Toward a Meaningful Life with Simon Jacobson
Radio Show Transcript - January 7, 2001

Rabbi Simon Jacobson: Good evening and welcome to another edition of Toward a Meaningful Life. With this show we begin a new secular year. It’s exciting to continue to receive all your feedback: the invigorating element that keeps the show going, so keep it coming, whether through email, regular mail or phone calls.

Tonight’s topic is a controversial one and a current event which is long overdue to discuss, and that is the situation in Israel. I know that many of you probably have opinions and comments on it, particularly about this most recent crisis, but in truth, this is really a historical battle that’s been going on since 1948, when the state of Israel was established, but in truth, it’s roots go much earlier than that. We see in the Bible the struggle between the forefather of the Arab world, Ishmael, and his half-brother Isaac, the ancestor and forefather of the Jewish people. That classic battle has been going on throughout history and goes back thousands and thousands of years.

But what I would like to address is the issue and state of affairs as it stands today in the state of Israel.

Obviously there are emotions and outrage, speaking as I am as a Jew, but in truth, every loss of life anywhere in the world particularly in that region, is a tragedy. For a Jewish person, the loss of life is sacred whether it’s the life of a Jew, the life of a non-Jew, the life of an Arab, the life of a Moslem.

There is a powerful statement in the Talmud regarding this. When the Jews left Egypt, the Egyptians pursued them. The Egyptians changed their minds and regretted allowing the Jews to leave, and they pursued them all the way to the Red Sea. When the miracle of the Red Sea took place and the Egyptians were drowning, the Jews began singing songs of praise, seemingly a legitimate acknowledgment of G-d. It says in the Talmud that G-d says at that moment, “My children are drowning and you’re singing praise?”

In other words, G-d rebuked them for singing praises at a time when people were dying. Now the Egyptians were clearly at fault: they had held a nation in bondage and had murdered them—essentially a genocide—and they couldn’t even tolerate allowing the Jews to leave, so they clearly deserved to be killed. Yet at the same time, the sensitivity to life remains, and we never gloat or celebrate when our enemies—even our deserved enemies—have died.

So when you talk about death in general, it’s important to emphasize, and I emphasize this as a Jew, that any loss of life is a tragedy.

Now you have this conflict which, for Americans, is very difficult to really understand because it’s not just political, it’s something that is deeply ingrained and very deep-rooted. Essentially—and I do speak in a biased fashion because I am Jewish—yet at the same time I am trying to think of this in a light that brings peace to all people. Since the time that Israel was established as a state in 1948, there have been several wars, and in every instance it was a defensive war for the Jews who were trying to protect their own little territory that was given to them.

After the 1967 War, where Israel was again on the defensive (Nassar, the president of Egypt at the time, had mobilized armies, closed the Suez Canal, etc. Anyone familiar with the facts knows what the circumstances were. Israel then captured the Sinai Desert and captured what was then known as the West Bank (which is really called Yehudah and Shomron). There was a piece of land called the East Bank which was separated and given to Jordan (Transjordan at the time). I remember being in Israel in 1971, and it was quite peaceful. There was no what we call intifada, no violence. You were able to walk into the Moslem section in the Old City of East Jerusalem without any fears.

So essentially it’s only in the last 10-15 years that there’s been an uprising, what they call intifada, a violent uprising of what is being labeled as the Palestinian uprising for their right to their homeland. This essentially has pitted the Jews against what they call the Palestinians. I must say, that when you look at the P.R., especially in the United States, the media war is just as great as the war on the streets, because images are being painted that affect how we see the situation.

I was always shocked at the fact that after the ‘67 War took place officials in the Israeli government offered back the land for peace. The ’67 War was one in which the Israelis had conquered the land under the laws of war—a defensive war—a land that had not given them the equal right to worship at the Western Wall. If you look at the photographs of the Wall prior to the war, it had essentially been turned into a slum and garbage dump, and Jews were not allowed to easily worship there. Since 1967, the Israelis have bent over backwards to give equal ability for Christians and Moslems and Jews to worship at their respective sites.

After the war there was an immediate offer on the part of the Jews to return land to the Arabs (I don’t know if they were called Palestinians at the time), whatever the name was. On a practical level, I was once asked to speak for a group of American politicians, and they asked me to represent the Lubavitcher Rebbe, whom I was a student of, his opinion and his stand—which was a very strong one—against returning land.

