Michael Laitman, On The Times of Israel: “The Meaning of Being Jewish”

I received an email from a man who converted to Judaism in a Reform synagogue in Arizona, U.S. To his dismay, he discovered that his conversion was not recognized by Conservative and Orthodox denominations. As a result, he started looking into the meaning of being Jewish and asked me what the wisdom of Kabbalah and The Book of Zohar say about it.

To begin with, the wisdom of Kabbalah does not relate to a person’s body or to one’s material actions whatsoever. It speaks of and relates only to the desires in one’s heart, and how to help us unite with each other and with the power of unity, the Creator. As a result, the wisdom of Kabbalah does not relate to one’s formal religion, but only to one’s spiritual state. In other words, a person can be Jewish and a member of the Israeli nation at one moment, and a gentile (non-Jew) the next. At the same time, one can be born into a different religion altogether, yet be regarded as a member of the people of Israel in the spiritual sense. I hope my explanation below will clarify what I mean by these statements, which I know will surprise many people.

The Hebrew word for “Jewish” is Yehudi, from the word yechudi [unique or united]. Unity is the heart and soul of Judaism, and particularly unity above differences and divisions. King Solomon said (Proverbs 10:12), “Hate stirs up strife, and love will cover all crimes.” The Book of Zohar (portion Aharei Mot) describes the relation between uniting precisely above hatred, and what it means for the whole world: “‘How good and how pleasant it is for brothers to also dwell together.’ These are the friends, ‎as they sit together inseparably. At first, they seem like people at war, wishing to kill one another. Then ‎they return to being in brotherly love.‎ …And you, the friends who are here, as you were in fondness and love before, you will not part henceforth … and by your merit there will be peace ‎in the world.”

The ancestors of the people of Israel united so deeply that they became as one, or as the great commentator RASHI described it, “as one man with one heart.” Only once they achieved that profound unity, they were proclaimed a nation, having united with the power of bestowal that we refer to as the Creator, and with each other. Once they achieved that unity, they were commanded to lead the world to unity, as Prophet Isaiah (42:6-7) described it: “I will appoint you as … a light to the nations, to open blind eyes, ‎to bring out prisoners from the dungeon, and those who dwell in darkness from the prison.”‎

Indeed, if we examine the ancestry of the founders of the Israeli nation, we will find that the greatest among them had non-Jewish roots. They achieved greatness because they united the people, not because of some ancestral privilege. Abraham, the founder of our nation, was not born Jewish; the nation did not exist before his time. Moses’ wife, Zipporah, led the women of the people of Israel along with Moses’ sister, Miriam, after they came out of Egypt and crossed the Red Sea. Rabbi Akiva, the greatest sage after Moses, whose disciples wrote The Book of Zohar and the Mishnah (the basis of Judaism), was born to parents who were not born Jewish. Another one of Rabbi Akiva’s greatest disciples, Rabbi Meir, who is the third most frequently mentioned sage in the Mishnah, and whose wife Bruriah is cited in the Gemara, descended from the Roman Emperor Nero. And last in this list, but certainly not the least, Ruth the Moabite, the heroine of the Biblical story, was the great-grandmother of Israel’s greatest king, King David, and whose dynasty were the kings of the people of Israel for centuries, during Israel’s greatest times.

We therefore see why the wisdom of Kabbalah pays no attention to one’s physical ancestry. If a person believes that unity of all people is the ultimate value, that everything else is secondary to it, and strives to unite all the people “as one man with one heart,” in the spiritual sense, that person is regarded as a member of the people of Israel.

From the spiritual perspective, as the wisdom of Kabbalah sees it, being Jewish has nothing to do with one’s color or creed. The only “test” is whether one strives for unity or for self-centeredness. As long as one chooses unity, one is Israel. If you ever watched one of my lessons, you will see that I have students from all over the world and from every ethnicity and background. The one thing that unites all of us is our aspiration to unite above all differences. This is the spiritual people of Israel.
[305608]

Filed under: Israel, New Publications - No Comments →

Michael Laitman, On The Times of Israel: “The Left Has Left”

If you look at the leaders who founded the State of Israel, you will find that most of them were socialists, Zionists who strove to implement the socialist ideology of the Left in the fledgling Jewish state. David Ben-Gurion, Chaim Weizmann, Berl Katznelson and other prominent leaders and thinkers were all socialists. Moreover, the majority of the olim (immigrants to Israel) who came before the official founding of the State of Israel in 1945 were socialists or even communists. Accordingly, socialism was the predominant ideology in Israel’s early years.

