My Thoughts On Zionism
What I thought previously… well sort of
Zionism is an evil racist movement that seeks the establishment of a Greater Israel spanning from the Euphrates all the way until the Nile. It’s a movement that seeks world domination for the Jewish race. Zionists want to rule the world and make everybody else their slaves. They’re all a bunch of cunning, deceiving, occupying, ruthless, filthy, liars and killers. The Zionist movement was founded by a group of arrogant secular Jews who have perverted the teachings of Judaism to establish a Jewish-only state on what they believe to be their land… a land without a people for a people without a land. To sum it up, Zionism is a Jewish movement founded by “pigs and apes” for other “pigs and apes”. It must be destroyed! It must be made very clear however that NOT all Jews are Zionists. Many Jews actually oppose the evil ideology of Zionism and are against the Jewish state of Israel. We must stand by those Jews and treat them as our human brothers and sisters. They’re Jews who follow the true teachings of a great religion… Judaism. Unlike Zionist Jews, they’re Jews who believe in peace, kindness, tolerance and coexistence. Neturei Karta anyone?
What I think now
At its core, Zionism is a movement that supports a Jewish home in the Holy Land of Israel. The fact that the Jewish home has to be in the land of Israel indicates the religious elements of the movement since Judaism and Jewish tradition are intrinsically linked to that patch of land. According to conservative religious Jews however, establishing a Jewish home in the land of Israel and the return of the Jewish Diaspora to it goes against Jewish law since God wants Jews to remain in exile. That indicates the secular aspects of the movement. Moreover the fact that Zionism supports a Jewish state with a secular government also denotes the secular aspects even further. To sum it up, Zionism is basically a national movement.
Is Zionism racist?
Zionism supports a Jewish home in the land of Israel where Jews can have their own state in which they can live away from the risk of harsh anti-Semitism elsewhere (Holocaust anyone?). In order for this home to remain Jewish, the majority of the population needs to be Jewish. This will ensure a mainly Jewish government. After all, Israel is meant to be a Jewish state and Zionists want it to remain that way. The very notion that Israel is a Jewish state and should remain as such is in a way racist. Imagine if some American white Congressman suggested that America should become a mainly white State and should remain as such. Imagine if the American government did its best to make sure that the majority of new immigrants are white to ensure a white majority in the country. What would happen then? Zionism in a way is racist.
Aren’t other national movements racist?
Zionism is a national movement and in a way it is racist but aren’t there other national movements that are racist in one way or another too? What about pan-Arabism?
Zionism bears some slight similarities with other national movements. The best example I can think of right now is the Kurdish plight for a Kurdish homeland i.e. Kurdistan.
The Kurds are an ethnic group who consider themselves to be indigenous to a region often referred to as Kurdistan, an area which includes adjacent parts of Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Turkey.
Estimated at about 30 million people, the Kurds comprise one of the largest ethnic groups in the world that do not have a nation-state of their own. In the 20th century, Turkey, Iran, and Iraq have suppressed many Kurdish uprisings.
Kurds claim they’re generally discriminated against and they crave a homeland of their own, where they can build a Kurdish nation and escape the oppression facing them elsewhere. If Kurds succeed at doing that, they will need to remain the majority in order to keep their nation a mainly Kurdish state. Hence the very notion of a Kurdish state with a majority of Kurds is in a way also racist.
What makes Zionism so different and notorious then?
1- Zionists actually achieved their goal. They created a Jewish state on their land… or isn’t that Arab/Palestinian land? Controversy is the word. If Kurds achieved their goal of creating their own nation, Kurdistan, the issue of land won’t be such a controversial topic. The Kurds have inhabited the land they’re living on for a fairly long time without a period of absence. Proving that the land is not theirs should be a real headache. Jews on the other hand certainly inhabited the Holy Land and were the first ones to give it its “Holy” status thanks to Prophet Moses. They without a doubt had… have an intrinsic link to it. The difference between Kurds and Zionists regarding the issue of land is that Jews were exiled from the Holy Land. They remained in exile and absent from a land they considered theirs for a period of about 2000 years. That’s an awfully long time. During this long absence, other people settled on the land and developed a strong bond to it. They fell in love with the land and developed an intrinsic undeniable link to it. What about them? They remained on the land until… until Zionists came to reclaim back what they considered rightfully theirs.
(Frankly, I honestly think it’s something utterly wild to come back after an absence period of about 2000 years to grab back something which you still consider to be yours but then again… the further away you are from something you dearly long for and the larger the gap between you and a lost love you desire to feel again, the more you miss it and the more you want it back. Moreover when you’re in a place in which you’re facing discrimination and hatred, you’ll simply long for that “love†and for that sanctuary even more. Why? Because having a sanctuary of your own brings comfort.)
2- The creation of the Jewish State of Israel was NOT a pleasant process. Zionists brought a lot of pain and suffering to the Arabs of the Holy Land. Jordan also contributed towards this suffering but the Zionists were the ones who were mainly responsible. At least that’s what happened according to the history which *I* learnt growing up. My mind is quite made up on this one.
3- Anti Semitism. It’s not some myth the Jews invented to make others sympathize with them. It existed for a long time, still continues to and is very real. A lot of anti-Zionist rhetoric in the Arab world is just plain anti-Semitism hiding behind the “Zionists are evil†argument.
4- Again, controversy. The media likes controversy and there’s no modern day conflict that’s more controversial than the Israeli-Arab and more recently Iranian conflict. The media is sensational and it loves to grab our attention.
Are ALL Zionists evil people? Shouldn’t we Muslims regard them as enemies?
I certainly don’t think so… anymore at least. After engaging in discussions on the blogosphere with a number of Zionists and after immersing myself in Zionism/Zionists related online reading material, I realized that the initial basic ideology of Zionism is interpreted rather differently by different Zionists today. Whether a Zionist is an enemy or not depends on his/her interpretation of Zionism. I truly doubt if there are many “Euphrates to Nilesâ€, Zionists out there nowadays with “expansionary†tendencies. I certainly doubt if there were many of them about 2 decades ago also. Why would Israel hand Sinai, an area about 10 times Israel’s current size back to Egypt? Either Begin was a very stupid “Euphrates to Nilesâ€, “expansionary†Zionist or he didn’t have much of those tendencies to begin with. Anyways, I’ll probably get into greater detail regarding this in a future post but for now I have some questions for my Zionist readers. Does being a peace loving moderate Zionist who’s against the expansion of the current state of Israel mean you’re less of a Zionist who’s not following the real “evil Zionismâ€? Is your Zionism only limited to patriotism and love for Israel or does it include “expansionary†tendencies? In other words, do you support the continuing construction of Israeli settlements on Palestinian land?
When answering, please don’t practice the Zionist version of Taqiyya. Okay? 
Is it possible to live in peace with peace loving moderate Zionists? (Reality check)
Hell yeah! It’s bound to happen next week. Fine, maybe a year or two tops.
Alright, FINE! At this point the above question is actually quite irrelevant especially in the context of the Arab world. Instead, we’ll first need to ask “is it possible to live in peace with Jews?â€
We all know the answer to this one don’t we? This guy here is not the general rule but the exception.
Conclusion
Knowing history is not a bad thing at all but being obsessed with it certainly is. You can’t dwell on the past for too long if you want to remain sane.