They were very surprised that I didn’t present the views in a religious, Biblical, or Messianic context but in a very practical one: which was, that when you go into business negotiations and you know you want to offer a million dollars for a particular business, you don’t begin by saying, “Here, I’m ready to give you a million dollars.” You say half a million. And the other party says 3/4 of a million, etc., etc. That’s the art and skill of negotiation.

The fact of the matter is, when the Cold War was going on between the former Soviet Union and the United States, and there were issues of lowering the number of nuclear warheads/ballistic missiles, no one suggested, for instance, that the United States give up the state of Alaska and the Russians should cut their arsenal by 50 percent. Why? Because you reciprocate in kind. The fact that the Israelis offer land for peace is unprecedented in history. The United States did not do that with France, with England, with the Native Americans. Any land conquered in war, even unjustified, was never just returned for a promise of anything.

So the fact is, even on a very practical secular level, even if someone had in mind to return a piece of land to begin the negotiations saying, “Here is a piece of land and in return, we want you to sign a paper of good faith,” in a volatile region like that, it is essentially quite insane. No human being would do that with his home, and no one would do that with anything that they conquer in a defensive war.

So far I’m turning the clock back; I’m not even talking about how things are today. But once that Pandora’s Box opened, there’s no return. Because if I know that I can get land, and by holding out I can get more and more and more, where do you draw the line? Furthermore, in negotiations, there is always a place where you have to be able to say, “I’m leaving. I am not negotiating any further. Here’s the line that I draw in the sand.”

I find it fascinating that the Jewish people, and again I’m saying this as a Jew, bend over backwards to open up what goes on in Israel to the media. I remember in the Persian Gulf War back in 1991, there was a total blackout. And in America, which is the capital of the media world, we had no idea what was going on there. Why was there a blackout? Because it’s obvious that public opinion and the “spin” as they say of the media has a direct impact on pressure and doesn’t allow an army to do what it has to do.

So that Israelis should be so open and democratic—a trait of the Jewish people that they always bend over backwards and create their own double standard—in many ways is infuriating. In a sense, the problems that exist today, and I can unequivocally say that this is my opinion, are a result of the Jews’ own shooting themselves in the back.

First of all, opening up the Pandora’s Box of offering a piece of land, real estate, an irreversible act for the promise—even if it was a completely sincere promise; still a promise which can only be backed up on paper and you have no idea whether or not their children or grandchildren will honor it—is absolutely unprecedented.

I think that once you opened that door—and you see it in the historical events of what is going on in Israel today—it created a demand: “Oh, you’re ready to offer that? So we’ll be violent and use other terrorist methods, and we can demand more and more and more.”

And I don’t see where one draws the line until you actually unequivocally state it. And with all that’s been going on with the deaths and murders, affecting families in an unprecedented way, the threat in Israel at the same time, no one is still ready to say, here’s where we draw the line.

I hear today that Prime Minister Barak said that he will not sit in negotiations until there is a lowering of violence. Now what does lowering of violence mean? That one less gun is shot?

It seems to me that everyone is sort of stuck in a certain type of waffling and pandering in this peace process, which I’m sure has a lot to do with money (and has not been discussed in the media), with the United States giving billions of dollars both to the Israelis and the Palestinians, so there’s a certain investment, so to speak, to keep this “peace process” alive, because it has to do with dollars and cents.

But the bottom line is that regarding this issue, there are the symptoms and there is a root. I have no doubt that there’s resentment from anyone who lived in Israel prior to 1948 when Jews began immigrating there and living on different pieces of the land. Yes, it’s very possible that people were uprooted. But that’s not an uncommon thing in neighborhoods.

First of all, the Jews, historically, have been living in Israel since the beginning of time. Even after the Holy Temple was destroyed, there was always a community, perhaps not as large as it is today in the last few hundreds years, but Jews always had a presence there. Israel is the holy land of the Jewish people, as stated in the Bible, and Jews never gave up that right and never left the land.

It’s a natural thing that after the Holocaust and after the wars that were fought, and in a more democratic environment, more Jews would turn to the place that they originated from. So it’s natural. It’s like saying neighborhoods in New York were once Irish and then other people moved in; it’s true that the Irish people were resentful originally, but that’s how life works—that there’s sometimes displacement.