The general election that took place November 1 demonstrated how far Israel has moved from those early years. In this election, the Labor Party won only four out of 120 seats in the Israeli Parliament, the Knesset. Its sister party, Meretz, which is considered slightly more Left than the Labor Party, failed to cross the electoral threshold and was erased from the political map. The two parties that purport to represent the center Left, Yesh Atid and the National Unity Party, do not advance socialism or any of the values of the classic Left, leaving socialism without any prominent advocates. The Left, it seems, has left.

Indeed, there is no Left in Israel. No one is fighting for the rights or the well-being of blue-collar workers, the proletariat; no one is fighting for free education, for free and decent health-care, or equitable housing; and no one is fighting even for food security for the disadvantaged. Israel has become a capitalist state, and those who claim to speak for the Left and for the workers are even more capitalist than those who portray themselves openly as capitalists. All that is left of the Left is empty slogans that no one believes. This is why so few voted for parties that profess to represent it.

The Left deserves credit for its significant, even essential role in the establishment of the State of Israel. Although the countrywide institutions that the Labor Party founded—the trade union, healthcare services, consumer cooperative, housing construction company, civil engineering company—were monopolies that controlled everything that happened here, they truly built the Jewish state. However, they also secured the political dominance of the Labor Party for decades. I remember that Shimon Peres once said that as long as the Labor Party has Kupat Holim (the healthcare company), they will remain in power.

The problem was that in the end, the ideology became a tool for what the Labor really wanted: power and control. As it happens in every country where the Left is in power, in Israel, too, the ideology fell prey to power-hunger. Human nature is stronger than any ideology, and in the absence of a balancing power, an idea that aims to improve people’s lives becomes a tool for tyranny. The Left’s arrogance and illusion of invincibility eventually caused its decay and ultimate demise.

At the same time, the disappearance of the Left caused the Right to disappear, as well. In the absence of a counter-ideology, there was no need to maintain and hone the ideology of the Right, and it, too, became amorphous and dissolved. What remains of the two worldviews is only tactical approaches to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

I think there will be no revival to these ideologies, at least not in Israel. The decline will continue until we realize that we should not divide society at all because society is indivisible, and any attempt to do it only causes hatred.

Eventually, the Israeli people will realize that only one ideology can dominate the people of Israel: unity above all differences. That was the idea that prompted our ancestors to establish our nationhood, and this is our root, the core of our nation. When we return to it, we will find unity, peace, and recognition from the world.

Israel should not be divided into parties. Anything that contains the word “part” is inherently wrong for the people of Israel. The dominant word for us must be “unity,” and any effort to promote unity and nationwide solidarity will improve our situation and receive the world’s support. This should be our one and only focus.
[305522]

Filed under: New Publications - No Comments →

My new article on Linkedin “The UN May Declare, But Only We Determine”

On November 11, the United Nations’ Special Political and Decolonization Committee (Fourth Committee) approved six draft resolutions, one of which will “request an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice on Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory.”

What I think we should really do about this decision is nothing at all. We should ignore it as though it never happened, or we did not hear about it.

According to the resolution, the Assembly is to “demand that Israel cease all measures that violate the human rights of the Palestinian people,” as well as “have the Assembly decide to request the International Court of Justice to render urgently an advisory opinion on the legal consequences arising from the ongoing violation by Israel of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, from its prolonged occupation, settlement and annexation of the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967.”

The UN’s press release also noted that “Israel’s representative … said that calling for the Court’s involvement would decimate any chances of reconciliation between Israel and the Palestinians.” The representative also said that “such resolutions demonize Israel and exempt the Palestinians of any responsibility for their current situation.”

