Transcript for:
Insights on Israel-Palestine Conflict

Hello everyone and welcome once again to the Temple Institute Parsha class. My name is Gedalia Meyer and I am podcasting from Maale Adumim in Israel. The war has entered its second month with no firm end in sight. Israel s goal is clear - to eliminate Hamas as a real threat in the near future. How that plays out in the ultimate reshaping of the Gaza Strip is anybody s guess. Meanwhile, things are unfolding both in Gaza and around the world like the moves of two chessmasters whose endgame positions were determined early in the match. There is only so much flexibility once things are set in motion. One thing has become clear to all who choose to recognize it. This is not a dispute over land rights. That idea has been floating around western liberal society for decades. It is almost mandatory in intellectual circles such as university settings. The reason for this is obvious- it presents a possible solution. Find the right division of the land and the problem is solved. The so-called two-state solution is the royal road to peace in this region, and anybody who contests it is deemed not only ignorant but evil. The only problem with it is that the Palestians and their backers have never accepted it in any shape or form. From day one they rejected it out of hand. This has always puzzled western political and academic types to the point that they have been left with no choice but to ignore it altogether. It simply does not fit into their paradigm so it must be discarded. But there it is right in front of us. The Hamas spokespeople and many of their backers in the west say it straight out with no attempt at concealing things. They are not interested in a Palestinian state, either in Gaza or anywhere else. They have one goal only - the destruction of Israel as a Jewish state. Everything else is secondary. This has always been their single goal, regardless of any well-meaning outside ideas to gloss things over and make them into just one more dispute over land. If one were to ask why this is the case, the answers might vary. Some might say its a matter of ethnic pride. Others might put certain historical factors in going back to the 19th century, such as immigration movements and colonization. Still others might call it a clash of civilizations , with this inevitable and irreconcilable conflict the result. But all this ignores the elephant in the room

  • religion. Religion has always determined the fate of this region since its history was first recorded. It saw the origins of monotheism in the form of the ancient Israelite religion and its battle with polytheistic paganism. It witnessed the development of Judaism from that ancient religion. It then fostered the birth of Christianity as a direct byproduct of messianic Judaism. It saw both religions evolve until they reached forms resembling what they are today. It also was one of the earliest arenas for the spread of Islam out of the Arabian peninsula. In 638 they arrived here and conquered the land, thus establishing it forever as part of the Dar al-Islam - the Islamic world. The centuries wore on, watching Crusaders come and go in a fruitless attempt to bring the Holy Land back into the Christian world. The Muslims outlasted the Crusaders but the land returned once again to the dormant and backwater state it had gradually assumed since the destruction of the Jewish temple in Jerusalem 1200 years earlier. As the decades and centuries went on, the Holy Land was forgotten, until the Jews started to make their way back in the late 19th century. It was under the Turks then, but that ended with the first world war. Then the British took over for 30 years, overseeing a seething cauldron of ethnic tensions as Jews and Arabs struggled to gain a firmer foothold in what was increasingly seen as a land of religious destiny. It all culminated in an gallant attempt by the newly formed United Nations to divide the land between the two groups, which was followed by the war of 1948, the birth of modern Israel, and the Arab nakba, or exile. Periodic wars throughout the second half of the 20th century achieved nothing but further cementing Israel s military and political position and Palestinian resentment at having lost what belonged to Islam. The first two decades of the 21st saw more of this and further solidified the idea that there was no resolution to this conflict. Which brings us to where we are today. This week s Parsha is called Hayei Sarah, meaning the Life of Sarah . Ironically, it begins by speaking of her death, at the grand old age of 127. Her burial in the cave in Hebron purchased by Avraham from a local Hittite named Ephron takes up the first section of the Parsha. This became known as the Cave of the Patriarchs , and remains to this day one of the most sacred sights in Israel to both Jews and Muslims. Following this is the sequence of events that takes up the bulk of the Parsha - the mission and journey of Elierzer, the servant of Avraham, back to Mesopotamia to find a wife for Avraham s son, Isaac. Avraham tells his servant that he must find a wife for Isaac from his family who still live there. The girl must be brought back to where Isaac lives, and not the other way around. If no suitable candidate can be found there, Isaac would not be allowed to marry into any of the families of the local Canaanites. There were a lot of deal breakers in this