Jordan's Juice

In our Parasha this weekend, Jacob has his fateful meeting with Esau. As we will learn tomorrow morning, Jacob sends his family across the River Yabbok and remains alone, awaiting Esau’s arrival. While asleep, he wrestles the angel. We know this story well; it parallel’s last week’s dream sequence of the ladder reaching up to heaven. The dreams bracket the Jacob story in the Torah.

But we don’t often look at what follows. Following Jacob’s episode of God Wrestling, he takes a deep breath and goes out to meet his brother. He sends wave after wave of gifts to Esau, hoping against hope that Esau won’t kill him. These bribes, if you will, accomplish their purpose for Esau greets his brother Jacob warmly, even going so far as to kiss his brother on the neck. Following a bit of family time, Jacob and Esau go their separate ways, never to meet again.

Of course, things are never as simple as that. When we take a closer look at the text, there are a number of items that stand out; some of them will indeed surprise you. Let’s start at the beginning. If you recall from last week, when Jacob cheats Esau out of the birthright of the first-born, Esau had demanded some of that red stuff, that red lentil stew. The Hebrew word for red is Edom; hence Esau is also called Edom in the Torah, the father of the Edomites. Edom is a kingdom in what is now southern Jordan and northwest Saudi Arabia. More to the point, in Roman times, Edom was called Idumea, a kingdom conquered by the Maccabees and its inhabitants forcibly converted. The most famous of the Idumeans, descendents of Esau: Herod the Great. So realize that when the rabbis of old would look at this story, they wouldn’t see two brothers embracing, they would see Jacob – or more to the point, Israel – encountering Herod, a symbol of Rome. And since the Romans destroyed the Temple and later expelled the Jews from Judea, the rabbis hated the Romans; any mention of Esau, therefore, evoked this hatred.

So Esau came to symbolize Rome, specifically Christian Rome. In the Talmud and other Rabbinic literature, whenever we see the word “Edom” in the text, we are supposed to think about Christian Rome. It is a code word. And the rabbis are quick to read that code back into the Biblical text – which of course knew nothing of Rome or of Christians, to be sure.

Instead of Jacob and Esau meeting on the plain, we now interpret this passage as Israel and Edom, Christian Rome, meeting on the plain. And Edom kisses the neck of Israel. Or does he? Once again, we can look at a wonderful fanciful Midrash:

The rabbis revocalize the Hebrew word for kiss, nashek, and come up with the Hebrew word “to bite”. In this new interpretation, perfectly consistent with the text, by the way, Esau, Edom, Christian Rome, bites the neck of Jacob, Israel, the Jewish people. But suddenly, Jacob’s neck turns to stone and Esau’s teeth all break! That is hardly a friendly reunion.

Suddenly, when we compare these two versions of the text, we can find a deep meaning. What is the difference between Israel and Christianity embracing or biting each other’s necks? I think you can see the obvious: one story tells of reconciliation while another tells of conflict. In the latter story, when Jacob’s neck turns to stone, we can learn that no matter how greatly we Jews have been persecuted over the centuries, we will survive and our enemies will eventually shatter. We are, the Torah tells us, a “stiff-necked people”; the Midrash suggests that we are a “stone-necked people”. The latter story then is a story of triumph over adversity – and it is a good story to tell. We Jews hear it all the time; it confirms our deepest anxieties and still gives us hope.

But the first story is even better because of its potential. Jacob and Esau, Israel and Edom, have been separated. Israel lives in fear of Edom, of Christianity. One day, Israel is forced to confront his fears. He is sleepless; he takes safety precautions; he prepares for the worst. And then, at the moment of encounter, Israel and Edom embrace, spend time together and then go their separate ways. They do not become one people again – but that is fine. Instead, they move forward in love – and with a healthy dose of respect for each other, knowing that both of them are rich in spirit yet going on separate paths towards the Almighty One.

That is what we hope to accomplish when we encounter the Other in Judaism. Respecting each other’s differences, we are richer for the experience.

Now surely there are xenophobes and suspicious minds among us. We Jews have a bitter, 2000 year experience of persecution. Even in America, we still perk up at even the slightest inkling that our modern Golden Age might be compromised. Perhaps this explains our attitudes towards so-called Messianics and other Evangelicals who seek to convert us. It also explains our support of Israel, a country truly under siege by those who seek to destroy us, latter day descendents of Esau, perhaps. There are those among us who advocate a total separation from non-Jews, a return to the ghetto as it were. They offer this as a panacea for a whole host of ills: intermarriage, Jewish learning, community building, etc.

But I never liked the idea of a ghetto. It seemed to me that ghettos always led to pogroms and gas chambers. It might be wistful thinking to believe that an insular community would solve certain problems – but I feel that these problems would only be exacerbated by a retreat from the children of Edom. We have to find a way to build a Jewish world amongst the Edomites.