And the Israelis did not do it by murdering anybody. They did it in a way, it’s true, that the numbers were stacked, but the fact of the matter is, this was a large region of many Arab peoples, and there wasn’t such a thing as Arabs that were called Palestinians.

If you look at history, there was no such word as Palestinian before 1948. They lived in that region. Jews lived there and there were Arabs that lived there. So the question of where they should move is a practical question that everyone has to deal with. I still do not minimize the pain of anyone who is being displaced. I think what happened was, once the Jews became a presence there, the old animosity of the Jews was reignited.

Remember, the Jews were under Islam rule for many years—the Turkish Empire and so on. And then suddenly the Jews came into control, which brought up many, many deep-felt sentiments and anger and so forth.

But the bottom line is that the violence being directed against Israel, the call for its destruction (which still remains in the Palestinian mandate, and definitely in their consciousness and their propaganda and psychology), is something that has never been changed. And where do you see a changing attitude where you can say, “Okay, we gave land and here’s the peace.” I don’t think that anyone expects that by the Israelis giving up a certain piece of land—the Temple Mount—the entire Palestinian community in Israel would suddenly make a u-turn and say begin to sincerely love Jews and love Israel, I don’t think anyone, even the most liberal person, would suggest that. At best it’s damage control.

So I think you have to call a spade a spade, and be realistic about the situation and the expectations, even the most optimistic ones.

I definitely don’t want this show to become another part of the propaganda machine. I think there’s a lot of media slant going on and even though I acknowledge that I’m Jewish, and therefore I’m pro-Jewish, by no means do I think that the life of a Palestinian man, woman, or child in any way is negligible; on the contrary, I think that perhaps with some suggestions that I’d like to make, which may be realistic or not, it can create a situation where peace, shalom, peace for all people is something that the Jews have always aspired to—peace means not just peace for Jews but peace also for Arabs, so everyone can live in peace.

(Announcement break regarding obtaining a copy of “Meanings,” the free newsletter of the Meaningful Life Center. Call 1-800-363-2646 or write to us at wisdomreb@meaningfullife.com or write Meaningful Life Center, Suite 303, 788 Eastern Parkway, Brooklyn, NY 11213 to receive your free copy.)

Jacobson: I want to add one more thing, that is, the history of the Jewish people has been as a docile nation. We as Jews have always searched and wanted to live and coexist in peace with our neighbors. You do not find, except in rare exceptions (and those I want to address as well), that Jews as a people turn into vigilantes and to terrorists, nor are they the aggressors in the wars they fought.

Essentially, they have always fought defensive wars, even if you go back to the beginning of history. In the Bible, it says that the Jews entered the land of Israel and they went to war to reclaim their land. This was a land that was legally owned by them, and the fact that they were in Egypt in bondage, in slavery, in no way minimized or compromised their right over that land.

In that sense, they had complete right to go in, and they said clearly, this is our land. They offered the nations there the opportunity to leave peacefully. It was only those who didn’t want to leave peacefully that they went to war with. But throughout history, and particularly in the last 2,000 years, you’ll never find that Jews launched an aggressive and offensive war.

Just to give an example, I was in Crown Heights during the Crown Heights riots. An unfortunate incident happened with a young black child, Gavin Cato who was killed in an accident. Following that, a mob essentially attacked and killed a man called Yankel Rosenbaum just because he was a Jew.

No one in my neighborhood or community, and I was there that night, considered getting a mob together with a knife and trying to go kill a black in retaliation. It was not even a consideration because it’s just not the personality of most Jews, and that’s part of our history.

The same is true in the Middle East. I say this in defense—because you don’t hear much about this in the media—so I say it here unequivocally and on the record, that this has always been the attitude amongst Jews, and it’s the same attitude in Israel.

The fact is, I remember in 1971—there were millions of Arabs living in Israel—that many of them had a much higher standard of living than they ever had under any Arab government.

It’s true that the Jews were the majority and they ruled, but nevertheless, within the Knesset, there are also Arab seats; the fact of the matter being that it is essentially run like a democracy, a Socialist democracy perhaps, but the bottom line is that that’s the way it’s run.

So it’s ironic that when you behave in that type of democratic fashion giving the Arabs all these rights and comforts, and you’re treated in return in a Fascist fashion, you’re the one that’s accused of being the aggressor.

Let’s go to the phone.