I can understand why the Israeli delegate would urge the delegates of the member states not to approve the resolution although he knew it was a hopeless effort. He is only doing his job.

However, what I think we should really do about this decision is nothing at all. We should ignore it as though it never happened, or we did not hear about it.

The United Nations has been against the State of Israel since day one. This resolution, which purports to decry Israel’s violations of human rights in the areas occupied during the 1967 war, is nothing but a pretext to exterminate the Jewish state one step at a time. This is why in 1955, long before the 1967 war, when Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion was told that the UN would oppose a suggested military campaign in Gaza, he replied, Um shmum (lit. UN [is] nothing).

If, on the other hand, Israel is to respond after all, it must unequivocally state the facts:

1. The one book that all three Abrahamic faiths recognize, the Bible, writes that the Land of Israel is the land of the people of Israel.

2. Every historic evidence ever found supports that the land of Israel was the historic land of our fathers, including, of course, the Temple Mount.

3. There is not one text that mentions a Palestinian people in this land (Philistines are not Palestinians and certainly have no connection to Jerusalem or Judea and Samaria).

4. The name Palestine appeared very late in history: It was given to Judea in the 2nd century C.E. by the Romans after they crushed the Jewish Revolt of Bar Kokhba. By doing so, they attempted to obliterate all traces of Jewish presence in the land, so the Jews would not try to return to it. However, according to Prof. of History Louis Feldman, Rabbi Akiva testified in the second century that Diaspora Jews still referred to the land as Eretz Israel [Land of Israel].

5. If any territorial demands are to be made, then according to what is written in the Bible and what has been found by archeologists, Israel should stretch from the Nile in Egypt to the Euphrates in Iraq.

I have no qualms about whether the world will agree to such demands, but I do think we should stop apologizing. Instead, we should insist on our rights, and—even more importantly—do what we came here to do: unite among ourselves and become a model nation, a nation of solidarity, mutual responsibility, and love of others as ourselves, precisely the legacy of our people.

Our presence in this country does not depend on this or that UN resolution, on the terror of Arabs, or on our sophisticated weapons. Our presence here depends on doing what I just stated—on our internal unity. Through our connection, we will determine not only our fate, but the fate of the world.

This is not my idea, but what our sages have been writing since the inception of our nation. It is something that every Jew feels, even if subconsciously, and that every antisemite feels, as well, even if they do not admit it. This is exactly why the Jewish people conceived the concept of Tikkun Olam (correction of the world) and made it the highest moral goal of a Jewish person. In fact, some Jews define the level of Jewishness by the commitment to Tikkun Olam, although disputes over the meaning of the term are often so deep that they prolong the correction of the world because they hinder Jewish unity.

Antisemites, too, feel that the Jews must correct the world. They may not articulate it to themselves in this manner, though some, like Henry Ford, actually did, but the fact that antisemites blame Jews for the world’s misfortunes implies that they believe that Jews are responsible for what is happening in the world—for better or worse.

To conclude, I do not think that Israel should altogether ignore the latest display of UN antisemitism; I think we should use it as a reminder of the urgency to unite. We need not respond to the actual resolution, but simply do what we must do: unite among ourselves and thereby put an end to our internal problems, to our troubles with our neighbors, and to all hatred around the world, since the world will follow the model nation, as Ford, Shulgin, and other antisemites had hoped to see from the Jewish people.

*For more on how Israel should relate to UN anti-Israel bias, read my ‎latest publication, New Antisemitism: Mutation of a Long-lived Hatred.‎
[305403]

Filed under: Israel, New Publications - No Comments →

My new article on Linkedin “Israel – A World Leader in the Wrong Expertise”

Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) have become essential components in the battlefield. In Ukraine, both sides use them extensively to attack and for surveillance, and the US, Turkey, Israel, and other countries have been using them for military assignments. Terror groups, such as Hezbollah and Hamas also use them, as do the Houthis in Yemen in their conflict with Saudi Arabia.

