is just stupid. And while it is true that Israel does allow some aid to enter Gaza, it is also true that Israel is following a policy based on the erroneous idea that crushing the Gazan people economically will somehow cause them to rise up and crush Hamas politically. This will not work. It only hardens the loyalty of the people to their oppressors by allowing the oppressor to shift the blame for oppression to others. Gazans will only overturn Hamas when they see Hamas rather than Israel as their true oppressor. And neither Hamas nor the current Israeli government seems eager to let this happen.

Fourth, the purpose of the flotilla was to provoke confrontation. Israel told the flotilla leaders that it would allow the humanitarian aid to enter Gaza if the ships would come to an Israeli port for inspection. Israel wanted to be certain that the cargo going into Gaza was indeed humanitarian and not military. The flotilla leaders refused. Further, film from Al Jazeera provided by Act! for America shows pockets of activists chanting anti-Jewish rhetoric from the Koran, and the fact that the activists attacked Israelis with metal pipes, knives, and clubs, and tossed one soldier off the deck suggests that some were itching for a fight. There is no Gandhi on either side of the Muslim/Jewish divide, and no one should imagine that either side has a monopoly on hatred or violence or sainthood. The Israelis want heroes, the Muslims want martyrs. Nobody honors saints.

Fifth, Israel made a mistake in sending this particular commando unit to do this particular task. The unit had no experience with civilians, with riot control, or with diplomacy.

In short, the flotilla leaders got just what they wanted: worldwide anti-Israel propaganda. And they couldn’t have done it without the help of the Israelis themselves.

I have no hope for peace in the Middle East. I do not think we will see an end to war in Afghanistan, Iraq, or Israel/Palestine. I expect the conflict to expand. It is already in Pakistan and will soon be in Iran.

It is said that there can be no peace because there is no one with whom to make peace, but I do not believe that. There are people of good will on every side of this conflict who would rather send their children to college than to war, but their numbers are dwindling, and they have no political power in their respective countries. What is missing are politicians who can make peace.

My fear at the moment is that Israel will once again be demonized. It is just too easy to picture these “loving, good-hearted humanitarians” being brutalized by “violent, heartless Israeli soldiers.” That will be the story: demon Israel against the love boat of Islam.

There are some who will rush to defend Israel, but in so doing they will demonize the Muslims, adding to the heat even as they pretend to shed light.

The end game? War. War with Hamas, then war with Hezbollah, then war with Iran. The question people have to ask themselves is this: how many of our children are we willing to the feed to the god of war? The answer I suspect is “all of them.”