Thursday, September 26, 2013

I Did Not Give a Drash last Shabbat...

...I was away, speaking at an interfaith conference in Toowoomba.  Here's the talk I gave, on Judaism and Multiculturalism:

A Jewish View of Multiculturalism
Rabbi Don Levy
Gold Coast, Queensland

I’ve been asked to speak to you today on the subject, ‘A Jewish View of Multiculturalism.’  My brief did not include a working definition of the term ‘multiculturalism.’ Since it means different things to different people, I am therefore going to fill in a definition.  Multiculturalism for the purposes of my talk is ‘the ideologies that acknowledge and celebrate that society is comprised of people from a diversity of cultures, and policies that encourage and enable people from various cultures to live according to them.’  I understand my brief then, to be the answering of the question of how Jews and Judaism see the validity of, and support, this enterprise.  So, here we go!
          First of all, some statistics.  According to the 2011 census, there are 97,335 Jews in Australia, or 0.3% of the total population of about 22.68 million.  Likewise in the world as a whole; the most authoritative estimates show the total number of Jews as being no more than 15 million, in a total world population of some 7 billion.  That means that, most optimistically, Jews comprise 0.2% of the world’s population – very close to our proportion in Australia.  But because almost 12 million of the world’s Jews live in two countries – the United States of America and Israel – that means that Jews are pretty thin on the ground in the rest of the world.  Specifically, in the Arab world (except Morocco), Africa (except South Africa) and Asia.  In these three parts of the world with the exceptions noted, Jews are especially thin on the ground.
          So why does this matter?
          It matters because the premise of multiculturalism is that it is good for groups in society to retain strong parts of their unique identity.  The premise is that the ‘salad bowl’ society is better than the ‘melting pot.’  In societies where many people’s family origins or cultural cues are different from the majority culture, it is a positive thing when they retain a strong element of that culture.  They then bring this element to the patchwork of cultures that comprise the larger society.  Which is richer for that.
          Australia certainly matches this description.  She is a country of immigrants, and many Australians today, even if they were born here, have shallow roots here.  They trace their family origins to a vast number of places.  This certainly contributes to Australia’s being an incredibly tolerant place.  You have absorbed repeated waves of immigration for various parts of the world, and each immigrant group added something unique and desirable to the mosaic that is Australian culture.  This is as noticeable here, in the ‘wilds’ of Queensland as it is in the metropolises of Sydney and Melbourne.
          For the Jews’ part, there were Jews among the first European settlers to this land; eight Jews were among the passengers of the First Fleet, and over 1,000 are estimated to have arrived over the following 60 years.  But the largest group of Australian Jews originated in Europe and came here as refugees after the Second World War and the Holocaust.  Later groups of Jewish immigrants to Australia, or notable size, came from South Africa and from Israel.  But the largest and most influential group consists of Holocaust survivors and their offspring.  Proportionally, Australian Jewry contains the largest proportion of Holocaust survivors- and their offspring – of the entire Jewish Diaspora.  Specifically, 35,000 Jewish refugees of the Holocaust found their way to Australia’s shores.  80,000 went to the United States, but in the community of about six million Jews there, they are less of a force.  This fact very much colours attitudes among Australian Jewry, something which I’ll address in just a moment.
          Because Jews are such a drop in the bucket of Australia’s population, they struggle to retain something of what is unique to them as Jews.  They also struggled to make their presence felt in the national dialogue.  Why should it matter?  Because it is a non-negotiable in Jewish life, that each individual and the Jews as a group, must make a positive difference.  Our religious teaching suggests that the world is not yet complete.  If God created the physical world in six days and then withdrew from His creative energy from the equation, it was to make room for humanity to ‘finish’ the world by creating a just order, a place of goodness.  This imperative is so strong, that often Jews who are outwardly, entirely non-religious have absorbed it and integrated it into the actions that comprise their lives.  As a result, Jews are represented out of proportion with their numbers in public life:  in politics and other social leadership, in academe and in the helping professions.  In Australia, and in the world.
As much as Australian Jews have worked to make a positive difference in society, because of the reality I noted above there is also an undeniable insularity among Australian Jews.  Compared with most other countries in the Jewish Diaspora, Australian Jews are more likely to have attended Jewish parochial schools.  And anecdotally, among Jews here, all or most of their close friends are more likely to be Jewish than among American Jews, which is of course my point of reference for these observations and comparisons.
Tendencies toward insularity aside, there is a strong tradition among Jews living in non-Jewish lands that the civil law of the land trumps Jewish law.  This is an important point when talking about multiculturalism. Many citizens, here in Australia and elsewhere, fear that multiculturalism by necessity creates a different social order for each group.  And to be sure, there are members of minority groups who wish for their own laws and customs to trump the larger civil order.  But not Jews; that is, when the latter is more stringent.  This principle is known in Aramaic as Dina d’malchuta Dina – the Law of the Land is the Law.  It was already articulated in the Jewish legal writings of early antiquity.
As an example of how this works, Jewish law allows the marriage of males from age 13, and females from 12.  But in a place where local law does not permit marriage at such a young age, no Jewish authority would sanction a marriage of anybody below whatever is the legal age locally.  I should mention that, while Jewish law does PERMIT marriage at such a young age, I cannot think of any Jewish community in the world where marriage at such a young age has been normative since the mid-twentieth century.  And even then, only among Jews in the Arab world where it was normative generally.