Caller: Yes Rabbi, good evening. George Will had an article in Newsweek recently concerning President Clinton and his aggressive moves to move for a peace process that may in fact be counterproductive for Israel. Can you comment on that?

Jacobson: Can you tell me more about what he wrote because I didn’t read it.

Caller: Well, basically he was implying that Clinton very much wants to go on record as being a peacemaker, and he’s pushing for a peace that will cause a compromise for Israel.

Jacobson: But that’s been the consistent policy of the Americans, so what’s new?

Caller: The thing that concerns me so much is that the Jewish population is so democratic and has been so much in support of Clinton, that it seems like not enough Jews want to come up and say, “You know, there’s somebody in the Democratic party who really is moving in a way that is really uncaring for Jews but at the same time he’s courting the Jewish vote.”

Jacobson: Thank you for the call. In general I feel that what’s going on in Israel is not controlled by the American government; it’s controlled by the Israeli government and the Jews there. It’s true that American Jewry has a strong impact on the support of Israel but the bottom line is, when there is waffling and a mercurial and non-committal approach by the Israeli government, no leader that gets up and unequivocally states a certain approach, it’s inevitable that you’re going to be pressured and affected by all sorts of influences around us.

The fact is that the different governments of the United States all had their different attitudes toward Israel, but no American government would be able to intervene if the Israeli government took a certain stand. The problem is that Israel doesn’t have a firm stand.

Frankly, if you asked an average American, if you asked President Clinton, what is Israel’s stand, I have no idea. The stand changes every month. No one ever imagined, even the Arabs did not imagine a year ago, that there would be someone who would offer some type of autonomy on the Temple Mount. It was always said that Jerusalem was completely off-limits.

So that itself is a surprise to almost everyone. So no one really knows what their stand is, and as long as no one knows that stand, everyone is going to try to exploit the situation. And the tragedy continues. Ambiguity—in Hebrew the word sofek, which means doubt—has the same gematria as Amalek, which is the arch-enemy of the Jewish people. Ambiguity is much worse than making a mistake. Because if you make a mistake, at least the mistake is a clear one and you learn from your mistake. But ambiguity creates a vacuum which doesn’t allow for any opinion; people do not know: do they support it, don’t they support it? You can’t even say you support a position when you don’t even know what the position is, when it’s continuously shifting. And that’s part of the great tragedy here.

Let’s go to Cheryl.

Caller: First of all, I’m way over my head on this topic, but I wanted to ask you more from an academic point of view. I understand some of what you say, and you speak very eloquently, but I wonder why… you say it’s not really a problem between Palestinians and Jews, that it’s really an Arab-Jewish problem. And yet I think most people, at least academically, maybe see it as more of a modern kind of battle between nation-states, that sort of thing and they don’t really understand or appreciate the full history behind it.

So I know that you must have a number of people that agree with your position, and to me it is the best position that I’ve heard, but academically it just doesn’t cut it because it doesn’t deal with it from a more secular perspective.

Jacobson: Okay, thanks for the call. My response to that is that the issue unfortunately in Israel is not an academic one, it’s a practical one. You’re talking about life and death. No one’s suggesting that there be a shared power—there’s no country in the world that’s shared by enemies who share control and power. The United States is controlled by a government that may have political parties, but it’s all within the framework of a democracy.

The Jews are the ones who are in control of that region of the land. They have bent over backwards to be a democracy and give equal rights, but at the same time there is a very deep animosity that exists from Arabs to Jews and vice versa. The question is, how do you deal with it?

The fact is, the policy of the Jewish people and the Israeli government is not terrorism and it’s not built on violence. The accusation of untoward Israeli violence by the media that is being used here as a trump card by the media is completely unfair and it’s not being accurately reported. The fact of the matter is, that now, the 40,000 Palestinians who have been armed by the Israelis sit side by side with them within the borders of Israel. Should a war break out, G-d forbid, the danger is much greater today than it ever was. So what did the Israelis gain from everything that they returned? Let’s speak very practically.

I speak even from a secular point of view. What have they gained? They didn’t gain a lesser threat of war. If there’s less threat of war, it’s simply that the Israeli government and the Israeli army is a very powerful one, so it’s a deterrent for anyone to attack them.

But it’s not because their neighbors have any less animosity or are less their enemies than before. So what did they gain from anything that they’ve given away?

