A couple of weeks back, the Internet was ablaze with images of Aharon Barak, Israel’s mythological former Supreme Court President, with Tefillin upon his arm and head. The moment, breathlessly described by Areh Erlich as a “beautiful, pure Jewish moment,”[1] came at the close of an interview with Barak for Mishpacha Magazine – one of many he gave in a blitz of media appearances opposing proposed reform to Israel’s judicial system. Erlich summed up the rare occasion as “the most moving moment in my professional career.”
While some saw it as a gimmick on the part of Erlich and, indeed, of Barak himself, who has been doing everything within his powers to broadcast his message, some, like Erlich, saw it as an authentic Jewish moment
Naturally, the picture and attendant video footage went viral. It was a demonstration, according to ShluchimSermons[2] (a Chabad site that provides sermons for Shluchim around the word), that “an Israeli cannot be an atheist” – as the Rebbe had stated. While some saw it as a gimmick on the part of Erlich and, indeed, of Barak himself, who has been doing everything within his powers to broadcast his message, some, like Erlich, saw it as an authentic Jewish moment.
Personally, the situation made me feel very uncomfortable. In my opinion, the collective excitement around Barak donning Tefillin expresses a deep inferiority complex among observant Jews. This weakness causes a respected and seasoned editor like Mishpacha’s Erlich to fall prey to crude emotional manipulation. We are thus led to believe that Aharon Barak is a lovable old Jew who didn’t merit growing up with a strong Jewish education and, deep down, wishes to return. Today, evil people – his adversaries – are threatening the enterprise to which he dedicated his life. He deserves to be pitied, and those attacking him should be condemned.
Manipulation of the Personal Narrative
The standard of truth distortion these days is to take all that is to use the personal and private as a shallow representation of the public. There are no general rules; there are only details, private and intimate. Like every good movie tells, we live off personal stories, points of view, and narratives. This approach eliminates the ability to defend principled positions. All things are analyzed based on details that are forever subject to change. Whenever we try to assert a general claim, someone will immediately respond with a tear-jerking story about exceptions who fall victim. Thus, the obvious conclusion is how wrong we are for applying rules. The suffering of the many, the plight of the general public, is never told. All things great and small become a battle of one personal story against another.
Those who delve into the realm of objective truth, sound principles, and a comprehensive understanding of a social issue are castigated as lacking compassion, empathy, tolerance, and moderation or even as dark, primitive, and potentially harmful people
However appealing to our emotions, this approach is highly destructive. When discussions take place exclusively on a personal level, they inevitably become emotional and irrational. Those who delve into the realm of objective truth, sound principles, and a comprehensive understanding of a social issue are castigated as lacking compassion, empathy, tolerance, and moderation or even as dark, primitive, and potentially harmful people. The major issue promoting this attitude today is, of course, the wholesale rejection of traditional sexual morality – a morality that inevitably prevents somebody from realizing his or her desire. Those who critique sexual activities of any type are reproached and reprimanded for their gross insensitivity, the sole exception, for the time being, being pedophilia.
But the puck doesn’t stop with sexual morality. Recently, fireworks on Israel’s Independence Day – Yom Haatzmaut – were canceled in cities across the country.[3] The official reason for this traditional form of entertainment, which even Charedi children would annually enjoy, was the potential harm to those suffering from PTSD. Advocates of canceling fireworks events did not need to make compelling arguments to justify their position. All they had to do was shoot an emotional video of a combat veteran telling his traumatic story. There was no need even to mention fireworks. A personal trauma story renders any attempts at weighing the benefits and drawbacks or exploring alternative options irrelevant. The debate was settled. Anyone who tried to make claims about the common good, the public interest, and that of children – fireworks certainly used to make the day special for many, including those (such as Charedi kids) who didn’t mark the day by any other means – was rudely silenced. How can one be so insensitive in the face of traumatized war veterans?
A personal trauma story renders any attempts at weighing the benefits and drawbacks or exploring alternative options irrelevant
Coming back to Prof. Barak, his act of wearing tefillin needs to be correctly framed: the observance of an important and basic mitzvah by a sworn secularist who fought throughout his life against Torah and its values and never expressed regret for it. Unfortunately, things were blown out of proportion, and the event became “the most moving moment” in Erlich’s professional career.
The mournful face of Barak donning Tefillin against a background picture of a bearded Jew wearing a grave demeanor did its job. If it weren’t for the passing of Rabbi Baadani zt”l, the viral picture would surely have made the magazine’s front cover. At beholding the laden picture, the merciful Jewish heart asks, “Why do we so strongly oppose him, this gentle elderly Jew, this tinok shenishba who has finally found an opportunity to return to his roots?” Our heart feels a sense of sympathy, our opposition dissolves, and an embrace of nostalgia sets in. We are brothers, after all.
When gangsters pose in court wearing a large kippah, we despise them. We understand that there’s no connection between their crime and the mitzvos they observe in private. But Aharon Barak? Well, he’s a highly respected intellectual and jurisprudential superstar admired by much of the enlightened world, and here he is showing a touch of affection mingled with nostalgia toward our strange culture. How exciting.
The Inferiority Complex of Charedi Apologetics
It often seems we suffer from an inferiority complex. Our need to receive approval and recognition from the “enlightened,” those on the “right side” of the political or academic arenas, causes us to lose our critical abilities. This feeling of inferiority – we’re less academic, less enlightened, less intellectual – makes us long for approval and “certification” by precisely those people who see everything we find dear as contemptible and everything that repels us as ideal.