Unlike conventional military aircraft, which are very expensive to develop and build, UAVs are relatively cheap and rely on advanced technology rather than superior aerobatics to accomplish their missions. This allows countries with limited resources but advanced technology, such as Israel, to become world leaders.

Not only in the air, but also on the ground, unmanned military vehicles are “gaining ground.” Remotely controlled armed vehicles regularly patrol borders, and if they need to engage, they can open fire with high precision machine guns. At sea, unmanned patrol boats guard maritime borders and can detect, track, and fire on enemy vessels.

The problem is that while autonomous war machines give countries advantages they would not be able to achieve otherwise, they also make killing easier and risk-free for the attacker. They may give their owner a temporary edge over less advanced adversaries, but in the long run, they do not bring us closer to peace, but rather to a world war.

The evolving human intellect is captive in the hands of human wickedness. Instead of using it to improve our lives, we use it to destroy the lives of others.

If we want to change course, Israel must become a world leader in something entirely different: education. And more specifically—education for connection.

If we truly want to avoid war and promote peace, our focus should shift from protecting ourselves or destroying our enemies, into nurturing and enhancing internal unity and cohesion. With this tactic, we will not need to protect ourselves from enemies or destroy them in self-defense since we will have no enemies. We will become a beacon of hope for the world rather than a constant point of contention, which is our current international status.

Furthermore, our internal unity will reflect on the entire world, and conflicts that seem unrelated to us will subside as if on their own. The unity we will project to the world will install a mindset of peace on all of humanity and nations will conclude that they gain more by making peace and cooperating rather than by making war and obliterating.

I wish humanity would understand Israel’s role and pressured us to unite, so we could become a model nation, as our calling mandates. Yet, even if the world does not understand it, it is still our duty to unite and become a role model for the world. This is our only road to lasting peace and a prosperous future.

*For more on this topic read my book The Jewish Choice: Unity or Anti-Semitism, and my ‎latest publication: New Antisemitism: Mutation of a Long-lived Hatred.‎
[305351]

Filed under: Israel, New Publications - No Comments →

My new article on Linkedin “The Meaning of the Hebrew Alphabet and the Prisoner from Siberia Who Suddenly Knew Hebrew”

Many years ago, not long after I had begun to study the wisdom of Kabbalah with my teacher, RABASH (Rabbi Baruch Shalom Ashlag), I received a letter from a man who was imprisoned in a penitentiary facility in Siberia. Back then, in the Soviet Union, those prisons were known as ruthless places where many did not survive. I do not know how the letter came to me, but its author wrote in eloquent, poetic Hebrew about his ordeals at the prison. He described hunger, cold, and inhumane conditions. However, what struck me most was that the man had no Jewish upbringing and had never been exposed to Hebrew; the language simply “landed on him.”

I asked RABASH how it was possible for someone who was not Jewish and never learned Hebrew to suddenly know the language so intimately. RABASH explained that extreme suffering can sometimes do that. When the suffering becomes too great and too long to bear, sometimes the ego becomes so broken that it seems to disappear completely. At that point, a person begins to connect with the whole of reality.

The Hebrew alphabet, explains The Book of Zohar in the essay about letters, consists of dots and lines that connect with one another. Each combination of dots and lines creates a different letter, which together form words, sentences, and the entire language. These dots and lines that form the letters represent interactions between the giving force and the receiving force of reality. Together, these forces form all of reality, the part we perceive and the part we still do not perceive.

When one’s ego is removed, the veil that hides from us the part created by the giving force is lifted, and we begin to see the full picture of reality. At that time, the way to express it through dots and lines may sometimes appear. This is why the prisoner from Siberia suddenly knew Hebrew. It did not actually “land on him”; it became revealed because the suffering had vanquished his ego and thereby removed the veil that hid it.

After explaining this, RABASH added that we do not need to suffer in order to reveal the hidden part of reality. The wisdom of Kabbalah reveals that part without any suffering, but simply by learning with a group of people who also wish to reveal the hidden part. As they study and work on their connections, they begin to grasp the meaning of the Hebrew letters. This is part of what Kabbalah defines as “spiritual attainment.”