Israel today exists. This is the present reality. About 70% of Israelis today are 3rd generation, born and raised in Israel. As Israelis, they love their country, they support it and they’re patriotic. Hence that makes them Zionists.
We can continue wishing for this to happen:
…but I doubt it will.
We can continue cursing Zionists but if we truly do believe in a 2 states solution and do want to live in peace side by side with Israel then we’re going to have to drop this whole “Zionists are evil devils†crap. There are many many Zionists who just want to live in peace with their neighbors. They don’t believe in a Greater Israel and they don’t believe killing Arabs just for the fun of it is a nice thing to do. There’s no need to harbor ill-intentions towards them. Befriending them is not wrong. It’s perfectly fine and indeed they’re our friends. As for loony land-hungry blood thirsty Zionists, may they burn in hell. Amen! 
Join the Conversation
It’s good that you have dropped the ‘Zionists are evil’ attitude and have recognized that a lot of rhetoric masks anti-Semitism with anti-Zionism.
However, the way you have classified Zionism and Jewish tradition as intrinsically linked is very inaccurate. I am not saying that Zionism is against Judaism–as a non-religious person, I frankly don’t care whether or not Zionism is compatible with Judaism; I’ll let Jewish people dwell on that. But looking at the history of political Zionism in the past 200 years, the nature of the Zionism advocated by Hertzl and others was rather revolutionary and had marginal support among the world-wide Jewish community. His Zionism, under the tutelage of other prominent political Zionists that came after him, eventually cultivated a new national Jewish identity that had not existed in any meaningful way before hand. For example, if you look at early Jewish emigration OUT of Europe in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, only a fraction of those people moved to Palestine–most went to the United States. In his book “The Iron Cage,” Rashid Khalidi describes this as a self-selecting population; that is, those Jewish immigrants who did end up in Palestine were already Zionists, because the ones who weren’t went elsewhere. So, the idea that Zionism is and always has been the predominant ideology among Jews is false. However, this changed dramatically after the Holocaust and the establishment of Israel in 1948.
Secondly, the part where you recognize the need for a Jewish state so that Jews from all around the world can take refuge from anti-Semitism is an unfortunate apologism for racism. Rather than address the racism, it’s treated as if it’s an inevitable phenomenon that cannot be resolved or fixed in any reasonable way. Of course, this is not true, and is a shameful position. The meaning of justice–the entire point of progressive activism–is to make the whole world safe for all peoples, and a part of this task means fighting racist attitudes with education. Anti-Semites in Europe did in fact support the early Zionist project because it meant the Jews would leave their countries and go elsewhere. Americans tried a similarly racist project in the mid-1800s when they helped establish Liberia in Africa as a place for American Blacks to go so they wouldn’t be in a racist environment. This does nothing but pin the responsibility of fixing racism on its victims, rather than the racist abusers themselves.
Thirdly, it is remarkable that there can be a discussion about Zionism without mentioning any of its victims–what of the 1948 Palestinians, the Lebanese, the Syrians, the Egyptians, and the Jordanians who died or were otherwise dealt with unjustly at the hands of Israel? A marginal note, but you err when you say that the terrorist Menachem Begin handed the Sinai back over to Egypt–in fact the leaders of Israel during that period were Golda Meir (a racist who denied the existence of a Palestinian identity) and Yitzhak Rabin. There is no point to apologize for Begin who was as a former leader of the Irgun a terrorist, and secondly the father of the settlement project which continues to this day as a means of justifying the occupation and later annexation of parts, if not all, of the West Bank and Gaza.
Fourthly, I don’t understand how you can talk about maintaining demographic control of a country to ensure its population is always a Jewish majority as being only “in a way racist.” It is flat out racism, and there is no other way to explain it.
Overall, I think you are very well-intentioned and I’m glad you overcame your initial views about the “evil” of Zionists. However, don’t allow this realization to lead you into believing that it is okay to take the crimes of the state of Israel (Zionism or not, who cares about what Zionism is, let’s just look at what Israel does) lightly. Never compromise your principles in order to satisfy others.
First off, interesting article. Secondly, Zionism is another one of those things which people understandably, but wrongly group into one category. From the very beginning there were the secular zionists and the religious zionists (i.e. Theodor Herzl and Avraham Kook), not only were those two groups divided but you also had different zionist factions, some more militaristic than others (i.e. Hagganah and Irgun).
In response to Yaman, to say that a return to the Holy Land was not a firm part of the Jewish identity is a firm misunderstanding of Judaism. Look at Jewish texts and prayers, the amount of times they refer to Jerusalem is rediculous. Those Jews, you refer to, who left Europe, were the product of the haskalah, and were of German descent. This means that they a secular group of Jews. These German Jews were not zionist because they, as a community, had renounced their longing for the Holy Land because it was a big cause of anti-Semitism. This was due to the fact that people believed these Jews to be more loyal to each other, because of their common longing to return from exile, than to the country in which they resided.
Additionally, it is all too easy to recognise the pain of the Arab inhabitants of the Holy Land while not recognising the 900,000 Jewish inhabitants of the Arab countries who had their land and possesions stripped away and were kicked out of their countries. There were at least the same number of Jewish refugees as Palestinian refugees (according to Palestinian estimates) if not a good deal more (according to U.N. and Israeli estimates). If this was not enough, the U.N. has contributed a great deal of money to the Palestinian refugees while not sending a penny to their Jewish counterparts. And if you think Israel had an easy time absorbing the refugees simply look at the conditions of the refugee camps which were in place.
Furthermore, if you have such an easy fix for racism please due share. Why should any group of people have to continue to suffer from the cruelties of racism while the world searches for its magic answer. Anti-Semitism has occured for thousands of years and I cannot see any end in sight. Is it not better for Jews to be independent and govern themselves and wait for a cure to racism rather than having to wait while their wives are being raped and murdered by pogroms and their brothers are being accused of drinking the blood of children?
Yaman-
“the Lebanese, the Syrians, the Egyptians, and the Jordanians who died or were otherwise dealt with unjustly at the hands of Israel?”
Huh? In 48 the UN voted to partition Transjordon…Israel accepted..the Arabs did not. Eygptians, Lebanese and Syrians and Iraqis helped attack Israel…maybe they got shot because they were shooting at us?
Ezra, contrary to what you have implied, I completely support the cause of Jewish refugees from Arab countries who were forcibly and unjustly kicked out after Israel was created. These victims are entitled the same rights as their Palestinian counterparts. However, I do not believe that because there was a similar number of both that some how they have been “equalized” and therefore we don’t have to worry about the refugee problem. Another important factor is that the Jewish refugees from Arab countries came from all over the place; Morocco to Iraq to Yemen. But none of them were made refugees by Palestinians, who did not benefit one bit from their expulsion from the Arab countries and into Israel (where most of them went). It is also disingenuous to claim that Israel did not actively seek and support the transfer of Jews from all around the world (especially Eastern Europe and the Arab countries) into Israel. We should also look at what happened to the various refugee populations: the Arab Jews were absorbed slowly into Israel (though it is a well known fact that the Sephardim suffer from discrimination and other economic problems within Israeli society) and given political rights, their Palestinian counterparts are in a more dire economic situation, deprive of basic political, social, and economic rights. All refugee problems should be addressed, but the existence of a Jewish one and an Arab one does not mean they cancel each other out.
