12 JEWISH FRONTIER Pluralism and Religious Zionism: Can They Converge? David Twersky interviews David Hartman ‘Ata time when the » ices of theocracy and religious coercion irrisrael have becom: distressingly loud, Habbi David Hartman stands as an invaluable counterweight, ‘passionate advocate of an Orthodoxy that must not only tolerate. sity but embrace it. The New York-born Rabbi Hartman re ligious diver- ived his rabbinical ordination from Yeshiva University's Theological Seminary. Now living in Jerusalem, where he is the founder and director of the Shalom Hartman Institute for Advanced Jewish Studies, he is also a member of the Department of Jewish Thought and Philosophy of the Hebrew Universit and has served as an advisor 1o Israe!'s Ministry of Education. Rabbi Hartman's most recent book, A Living Cove- ‘nant (Free Press), finds in traditional Judaism a mandate for autonomy and in- dividual religious choice. Jewish Frontier editorial consultant David Twersky interviewed Rabbi Hartman in Jerusalem. DT: Looking in from the outside, it seems to me that You see yourself as a lonely man within the world of religious Orthi-doxy in Israel. Where do you place yourself in that world? DH: I am lonely because I am a philosopher, and I still believe that there’s some ideological importance ee Labor itself must be the initiator for Judaism, rather than let the religious parties set the agenda. It has to create a framework together with religious Jews who feel like me. to what we've created here in Israel. In other words, as a religious Jew, I'm a Zionist. My Zionism is con. stitutive of my religious commitment. It is not: tangen- tial and extraneous. It doesn’t find expression in some sort of blind nationalism or serving in the army. It is, to me, a spiritual category. But I don't see that commitment reflected in the marketplace. I feel in this country today the absence of a larger vision, of the utopia’. or radice! implications of the Zionis: revolution. DT: There are those for whom the spir: sual eategory of their Zionism has led them to a messianic idea of Greater Israe}, How do you relate to that? DH: That's the pain I feel — that the only expression for religious Zionism became some 0: of messianic politics. The last chapter in my book A Living Cove- nant argues with Gush Emunim. The common feel- ing among both secular and religious Zionists was that the land, and settlement in the land, was preemi- nent. And I feel that that is a great mistake. DT: And what do you replace it with? DH: My concern is the quality of human being you produce in this society. Zionism is ultimately a desire to transform Jewish psychology, rather than to make the desert blossom. But it's much easier to focus on the desert because it's a measurable objective. You can test it. You can see it. Changing human nature, or changing psychological tendencies in an individual, is much more difficult. Iam not a utopian Marcusian who believes that there can be a transformed peyche,1an I feel in ision, of Zionist SULY/AUGUST 1987 nor a Marxist who believes that if you change the social conditions you create a new, liberated man. In that way, I'm much closer to a Freudian conser- fatism. But I think something is possible. And tome, part of Zionism is the therapy of the Jewish psyche. believe that the land and coming together as a na- tion were meant to heal some very real psychological tendencies in the Jewish make up. Namely, suspicion of the world, reveling in suffering, feelings of ‘uniqueness because we're misunderstood, building identity in hostility toward the world. see two Jewish psychological types. There's a type that built a ghetto mentality, that built inwards. Hav- ing other Jews to share with, you could say, “Screw the world.” The world disregards you and you don’t care, because why should you value that which rejects you? Understandable. So in the time of the Christian medieval world, or a world of hostility, the ghetto is avery healthy way of building some degree of dignity. ‘The second mode of consciousness came from the feeling that maybe the world does want you. Maybe you can be in the world. Then started this drunk ‘universalism, this drunken notion, “I shall be as you desire me, and my whole identity is grounded in what, your perception of me is. So therefore the rules of my own self-understanding don’t grow in any way inter: nal to myself.”” And therefore the only criterion for Jewish legitimacy after emancipation was that Jews were a symbol of a universal drama. The only language was that of “I am part of,” “I share.” ‘But Zionism is a third option. Zionism is not ghetto- ization nor is it universalism. Zionism is a focus on nationalism as a fundamental priority. It means that there is a legitimacy to having your own body politic, that there is a legitimacy in being alive as par- ticular community. I call it the dignity of particulari- ty. Not only because you will contribute more to the world that way but because peoplehood — with its own history, its own memories, its own language — is a legitimate category. Without making claims of superiority. That's normalcy — that I don't have to justify my identity through claims of superiority or triumphalist claims about Jewish uniqueness. I don’t know if we're unique, better, a light unto the nations. I like Jewish history. I like Jewish memories. [like Jewish experience. Is it the only way to be a human being? No. But I happen to be in love with this people. And I don’t have to explain that. I don't