Years later, the prisoner got out and came to live in Israel. His suffering had ended, but so did his enlightenment. In the absence of torment, his ego had reawakened and veiled once more the hidden part of reality.

Today, we can all reveal the full picture of reality. All we need is to study Kabbalah with like-minded people. Today we can study in almost any language we choose, and the material is available online. We do not need to suffer in order to reveal the secrets of reality or the meaning of the Hebrew alphabet; all we need is to want it.
[305354]

Filed under: Hebrew, New Publications - No Comments →

Michael Laitman, On The Times of Israel: “Bad Jews – A History of American Jewish Infighting”

Emily Tamkin, a Jewish writer from the UK who writes about American Jewry, has recently published a book titled Bad Jews: A History of American Jewish Politics and Identities. The book’s publisher, Hurst, describes it as “A lively, thoughtful history of America’s Jews, exploring their complex relationships with national culture, identity, and politics—and each other.”

The book caused a bit of a stir among Jewish publications. JTA, for example, wrote that Tamkin “takes a different tack, tracing the history of American Jewry through the ways Jews on one side of social upheaval seek to discredit the very Jewishness of those on the other side.” The book itself focuses on what is happening in America, since “American Jewish history,” writes Tamkin, “is full of discussions and debates and hand-wringing over who is Jewish, and how to be Jewish, and what it means to be Jewish.”

When a student of mine told me about the book, he asked for my opinion on these questions, stating that they “haunt” virtually every Jewish person. He also noted that when Tamkin asked people, “What comes to mind when you hear ‘Bad Jew’?” the most common answer she got was “When I think of a ‘Bad Jew,’ I think of myself.” Since, as Tamkin writes, “The issue of what it means, or doesn’t, to be a Good Jew or a Bad Jew is particularly fraught at this moment in US history,” the student asked for my take on the topic.

So, first, we need to realize where the word Yehudi (Jewish) comes from. There is the known answer, that Yehudi comes from Yohuda (Judah), the name of the tribe that lived in the land of Israel during the Second Temple. However, there is another meaning to the word: Yehudi also comes from the word Yechudi, meaning united. This makes perfect sense if you remember that we were pronounced a nation only after we committed to love each other “as one man with one heart” at the foot of Mt. Sinai, yet, for the most part, this explanation did not receive the notoriety it deserves.

If you look at being Jewish through the spectacle of Jewish unity, as I do, then being a good Jew means first and foremost that you want to unite with all the Jews, that this is what really matters to you, your prime value. If Jewishness is about unity, then a Jew is a person who knows, feels, understands, and even spreads the idea that the most important thing is to be connected in ties of love with all the Jews, regardless of denomination, customs, political views, or any other issue that currently divides and splinters the Jewish people.

The author wrote that one of the answers she got to the question about the meaning of being a bad Jew was “someone whose conception of Judaism doesn’t have applications to the wider world.” I understand where this answer comes from. It is with good reason Jews gave the correction of the world such a pivotal place in their identity. We even gave that mission its own Hebrew term, Tikkun Olam (Hebrew for “Correction of the World”).

However, we must know what it means to correct the world, to be responsible for it, or even to care about the world. Tikkun Olam are not simply words; they imply a very specific task, and until we accomplish it, we will not be “good Jews.”

At the “inauguration” of our people, we were commanded to unite “as one man with one heart,” as RASHI interprets. Immediately after, we were declared a nation and were tasked with being “a light to the nations.”

In other words, our unity and our obligation to the world are indivisible. We cannot be a light to the nations if we are not united. At the same time, we cannot unite unless we do it in order to be a light to the nations.

When our ancestors united for the first time, under the guidance of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, they were not a biologically related group. They were an eclectic crowd that was taken by the idea that all the people should unite, and we should not succumb to our ego. This is why Abraham advocated kindness and mercy, to teach people how to rise above their self-absorption and care for one another.

