search

Can we really disagree constructively?

We live in a time when it is extremely hard to listen to the opinions of others. The world around us seems to be getting split more and more everyday with polarization becoming sharper, and the middle ground splitting under us. 

There are, of course, some very legitimate reasons — it is hard to listen to someone accusing you of war mongering, for example. Everybody is on the verge of tears or shouting. Today, I don’t even dream of finding a civil way to argue with those who just plain hate us, but how can Jews in this post-October 7th world speak to each other even if we disagree on some very serious issues? 

Earlier this year, I took part in the Pardes Institute for Jewish Studies fellowship titled “Machloket Matters”, which was supposed to teach us how to disagree constructively, or try to steer our disputes into the realm of Machloket l’shem Shamayim, based on the most famous disagreements in the Talmud, those of Hillel and Shammai, who famously argued only “for the sake of heaven”.

כָּל מַחֲלֹקֶת שֶׁהִיא לְשֵׁם שָׁמַיִם, סוֹפָהּ לְהִתְקַיֵּם. וְשֶׁאֵינָהּ לְשֵׁם שָׁמַיִם, אֵין סוֹפָהּ לְהִתְקַיֵּם. אֵיזוֹ הִיא מַחֲלֹקֶת שֶׁהִיא לְשֵׁם שָׁמַיִם, זוֹ מַחֲלֹקֶת הִלֵּל וְשַׁמַּאי.:

Every dispute that is for the sake of Heaven, will in the end endure; But one that is not for the sake of Heaven, will not endure. Which is the controversy that is for the sake of Heaven? Such was the controversy of Hillel and Shammai. (Avot 5:17)

But what exactly does “for the sake of heaven” mean? Who decides what “heaven” really wants? And how can we find proof texts for the opinions we hold dear? Jewish tradition, as if specifically designed for lots of disagreements, gives us abundant examples. These examples, offering the eish omrim – “some say” introduction are scattered throughout Talmud, making sure that all opinions are preserved even if not all of them are worthy of following.

Not all of those opinions make their way into Law. Some of those that don’t are there just to illustrate the different possibilities of interpretation, and some are said to come forward in the world to come — a new world that we are all hoping for, a world with no wars, no great pain, and everyone’s knowledge of The Higher Truth.

Though until that happens, the Law should be clear in every case. Unfortunately, sometimes several roads seem to be going in the right direction only to confuse us later and bring us to morally shaky ground. How can we disagree while still being able to respect each other?

The methodology offered by the fellowship includes four pillars essential to a constructive debate:

  • Active listening: trying to get to the bottom, asking questions without offering your view first.
  • Motivation: clearly stating the goals to ourselves and realizing that we should strive for truth, and not for self-aggrandizing.
  • Issue(s)-only discussion: not attacking anyone personally for their views however different from our own.
  • Striving for truth: being open to reconsider your opinion or understanding that both ways may be right, or at least have the right to exist.

I am happy to have learned from every one of these principles, and, I am sure, so will most Jews. However, somehow we are still unable to have a civil discussion about the issues that are most pressing for the Jewish world today. 

One of those issues, is of course, Zionism. It seems that we don’t have a conclusive definition of the word that somehow became almost like a curse to our opponents. For some, to be a Zionsit today is to be a war monger, a racist, etc. If one Googles the definition of Zionism, there are multiple results on the first page. The definitions are similar, and yet have significant differences. 

History.com says “Zionism is a religious and political effort that brought thousands of Jews from around the world back to their ancient homeland in the Middle East and re-established Israel as the central location for Jewish identity.”
Jewish Virtual Library states that the term “Zionism” was coined in 1890 by Nathan Birnbaum, and “its general definition means the national movement for the return of the Jewish people to their homeland and the resumption of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel.”
Webster Dictionary claims that it is “an international movement originally for the establishment of a Jewish national or religious community in Palestine and later for the support of modern Israel”. 

For me, Zionism is the love and yearning for the Land of Israel, with Zion (Jerusalem) as it’s center, as praised so beautifully in the psalms: 

אֹהֵ֣ב יְ֭הֹוָה שַׁעֲרֵ֣י צִיּ֑וֹן מִ֝כֹּ֗ל מִשְׁכְּנ֥וֹת יַעֲקֹֽב׃

The Lord loves the gates of Żiyyon more than all the dwellings of Ya῾aqov.

