Crossing boundaries
Matot/Masei
Numbers 30:2-32:42
Numbers 33:1-36:13
Contemporary Jews often discuss and debate the relative roles of the State of Israel and the Diaspora. Diaspora Jews often speak of the centrality of Israel, despite our continuing to reside outside the Land. Israeli Jews generally affirm, in varying degrees of intensity, the central role played by Israel in modern Jewish life.
This week's Torah portions remind us that the debate about living within the Land of Israel and outside of it is as old as our people's history. Ours is hardly the first generation to struggle with issues of identity and responsibility that cross geographic boundaries.
In the first of this week's portions, we find the Israelites poised on the edge of invading Canaan. At just this moment, three tribes – Reuben, Gad, and Menashe – step forward and ask Moses if they may occupy land east of the Jordan River and remain there. These tribes had many cattle, and "this place was a place for cattle." They ask: "Let this land be given to your servants as our possession, and do not bring us across the Jordan." (Numbers 32:5)
Moses' reaction is one of anger: "Shall your brothers go to war while you sit here? And why should you weaken the resolve of the Israelites from crossing over into the land which the Lord has given to them?" (32:6-7)
Only when the three tribes have reassured Moses that they will come and fight with the other Israelites during the invasion does he grant permission for them to settle in Transjordan. Thus the Torah presents the anomaly that the first permanent Israelite settlement is outside the Promised Land.
This story hardly suggests the model for Israel-Diaspora relations that might open up avenues for contemporary conversation. The three tribes, after all, pledge to show up in person to fight with the other Israelites when the time comes to do battle. As committed as Diaspora Jews are to modern Israel, few of us avail ourselves of the opportunity to fly to Israel during times of conflict and join in the fighting.
Still, like the three tribes of antiquity, we know that our destiny is linked to those Jews in the Land and that we share in the responsibility to ensure the safety and security of the Jews of Medinat Yisrael.
But beyond the issues of responsibility and support lies the debate about to what degree life within Israel is qualitatively better, and in fact indispensable, for Jewish survival. With the rise of modern Zionism in the 19th century, the modern debate about the indispensable nature of life in the Land of Israel began. Central to this debate was the split between "political Zionists" and "cultural Zionists." The repercussions of this debate continue to resonate in modern Jewish life.
Political Zionists believed in the "negation of the Diaspora" – that Jewish life outside of Israel was artificial, subject to subversion, and ultimately doomed to disappear. Cultural Zionists affirmed the importance of a Jewish homeland in Israel as essential for worldwide Jewish life but expected, and encouraged, the continued living of Jewish life outside the Land.
When the three tribes petitioned Moses for permission to settle in Transjordan, they anticipated this debate by some 4,000 years. What was missing from Moses' reply was a concern that the three tribes might lose their collective and corporate identity – that by being in a different place they might experience a weakening of their connection to the Israelites of which they were a part.
Our discussions about where Jews should live, about the importance of aliya, and about the obligations of Diaspora Jews to Israel now also include concern that the future of the Jewish people in the Diaspora is threatened. To put it in the language of the Torah, while we have many "cattle" to feed (Jews to keep Jewish), the lands in which we find ourselves may no longer be suitable for "pasturing" (nourishing Jewish souls).
The Jews of the former Soviet Union who remain are struggling to create and discover Judaism, but one must wonder if it is too late and if political and social conditions will remain conducive to their succeeding in establishing a Jewish life and identity.
The Jews of Western Europe face similar assimilatory pressures as those facing their brothers and sisters in North America; in recent years, they have also faced a higher incidence of anti-Semitic acts. The Jews of South America, South Africa, and a host of other places around the globe all face challenges, in varying degrees, to their identification, safety, and survival.
Of course, within Israel, the debate rages not with regard to the survival of Jews, but with regard to the survival of Judaism, which often seems caught between the religious fundamentalists and the secularists. While there are glimmers of secular Israelis' reengagement with the Jewish textual tradition, it remains to be seen if such a "middle way" will yet emerge.
Commenting on the request of the three tribes in this week's portion, the midrash suggests that their deviance consisted of the placing of material benefit before spiritual fulfillment. They were unwilling to surrender the comfort they had found where they were for the challenge of fulfilling their obligations as Jews.
Whether in Israel or in the Diaspora, contemporary Jews face the same fundamental challenge: to seek constantly meaningful and active channels of participation in full Jewish life, embracing both peoplehood and religion. Only thus can each of our "tribes" be assured of a continuing connection to each other.
All rights reserved