Now, if you had ever given up something to get something, and you didn’t get what was promised in return, you have to stand up and say that a big mistake was made. You have to say, “I should never have given it and I don’t know if I can take it back, but I definitely am not going to continue.”

But the tragedy is that the ambiguity continues. From my perspective, Israel is in desperate need of a true leader. Leaders both in America and in Israel, and everywhere have become panderers and media experts—basing important strategic decisions on what their standing in the polls will be. You need a leader: a leader who makes strong decisions when necessary that are not based on public opinion but on what’s right for the country’s best interests. Decision that are nor short term band-aids that are safe and make everyone feel good for the moment, but long term ones. A visionary leader who sees the big picture and plans accordingly. Whether we agree or disagree with Truman dropping the atom bomb, the fact that he had to struggle with the issue of dropping the bomb, knowing that it would be killing hundreds of thousands of people and maiming so many more, or allowing WWII to continue with the estimates of even more people dying; nevertheless, he had to do make a decision, a real decision that killed more people than any gun could kill.

But the justification was that if the war would have continued, many more people would have died. But that was the decision he had to make. And he had to rise to the occasion when there was a decision to be made; he couldn’t remain ambiguous. He couldn’t say, let’s buy time and see what happens. He had to make a quick decision.

Unfortunately, Israel, the Middle East, is in a state of war, a state of siege. In a state of war, ambiguity is disastrous. We need a leader who will get up and make a decision and state clearly: this is what I want to do. And the decision in my view should be one of strength because people respond to strength.

I think Americans make a big mistake: they think that Arab populations are like Americans—if you give them the Internet and McDonalds and a few other American luxuries, they’re going to become like us. But they have a different culture, a different attitude, and we have to respect that. They don’t have to be Americans. Actually, it’s quite arrogant and condescending for Americans to think that the Arab nations will become American if you Americanize them. They are who they are. They have their deep-rooted tribal attitudes, which are very different from ours. And knowing their  psychology is extremely vital in determining how to deal with them as well.

Let’s go to Sonia on the line.

Caller: Hello Rabbi. I’m very touched and I’m happy that somebody like you comes out and talks about what I’m saying: we the Jews—no matter Democrats, Republicans, businessmen or just common people—we must understand that we must take care of Israel. And I’m saying that from now on, everybody should donate $50-$100 to their synagogue to send to Israel to help the people and it must be to hit back.

There is no mercy; there is no saying because of this or that. It’s our land. We went through such a Holocaust, such a killing. I wish we would have had an Israel at that time to go somewhere. So much blood and our chalutzim, our parents, our cousins, whoever was there built that country.

Now the Arabs come, they call themselves Palestinians. I come from Poland. When I was a little girl, I remember the way the anti-Semites would say Je dufte peshiva marchta Palestina. That means, “Lousy Jew, go to Palestine.” Palestine was the Jewish Palestine. We do have it and we shouldn’t give it away because if they do, we will not be safe in any place. Just the way the Irish came from their country, the French from France, the Germans from Germany, this is ours and we come to visit or live there; it’s our country and we must fight for it, and we cannot let them negotiate because President Clinton is today a few more days and then goodbye.

Jacobson: Thank you very much Sonia. I’m sure your sentiments and feelings reflect many of the listeners and I appreciate your call.

We go to Ira.

Caller: Good show. I have three quick questions that will take a lifetime to answer:
1. Why are the Jews hated so much all over the world? 2. I just don’t understand this “land for peace.” We are the stronger nation and the so-called Palestinians are very weak. I just don’t get it. I just don’t understand why there’s a problem. We have so much strength. My third question is, all those other Arab countries were formed in the 1920s, 30s, and 40s, why was this one particular area of land known as Palestine not made into a country before this? Why was this left for last, and all the other areas beside that had become countries under Arab rule?

Jacobson: Thank you for your call. Regarding your first question about why Jews are so hated, Rashi (1040-1105CE), the foremost Biblical commentary, says that it’s a known thing that there’s a certain animosity that the nations have for the Jewish people. There have been many books written on the analysis of it; some say because they’re the conscience of the world and people want to kill the conscience. Jews stand out.

The fact of the matter is, the major religions of this world are all based on Judaism. It’s strange because Jesus, whose teachings are the basis of Christianity (for over a billion people on this earth), would not have been allowed in many country clubs in this country were he alive because he’s Jewish. And so it’s a strange irony to me that you can worship a Jew as G-d, and at the same time vilify the people that he comes from.