And so I embrace the embrace, the time when Jacob and Esau, Israel and Edom, kissed, talked and moved on. There will be times when we can make this happen, not just with Christians but with Muslims as well. Now I am no Pollyanna and I know that there are indeed some Christians and Muslims out to get us. But really, they are few and far between, especially in this country.

A good example of an embrace is our annual December Dilemma, when we celebrate Chanukah at about the same time that our Christian neighbors celebrate Christmas. We discussed this a few weeks ago but suffice it to say that the proper response to a WalMart clerk wishing us a Merry Christmas is “Thank you”. But more to the point, if Christians are professing, “Peace on earth, good will to all”, I’m willing to sign on to this campaign. I’ll still be a Jew and she might still be a Christian – but hopefully we will all live in peace. If we can live out our faiths – instead of killing for our faiths – I’ll put a Jewish star on my fireplace chimney.

The three Abrahamic faiths all worship the same One God. We just have very different – and exclusive – ways of doing that. We do not mix well, theologically. But we do mix well in the public square because our values are essentially similar. And that is good; it is like Jacob and Esau embracing, talking and then going their separate ways.

So the final lesson of this passage is this: when we are at work, at school or at play, our respective faiths are at work, school or play as well. And our faith discussions should we frank, honest and joyful – a testimony to our faiths without coercion. This is kissing and talking. And then, after work, school or play, we go home and celebrate with people of like faith – just as we are doing now. Our encounters here and there will enrich our lives, the lives of others – and the lives of the Other, who now is not our enemy but our friend. And friends respect the differences – and the similarities – between them.

So Jacob and Esau’s tale can be read as a morality play – and we can choose the ending. We can choose whether our necks turn to stone and we shatter our enemies. Or, we can embrace, talk and move forward, confident in our faith and strengthened in faith by the encounter with the Other. Surely there will be problems, often severe, that will arise. But if interaction is the norm, we will be able to work them out.

Let us resolve, then to embrace and not bite, keeping our eyes open but our necks soft. As we learn from each other, we enrich each other. And truly, that is Divine. Amen.

# posted by Jordan Parr @ 11:43 AM 0 comments

Parashat Vayetze 5767

Mel Gibson. Michael Richards. Borat. What a trio.

By now, their stories are familiar to all of us. Mel Gibson goes off on a drunken rant and shouts anti-Semitic expletives at a Jewish police officer in Los Angeles. Michael Richards loses his cool and uses the n-word against a heckler. And Borat, an anti-Semitic comedic character played by the observant Jewish comedian Sasha Baron Cohen, goads and tricks unsuspecting victims into revealing their deepest prejudices. This is quite a controversial group, to be sure.

Let’s look at these cases a bit more closely. When we do, we will find some disturbing tendencies, not just about them – but about us as well. The good news is that we can change our behaviors but it may be difficult. By examining these three incidents, we can take the first steps towards change.

Let’s start with Mel Gibson. Several years ago, we recall that his movie, The Passion of the Christ, caused a furor among Jews and non-Jews alike with its negative portrayal of the Jewish authorities in Roman Palestine and with its sheer brutality. I saw the movie and, if you recall my comments, was stunned, both by the gore and by what I perceived to be inaccuracies in its portrayal of all of the major characters: Jesus, Caiaphas, Mary Magdalene, etc. At the time, Gibson kept telling the world that he was not an anti-Semite but rather he was a passionate Catholic, whose faith led him to produce and direct this movie. As an act of faith, the movie exhibited his interpretation of these events. As a faithful portrayal of history, it fell short. I did not label him an anti-Semite at the time; I labeled him a committed and zealous Catholic instead.

Perhaps I was mistaken about Mel Gibson. I don’t like to slap labels on a person; it is too simplistic to call somebody a name when human beings are such complex creatures. But I have always held that the true measure of a person is not how he or she acts when sober but rather how that person acts – and speaks – when drunk. None of us sitting here this evening would, I am sure, use a defamatory name during our Oneg conversations tonight. But if I got you drunk and asked you what you thought of Catholics or, dare I say, Muslims, you might not be so polite. So while an alcoholic might rightfully claim that he didn’t know what he was saying while drunk, what he said reflects, I believe, his true beliefs. So in a sober moment, Mel Gibson would deny vociferously that he is an anti-Semite, when drunk, his true feelings towards Jews emerge. And that is cause for concern. I for one will not see his new movie, Apocalypto, because of this drunken rant – even though it has a very interesting premise.