We disguise this spiritual weakness with a defense mechanism of idealization and refer to it, somewhat sacrilegiously, in my opinion, as a “Kiddush Hashem.”
This vulnerability is particularly prevalent among individuals who interact with secular society, often those we consider “modern Charedim.” They feel deeply uneasy about being a part of a regressive and behind-the-times society and want to separate themselves from the Charedi typecast depicted in the secular media
Our desire for approval from secular society has two manifestations. One is an uncontrollable reflex of self-flagellation and an almost automatic identification with hostile criticism. This vulnerability is particularly prevalent among individuals who interact with secular society, often those we consider “modern Charedim.” They feel deeply uneasy about being a part of a regressive and behind-the-times society and want to separate themselves from the Charedi typecast depicted in the secular media. In this mold, we find Charedi individuals denouncing Israel’s newly-elected government, employing shallow slogans and selected quotations in an attempt to demonstrate that it runs against core Torah values. They post hateful articles and inflammatory content on social media and engage in self-blame even when confronted with media portrayals that border on anti-Semitism.
A second expression of the need for approval is the defense ad absurdum of every failure and moral lapse in the Torah world. Certain Charedi individuals, often those involved in politics or local leadership, take great pains to cultivate a victimized and downtrodden Charedi image. Any criticism of Charedi behavior is thus immediately deflected in the name of victimhood. Charedi-inspired government decisions, even those that have no ostensible connection with religion (such as lowering taxes on sugary soft drinks), are deemed holy and above criticism, and those who dare to critique them are met with deep indignation at the uncaring attitude towards poor, underprivileged, and oppressed Charedi communities with large families and no means. “Charedi society,” we read, “is forever careful to preserve life, taking care of the elderly and the weak, including the secular public which travels abroad every other day and doesn’t care for its parents – so who are you to criticize us?” The Charedi public becomes a martyr, a poor victim free of any fault.
“Charedi society,” we read, “is forever careful to preserve life, taking care of the elderly and the weak, including the secular public which travels abroad every other day and doesn’t care for its parents – so who are you to criticize us?”
Though these appear to be contrary reactions, they represent two sides of the same coin: the coin of craving recognition. Basically, we desire the acceptance of others and their permission to exist simply as we are. When one of the generation’s great enlightened luminaries is ready to throw a wretched bone in our direction, we melt with excitement.
Acting Like Mature Adults
Part of our social confusion derives from the gradual drift toward personal narratives. Our language used to be that of ideas, theology, and principles; today, it is the language of narrative, the story of the individual.
What we need, above all, is to stand tall and take real responsibility for ourselves. We need to stop playing the victim while also refraining from being arrogant. We need to grow up; we have to return to the inner strength that inspired us for over two thousand years. We need to be connected with ourselves and stop measuring ourselves in relation to others and their approval. This does not mean, as some seem to think, that we should be rude or condescending. On the contrary, pride in our path and confidence in the rightness of our way will allow us to be more open to criticism. We will be ready to hear accusations from others without necessarily identifying with them and without becoming overly defensive. We will not have to fear that accepting criticism implies a total loss of self-worth.
On the first verse of the Torah, Rashi writes that our right to conquer the land of seven nations draws from the creation of the world. The land belongs to Hashem; He can give it to us. Perhaps this wonderful Rashi can provide us with some guidance concerning the question of “by what right do you live here at all?” that we are asked so repeatedly and forcefully. It teaches how we need to return to the story of our roots – a story that provides us with pride and confidence, negating the need for coercion or submission. We don’t need to apologize for our existence, to be “constantly fear the rage of the oppressor” (Yeshayahu 51:13). We are servants of Hashem, Creator of the heavens and the earth.
Perhaps it is time to abandon the sentimental stories and disjointed narratives and return to the collective history, the history of the return to our land. It is our collective story – Aharon Barak’s no less than ours. Connecting to the tale of our creation and our destiny will allow us to draw on inner strength, repel negative condemnation, and welcome constructive criticism.
[1] See https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/365852.
[2] See, for example, https://shluchimsermons.org/5033.
[3] See https://www.i24news.tv/en/news/israel/culture/1649258098-israel-independence-day-event-will-not-have-fireworks-due-to-ptsd-concerns.
Unfortunately the American model of minority groups celebrating and exploiting their own victimhood is catching on all over. Chareidim will be taking a giant step if they can unite to formulate and release their own detailed political/economic vision for Israel that meets the needs of the whole nation. They might then be trusted to govern in the general interest.
This is a good article, however the quotation from Rashi is not correct, Hashem gives the land to whoever is ‘yashar be Einav” ,. not to “us”…This is a condition, if we don’t merit we don’t have the Land…that is why we had Galut, and it can happen again. I agree with the comment of RAM
I completely disagree with the premise of the article. Aryeh Erlich was clear that in reporting that when he interviewed Aharon Barak, he and Barak disagreed strongly over the proposed judicial reform. Erlich reported there were “almost no points of agreement” between them. Framed in this light, Erlich’s decision to offer Barak the opportunity to put on tefillin and say “Shema Yisrael”–and Barak’s decision to accept–was not an ideological concession by either man. Instead, it was their mutual recognition that while they may disagree strongly on a matter of public policy, they are also brothers: two proud Jews whose neshamot were present at Sinai and pledged “na’aseh v’nishma.” This isn’t a left-wing talking point, it’s a basic Jewish belief. There is no conflict between advocating our values and loving our fellow Jews who do not share them. In fact, the two must go hand in hand.