But I guess there are many things that can be discussed, and it deserves another show: the root and psychological and subconscious causes for anti-Semitism. The fact of the matter is, going back to Biblical times, there were a certain two nations at war with each other: Ishmael (the father of the Arab world) and Isaac (the father of the Jewish world). And perhaps that’s the way G-d wants it to be until the Messianic Age when there will be peace within the entire world. That doesn’t mean that we have to feed into it and we have to necessarily add to it, it just means that there is something deeper rooted.

The issue that we’re discussing on this show is: What do we do practically under the circumstances? I’m advocating a position of strength, a lack of ambiguity, where you state your position very clearly and do not budge from it, which unfortunately has not been the Israeli attitude.

About the question of land and peace I’ve addressed already, and I think the other topic has also been part of the discussion here. I obviously am advocating a position that comes from a Jewish perspective, but at the same time I feel this is the way to bring peace to the region—which comes with respect for a strong position. We need to say: where we’ve made a mistake, we will not continue to make the same mistake. You don’t give land for peace, you trade peace for peace. We won’t only give you peace, Israel should say to the Arab population in the country, but we’ll give you a higher standard of living, we’ll give you a standard where you can benefit and reap economically in ways that your cousins and neighbors across the borders cannot.

The truth is, I don’t think any type of effort can eliminate the animosity and the hatred that many Arabs have for Jews, and perhaps vice versa. But Jews are not the ones who are being violent here. The Arabs are being violent. I call them Arabs and not Palestinians because the name “Palestinian” is a political one that has been adopted to put Israelis on the defensive.

(Announcement break for Rabbi Jacobson’s weekly Wednesday Night class at 346 W. 89^th St., corner Riverside Drive in Manhattan at 8pm. Listeners are also invited to visit the website of the Meaningful Life Center at www.meaningfullife.com, call 1-800-3MEANING, or email at wisdomreb@meaningfullife.com for all the activities of the Meaningful Life Center, transcripts of the radio show, seminars, and other important information.)

Jacobson: Okay, we’re back. I definitely want to extend my condolences and feelings to every lost life and to the families that are being affected by the situation there.

Now, there’s no question that after WWII, when the United Nations resolved to partition the part of the land and give Israel what we call the state of Israel, that because it was post-Holocaust, there was definitely the sentiment of dealing with the “Jewish problem” as they called it. Even Stalin, a great anti-Semite who murdered millions of Jews himself, as a Soviet, even he voted for that state.

It always interested me that there was such an environment that fostered them all to vote for the establishment of Israel, but I have to say, Israel is not 52 years old. It’s not something that is based on the Balfour Declaration nor on the events of 1948. Eretz Yisroel, the land of Israel, is clearly documented in the Bible. As a matter of fact—a fascinating little piece of information—it says in the Bible that when Sarah, the wife of Abraham, passed away, Abraham went to search for a place to bury her. And he found a place which is now called the Meorat HaMachpela in the city of Hebron, which has been in the news so much regarding this issue. That’s where he bought the plot of land, which he bought from Efron, the people who owned it at the time. They offered it to him as a gift but he rejected it as a gift; he insisted on buying it for money. And the Torah says he bought it for 400 of the currency at that time. The question is, why didn’t he take it as a gift? The reason was that in international law, even going back to Biblical times and today, when you receive something as a gift, you don’t have the same legal control and legal entitlement to it as when you buy it. When you buy something, it’s irreversible unless you sell it.

Abraham, anticipating any questions that may ever rise about ownership of the land throughout history, preempted any challenge by buying outright the piece of land with his money. And he buried his wife Sarah there and afterwards he passed it on to Isaac and to Jacob, and they’re also buried there. So when you think of it from a legal point of view, there is a document, a document in the Bible, and no one disputes that story. Even if you don’t consider it sacred from a secular point of view, it’s still a document that states clearly that he bought a piece of land and he bought it for that particular reason.

Another thing I’d like to share is that Rashi’s first commentary on the entire Bible begins with a comment on the verse: In the beginning, G-d created the heaven and the earth. So Rashi (Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki) poses the question, if the Torah was given as a book of laws, it should have been given as laws: the first law being the law of kiddush hachodesh which is blessing the new moon (which is actually in the book of Exodus). So why does the Torah begin, he asks, with the story of creation?