mission, and Eliezer was highly limited in what he could do. In the end he finds the suitable girl, Rivka, at the classic Biblical location of a well. In the course of a monologue between Eliezer and God, a dialogue between Eliezer and Rivka, and a trialogue between Eliezer, Rivka s father, Betuel, and her brother Lavan, the matter becomes settled. Rivka is determined to be the appropriate bride for Isaac and she insists on setting out immediately to marry him. The long journey back is described just as briefly as the long journey there. What mattered was the interplay between all of the protagonists. In the end. Rivka becomes the next matriarch in the family of Avraham, a worthy replacement for Sarah, the mother-in-law she never met. The Parsha closes with the final years of Avraham and his ultimate death. He marries another woman in his old age, one name Keturah. He even has several sons through her, but he gives everything he has to Isaac. He sends his other sons off to some distant area to the east with certain gifts , which are left mysteriously vague. The final verses of the Parsha deal with the genealogy of Yishmael, the oldest son of Avraham through his maid and then wife, Hagar. Yishmael, we are told, lived to the age of 137 and sired 12 sons, each of whom became a tribal leader. The final verse of the Pasha states, They dwelt from Havilah until Shur which faces Egypt, all the way towards Syria. In the presence of all of his brothers he fell . This final verse is a bit of a puzzle. What is the meaning of the phrase in the presence of all of his brothers he fell ? Is this a way of saying he dwelt among them, or is it saying that he was in conflict with them. The text is tantalyzingly vague on this point. This was the Biblical origins of the Ishmaelites, who became associated with the entire Arab nation, and then, to some degree, with the Muslims. In other words, this was a foundational event in human history, and certainly a watershed moment in the history of the middle east. Whether the Arabs, who emerged out of the Arabian peninsula, are truly descended from Yishamel, whose descendants settled between Egypt and Syria, is anybody s guess. But that is certainly the way the religious traditions of both the Jews and the Muslims have taken things. There is a fascinating section of the foundation work of Jewish mysticism, the Zohar, which deals with the intertwining of the fate of the Holy Land with that of the descendants of Yishmael. This passage states that some sort of guardian angel of Yishmael came before God with the complaint that Yishamel had never been adequately compensated for his acceptance of the Abrahamic practice of circumcision, which was performed on Yishmael at the age of 13. The response is that Yishmael s descendants delay their circumcision long beyond the mandated period of 8 days. But the complaint is still there, Yishmael was never rewarded for his participation in this practice, delayed or not. The decree is that Yishmael would receive his reward in the form of control over the Holy Land for a long period. However, the state of the land under his dominion would be empty of everything, just as his acceptance of the commandment of circumcision was devoid of any sense of spiritual perfection. They would, nevertheless, prevent the Israelites from returning to their place in the land, until the fulfillment of the reward of Yishamal s descendants for their acceptance of circumcision. It is left unclear how in the Zohar how long this was to be. Certain Jewish interpretations of this text claim that the period was to be 1300 years, with a century corresponding to each year of Yishamel s life prior to circumcision. Whether this interpretation is truly justified is up in the air, but it does result in a rather remarkable historical coincidence. The period of Islamic dominance in the Holy Land, with small gaps, was from about 638 to 1948, a period of about 1300 years. This uncanny number seems to emerge right out of those cryptic words in the Zohar, if one is willing to read it there. How this could be in a book recorded in the 13th century is a bit of a mystery. But, then again, everything about the Zohar is a bit of a mystery. One thing that comes from all this is that the Zohar saw the Muslim domination of this land strictly as a matter of religious practice and belief. This was all due to Yishmael s acceptance of circumcision, the foundational ritual of Judaism. Yishamel s complaint was that they had never received their adequate reward for this, and the result of that complaint was their control over this land. It was to be, however, empty of everything. It is one of the great ironies of history that the long period of Islamic control of Israel saw almost no social or agricultural development. The land was a desert for most of that time. With the return of the Jews after about 1300 years of Islamic control, everything changed. Almost instantly the land returned to its fruitful and productive state. This is not a dispute of borders and land. This is a matter of ancient claims of religious priority. It is difficult for the western mind to see this and even more difficult to accept it. But it is there for all to see. Hamas agrees with this in principle, but disagrees with who should have control. Perhaps it is best if a religious matter be settled by religious means. Perhaps this is what is going on as we speak. Shabbat Shalom!