Letter from the Editor

Nadine Epstein

Moment strives to represent the diversity of Judaism and Jewish opinion, and that means that sometimes we publish something controversial. We did just that in our May/June issue, setting off a media frenzy in the Jewish world and beyond.

The story begins with our Ask the Rabbis section, a forum that appears in each issue of Moment and provides a rare opportunity to read the opinions of rabbis from across the spectrum of American Judaism. The question posed in our last issue was: How should Jews treat their Arab neighbors? Ten rabbis—from independent to ultra-Orthodox—responded, nine with variations on the theme of compassion. Within these nine opinions there were important differences, but all were based on Judaism’s key teaching that all people are created in God’s image. As Reconstructionist rabbi Fred Dobb wrote, this means “everyone, not ‘everyone whose nationality includes no extremists.’ We Jews have our own extremists, terrorists and demagogues.”

The tenth rabbi responded differently. “I don’t believe in western morality,” he wrote. “The only way to fight a moral war is the Jewish way: Destroy their holy sites. Kill men, women and children (and cattle)...The first Israeli prime minister who declares that he will follow the Old Testament will finally bring peace to the Middle East…Living by Torah values will make us a light unto the nations who suffer defeat because of a disastrous morality of human invention.”

I’ve excerpted these sentences from the comments of Rabbi Manis Friedman, a regular contributor to our Ask the Rabbis section, and a well-known and beloved figure in the ultra-Orthodox Chabad movement. His words made many here at Moment uncomfortable. But as editor, I made the decision to include them because I believe that they express a point-of-view that should not be ignored. Had we left Friedman’s comments out of the section, we would not have provided our readers with an accurate portrayal of the range of thought that exists within the Jewish community.

Once published, Friedman’s comments went viral, and he was accused of advocating genocide and collective punishment reminiscent of that practiced by Nazi Germany. His words were picked up by the editor of the student magazine New Voices, then by reporters at The Forward and JTA. Questioned about what he had written, Friedman issued a statement in which he apologized for his language and explained that he did not advocate massacre. “I attempted to briefly address some of the ethical issues related to forcing the military to withhold fire from certain people and places, at the unbearable cost of widespread bloodshed (on both sides!)…,” he wrote. Chabad issued a statement distancing itself from the rabbi, who affirmed that he didn’t speak for the movement. (Ask the Rabbis does not consist of official statements, it gives voice to the rank-and-file.)

Friedman’s original answer—most often taken out of the context of the forum and sans the comments of the other nine rabbis—caught fire in the media, making its way into newspapers and blogs across the country, in Israel and elsewhere. Traffic to our website nearly tripled and our IntheMoment blog (momentmagblog.com) drew thousands of visitors, including some who participated in the discussion. Thoughtful civil comments were mixed with the kind of unfiltered vituperative reactions that spew out of people alone with their computers. Eventually Friedman’s words—interpreted in the worst possible way—came to the notice of the Arab world and were flaunted on Al Jazeera and Arabic blogs as the way Jews think. Friedman received threats.

What happened is not unusual. Once ideologues get hold of something, wild discourse is often the result. However, among the rest of us, and that is most of us, accurate coverage sparks genuine thinking. In a case like this, it encourages us to pay more attention to what is being said—and sometimes done—in the name of Judaism. That’s the point of a magazine like Moment.

As is evident in the pages of this very issue—in any issue of Moment—American Jews do not agree with each other on a variety of subjects. Many are convinced that the Arab-Israeli conflict cannot be ended by peaceful methods and that strong talk, backed up by unforgiving military force, may be the best deterrence. Most of this discourse takes place in sophisticated political language, but there are those who use incendiary language or quote the Torah. You can read a sampling of the latter among the comments spurred by Friedman’s words on Moment’s blog. At last count, nearly a third of the people who participated defended Friedman or agreed with his published views.

Despite, or perhaps because of, our access to unprecedented amounts of information, each of us tends to live within the boundaries of our own network of friends, family, colleagues and acquaintances. Society has evolved so that people who share similar ideas and values rarely bump into opinions with which they seriously disagree. As thinking people we need to transcend these networks and keep an eye on ones near and distant, both geographically and philosophically. We can’t pretend they do not exist.

We have published Rabbi Friedman’s full statement on page eight in the Letters section. I know from my talks with him that he feels misunderstood and would like people to read his original comments in their entirety. Moment offered him the opportunity to further explain his thoughts in this issue and he initially agreed. Due to the threats he received, however, he has decided to wait until a future issue. As usual, he has contributed to the Ask the Rabbis section on page 24, where he cherishes his role as contrarian to what he perceives as modern political correctness.