While it makes some people uncomfortable, the fact is that according to some readings of Islam, Israel's existence does violate foundations of the faith both morally and theologically. Of course, it's not the only reading of that tradition, but it's one that can find plenty of textual support. Just as some readings of Judaism find support for treating all gentiles living in Israel as second-class citizens or justify Jews killing Jews over the return of settlements. So what? The faithful of every tradition have always found footnotes to justify what many of us would call their worst actions.
So yes, Hamas theologians have a point. As do the rabbis of radical messianic settlers. Pretending they do not, or that it is a willful mis-reading of the tradition, is absurd. The endless debates about what is "true Islam" or "true Judaism" are arrogant exercises in self-serving theology, which "prove" that the faith says what the speaker wants every time. It's actually as dogmatic when done to prove that the faith is about peace and love as when it is done in the name of hate and war.
In each case, we are told that the faith means one thing and that all people who depart from that one understanding are not "real Muslims" or "real Jews". It's a dangerous form of apologetics which keep the faithful from taking appropriate responsibility for the damage done by members of their community.
Worst of all, raising the issue of such damage is quickly branded as Islamophobic or anti-Jewish. Sometimes it may be, but often it is not. And it is those who love a faith most deeply that must critique it most seriously and listen most attentively to the critique offered by others. That doesn't mean those who critique you are always right, but if you think they are always wrong, it's you who probably is.
The real question is not which positions are within the tradition and which are not.
The real question is how many believers stake their lives on any given position, how does their choice affect the lives of those who disagree, and are they willing to pay the price for the choices that they have made.
Israel's stated goal, one which makes perfect sense to most people, is to lessen (forget about ending) the steady rain of rockets on Israeli civilians. But since the range of weapons flying out of Gaza has only increased in recent days, and the number of dead civilians is going up more quickly than the number of Hamas fighters killed, one wonders if this is the best way to achieve that goal.
Israel needs to assess the gap between fighting a war which seems, to me and many others, to be justified and whether or not that justified war will actually lead to its ultimate security. What alternatives might exist to this war which seems as much punitive as it is defensive. The two are not necessarily mutually exclusive. But they may be. And whether they are or not, needs to be asked again and again.
Hamas' stated objective is the destruction of the State of Israel, a goal no longer shared even by most in the Arab world, witness the response of most Arab heads of state. They blame Israel for the proportionality of its response but admit that Hamas ended the cease fire and provoked this war with their endless missiles.
Does Hamas really think that Israel is going to allow itself to be destroyed in any case? It's not going to happen. They need to ask themselves what they expect from a neighbor to whose annihilation they have committed themselves.
Having a theology that supports this position, or any other one like it, on either side of this conflict, is not the point -- it's not even something new. The will of God has been used as the ultimate trump card by Christians, Muslims, and Jews for years. The amazing thing is that we keep doing it despite the fact that using God that way, almost always renders everyone a loser!
This is not about what any tradition says. Our traditions are as much mirrors as they are guides. This is, as it always is, about the desires of those following the tradition.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
Author, radio and TV talk show host, and President of CLAL-The National Jewish Center for Learning and Leadership, Brad Hirschfield is the author of 
Dear Ruvain,
I am curious as to what you actually believe in,as I don't want to assume anything,but by your comments I take it you don't believe in The Creator,which you refer to as "super daddy". Before I start a dialogue with you I first must understand your thoughts on (1)The Bible and (2) the One who inspired it.
Looking forward to your response,
Jay
Dear J.Kravette,
I think my comments speak for themselves. If you want commentary, I point to the Shema.
Ruvain
What is a Hamas "theologian"?? That seems like an oxymoron to me!
It is an old well-known fact that an innocent individual can be convicted of any crime by a series of pre-arranged yes & no answer questions... which means any debate is inconclusive but by self-conviction.
Dear Ruvain,
Thank you for your response, but please indulge me as I didn't quite get your point. Are you referring to the" Shema Yisroal Adenoi Elohenu Adenoi Echad"?
J
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.