Also, Ezra, there is no easy solution to racism. But improving education and addressing widespread social and economic discontent is a start. As you know, radical ideologies usually find the most support amongst the disenfranchised of society who are more prone to accepting an ideology which claims it has found the solution. Nazis blamed the Jews for Germany’s problems, the KKK blamed American Blacks, etc. Obviously all of these ideologies were incoherent not to mention inhumane. But let me ask you this, Ezra: do you think that Israel’s actions have really made worldwide Jewry safer? Even more pressing, are Israeli Jews safer than they would otherwise have been if their predecessors had not adopted brutal policies of expropriation and expansion? The only thing protecting Israelis today is an excessive imbalance of force: and if (and when, because power never lasts forever) the scales tip the other way, I am afraid to see what over a century of discontent and frustration will culminate with. If all parties with power refuse to be moderate (and by moderate, I mean truly and genuinely moderate, not the “moderation” of the Abu Mazen and Ehud Olmert [which according to some people is the same as the "moderation" of the wonderful Kings of Saudi Arabia and Jordan]), then only the extremists will succeed. This is the nature of such things, they become uncontrollable and will not turn out as planned.
Finally, regarding what you say about Judaism and the Holy Land, this is not what I was commenting on. But traditionally this spiritual and religious belief was not linked to a political movement until the advent of Modern Zionism. It should be difficult for any rational person to believe that the Zionism of the 20th century is the same as the Zionism of the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, or 5th centuries–no matter what you refer to when you use the term. Frankly, every ideology always claims to have traditional roots: look at Salafis and Wahhabis, they all believe that they are returning to the original beliefs. Look at Iranian and Turkish nationalism of the early 20th centuries, both hearkened back to the existence of an ancient people. 19th and 20th century Zionism is no exception to this pattern.
Esra’a: I understand that you disagree with the way it was created, and with the current policies of the state, but I am curious as to why you support the creation of Israel?
Maybe Jews were safer before Israel, maybe Jews are safer now, regardless, Jews now have control of their own fate as oppose to Hitler or the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem. It is interesting what you say about Zionism. You cannot dismiss Zionism simply claims to have traditional roots. The only true change that Zionism underwent was a secularization. It was always there, surely the fact of a Jewish Majority in Jerusalem in the 1800s even before Theodor Herzl wrote Der Judenstaat is proof enough. Similarly, it is a bit distasteful to say that the Jewish refugees played right into Israel’s hands in the manner in which you did. Contrary to what you might think, Israel by no means was in need of hundreds of thousands of pennyless exiles. Israel accepted them with open arms because that was the whole point of Zionism to begin with. And by the way, the “widely known fact” that the Jews from the Arab countries suffer from discrimination was a true in the fifties and sixties. The intermarrage rate is now extremely high and any gap between Ashkenazim and Sephardim is rapidly shrinking. Just ask Moshe Katsav and Amir Peretz.
Yaman, Esra’a & Ezra, interesting responses. I’ll get back to you all a bit later. Busy right now. @ work.
Because I think Jews aren’t safe enough if they remain minorities in other states, which they always have been, and I also believe that the Koran is in favour of its creation. Islamic Zionism is often confused with pro-Israel Muslims which is not the case. I believe the Promised Land is the Homeland of the Jews, which they have the right to.
Esra’a-
“I believe the Promised Land is the Homeland of the Jews, which they have the right to.”
I have been reading the Qur’an and I think I came across the part you refer to.
Whatever the case…what a brave and bold statement.
I consider myself a religious Zionist..but no zealot. We all seem to interpret and view the history of the area differently, but how can anybody doubt the Jews have a long and powerful attachment to that little place? Also…how can anybody deny that others besides Jews lived there and and homes there?
I have always said it is a complex question and nobody is going to have it “their way”.
How to get an agreement that will stop the on-going destruction…oh boy..there is the rub.
Yaman,
You misunderstand. Nowhere did I recognize such a need. I did however recognize the Jews’ stance on this need which they claim arose as did anti-Semitism in Europe. But now that you brought it up, I do think I’m leaning towards a “recognition” stance. Things were horrible for the Jews back then. Education and all that would have worked but it would have taken too long.
The discussion is about Zionism as an ideology and NOT its application. I see the 2 as being quite different.
You’re putting words into my mouth. Where did I apologize for Begin as you claim? The man was a damn terrorist. I was speaking strictly in the context of “Euphrates to Niles” which is the wild claim many Muslims and Arabs always bring up.
Again, you’re misunderstanding. This post is about Zionism as an ideology and NOT application. Israeli actions would require a totally new post. And believe me I don’t compromise my principles in order to please others but I do believe in compromise (from BOTH sides) when it comes to tolerance and peace related issues.
I also disagree with you regarding the term I used which is “racism”. I’m Sudanese and I would prefer if Sudan remained a Sudanese-majority country. I wouldn’t want some people coming from let’s say South America and becoming the majority. Sudan is and should remain Sudanese culturally and demographically. It might be racist in a way but for me I prefer to call it nationalism.
Esra’a yes I’ve read about the “Muslim Zionists” and their arguments. Interesting stuff. I haven’t seen any counter arguments based on theological grounds. I’ve also always thought about another thing. The Koran commands us to allow Jews and Christians freedom of religion which means that Jews can worship in their holiest city i.e. Jerusalem. Obviously that would require their presence there now wouldn’t it?
I perfectly agree with you!
Yaman, you ask, “Even more pressing, are Israeli Jews safer than they would otherwise have been if their predecessors had not adopted brutal policies of expropriation and expansion?”
Just to clarify, are you suggesting that the institutionalized bias levied against Israel by most Arab (and many Muslim) nations is on behalf of humanitarian concern for Palestinians when Palestinians are themselves denied their rights and oppressed in every single Arab League nation? I certainly hope not because it is not only illogical, the evidence doesn’t support it. The issue is not about a desire to sanctify the humanity of Palestinian Arabs, however righteous that may be. The regional hatred toward Israel has one defining motive — loss of power and control over a valued parcel of land by a regional group that doesn’t like to share.
And, I single nobody out. That’s the region’s culture … nobody in the Middle East shares power willingly.
The fact that Jews wish to preserve a Jewish identity on their land is not racist It is an understandable defensive posture in the face of a hostile and tyrannical majority, which denies minorities throughout the entire region opportunities for free communal expression on par with the dominant group. Switch the groups and the same situation will still occur. This has been the unfortunate status quo in the Middle East long before the establishment of modern day Israel. At least be honest in your assessment — that Israel’s problems are part-and-parcel, and hence reflective, of the region-at-large, rather than some microcosm of social problems in an otherwise harmonious region. People in the area are desperate to protect themselves, and therefore have many perceived enemies.
Unfortunately, the region is full of rivalry, and this is not because of Zionism or the establishment of Israel. It’s ancient. What occurs in Israel is because of a regional culture of competition and suspicion of “the other” and hence, shows why any chance for peace in the region should not focus on only one area or group or ideology, but should be regional, comprehensive, and systemic, by giving the various peoples of the region opportunities to invest in each other productively — enhancing their own and each others ways of life — while also allowing each to maintain their own individual identity and culture. Sudan, Israel, Iraq, etc. need one strategic plan because their problems all have the same roots — suspicion and fear of sharing power. All else seem to be putting a bunch of bandaids on a sick system. And that’s why nothing works. Only when all stakeholders are engaged will progress occur.