have to justify this love by claiming that through it the world will become better. This whole notion that Israel has to be an instrument for some ‘sort of universal purpose, I reject completely. And that’s what I consider to be very healthy in Zionism, But at the same time, it is not a ghetto move. It is a desire to meet the world from the dignity of my own particularity. But to live in dialogue with the world, to establish a relationship with it, to be responsive 18 to what is decent and human in it, And that therefore means to value the world. T'm Sut to develop a very deep-rooted Jewish spirituality without triumphalist claims, without ex- aggerated claims. I'm not interested in sentimentali- ty. I'm not interested in Judaism as a museum, as @ Fiddler on the Roof kind of thing. That sort of shmalz doesn't appeal to me at all. My concern is the present. ‘My concern is the way in which the tradition can in- fuse — not resolve — infuse the discussion. My joy is to get Jewish tradition to talk with the best of ‘Western thought and see if something interesting can come out of it. DT: Do you think that the way in which organized I’m out to develop a very deep- rooted spirituality without trium- phalist claims. My joy is to get Jewish tradition to talk with the best of Western thought and see if something interesting comes out of it. religion has expressed itself politically in Israel has contributed to what you're aiming for? DH: No, no, no. On the contrary. Because I don't think the religious Jew lives in dialogue even with other Jews, let alone with non-Jews. Instead of Israel leading to the breakdown of narcissism, it has fallen victim to the ghetto mentality. The ghetto is a political framework which is similar in the deepest sense to psychological narcissism. You don't live in dissidence. You don’t live with that which is other than you. You only live with that which confirms you. The meaning for me of being in Israel is to present the Jews with alternate ways in which to make sense of being part of Jewish history. DT How do you answer Orthodox critics who say that your position implies the legitimacy of the secular option? DH: I don’t have to acknowledge that legitimacy. I have to acknowledge that the option exists! Who needs my legitimation? I can disagree with the Reform and Conservative movements, or with the secular understanding of Jewish history. But I believe it is a factor in Jewish consciousness. It is an em- pirical given. I want to argue with it. I want to debate it. And I want to engage it, but I cannot say that it is not a serious attempt by serious people to make sense of Jewish history. What we don’t have in this country is a serious encounter of the heterogeneous methods in which people make sense of Jewish history. And the whole meaning of the ingathering of the exiles is to have that discussion.“ DT: But that raises another point. Part of the ongoing religious crisis in the State of Israel has to do with makor hasamhut, the source of authority. What do you see as the source of authority? DH: Ifa person quotes the Rambam or quotes the Bi- ble, or quotes anything, it's just one opinion. DT: The past has a vote but not a veto. : That’s right. It's opinion. If the chief rabbi, or “The Rambam says. ..,” then a person The more power the rabbi has to legislate, the less he Aas as an educator. I want Judaism to have no political power so that it can be a moral, educative force in society. can say, “Yes, he said it, but let me see if it makes sense. Let me tell you why I agree or disagree with it.” In other words, for me, Judaism can infuse our discussion. It cannot lay claim to special authority. ‘As Plato should infuse our discussion, Now a person may say, “I'm going first to see what the Talmud sai but I'm not going to give it special authority.” Imay want to listen to what my own tradition has to con- tribute on any issue, but I want Israeli society to decide. I want Israelis to have a conversation with the Jewish intellectual, creative tradition. Not to view it as in some way obligating them. If it does obligate them, that has to be their personal decision and not something the Knesset decides. You see, if Judaism gets into the obligatory framework, it loses its educational influence. And that's what I've meant when I’ve written that the ‘more power the rabbi has to legislate, the less he has. as an educator. In other words, I want Judaism to have no political power so that it can be a moral, ‘educative force in society. At present it is not. It’s an ugly, exploitative force, rather than being something that can touch the soul of a whole nation, And I think the Israeli wants to be touched. But the religious par- ties are making sure that their view of Judaism will never be given a freely-chosen exposure. Because if ‘speak to you because I have power, then you're never going to open your soul up to me. So take away the power and let education prevail. DT: Given the balance of power between Labor and Likud, it doesn’t look as if either one is going to. radically lessen its dependence on the religious bloc. As long as the foreign policy discussion remains primary, both sides will be willing to make deals with JEWISH FRONTIER the religious parties, because they'd rather be with them than with each other. So the religious parties continue to hold decisive power on issues that have nothing to do with religion. Have you thought about a way in which there could be some social compromise that would limit this? DH: NRP