You might think that he would give a philosophical answer; for example, before you accept laws you need to know that G-d created heaven and earth. But he says something which is seemingly out of the blue, he says the Bible was written that way because it’s in anticipation of the day when the nations of the world may come and say to the Jewish people, “You are thieves. You have taken away the land of Israel.” So the Bible begins, “G-d created Heaven and earth,” and gave different parts of the earth to different nations. In the beginning the land of Israel did belong to many nations, but then He took it and gave it to Abraham which is documented in the Bible. So the entire Bible begins, “In the beginning G-d created Heaven and the earth” in anticipation to answering this question should one day there be someone who will accuse the Jews of being thieves.

Now how Rashi knew, living in France in the 11^th century, that one day there would be this issue is simply amazing. But the fact is, he does document it and it is literally what is happening today in what we call Eretz Yisroel.

Let’s take a call. We go to Daniel.

Caller: Hello Reb Simon. Exactly when I called, you brought out the topic of something I wanted to tell you about, that at the beginning of the Bible—and I think that all the world believes in the Bible, right?—they will believe in Rashi’s commentary that even the Arabs will believe that the land belongs to the Jews?

Jacobson: Well that’s why I just told it. Maybe your brainwaves had an effect on me so I said what you were going to say.

Caller: So it will be acceptable by the world?

Jacobson: I think the world accepts the Bible and the fact of the matter is, Rashi is a commentator who wrote this centuries ago.

Caller: I’m French also so I’m connected a little bit with Rashi. But anyway, about Jerusalem, Jerusalem is not mentioned even once in the Koran.

Jacobson: Yes, I hear that.

Caller: So why is it that Jerusalem is a shrine of the Moslems? It’s political; it’s not religious.

Jacobson: I agree with you. You know, once the Jews didn’t claim that it’s holy for them then it would seem a little irrational for them to hold onto it. But anyway, thanks for your call.

We’ll go to Charles.

Caller: Hello Rabbi. I just heard you on the radio for the first time. It seems that what the Arabs are doing presently is probably very similar to what the Germans did between the Wars. They figure whatever they can take without war is fantastic, and after that they’ll fight. First they want to emasculate the Israelis, to bring them into a smaller population, make them weaker, possibly have the United Nations come in there. Many people who are over 40 years old remember the 1967 War, when Nassar told the UN observers to leave, when he blockaded the Gulf of Aqaba. One more interesting thing that Arafat did; until recently, his standing in the Arab world was weak, so he decided instead of making this a political matter, he made it a religious matter. And by making it a religious matter, he has the backing of I would say the vast majority of Moslems. Before that, they figured he’s some kind of Arab no-man and they really didn’t care.

Jacobson: Good point. I appreciate that. Thank you Charles. We go to Abe.

Caller: Rabbi Jacobson. Good evening. I just want to say something. When we look at how the situation was before the Declaration of Independence of Israel, the Arabs had the possibility with the partition plan to get what they wanted: an Arab state and a Jewish state. But with the loss of the occasion what happened? Hashem helped the Jews and it became Israel and they lost. No, I think what Jews are doing is just bringing back the situation which was before the Declaration of the Independence of Israel, they are bringing it back today and I think Arafat is making a big mistake because b’ezrat Hashem it will happen today just as it happened then, b’ezrat Hashem.

Jacobson: Thank you very much, Abe. I was just sharing some of the commentaries. You see that the anticipation of a struggle and the battle that’s going on today is not something new, it’s something that has been documented and anticipated.

I just want to reiterate that there’s no greater blessing than shalom, peace, because peace creates an environment where families, communities, people of all backgrounds and of all races can grow. Instead of focusing on negative energy and defending themselves and fear of retribution and fear of murder and war, they can build their lives. This is the greatest blessing that goes all the way back to the Bible where G-d blesses and says, “V’nosati shalom b’aretz,” “I will give peace to the earth.”

Peace is the greatest blessing of all for all people. Why that is not the priority, when you talk about a peace process, is that the process has become more important than the peace, unfortunately. The priority has to be, what will achieve an environment where people will really be at peace? Unfortunately, politics have taken over where the argument goes that if the Israelis continue to negotiate, and they continue to give, they’ll ultimately satisfy the Palestinians and make them happy.