I suggest you listen to what Kurds are saying. Open your heart their frustration over continuous disenfranchisement by dominant regional groups — Turks, Persians, and Arabs. Will you still lecture them on how racist they are to want to be sure to be in control over their own fate and thus, won’t be available to be pushed around any longer, by ensuring a majority population in their ancestral homeland after all they’ve been subjected to specifically because of their weakness?
I believe solving social problems will not occur by lecturing victims to martyr themselves and be the first ones to reinvent a screwed up geopolitical social system. What it will take are unbiased, nonpartisan partners willing to enhance everybody’s security, livlihood, and overall way of life together without pointing fingers or making anyone feel particularly responsible, regardless of the identities involved; but while respecting and upholding the identities involved nevertheless.
Peaceful Vanguard: Your response is preposterous.
I would never–and never have–adopted the position that the various Arab countries have acted on “behalf” of the Palestinians out of humanitarian concern. Come now, that’s ridiculous. The cause of the Palestinians has been exploited and manipulated by others in the region since the beginning.
I don’t know what it is you imagine when you say that “nobody in the Middle East shares power willingly.” What, is it the truth that everybody in Europe and North America shares power willingly? Oh how civilized!
As for the preservation of Jewish land, of course, you talk as if this land has always belonged to Jewish owners. This is not true unless you are talking in religious terms, in which case your beliefs are fanatical, not grounded in logic and I cannot argue with you. Second, if you had judged me on my own merits, you would know that I absolutely do not assess Israel in a vacuum, and I know that the problems it has (discrimination against the so-called Israeli Arabs and Sephardim) are widespread in the region. But, unlike you, I do not use this as an excuse (everybody’s doing it!) to allow injustice to continue.
About the ancient, endless, and unendable rivalries, your studies of the Arab Mind and Arab Culture are really quite phenomenal. Could you please tell me how you learned to understand them so well? I think it would really help me if I could understand the suspicious and competitive nature of my mind.
Why do you even mention the Kurds? Do you think that I do not support their struggle for recognition and equal rights? My heart is “open,” thank you very much, and this pseudo-humanitarian rhetoric that you use is unconvincing.
Of course, I never asked anybody to martyr themselves (anywhere) and I never subscribed to a view so naive as the one you’ve pinned on me. Part of being “unbiased” means that you are not beholden to a certain political structure (identities do not manifest themselves only in one political structure, that is, of the state), but I can see that any Zionist (Muslim, Christian, or Jewish) is already committed to working an exclusively Jewish state into any solution regardless of the findings of the inquiry you’ve suggested. That is bias.
Drima: I apologize if I misunderstood your statements. Thank you for clarifying.
Esra’a: But there are minorities in states all over the world; do you suggest that each of these minorities claim a plot of land somewhere in the world as their ethnic homeland so that they can have a refuge? The Zionist question is fundamentally different from the Kurdish one because the Kurds already live in a certain geographical area. Jewish communities on the otherhand were widely spread around the world, and this was a central problem with Zionist ideology: they had invented a national political identity but they did not have any land which could be described as theirs. It’s completely wrong to believe that at that time the largest concentration of Jews in the world was in Palestine. Zionist ideology required mass immigration to Palestine of European, American, and Arab Jewry (mostly the first two), and eventually this became a hostile and armed takeover.
If you do believe that every minority in the world should be allotted a plot of land for his or her national home, then what you are basically advocating is that each person is better off with his ‘own kind’ than elsewhere. This is a very pessimistic view, I think, and I don’t think it would help in trying to build a progressive future where all people are equal regardless of ethnicity, religion, or nationality.
Ezra: Just to clarify, I am not saying that “Zionism is untraditional” in order to delegitimize it. It is a legitimate ideology because it exists–but some people believe that it has always been there, and that the creation of Israel was the final culmination in a struggle that has been active for two thousand years. Of course, this is not true as political Zionism has not been active that long, and the Zionism of Herzl et al was only a very recent historical development. My point is not to say that because Zionism is not traditional, it should be dismissed, but simply that it is not traditional as people suggest.
As for the question of Jewish refugees, I apologize if I treated it with less tact than necessary in dealing with such issues. My intention was to contradict the popular view that some people hold, which is that raising the issue of Jewish refugees from Arab lands somehow undermines the Palestinian refugees. But, if we look at these events, it was NOT the Palestinians who evicted those Jews (it was not their crime, but the other Arab countries), and it was most definitely NOT the Palestinians who benefited from it. Israel, on the other hand, had been actively promoting Jewish immigration for the past several decades (in some cases it even forced it upon Jewish residents in Eastern Europe by making deals with governments there), and of course did benefit from a surge in its population. Israel is the only party that benefited from both refugee problems, while the Palestinians benefited from neither.
No, that is not at all what I implied. Minorities are all different in my opinion. Jews have a different situation than other minorities. It is a major religion with historical and religious significance and the Koran is in support of them having their own designated land, so why should I not support such a thing?
So does that mean you can do what ever the Koran says because it says so? Koran says lots of disturbing things and I don’t think you want to act out all of them. Koran like the Bible and the Torah was written long time ago. The geopolitics or in some cases the laws and morality doesn’t apply now.
I don’t think anyone want the Mongols, the Romans, the Greek or the Persians make claim on lands based on their history.
At the same time, Israel was created, it’s there. What’s done is done. Can we just move along? How about the world puts their effort into building homes for the Palestinian refugees in West Bank or Gaza rather than using their misery for their own political gain?
Arabs when they went to war with Israel, they weren’t fighting for the Palestinians. People have to realize this, this include Jews and stop punching the Palestinians for what their neighbours tried to do to them. Considering this thing took place couple of generations ago should give the Jews a hint to stop using that to justify the occupation and expansion.
Judaism is not a major religion based on number, but rather history alone. There are much larger religious and ethnic groups out there without their own nation.
Hello Yaman. You said,
No, I am talking about anthropology based upon the following:
(Aside from an extremly tiny number of Samaritans today …)
1) Jews are the only group with an independent history, patrimony, culture, ethnic identity, philology, liturgy, folklore, customs, and legal institutions that stem directly from Israel and the West Bank (Judea);
2) Jews utilize and subscribe to the precolonial names for the region whereas their rivals use foreign, modern names;
3) Jews are the only people who trace their ethno-tribal roots directly to the land in question;
4) Nowhere in international law or legal definitions of indigenousness are there stipulations for an ancestral community to be the majority population on their land; nor are diaspora communities rejected from the concept of indigenousness;
5) All rulers from Roman times until modern times of the land of Israel and Judea have been foreign, colonial rulers. The only native born rulers of the land for thousands of years have been Jews;
6) Palestinian Arabs never formed a communal identity on the land (until the past century), which is a normal stipulation for a group to be granted sovereignty (ownership).
I could go on for awhile longer, but this should make a strong, non-religious case for the right for Jews to be sovereign on their ancestral homeland.