And now I am similarly torn about watching Seinfeld reruns on television. I always thought Kramer was one of the greatest characters ever developed and Michael Richards played him perfectly. He’s a terrific physical comedian who also has a long history of doing stand-up comedy. I have to say, the thought of developing a 30 minute comedy routine, delivered at a microphone in front of strangers, often drunk strangers, in a smoky club is one of the most terrifying moments that I can imagine. Even when I don’t like a stand up comedian’s humor, I admire the fact that he is out there.

So Michael Richards should have known better than to confront a heckler during his act. I’ve been in clubs where the comedian is heckled and usually he or she knows how to handle it; there are certain stock methods that comedians learn; they work well. Richards did not utilize any of these methods. While I won’t get into the debate over the use of the n-word by either white or black comedians, all I know is that if I used the n-word in public, I would be looking for a job on another continent! It is certainly the wrong word to use when describing blacks.

So why did Michael Richards use the word? It seems like he simply lost control. This of course is an explanation, not an excuse. The damage has been done and, no matter how many times he apologizes, he cannot take back his words. He will forever be known for this rant.

So if I were to ask him if he were a racist, obviously Michael Richards would say no – just as Mel Gibson would certainly deny that he is an anti-Semite. But under pressure, just as if he were drunk, Richards cracked and perhaps exposed his true feelings.

Which brings me to Borat. It seems incongruous to include a fictional movie character with these real live people but Sasha Baron Cohen is a comedic genius. Borat himself is disgusting and the movie is very difficult to stomach. But when you are not reacting in horror, you are laughing hysterically. I found much of the movie distasteful but it was really funny in a way that I for one do not like to admit. It is Candid Camera – or Punk’d – with a vengeance. And some of it is quite meanspirited.

Cohen’s genius is in getting people, after they have given permission to appear on camera, to reveal their deepest prejudices, especially anti-Semitism. In conversations with his travel companion, Borat speaks fluent Hebrew yet he gets people, from rodeo groupies to college students, to reveal their latent anti-Semitic tendencies, often with the aid of mass quantities of alcohol. Mel Gibson, step aside: you have nothing on drunk frat boys from the University of South Carolina.

All in all, we see that Michael Richards and Mel Gibson self-destructed, while Sasha Baron Cohen as Borat leads others to self-destruct. So the question posed is this: when our latent prejudices surface, is that who we really are? Or should assume that person is not really like that, he was just drunk, high or deranged at the time?

Mel Gibson could make a film about Moses, or the founding of Israel in 1948, with Israeli actors speaking fluent Hebrew, and many among us would still think of him as an anti-Semite. He may or may not be one – again, I am not going to label him – but he is perceived as an anti-Semite and that is all that matters, really.

Michael Richards can fund a dozen projects in inner-city neighborhoods designed to improve the lot of African-Americans and he still would not be accepted by large parts of the black community. He is now perceived, rightly or wrongly, as a racist – and the perception is all that matters.

Those people whom Cohen punk’d in his movie will also be perceived as anti-Semites and rednecks, no matter what they are really like. Those frat boys from South Carolina are suing him but it really does not matter. In a sober moment, they probably would love us Jews but they will be perceived as anti-Semites for as long as the film remains popular. And in the DVD and electronic download age, that could be for a very long time.

So who are we really? Are we upstanding men and women who never use the n-word but do use the Yiddish s-word instead? I doubt that we are anti-Semites, but are there closeted self-hating Jews amongst us? To expand on the theme, how many of us would like to see civil unions for gays and lesbians to be the law of the land – but are put off when a gay couple moves in next door to us? Or how many of us say that we support efforts to end the genocide in Darfur – but don’t lift a finger because Darfur is in darkest Africa?

So who are we, really? I am certainly not accusing any of us of anything, please know that. But each of us has latent tendencies toward denigrating the Other, the one who is not like us. It is a human deficiency, not a specifically Jewish one, to be sure. But we all need to work to eliminate these tendencies so that we do not hurt others or ourselves.

How do we do it? How do we eliminate the xenophobia and prejudice from our hearts? First of all, we have to stay sober. Mel Gibson and those frat boys will be paying the price of their drunkenness for years to come. Second, we have to keep in control of our faculties. Those few minutes of ranting will cost Michael Richards his career. And finally, we cannot be tempted when others goad us. It’s a lot of fun to laugh at the failings of others but we have to realize when our words might get us in trouble. In other words, we need to avoid lashon hara, evil speech. If we resolve neither to gossip nor to denigrate others in public, we will be well on the way to removing this evil from our hearts. It’s fun to gossip; it’s also fun to put people down – but we have to stop; the stakes are just too high.

If we resolve to speak only positively about individuals – and the ethnic or religious group that they represent – than we will truly be models for the rest of the world. It is within our grasp to do so; may we find the will to make it happen. Amen.

# posted by Jordan Parr @ 4:12 PM 0 comments