Abraham was a maverick, a pioneer, a trailblazer, but thanks to him, these noble ideas are now universal. As a nation that formed out of disparate tribes and clans, it was our duty to be the living proof of Abraham’s paradigm. This is why we became a nation only after we united, and not a moment prior.

Since our inception, we have known that unity is our “secret weapon.” However, we never understood why, what was the secret of the strength in our unity. The secret is not that unity itself makes us undefeatable, but that our unity dissolves the world’s hatred toward us and turns it into respect and awe. It gives the world the example of unity that it needs so that all of humanity can unite, as well.

Not only we received a message when we were at the foot of Mt. Sinai. At that moment, the nations of the world received the knowledge that we received the calling. Since then, they have been waiting for us to live up to it. This is why they support us when we are united, and scold us when we are divided.

Being a good Jew or a bad Jew, therefore, is not a judgment we pass on each other or on ourselves. It is determined by our commitment to the world, which we fulfill through our efforts to unite among ourselves and serve as an example that if we—the most divided nation, whose members often abhor one another—can unite, then the whole world can, as well.
[305220]

Filed under: New Publications - No Comments →

Medium published my new article “Space Tourism and the Overview Effect”

The overview effect is a cognitive shift reported by some astronauts while viewing the Earth from space. Researchers have described the effect as “a state of awe with self-transcendent qualities, precipitated by a particularly striking visual stimulus.” The most prominent common aspects of personally experiencing the Earth from space are appreciation and perception of beauty, unexpected and even overwhelming emotion, and a heightened sense of connection to other people and the Earth as a whole.

Michael Collins, a crew member on the Apollo 11 spacecraft (1969), said that “the thing that really surprised me was that it [Earth] projected an air of fragility. And why, I don’t know. I don’t know to this day. I had a feeling it’s tiny, it’s shiny, it’s beautiful, it’s home, and it’s fragile.” Edgar Mitchell, who was aboard the Apollo 14 (1971), recalled, “You develop an instant global consciousness, a people orientation, an intense dissatisfaction with the state of the world, and a compulsion to do something about it. From out there on the moon, international politics look so petty. You want to grab a politician by the scruff of the neck and drag him a quarter of a million miles out and say, ‘Look at that, you son of a …’”

A student of mine asked me about the overview effect and suggested that space tourism might make people feel more connected to the Earth and to each other.

I can see why a trip to outer space and a view of the world from there would make one aware of the fragility of our (not so big) blue marble, and how we are all dependent on each other. From out there, it is easy to see that we are all breathing the same air, feeding on the same soil, and drinking the same water.

Still, I do not believe space travel would change much about the way we treat our planet because the people at the helm, those who call the shots, could not care less. In April, António Guterres, the United Nations Secretary General, stated his opinion about such people in the most undiplomatic terms: “Some governments and business leaders are saying one thing but doing another. Simply put, they are lying.”

When you read this, you feel like taking politicians out to space, making them look down on Earth, as Edgar Mitchell suggested, and leaving them there to float until they change. But seriously, I do not think they will change, or even that they can.

Politicians care about one thing only: control. They cannot see or feel anything else. As long as they are alive, they want to be on top, and nothing else matters to them.

What can we do about it? I am not really sure. However, if enough people change their perception of life and realize that solidarity and mutual concern are more important than pride and power, perhaps politicians will change their views, as well. I do not think that they will change from within, but they just might realize that in order to stay at the helm, they must endorse such values as concern for others and compassion rather than vanity and self-absorption. In conclusion, we need a thorough educational process so we become not only human beings, but humane beings.
[305121]

Filed under: New Publications - No Comments →

Michael Laitman, On The Times of Israel: “Quitting Israel”

The results of the Israeli election had an interesting side effect: dissatisfied Israelis, presumably from the left side of the political map, have begun to explore the possibility of “quitting” Israel. They have set up Facebook groups with titles like “Leaving the Country Together,” where they debate where to go.

Apparently, there is more than just talk on the subject. This morning, the Population and Immigration Authority of Israel published an update (in Hebrew) to its announcement that “due to the high demand for passport renewals, Israeli citizens holding a foreign passport will be allowed to leave the country with their foreign passport.”