All that said, issues of sovereignty in my opinion are largely independent of human rights issues, meaning that just because Jews may have an excellent case to be sovereign on the land, it doesn’t give them any rights whatsoever to be exploitative or abusive of Arab minorities who live there. What I’m trying to say is that my belief that Jews should hold sovereignty over the land does not mean I would ever apologize for misanthropy against Palestinians.
No, you misunderstand. I do not use it as an excuse for it to continue. Quite the opposite. I say it must be tackled, but that a comprehensive, rather than singular, approach is needed. As I said … all the region’s stakeholders need to be engaged.
Come on, be fair. We are talking about politics here, not individual, personal psyches. And I do not mean just Arabs, I don’t know where you came up with that. We see it with the other groups in the area too, including Jews, Kurds, Turkmen, etc. Take a look at some of the occurrences between different Christian denominations just inside the Church of the Holy Sepulcre alone to see how badly non-Arab, non-Muslim groups also share limited resources. The region has its share of difficulties with tribalism and suspicion Yaman, which manifest themselves in all societies. That doesn’t mean every single person, but there are inter-group social problems we can’t ignore. And I’m only saying this to clarify the point, not to lecture you because I am 100% sure you know this already.
How exactly is preserving ones peoplehood an exercise in bias? Maybe you just don’t understand the culture … Jews see Zionism as a project of preservation and restoration after a history of repeated attempts at anihilation.
Not sure what happened, let’s try this again …
Hello Yaman. You said, “As for the preservation of Jewish land, of course, you talk as if this land has always belonged to Jewish owners. This is not true unless you are talking in religious terms, in which case your beliefs are fanatical, not grounded in logic and I cannot argue with you.”
No, I am talking about anthropology based upon the following:
(Aside from an extremly tiny number of Samaritans today …)
1) Jews are the only group with an independent history, patrimony, culture, ethnic identity, philology, liturgy, folklore, customs, and legal institutions that stem directly from Israel and the West Bank (Judea);
2) Jews utilize and subscribe to the precolonial names for the region whereas their rivals use foreign, modern names;
3) Jews are the only people who trace their ethno-tribal roots directly to the land in question;
4) Nowhere in international law or legal definitions of indigenousness are there stipulations for an ancestral community to be the majority population on their land; nor are diaspora communities rejected from the concept of indigenousness;
5) All rulers from Roman times until modern times of the land of Israel and Judea have been foreign, colonial rulers. The only native born rulers of the land for thousands of years have been Jews;
6) Palestinian Arabs never formed a communal identity on the land (until the past century), which is a normal stipulation for a group to be granted sovereignty (ownership).
I could go on for awhile longer, but this should make a strong, non-religious case for the right for Jews to be sovereign on their ancestral homeland.
All that said, issues of sovereignty in my opinion are largely independent of human rights issues, meaning that just because Jews may have an excellent case to be sovereign on the land, it doesn’t give them any rights whatsoever to be exploitative or abusive of Arab minorities who live there. What I’m trying to say is that my belief that Jews should hold sovereignty over the land does not mean I would ever apologize for misanthropy against Palestinians.
“Second, if you had judged me on my own merits, you would know that I absolutely do not assess Israel in a vacuum, and I know that the problems it has (discrimination against the so-called Israeli Arabs and Sephardim) are widespread in the region. But, unlike you, I do not use this as an excuse (everybody’s doing it!) to allow injustice to continue.”
No, you misunderstand. I do not use it as an excuse for it to continue. Quite the opposite. I say it must be tackled, but that a comprehensive, rather than singular, approach is needed. As I said … all the region’s stakeholders need to be engaged.
“About the ancient, endless, and unendable rivalries, your studies of the Arab Mind and Arab Culture are really quite phenomenal. Could you please tell me how you learned to understand them so well? I think it would really help me if I could understand the suspicious and competitive nature of my mind.”
“Part of being “unbiased†means that you are not beholden to a certain political structure (identities do not manifest themselves only in one political structure, that is, of the state), but I can see that any Zionist (Muslim, Christian, or Jewish) is already committed to working an exclusively Jewish state into any solution regardless of the findings of the inquiry you’ve suggested. That is bias.”
Come on, be fair. We are talking about politics here, not individual, personal psyches. And I do not mean just Arabs, I don’t know where you came up with that. We see it with the other groups in the area too, including Jews, Kurds, Turkmen, etc. Take a look at some of the occurrences between different Christian denominations just inside the Church of the Holy Sepulcre alone to see how badly non-Arab, non-Muslim groups also share limited resources. The region has its share of difficulties with tribalism and suspicion Yaman, which manifest themselves in all societies. That doesn’t mean every single person, but there are inter-group social problems we can’t ignore. And I’m only saying this to clarify the point, not to lecture you because I am 100% sure you know this already.
How exactly is preserving ones peoplehood an exercise in bias? Maybe you just don’t understand the culture … Jews see Zionism as a project of preservation and restoration after a history of repeated attempts at anihilation.
“I apologize if I misunderstood your statements.”
Yaman, no need for apologies at all. It’s all good.
.
Hmmmm, good point.
This is a response to Drima’s intial post and questions, the rest of this debate is quite interesting, but that’ll take some more time to respond to.
“Does being a peace loving moderate Zionist who’s against the expansion of the current state of Israel mean you’re less of a Zionist who’s not following the real “evil Zionismâ€? Is your Zionism only limited to patriotism and love for Israel or does it include “expansionary†tendencies? In other words, do you support the continuing construction of Israeli settlements on Palestinian land?”
Being a peace loving moderate, if not liberal Zionist, does not make me less of a Zionist than others who want expansionism. I am against any attempts to expans current Israeli territory, and I’m also almost 100% against the settlements in the West Bank. Its not simple, and I appreciate what you say about Sudanese nationalism- there seems to be a fine line between nationalism in practice and racism.
I love Israel and its people and support its existence, but its hard for me to figure out just how I can do so, living in the US, knowing that so many Palestinians’ lives are devastated, and Israel is one of the causes of that devastation (but not the only). All I can say is it is very difficult. I dont think its ok for Jewish tourists to flock to Israel without being aware of the realities of the living conditions of Palestinians.
But Zionism is no more racist than any other nationalism, and actually having the state does not make it more racist that other national ideologies that do not, cause its still fundamentally a nationalist ideology.
As to Esra’a
& your Howie response
I totally agree with your both statements above
I have read & researched a while ago also parts of the Quran, searching for what is there written about Jews & Israel etc., just because of the discussions with my Iranian friend about Israel & was so astounded to find in the Quran verses like this:
5:20 AND, LO, Moses said unto his people:” [31] O my people! Remember the blessings which God bestowed upon you when he raised up prophets among you, and made you your own masters, [32] and granted unto you [favours] such as He had not granted to anyone else in the world.
5:21 O my people! Enter the holy land which God has promised you; but do not turn back, for then you will be lost!”
so at least religious groups like Hamas or Hezbollah should accept the existence of Israel if they’d read their Quran more sorrowly..