Rav Kook’s definition of the land of Israel is the one I can wholeheartedly subscribe to:

“The Land of Israel is not something external from the soul of the Jewish people; it is no mere national possession, serving as a means of unifying our people and buttressing its material or even its spiritual survival.

Eretz Yisrael is part of the very essence of our nationhood; it is bound organically to its very life and inner being. Human reason, even at its height, cannot begin to understand the unique holiness of Eretz Yisrael. (Rav Abraham Isaac HaCohen Kook, Excerpt from “The Lights of the Land of Israel,” Chapter 1, 1920, my emphasis)

My definition of Zionism also encompasses what Hanna Senesh wrote in her diary in October 1938. “I became a Zionist. There is a lot behind this word. For me, it means in short: I feel consciously, strongly that I am a Jew, I am proud of this”.

It feels to me that any Jew calling themselves religious in any way should see the truth in R.Kooks’ or Hanna Senesh’s words. And yet, somehow there are Jews today who in the name of kindness, tolerance and tikkun olam – repairing the world – seem to not be able to tolerate that Jewish pride, let alone the Zionist pride, which today embodies total support of the Jewish state in its struggle for survival.

Recently, I have seen some of the younger Jewish, affiliated, and halacha (Jewish Law) committed acquaintances of mine at a demonstration that is decidedly anti-Zionist, and I am left to wonder how to use the pillars we spoke about in conversation with them. Should I have the conversation to begin with? Considering that my views are known to them, what would I accomplish? I try to go back to the history of the subject. Zionism is behind the scenes in the very first book of the Torah – Lech lecha – go for yourself – is the first parshah – Torah portion of the week – that talks about the area that will be called “Land of Israel” just in a few hundred years. The war that this land is fighting now can definitely be put under the title of milchemet mitzvah – Mandatory War as Rambam explains it:

“A priori, the king does not go to fight other than a War of Mitzvot (Mandatory War). What is the War of Mitzvot? This is the war against the Seven Nations or the war against Amalek or any war to assuage Israel of a persecutor.” (my emphasis) (Mishne Torah, Kings and Wars 5:1)

Additionally, he says (ibid. 9:14)
It was for this reason all residents of the City of Shechem deserved to be executed. For Shechem kidnapped, and they saw and knew and failed to judge him.”

Certainly, the current perpetrators of this war, not only “failed to judge” their leaders, but took an active part in atrocities committed by the active members of Hamas. How do I approach this conversation with Jews whose opinions differ from mine?

Adhering to the Machloket Matters framework, I am hoping to be able to listen to their views first, holding my own inside. After that, I am going to try to propose a historical overview, and use the examples of two men—one who brought shame and war on his nation, and the other, who brought bad peace, but peace that’s holding on nonetheless — Chamberlain and Begin.

I am hopeful that this way we may at least begin to talk to each other about today’s issues. Maybe we will find a middle ground. Here’s hoping! 

About the Author
Born in the Soviet Union, Yehudit (Yuliya) Mazur-Shlomi started her Jewish learning in the Great Moscow Synagogue in the early 1990s. She immigrated to the US in the summer of 1997 and has been involved in the New York Russian-speaking Jewish community since her arrival. After working for the JCC Association’s Mandel Center for Excellence in Leadership & Management, she transitioned to a career in Jewish education. Yehudit has a passion for Torah study and the fusion of traditional and modern Jewish learning. Today, she teaches Torah, Hebrew, and Jewish women’s history to those in her global Jewish community. For four years, she served as a co-author of the Global Limmud Chavruta book. Yehudit has an MA in English from Russia, MJCS from Gratz College, and MA in Jewish Studies from Touro Graduate School for Jewish Studies. In her free time, she is a kosher cooking enthusiast blogging about kosher food at https:/noshingacrossthenation.wordpress.com/. She is a loving mother, a grandmother, a wife, and a daughter.
Related Topics
Related Posts