On the one hand, I think it is good that people are not indifferent. On the other hand, I do not think that a phenomenon of leaving one’s homeland, “quitting” it because of dissatisfaction with the choice of the majority of the people in a free and democratic election, exists anywhere outside of Israel. But Israel is indeed a free country; if they want to quit being here, I have no objection whatsoever.

Perhaps it is a Jewish trait, a characteristic obstinacy that makes people feel that if things do not go their way, they will move away. At the same time, this same phenomenon does not exist when the opposite happens, when the Left wins the election.

Another interesting phenomenon, which may not be exclusive to Israelis, is harsh criticism of one’s homeland while living there, and the lack thereof when living abroad. It is patently clear when seeing how Israelis criticize the government, police, justice system, education system, and basically every institution one can think of when living in Israel, while praising those very institutions when that same Israeli person has moved abroad.

I can understand why people on the Left leave when things do not go their way. Generally speaking, the Right strives to unite the Israeli society, while the Left strives to control it. When left leaning people are not in control, it becomes very difficult for them to stay here. If they give up all hope of regaining control, they quit. This is when they leave.

From the perspective of the world, I think it is better this way because if Jews do not want to unite, it is better for them and better for the world that they are not together and not in Israel. The hatred between Left and Right in Israel is so profound that it seems impossible to bridge it.

However, the hatred between us is exactly what we should overcome. If we use it correctly, rise above it and unite, we will become a model nation, a symbol of unity that the world will embrace. Still, who among us understands it? Very, very few, regrettably.

Before we understand that hate is given not for itself, but as a basis for building stronger unity above it, we will not be able to bridge the gaps between us. As we can already see, we will not even be able to share the same country.

Nevertheless, neither the State of Israel nor Jews overseas will be able to solve their problems before we realize that we must transcend our hatred. There cannot be love without hate because hate is the motive for nurturing love. This is why King Solomon said, “Hate stirs up strife, and love will cover all crimes” (Prov. 10:12). This is the formula for peace, the formula for unity, and the only principle that should guide our actions.
[305217]

Filed under: Israel Today, New Publications - No Comments →

Michael Laitman, On The Times of Israel: “American Jewry Should Stay Out of Israel’s Internal Affairs”

The results of the general election in Israel are very difficult to swallow for many American Jews. Not only did they prefer Yair Lapid to Benjamin Netanyahu as prime minister, they loathe Netanyahu’s likely coalition partners. The New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman was explicit about it, writing, “The Israel we know is gone,” and “Lord save us if this [Right leaning government] is a harbinger of what’s coming our way [to America].” He also stated that every Jewish student who supports Israel and every Zionist American Jew will have to rethink their support, and every Israel supporting politician will dread being interviewed about Israel.

Friedman is not alone. In the weeks and months leading up to the election, Jewish American organizations poured millions of dollars into the Arab society in Israel to encourage them to vote in order to weaken Israel’s Right, since they vote for Arab and anti-Zionist or Islamist parties. Sami Abu Shehadeh, leader of the Israeli Arab anti-Zionist Islamist party Balad, asked in dismay during an interview [in Hebrew] on Israel’s Channel 13: “Why would an American Jew, who doesn’t understand us [Arabs], who doesn’t know where we live, pour millions of dollars into building all kinds of mechanisms to raise the voting percentage—busses, phone calls, people going door to door, etc.”

The answer to Abu Shehadeh’s question is clear and simple: They did this to prevent the State of Israel from democratically electing a government according to the will of the majority of the people. The truth is that the majority of American Jews think only about making their lives in America calmer and more convenient. For them, Israel is a pain in the neck. They want an Israeli government that aligns itself with American interests, at the expense of its own. This is how the majority of American Jews feel about Israel, and anyone who says otherwise is, well, a politician.

I want to be clear about this: American Jews have no right to interfere with internal affairs in Israel, certainly not in the results of the election. They do not live in Israel; they are not responsible for what is happening here, and they do not have Israel’s best interest in mind, only their own.