I don’t mean to argue with religious statements, but just agree, that from religious Islamic view Israel’s existence couldn’t be condemned, if even Muhammed called it their promised land…
Jews weren’t just a suppressed minority of any other country – all their traditional & religious roots lie in this country where once they were scattered by the Romans, but apparently not welcome in most of the countries where they lived for long 2000 years, so couldn’t assimilate & melt with the nations they lived in. – the idea to return to their origin country was ever present – “Next year in Jerusalem†– was a greeting under Jews in Europe since long centuries. –
There may be faults on both sides how it was done, but now they are there back in Israel in third generiation while a small Jewish community always existed there – just like the Palestinensians are there, both claiiming for the same small piece of country – peacuful solution not in sight..
Just because Jews want to live together in an own state after having really bad experiences with living peaceful together with & inside of other nations – doesn’t mean, that Zionism is racism, well there probably are also Zionist racists, like there are racists in all countries, but racism has nothing to do with Zionism – it’s just a hateful state of mind of narrow thinking persons who fell to strange ideology..
Racism doesn’t only mean that ‘a people’ want to live together or doesn’t want to get suppressed anymore – that’s what all nations want, but mainly also to discriminate, supress or try to extinguish other races – (yes I know what answers will now come.. )
There live about 18 or 20 percent Arabs in Israel – There live about no Jews in Egypt. p.e. & I don’t believe a Jewish not pro-Israel family could live & survive in Gaza. – So who’s the racist movement? – Anti-semitism is racism – I don’t see a movement of similar extent in Israel as only in some very right winged fanatics & there’s a lot of other Israelis who fight them & would a racist society tolerate relative tolerant & critical papers like Haaretz? – Of course you find tendencies of racism in every society, but as long as they don’t rule & critical voices are allowed there’s a chance..
& I understand a lot of Israels reactions living in a world where large majorities hate Jews in general & just want to wipe out Israel. – Under this scenario lasting since 60 years I understand that a nation sometimes really over-reacts & gets more & more militarized – just an act of survival. –
Yes this circle of violence has to stop, – but the first step should be that Hamas & Hezbollah & Iran should accept Israel’s existence or otherwise there will be no way for peace & eternal war forever – I fear the most terrible scenarios coming
Shalom & Salaam – Hebrew & Arabic so close together, both languages written from right to left – brothers claiming for the same small piece of land – Zion is the mountain where once Israelian king Solomon built the temple, also known as City of David (just to mention)
I forgot to subsribe to comments, which now I do!
Rachel, the fact that you can say that so honestly is truly deep and I really admire that.
Heimo-
Well said Heimo…too many folks focus on the secular politcal Zionism…the religious aspect is as old as Abraham…
Definitely, this is all part of being a Muslim. The Koran says no disturbing thing unless you of course misunderstand it – the whole point of the Koran is to give you the ideal Truth and have you apply it to actual life as best as you can, otherwise you are no Muslim. Secondly it is very important that you understand the time period in which the Koran was released which makes some things conidered irrelevant to life today, apparently no one seems to understand the origins and history behind this holy book especialy considering the amount of flak we have to deal with from big media outlets which associate us with their ill-defined Jihad and terrorism. It doesn’t make Koranic texts disturbing if you think about the context in which it was said in, don’t assume that it was disturbing if it was merely irrelevent to our time period as you implied.
You’re not religious, and therefore you don’t believe in miracles. But we do. Despite the huge time gap between the Koran and the creation of Israel, it still happened. To me that is one of the many great predicitions that the Koran has made which are still applicable today. Relevance and application are different things and humans are expected to use their common sense to differentiate between the two. For example marrying 9 women just because the Prophet did is completely irrelevant and unnecessary considering our lives today, but supporting something such as the creation of a holy land for a religious minority that’s actually been spoken highly of in the Koran is something we had to keep supporting until it was achieved. And since it happened, I support its achievement, and I also support my stance entirely when I say that supporting the creation of Israel is an Islamic thing to do. Other ‘major religions’ are not half as significant in our region as Judaism is, which plays a major role in the creation of both Christianity and Islam. A holy land for the Jews is well deserved. But using history to justify the nasty things that Israel does today and constantly playing the victim even when they are clearly no longer the victims anymore is something that pisses many Muslims off and makes them reconsider their stance for supporting the creation of such a state. So if people think Muslims have always been anti-Israel, they are very wrong. Current events changed their opinions and rightly so. I disagree with those who are anti-Jews and thus anti-Israel entirely as they don’t go by what their holy book says, but I can be grouped with those who are pro-Israel but anti-Israeli government.
Esra’a-
“The Koran says no disturbing thing unless you of course misunderstand it”
I don’t agree with sections of what you say in your response…some I do…but I had to focus on this line I selected.
I have read the Old Testament, New and a good part of the Qur’an…I find all three books filled with statements that bother the hell out of me…orders to kill, threats of Hell simply for not believing properly, lack of clarity, execution for minor crimes, floggings, and on and on. Did you know the God sent a bear to kill two boys for calling Elisha “baldy”. Just a little severe would you not agree?
I have yet to know a religious person…myself included….that attempts to squeeze something out of our religious books that just does not appear to be there.
Man would this make a GRAND topic of discussion. Exegsis..redaction…I probably am spelling both wrong…but those are some key English words to learn about this very important discussion.
These ‘disturbing’ things were said in order to prove that there are dire consequences for the wrong things human beings tend to, such as adultery. It is for the sake of social control, not hatred or violence. It was said in order to scare you into not committing these mistakes.
As for the violence, it is painfully misunderstood by outsiders. What execution of minior crimes does the Koran ask for?
Esra’a
By-the-way…I did not single out the Koran and don’t have one in front of me…but how about, for starters, like Christianity, eternity in Hell for simply not being “a believer”. Sounds just a little harsh, does it not?
Oh..and just to show I am not being “racist”…in the Torah Nadav and his brother were fried alive for being a bit too enthusiastic about some of their religious duties.
You have loyalty to your religion and I respect that. I have loyalty to mine. But I will not close my eyes and/or blindly excuse stuff that sounds whacky..like Elisha and the bear. And yes…the Koran makes many many references to non-believers going to Hell…not murders, rapists, etc. so much as non-believers. Same reason I have a huge problem with Christianity…too much emphasis on faith and belief.
I remember several things towards the end of the Koran you got 100 lashes for (ouch!!)…don’t remember all of them.
All three religions refer to God as forgiving, merciful, and just…but, well…though a believer myself…I see some real inconsistencies.
Esra’a
OK…this one sounds a little strict:
8:12
I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them.
Ouch!
Esra’a–
Oh…and what the heck is wrong with adultery anyhow
Why don’t religious people stop reading books written by other humans and just believe in God and try not to harm other or yourself and when you have time try to help out the disadvantaged?
Why must you all follow a book that was written thousands of years ago and prescribed to the laws and ethics that existed then?
I am going to hell according to Islam and Christianity, but don’t know about Judaism.
I have lived a life that didn’t involve harming others or myself and always helped others if I could. If your god is going to send me to hell for not believing in him then this god you speak of is not a benevolent god. The punishment this god is going to hand down to me is the same as what the devil you speak of would do. I see no different between your god and your devil.
If I were to live in an isolated mountain and didn’t know anything about any religion, I am going to hell. Here is your flow. Or can you give examples from Koran or the Bible and explain to me why I am going to hell in this scenario?
Howie, these things have their exceptions.
Jina, you believe that these holy books were written by human. That is, for us, yet another conspiracy theory which we proudly dismiss. Our holy book was sent to us through another human, our Prophet. That does not make it the work of a human, it is too perfect to be written or even thought of by another human and the predicitions so far have been right on.