I doubt that and I don’t think anyone would even suggest that. No one seems to know where to stop. The key here has to be strength: strength not in an aggressive or violent way, but in a position that is unequivocal. People will respect and honor that. The next leader of Israel should be a person of that caliber and that personality. That person will go down in history as a true peacemaker precisely because of his strength and not because of his waffling or his ambiguity.

Let’s go to William on the air.

Caller: Hi. I want to talk about Israel. First of all, the land was given to Jacob, who was also named Israel, right? You Jews are just two tribes from the twelve tribes, aren’t you?

Jacobson: Well yes, the ten tribes were basically lost, they say.

Caller: They’re not lost. G-d knows where they are.

Jacobson: Yes, well I don’t!

Caller: Well you don’t. You’re not G-d. My point is, the time when G-d said, “I will claim My children; they are Mine” and now is the time. Don’t worry about anything. The Arabs aren’t going to do anything. They haven’t done it since 1948 and they will never do it again. Do you understand what I mean?

Jacobson: Thank you. Yes I understand, William. Let’s go to Brian.

Caller: Speaking of the lost tribes, I’m calling from Canada.

Jacobson: You’re listening to the show in Canada?

Caller: Yes actually. I’ve been catching it for the last 3-4 weeks from New Brunswick. The gentlemen just spoke about the lost tribes. We are the lost tribes over here, part of us are anyway, Ephraim and Menasseh. And we’re all in this together because we have a common G-d at some level, and I guess I have a question for you, Rabbi. The abomination that sets up desolation, in your mind, what is that?

Jacobson: What are you quoting?

Caller: Daniel, chapter 12.

Jacobson: Well, what do you think?

Caller: Well, I think it’s when you’re not able to sacrifice any longer on the Temple Mount.

Jacobson: So then the abomination leads to?

Caller: Leads to the desolation.

Jacobson: Well, generally speaking, in the Bible, the Torah does say that when people transgress and commit abominations against G-d, one of the consequences is desolation, that we suffer. And even on a psychological level, when a person is not in touch with their soul, their lives become more desolate and more lonely, and in many ways filled with despair.

So I think that that’s a common experience throughout history. Let’s go to Dorothy.

Caller: Hi Rabbi. I have something to say on the subject. I lost my parents in the Holocaust. Also siblings and mishpuchah that I didn’t even know. I was 14 years old; an uncle in the United States brought me over here in 1939. I have a sister on the kibbutz, in Rosh Hanikra, she lives in Israel on the barbed wire as a kibbutznik. Built the country, did all kinds of things from the Lebanese borders, they used to infiltrate the kibbutz. Can you imagine, living in our homeland under barbed wire? She herself is a former soldier. Her children and so on and so forth.

I want to say, we used to go to Israel. This year I lost my husband, but I still went myself, we used to go every year. Every year Israel let out a certain amount of prisoners. Also, the Arab countries were letting out their prisoners on the backs of Israel. Rabbi, politically, the place is overrun with people that were prisoners.

Jacobson: Thank you and I appreciate your comments.

 (Announcement break. This show and all of the activities of the Meaningful Life Center activities are made possible by the contributions from people like you who wish to achieve a life full of meaning and purpose. We invite you to join us and become our partners in creating a better world. For contribution and sponsorship opportunities, please call 1-800-3MEANING, 1-800-363-2646, or write to the Meaningful Life Center, Suite 303, 788 Eastern Parkway, Brooklyn, NY 11213.)

Jacobson: Okay, well obviously we could dedicate a few more shows to this explosive topic, particularly because it stirs so much emotion and touches people’s lives; this isn’t just a philosophical or academic discussion.

I want to conclude by saying that as a blessing or a prayer, what we really want is peace. As a Jew I speak for all peoples—not just for Jews but for all people—that peace is the greatest blessing, but in order to achieve that we need to have strength and make decisions that are strong. Sometimes these decisions are very hard but they will be respected because they are wise decisions and they respect the environment, the climate, and the people who live there. One decision that needs to be made is that “land for peace” is simply an unacceptable approach. It hasn’t worked. It never would have worked, but now in retrospect we’re definitely wiser. Learning from our mistakes is often the greatest thing that one person can do.

May there be peace in Israel and peace all over the world. You’ve been listening to Toward a Meaningful Life with Simon Jacobson. See you again next Sunday.