ational Religious Party) cabinet minister Zevulun Hammer once asked me what my platform would be for the NRP. I said, “You should be a party that influences educationally, without legislative goals. You have been sent by the religious communi. ty to bring Judaism into the political discourse. And since without political parties you don’t get organized and no one takes you seriously, you are a political framework. But you should be a political party that doesn't use power; your task should always be to in- fuse the discussion educationally.” That’s how I see the role of religious Zionism. But it has not moved in that direction. It became a special interest group. Because it was afraid of the secular community. It felt that if it didn’t have the power of a special interest, it couldn't take care of its own needs. On its deepest level, the NRP was born from suspi- cion of the secular labor movement. The NRP suffered greatly with the surfacing of Likud, which didn’t pre sent itself as a secular party. Begin wore a kipah and said, "Im yirtzeh hashem” [God willing]. He symbo- lized all the things the religious constituency need- ed. So the NRP lost that constituency and the issues became Likud/Labor issues. A group that did surface strongly after this shift was the Agudah. Not because of a new religious Zionism but because the needs of| the yeshiva world grew. Its families have eight, ten, twelve, fourteen kids, and they have many educa tional institutions that need support. Their clout is, “Support your institutions!” So they'll make deals with any political party that will support them. Labor has to recognize now that the Jews in this, country are suffering from spiritual claustrophobia, and that Labor itself must be the initiator for Judaism, rather than let the religious parties set the agenda. But I don't see it. Because Labor's not serious spiritually. Its thoughts are purely in nationalist terms, and its sense of Judaism is to quote Amos as ‘ socialist. My belief is that they have to create a framework — they together with religious Jews who feel like me. And there are many. There are many serious religious Zionists who hope a different picture of religious Zionism can surface. DT: What about reports that teachers in the religious ‘school system tell students not to go into the army? DH: That's coming from the yeshiva world, the Agudah world. The Agudah world has now become the norm for authentic religiosity. And it had to hap- pen. After all, [Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi Shlomo] Goren doesn't offer you a different intellectual option from Agudah’s about Judaism. What he offers are nainister tform party lative muni- >. And anized litical y that toin- rT see noved group. Tefelt eds of t ten, ant is, deals JULY/AUGUST 1987 tionalist symbols. Goren’s claim to modernity is that he parachuted from a plane. As if modernity means serving in the IDF. DT: Just as Gush Emunim’s claim to modernity is that it has a spokeswoman. In my opinion, that’s a ‘very conscious decision on their part. DH: That's right. Absolutely. There has been no in- tellectual, critical self-examination about pluralism, liberalism, freedom of conscience. The Jewish religious mind is fundamentally eternalistic, unable to deal with the world critically and intelligently. Or- thodoxy is succeeding only because of numbers. If you havea lot of children, you perpetuate yourself. Ihave to take you seriously. But not because your ideas are ‘more compelling. ‘There was a time that Orthodoxy felt it had to be critical and capture minds intellectually. It was its ‘best period — the period I was nurtured in. The late forties, the early fifties. Now that’s gone completely. ‘Still, the situation is wide open in Israeli society. No ideological framework is winning. And there is confusion as to direction. In general, there is an over- ‘whelming feeling of alienation from the political pro- cess. The strongest feeling is, “Can I get through to my next paycheck?” A great turning inwards. A preoccupation with personal gratification. Personal satisfaction. It took place in America as well. And this is the greatest tragedy in Israeli society. ‘There's a big difference between Entebbe, which was a dramatic gesture about the sacredness of life, and the inner corrosion that takes place daily because of alienation and lack of trust. We have violated the dignity of human beings in our social structures. Peo- ple don't feel dignified in personal relationships. They don't know how to talk to each other with respect. We don't keep our words. You know the line: If you're honest, you end up on welfare. We call manners ‘western, feminine. Where do you ever have a televi- sion discussion in which someone says, “Gee, I ap- preciate what you said. I'll have torethink what I've just said on the basis of what you just said”? Never heard of. DI: It's considered a sign of weakness. We have polarized political packages of thinking in Israel. DH: That's right. We have a bunch of monologues go- ing on. Stereotyped boxes rather than people genuine- ly being open to each other. You know, thisis the first time that Israeli Labor people like yourself have started coming to me. Because they assumed, “He's dati {religious}. He wears a kipah [yarmulke). We already know what he thinks.” But they're suddenly becoming aware that maybe there are people who wear kipot srugot ("knit yarmulkes,” which have come to represent Gush Emunim in popular Israeli culture] and you can’t tell what's