And you won’t be sent to Hell just because you measure yourself through our book, we don’t even know that Saddam will burn in the depths of Hell. That decision is done by God and only him, and again there are many exceptions to how you will be judged on Judgement Day.
Jina and Esra’a…
Interesting…I fall right between the two of you…a spiritual sissy I guess.
I believe in our Holy Book…but I am FILLED with doubts. Esra’a says the Koran is perfect…our rabbis say the Old Testament is perfect, my evangelical brother-in-law says the New Testament is perfect…
Me…I just cannot accept it…but Jina…in response to “why do you believe in these holy books” is pretty simple to answer…there really is NOTHING else that just might represent Divine Revelation…which is the word Esra’a is looking for in her otherwise incredible English…Did God drop his word on us 3,500 years ago..or 2,000 and/or 1300 years ago…
Esra’a seems to fairly seemlessly accept the Book…you seem to easily disspell it and me…I just don’t know…I see grey grey grey…everywhere I look..
And Esra’a…when you say “these things have their exceptions” that might very well be true…but now you have opened the Pandora’s Box of “which are the exceptions”….which is why we have; Hindus, Jaines, several Bhuddists sects, about 5 main divisions in Judaism with about zillion sub-divisions and why we have Mormons, Catholics, Puritians, Calvinists, 7th Day Adventists, Bhai’s, Sufis and you get the point…if it is divine revelation…well we certainly all see it differently…and if not, why do we have church canons, suras, hadiths, Talmud, etc.
Ain’t so easy.
Oh..Jina…according to the Jews…you won’t go to hell, but they might assign you a Jewish mother for eternity if you don’t repent.
I say there are a lot of exceptions because many people, Muslims included, ignore the ‘buts’ and ‘only ifs’ in the Koran, and consider the punishment something that everyone in that situation will have to go through which is just not true. Secondly I really dislike it when Imams or Sheikhs damn people to Hell because to play the role of God and to act as if you’re in a position to make His decisions for him is very un-Islamic. So these people running around calling homosexuals sinners or saying non-believers will all burn in Hell are damaging the name and reputation of Islam, and they loathe Jews and Israel which to me is also un-Islamic especially since certain Islamic traditions and beliefs, including the Kaaba, are based on Jewish beliefs and principles. We have no reason whatsoever to hate or even dislike them. Our problem with Israel is politics, not religion.
Isn’t that what we call ignorance?
Wasn’t the prophet an illiterate? Doesn’t he Hadith say that? So it was not written by him, but it says he dictated to his followers and they wrote it down. Second wasn’t all the Korans were once burnt except one because of irregularities in them? I think it was during the rule of the third Caliph.
Being faithful should not be equated with ignorance. Questioning our belief is fine if done productively, but you dismissed it as something insignificantly written by a ‘human,’ and thus I dismissed that claim as well.
The prophet was illiterate until the day the Koran was released upon him. It is considered one of the many miracles of Islam by us Muslims. The third Caliph ordered that the unoffical copies of the book were to be burned as only the original one was good enough, and so that others can’t be charged with altering the book of God which is strictly forbidden. It has been said that this order eventually caused his assasination and marked a civil war in Islamic history.
Esra’a-
I adore your kind soul……I think Sufism better suits your approach to mankind
However…all three of these books, your’s, the Chrisitian’s and ours, have many very very harsh promises (esp. Koran and New Testament)…
The ultimate issues to me are:
Is there a God
Has He made his Will known
What is his Will for Man
How do we find this out
If there is no God…life is a farce…a mostly nightmarish farce…
If there is a God, which I believe, I do NOT believe he has clearly made His will known to any one select humanoid…on the other hand I tend to believe that God has revealed some aspects to some people
Why the hide-and-seek game…I have no answer to that.
There’s a bumper sticker in the USA that goes something like
God said it
I believe it
That’s it
I just can’t go that route.
No, I have gone through the questioning phase and I still travel on that road every other day when I doubt something, but certain things which have been proven in my opinion should go undoubted. The creation of Israel is one of them. The sticker should go like this -
God said it
I believe it
Or do I?
I have been going through the “questioning phase” for about 38 years…I just don’t have that quick easy faith that some do…sounds like you are cut from the same clothe.
But in response to your remark “but certain things”…yup there have been certain things that I have seen and experienced that give me complete faith there is a “master plan and planner”. There I have enormous faith…
But how to take “the Book”…literal, fundemental, methaphoric, allegoric, each detail, partial, complete, only the salient points, interpret, who gets to interpret…there I have a WHOLE bunch of issues..like killing boys with bears for calling, even a prophet, “chrome-dome” on “chopping off heads and fingertips of non-believers”. These types of things I do not believe…I just don’t.
And YOUR bumper sticker…to me that speaks from the heart. Like God doesn’t know we harbor doubts? We can trick God? I think He prefers we tell the truth.
in response to Jina
If you dont read the books, then what is your basis to believe in God? Its one thing to not harm others and help people as a person, but then religion is another thing. And I agree it does kind fo seem ridiculous at points, but I think there’s somethign in human nature that wants religion, and at this point whether or not some people made it all up or God actually did write or tell the books through a person doesnt really matter, cause at this point in time religions have thousands of years of history, or people, of a culture and community, that at least for me as a Jew is a very important and huge part of being Jewish.
And to bring up a totally different subject, Howie, do you truly think God is male or do you just refer to God as “He” out of habit?
Rachel—
Aw…don’t bring back 1970′s feminism stuff…yes I believe God is man with an enormous penis.
Hahaha Howie, I hope I don’t go to Hell for laughing at that.
But God is referred to as a ‘He’ in the Koran as well, the only thing we don’t know about Him is how He looks like or what He’s made of or His voice or anything of the sort. He only is what His 99 names says He is.
Rachel and Ersra’
I was in an annoyed mood when I answered.
No I do not believe God has a sex. In fact, Rachel should know that one of the Friday night prayers refers to “ain lo goof”…HE has no body…
Occasionally, in Heb. prayers…God is referred to in the feminine..like “uoo mi domeh lach” “and who compares (“compares” uses the masculine verb though) to “you” (fm.) just like Arabic..Hebrew has male and female pronouns like “esh sholnik”
But in the Judaism, Christianity and Islam…God is primarily referred to in the masculine…not just in the Holy writings, but in common use of the language. If we don’t editorialize when we talk…we will spend pages qualifying every important word and it gets old.
But I guess we could go with Mrs. God or the Creatoress?
Sorry for being a sarcastic schmuck…I do love you Rachel…
“Hahaha Howie, I hope I don’t go to Hell for laughing at that.”
This comment, Esra’a…is far more powerful than you might think. Think how it reflects the conversation we had about the bumper sticker. Can you make the connection?
I know what my next piece should be about.
Im with you God has no gender, or sex. And yes with language God is referred to in the default masculine, but since in English we dont have gendered language, like verb endings and such, and you dont believe God is strictly speaking male, have you ever thought about the fact that you still refer to God as male with your language, while thats not the message youre trying to portray? And it doesnt require editorializing to explain yourself, you can just use the word God, Godself, etc. And the argument for that can go beyond even the gender debate, as God is clearly separate, holier, more divine than humans, so in that sense God should be referred to in God’s terms, not in terms of people (himself, or herself.) to set God apart in our language.