Conversely, where Jewish law is more stringent than local civil law, Jewish law prevails.  Another example from marriage law:  today, Jewish law does not permit plural marriage.  So a Jew living in a country where plural marriage IS permitted, would be constrained by Jewish religious law to forsake the ‘right’ to more than one spouse.  But there is only one element of enforcement when Jews do not meet the higher standard of Jewish law.  That is the force of the community, which will choose to exclude anybody who flaunts its norms.  In a land where Jewish law is not the civil law of the land – that is to say everywhere INCLUDING Israel which is a modern parliamentary secular democracy – there is no other sanction.
Jews try to circumvent local civil law, usually by lobbying governmental bodies, when the clash between Jewish law and civil law creates a specific hardship.  For example, in America until about the 1960’s, in various states there were so-called Blue Laws, restricting most types of business activity on Sundays, the Christian ‘Sabbath.’  Where there were sizeable Jewish communities in these states, their leaders often worked to get exceptions to these laws since the Jewish Sabbath is on Saturday and such laws would result in an inability to do business two days out of seven.  But if such an exception was not forthcoming, no Jewish religious authority would advocate breaking the law – hardship notwithstanding.
Jewish law requires that the Jew disobey civil law only in three matters.  If it would require a Jew to commit murder.  Or perform some indecent and prohibited sexual act.  Or commit idol worship.  In these three cases, Jewish law instructs the Jew that he must disobey the law, even if the penalty of such disobedience is death.  In any other matter, he must obey the civil authorities.
Jews try so hard to be ‘normative’ to their environment that they often deeply resent laws that separate them even when a legal remedy exists.  For example, when the Australian parliamentary elections were called for 14 September 2013, many Australian Jews were deeply offended as this was Yom Kippur, the ‘holiest’ day of the Jewish year.  This, despite that early voting is readily available in Australia meaning that no Jew would be forced to vote on that date.  But some members of my congregation found it offensive that an election would be held on that day, because it represented an instance where Jews must choose between their religious faith and fully participating in national life.
          An anecdote along the same lines:  many of you have heard of the famous Jewish-American barrister, Alan Dershowitz, who is a law professor at Harvard University.  In his autobiography, Chutzpah, published in 1992, Dershowitz tells about the beginning of his years teaching at Harvard.  The university had classes on Saturdays at the time.  As a newly-hired Assistant Professor, he waged a strident battle to gain exemption from teaching Saturdays.  Since Dershowitz today is well-known as being a not particularly observant Jew, he quips that Harvard, by making him fight to avoid teaching Saturdays, kept him Sabbath-observant for several years longer than he otherwise would have been.
          I mentioned the State of Israel a moment ago and I’d like to return to her even though we’re talking more about multiculturalism in Australia.  I mention Israel, of course because she is the only Jewish-majority country in the world and therefore gives perhaps a truer glimpse into Jewish attitudes on multiculturalism – by showing how multicultural-minded Jews are when they are the dominant group.
          Israel is a modern, multicultural state where every citizen has the right to practice his or her religion as long as those practices do not violate civil law.  The latter is based largely on English Common Law although some aspects such as land tenure originate in Ottoman Turkish Law.  The only way that Jewish religious law has general authority is in minor ceremonial matters.  That is, only rabbis offer prayers at public ceremonies.  And the food in all government cafeterias is kosher.  And government offices are closed on the Jewish Sabbath and holy days, which are also national holidays.
Not only do all Israeli citizens have the right to freely practice their own religion, but each religious group in society enjoys a certain amount of autonomy.  So although there is a national system of secular schools which is open to all children, each religious group runs its own parochial school system at state expense, for parents who want their children to be educated according to their faith’s requirements.  And authority for the so-called ‘personal status’ issues are ceded to each recognised religious group:  Jews, Muslims, various Christian sects, Baha’is and others.  So, for example two Jews would go to the Jewish religious authorities to get married while two Muslims would go to their respective authority.  The religious groups are given such absolute authority that there is no civil alternative for marriage.  Of course this creates problems when a couple are not both members of the same religious group.  In that case, if there is to be no religious conversion of one of the principals, they must travel abroad to obtain a civil marriage, which is then recognised in Israel.  By the way, I mention this twist of Israeli law not to advocate for it.  I bring it up only to illustrate the absolute autonomy of religious denominations in Israel.
So Israel is a Jewish country in the same way that Great Britain is a Christian country.  In the UK, the Church of England is a unique public role as the state’s church, but members of other religious groups have freedom to practice their own faith.  Likewise, for example in Greece the Greek Orthodox Church has a special role but many Greeks freely practice other religions.  Israel is very similar.

So Jews, whether they are a minority or the majority, instinctively practice multiculturalism.  We are ready to assert our rights to practice our faith in a place where there are few Jews.  And to assert the right of others to practice their respective faiths.  This is why I am willing to travel all the way up here to Toowoomba to participate in these conversations.  Between the religious groups, you have a wonderful feeling of shared destiny and partnership here.  I come because there is unfortunately no organised Jewish community here.  But an opportunity for Jews to participate in these conversations should not be lost.  Thank you, and Shalom.    

No comments:

Post a Comment