going on in their heads and their souls. Maybe they really have an in- dependent position. DT: The point is well taken. Thet stereotype of anyone who wears a kipab. DH: There is more openness among Christians and other people around the world to what Ihave to say. Here either people identify me as Gush Emunim or they identify me as being on the ultra-left. They can't figure me out. When for seven years I was an advisor to (Education Minister Zevulun) Hammer, trying to help him be the minister for the whole Jewish peo- ple, I was accused of being a shofar for the NRP. It ‘was as if he was not minister of education for the whole State of Israel, But that’s how people in the kib- butz movement who were close to me reacted: You've become an NRP man. DT: It seems that the political space you occupy is, disappearing: a moderate religious Zionism. It is be- ing attacked on one side by the ultra-Orthodox haredi ‘world and on the other side by Likud, which as you said, coopted a lot of elements. People look at the pic- ture and say, “What do I need the NRP for? If want more Torah atmosphere, I go to Agudah. If I want a more political one, then I go to Likud.” DH: Right. That was my argument with Hammer. ‘The NRP's political future requires it to change its ——— There is more openness to what I. have to say among Christians and other people around the world. Here either people identify me as Gush Emunim or as being on the ultradeft. They can't figure me out. understanding of its purpose in Israeli society. I said to Hammer, there can only be one Agudah, but ‘Agudah with compromises is the NRP. Isaid to him, you have to radically redefine the difference between what it means to be a Zionist who's religious and to be a non-Zionist, and make the Zionism significant. We're so far from that. But I haven't given up. I am building different schools. That’s my great hope. 1am building a whole complex. From elementary school to high school to shesderina (religious schools for men doing military ser- vice]. We have an experimental high school already. We're moving into a full elementary school. We're try- ing to offer an alternative educational religious op- tion. It'll take a few years. But if we succeed, then I believe a centrist religious Zionism will surface — moderate, open to the world, willing to live in dialogue rather than coercion. It will happen if peo- ple believe that moderation and pluralism are capable of creating loyalty to Jewish tradition. People iden-16 tify pluralism and liberalism as lack of conviction. ‘They don't believe that Jewish religious tradition will Perpetuate itself with that kind of ideology. If we can show that the ideology perpetuates itself, that it creates its own talmidei chachamim (scholars), that ithas vibrancy and vitality, then I think there'll be some big changes. But we have to prove that. Because most people believe that a religious pluralist who ‘seeks no power but just to enter the political discus- sion is going to be swallowed up by modernity. And asa result of that he cannot be trusted to be the car- rier of the tradition. ‘Must modernity, with its pluralistic sensibility, be inhibitive of passion? Must passion be dogmatic? Or ‘can there be intense moderation? I call it passion in sobriety. Because Zionism creates pluralism, does it therefore defuse passion? That's the biggest issue. Because without passion nothing really survives. Unless we can educate a new Maimonides, of great intellectual intensity and encyclopedic intelligence, who can critically and respectfully deal with the world, then the fundamentalists are going to win and we are going to have Khomeini here. That's going to be civil war. as well as his role in develop- ing the politcal institutions and support essential to the creation of a Jewish state. “In this absorbing biography, we meet David Ben-Gurion... a true statesman, leader, and guide for [ca Ons Pas re Baas SOT A statesman before he had a state” So wrote Shimon Peres of his great mentor, and this definitive account of David Ben-Gurion’s remarkable life aptly illustrates the point. From his birth in Poland to the proclamation of the State of Israel, Shabtai Teveth traces the development of Ben-Gurion's beliefs and attitudes, qi Houghton Mifflin Company JEWISH FRONTIER The problem is not the Arabs. The problem is Judaism. Can we produce a Judaism that can live with the best aspects of modernity, which are pluralism, autonomy, individual conscience, room for people t live with their differences? Or will this socie. ty become paternalistic, one in which you infantilize the person who disagrees with you and appeal to's mass psychology of black and white, which is easy 19 achieve? That's the challenge in terms of Jews liv. ing with Jews, and it's the only hope with the Arabs, Because unless Islamic fundamentalism also moves in a pluralistic direction, we are going to blow each other up. The issue is to find the pluralistic soul in the monotheistic tradition. Monotheism has always been intolerant. And that’s the important question. Can you have a revolution in monotheism —a revolution in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam to create a new spiritual type? Or are fanaticism, dogmatism, ab- solutism, zealotry indigenous to the prophetic Biblical tradition? Unless the center in this country produces its own intense religious passion, but with a new type of pluralistic Zionist spirit, I see very little hope for this society. . 2k Soot Sowa, Meoacusets 0208 Routan Compare