And you could counter that by saying why wasnt it written in terms of God originally? (Im not fluent enough in Hebrew to know if there is an equivalent to “Godself” in Hebrew, is it possible?) well then ‘Im gonna have to pull out the feminist argument, (that belongs in todays world as much as the 70s) that it was written by men in a time when patriarchy was a much more inherent part of society and the idea of questioning gender anything was pretty much nonexistant. But we have changed since then! and I think its been a good change, that can be reflected in religion. (But then id say its not just the feminist argument, its the being open to gender equality and questioning gender roles argument)
and sorry, this is all pretty far off from is Zionism racism, but it had to be said.
You are closer to accepting Hinduism now… CONVERT… well figure out a way to convert first… yaa hmmm ok bie.
Rachel -
Like p.e. the old biblical creation story with Adam & Eve in the Genesis first book:
Meaning God includes both prinicples that was in ‘man’ divided to genders as female & male. – I’d also liked to know how this verse was in original Hebrew refering to gender of God.
Maybe it would have been better to refer to God as ‘it’ – like the ‘high holy being’ – ‘Life’ is also neutrum (at least in German) – aren’t there a lot of languages that don’t use genders? –
But most people probably wouldn’t like to refer to God with ‘it’ because they want to personalize him in their imagination & prayers –
I don’t believe you can change language use in this context anymore & don’t really see the need yet – but on the other hand I’m male…
Jina-
Actually…I kind of was a Hindu (kind of) way way back in the day…Paramahansa Yoganada…(Ji guru ji)…Hung out at the ashram for many a day.
Eastern thought powerfully influenced the way I approached and approach religion all my adult life…Zen, regular Bhuddism and aspects of Hinduism. It even shaped my basic understand of man when I like to say
“there is only one thing people want…more”…or as the guru said…desires have no end”. Eastern thought also tickled my fancy for mysticism and the idea that “you don’t have to wait for the pie in the sky when you die by and by” but that perhaps ultimate reality and Truth can be experienced in this lifetime…Also fed my vegetarian tendencies.
So I am a practicing Jew with Eastern leanings…oh…did you know that Judaism (at least aspects of it) believes in “gilgul nesfash”…i.e. reincarnation though they completely reject transmigration.
Rachel—Hebrew is filled with references to God as HIM..and I will continue to do so…God is referred to as male in every sense…in nouns, verbs, pronoun etc.
Ho yoshev al kesay ram!!! He sits on a throne on high…how is that for an anthropomorphic male chavinistic image of Mrs. God?
Jina—just turned around in my home office and what is the first book I notice? My good ol copy of Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintanence…what a great book about “being in the now”.
Also…as a therapist traning in the 70′s…Eastern thought had a huge impact.
Heimo- In Hebrew…verbs, nouns, and pronouns are ALL gender based…even rocks and buildings and cars are sexy (yeh baby…yeh!)…rocks are female…hah hah as are testicles…ha ha. Building is male…ha ha…your building has a penis.
So in Hebrew there is no getting around it. You gotta commit and God is almost always referred to in the male form…actually…God is sometimes even referred to in the male PLURAL…like “elohim” or “elokim”
Kahlil Gibran (my favourite poet, artist, philosopher) said it best
Yes, there is a Nirvanah; it is leading your sheep to a green pasture, and in putting your child to sleep, and in writing the last line of your poem.
Weird coincidence that the person I admire the most was born exactly 100 years before me
God being a male is what pisses me off about Western religions. There is no logic behind it. It reminds me that in the past it has been a patriarchal culture so obliviously that’s where they got the god being man idea. Makes sense too, if you think about it.
Plato, Aristotle, etc all used ‘He’ and ‘Man’ to refer to all human beings, so when the Koran was translated into the ‘old’ English language, I think these methods of writing were also employed.
Maybe there is no gender to God, maybe it is just this grand thing whose greatness we fail to fully comprehend.
Yup
If God is out there…and I believe He is (couldn’t resist)…this will be something far beyond anything we could imagine.
This is a common thread in mysticism…across all religions…which is why I am a mystic (very very poor one) that believes in an Ulitmately Unifying Entity (no penis)…without form..without body…which is pure Wisdom and pure Love of which we are all connected…except for feminists and the Irish.
Jina…come on…are you not impressed with my Hindu background?
Esra’a…American blacks and Mexicans also typically refer to “man” :
Hey man
Yo man
Sup man
You think they are anti-feminist?
Oh Jina…for what it is worth Gibran was likely a believing Christian…but also rather a mystic in nature…and just gave my 18 year old daughter my anciet copy of “The Prophet”
But I am a Jew…should I not have given her “The Profit”??
Jina-
“Weird coincidence that the person I admire the most was born exactly 100 years before me
”
OK guys…Jina obviously is inferring that he is Gibran reincarnated.
In German nouns, and pronouns (but not verbs) are ALL gender based too – with no logic why one thing is female or male.
.. this plural I had just noticed in “ .. God said: ‘Let us make man in our image..â€
on this site: http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0101.htm I just found by google while researching the origin – I looked for something like a word by word translation (not that I can read Hebrew letters, than just a few)
Allah & Elohim or maybe Elia – how close – it’s the same root of course..
Heimo-
The rabbinical explaination for “let’s make them in our image” is that there were angels and other members of God’s fan club around the time HE was creating.
I see..
Howie, Jina is the Gibran Khalil* Gibran of cyberspace.
*I prefer to spell it the Arabic way.
Hindu’s call this being Brahma and the meaning is almost identical to what you just said, Buddhist and Jains call it Nirvana. But to Hindu’s Nirvana is the path to Brahma. I am a weird mystic also. I am confusing and confused.
HIPPY!!!
Muhahahaha… now you done it. Better go burn it.
Of course, we are very identical in every way so yup yup… I am believer now. o.O
PS: I am the Prophet he speaks of -.-
Jina-
“I am a weird mystic also. I am confusing and confused.”
Anybody that would speak confidently of these types of issues can only be:
A Bhuddah
A self-deluded shithead
A schizophrenic
High on LSD
So confused and confusing sounds like a reasonable place to be on the path to Brahma…or Mrs. God
Esra’a
“Howie, Jina is the Gibran Khalil* Gibran of cyberspace.
*I prefer to spell it the Arabic way. ”
Funny…looks just like English!
Kahlil and Khalil
It was a joke that didn’t work
See what happens when old people make jokes.
Aww Howie’s not that old. He’s just wise.
Since we’re on the topic of Zionism, I’d just like to add that my mother thinks this website is a Zionist conspiracy, without knowing that I’m heavily involved here. She doesn’t even understand what that word truly implies, she just trusts the poison our media spews too much. The word ‘Zionism’ is really abused in our region.
So this site isn’t a Zionist conspiracy?
Crap… how did she find out… I mean wa… hmm ok…
Guys, I’ve been in denial. But the truth is out and I can’t help it. I AM WITH ZION.
At least you didn’t say you own this site. Muahaaahahahaha… I wonder how she would have react if you say that.
Pingback: Bible Searches For New Testament
Pingback: All Countries except Israel… « Sudanese Returnee