There is an oft-cited argument that because American Jews donate to Israel, they deserve to have a say in Israel’s affairs. If it were up to me, I would ban all money transfers from America to Israel, no donations, and no support. We will do just fine without it. Only those who live here should have a say in who runs the country.

Besides, Israel’s position in the world and the way that non-Jewish Americans relate to Israel and to Jews in America has nothing to do with the identity of Israel’s prime minister. Israel’s status is determined by the level of Israel’s internal cohesion. The more united Israeli society is, the more it garners the world’s support.

Through their donations, American Jews increase division in the Israeli society, leading to more hatred of Israel and antisemitism in their own country and around the world. By trying to work only for its own interest, American Jewry is producing the very result it is trying to avoid: intensification of antisemitism. As is always the case with Jews, we have no enemies other than our own selfishness.
[305124]

Filed under: Anti-Semitism, Israel Today, New Publications - No Comments →

Michael Laitman, On The Times of Israel: “When You Fail a Grade, You Must Retake It”

Recent studies have shown that there is a “democratic recession,” as one paper called it. Another study moaned, “To the surprise of many in the West, the fall of the USSR in 1991 did not lead to the adoption of liberal democratic government around the world … In fact, authoritarianism has made a comeback, and liberal democracy has been on the retreat for at least the last 15 years.” Speaking of 15 years, Chinese president Xi Jinping has secured a third five-year term, shunning his party’s tradition to step down after two terms. Additionally, President Jinping has “promoted allies who support his vision of tighter control over society.” Since we did not learn how to use freedom, we will have to retake the class, and perhaps the entire school year.

Every nation has its own character, and not all nations can handle liberal democracy. If you take China, for example, I do not believe that democracy is the right regime for it. With over 1.4 billion people, liberal democracy does not seem like a working arrangement for China.

Also, the mentality of the people leans toward being rank-and-file workers. This by no means implies that Chinese should be mistreated or exploited in any way, absolutely not, but only that they feel more comfortable than others under restrictive conditions. This is why the Chinese government has succeeded in imposing longer and tighter Covid lockdowns when others did not.

The problem, therefore, is not the retreat of democracy, but the resurgence of despotism. Several major powers are currently run by tyrants, and those that are considered democratic are less so today than they were a decade or two ago. It appears that humanity has become disillusioned with democracy, or that humanity is failing to hang on to it.

A nation whose regime allows freedom should use it for one and only purpose. When it fails to do so, freedom is taken away and pressure increases in order to impose that same purpose. The purpose of human society is not for every person to do whatever he or she wants. That would not be a society but anarchy. The purpose of humanity is to unite until we all care for one another more than we care for ourselves, until we are all “as one man with one heart.”

Sadly, nothing seems more repulsive to the ego than to care for strangers more than for myself. Nevertheless, the world is doggedly moving toward more connection and more mutual dependence. Because we resent connecting with others, the increasing, yet undesirable connectedness feels like a punishment, and subsequently, conflicts ensue.

The trend of shattering relations because closeness feels claustrophobic affects every aspect of our lives. It is dissolving the family unit, the resilience of our communities, the tolerance of our leaders, and the relationships among countries.

Where will this end? This depends on our decision. Not on the decision of this or that person, but on the will of humanity. We can choose to embrace connectedness and enjoy its benefits, or try to reject it, fail, and find ourselves embroiled in World War III. There is no third way.

By learning that we are headed toward increased connectedness and mutual dependence because this is the unalterable direction of evolution, we will start looking for the benefits in this compulsory situation. When we do so, we will find that there are countless pros to it, and literally no cons. We will find that our livelihood is secured, and our personal expression encouraged when it contributes to the common good. We will not need policing or the military, and there will be no depression because people will care for one another. As a result, people’s health and longevity will increase, and they will feel happy and content.

This description may seem utopic, but every journey begins with the first step, and we have yet to take it. When we begin, we will discover that the road to our new state of being is much more pleasant than the road we are on today, which leads to guaranteed dystopia.
[305036]

Filed under: New Publications - No Comments →