Most of us are familiar with the beautiful custom of dipping apples in honey at this time of year. As we dip the apple in honey, we say a bracha, a blessing, and wish for each other a shanah tovah u’metuka k’dvash, that the coming year will be as sweet as honey.
A lesser-known custom, which has become increasingly popular and more widespread in recent years, is of Iraqi origin, and one that my wife, whose family is from Baghdad, introduced to me. Iraq was once home to a prosperous, proud and prominent Jewish community dating back 2,600 years, and was a center of great learning where the Talmud was created. Every Rosh Hashanah, we observe in our home the practice of the Jews of Iraq and say blessings over various fruits and vegetables, each one being a pun on the Hebrew word for that particular piece of food.
So, for example, we hold up a date, which in Hebrew is tamar, and say, “she’yitamu soneinu,” which means “may our enemies perish.” We eat a leek, which in Hebrew is karat, and say, “she’yeechartu kol mevekshei ra’atenu,” which means “may those who seek evil against us be karet—cut off.” For beets, which in Hebrew is selek, we say, “she’yistalku oyveenu”—may our enemies be driven away.
There are more, but I think you get the picture.
I don’t want to give you the wrong impression. There are some positive blessings, such as when we eat seeds of the pomegranate and express the hope that our lives will be as full of mitzvot as the pomegranate is filled with seeds. Overall though, the pattern and theme of a number of the blessings are pleas for God to annul the plans of those who seek to destroy us, the Jewish people.
I do not know the history or origin of the custom, nor how long it has been around. The truth is, though, expressing the hope that enemies who plot to harm Jews will fail in their efforts could probably be said by almost any Jewish community, almost anywhere in the world, at pretty much any time in our history.
Regardless of when the custom began, I am certain and confident of one thing: I doubt that there was much debate, dissension or disagreement among them over how to define and determine who their enemies were.
Yet unfortunately today, it seems we Jews are so divided that we cannot even agree on what constitutes anti-Semitism. The left only recognizes anti-Semitism when it emanates from the right, and the right only sees it when it comes from the left.
The lack of unity on this most basic issue is why Natan Sharansky, during his most recent visit to the United States earlier this summer, asked me to convene a small group of diverse Jewish leaders to see if we could reach any agreement about the eternal external existential threats to the Jewish people.
In response to the rise in anti-Semitism around the globe, in 2016, the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) recognized that “in order to begin to address the problem of anti-Semitism, there must be clarity about what anti-Semitism is.” They set out to build an international consensus, and to come up with a working definition on which diverse parties could agree.
They undertook the project to give policymakers around the world the tools to identify the problem. After an arduous process entailing much vetting and discussion, what they came up with has met widespread acceptance, having been adopted by more than 30 nations, including the United States, the European Union, a number of NGOs, academic institutions and local governments and municipalities around the world.
However, since it cites as an example of anti-Semitism “drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis,” and another stating that, “denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor,” not everyone is willing to embrace and accept the carefully crafted document.
The opposition has come not just from those whom we would expect to oppose it, such as the Arab League, the 57 members of the Organization of Islamic states or Nazi sympathizers.
Objecting to its becoming official policy of the United States and opposing its being codified into U.S. law is a coalition of groups known as the Progressive Jewish Alliance, which consists of Americans for Peace Now, J Street, the New Israel Fund, T’ruah: Rabbis for Human Rights and a few other groups claiming to represent Jewish values.
Although the IHRA definition explicitly states that “criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as anti-Semitic,” the alliance of Progressive Jewish groups issued a statement that they were concerned that adoption of the doctrine would undermine freedom of expression, because it may encourage criticism of Israel to be suppressed.
Yes, you heard correctly—Jewish groups, which claim to support Israel, feel compelled to protect the rights of Israel’s critics! But, if there is any one thing we don’t have to worry about, it is that there isn’t enough criticism of Israel and that debate over Israel’s policies might be stifled. Indeed, rejecting the IHRA definition is comparable to a person drowning in the ocean refusing to accept a life preserver because he/she doesn’t like the small print on the inside lining of the floatation device.
Something is happening in the Jewish world today, and it is deeply troubling.
In 1975, the late Israeli diplomat Abba Eban wrote in a column in The New York Times that hatred of Israel and the Jewish people are one and the same. Almost 50 years ago, he pointed out that the singling out of the Jewish state for the kind of criticism not leveled at other nations is a convenient way for those with contempt for Jews to dodge the charge of anti-Semitism. While they may claim to object to a particular policy or leader, in reality, what they object to is Israel’s right to exist.
He wrote: “There is no difference whatever between anti-Semitism and the denial of Israel’s statehood. Classical anti-Semitism denies the equal right of Jews as citizens within society. Anti-Zionism denies the equal rights of the Jewish people its lawful sovereignty within the community of nations. The common principle in the two cases is discrimination (against Jews).”
Or to put it a different way, making obsessive, excessive criticism that focuses almost exclusively on Israel and claiming one isn’t anti-Semitic, just anti-Zionist, is like trying to explain the difference between lox and nova.
For 11 days in May, Israel was bombarded by more than 4,000 rockets launched by Hamas into civilian areas. Although Israel responded to the indiscriminate launching of a barrage of rockets with precision to destroy specific Hamas targets, while striving to avoid civilian casualties, Israel was the one accused of a disproportionate response.
If anything was disproportionate, however, it was the intense vitriolic hyperbolic criticism leveled against Israel in social media.
We have become somewhat inoculated and are not surprised that the International Criminal Court and the United Nations, as well as the Yale University Student Council, California Teachers Union, New York University professors and others came out against Israel. We are outraged and appalled but have become somewhat used to and almost immune to these criticisms.
In a post-Holocaust world where blatant hatred of Jews is unfashionable, I can understand why those who hate Jews would wish to justify their anti-Semitism and disguise their antipathy towards Jews in the guise of anti-Zionism, and claim they have nothing against Jews, only against Israel’s policies.
But for Jews to be so focused on publicly criticizing Israel while ignoring other human-rights abuses around the world, is inexcusable.
When almost 100 rabbinic students in non-Orthodox rabbinic seminaries have the chutzpah to sign a petition objecting to Israel’s taking measures to defend and protect its citizens and accuse Israel of “violent suppression of human rights,” something is terribly wrong.
To make the false claim, as they do, that “Israel’s actions constitute an intentional removal of Palestinians,” shows naiveté and a superficial misguided understanding of the conflict. Ignoring Hamas’s genocidal intentions as stated in its charter, these would-be rabbis probably believe the Hamas propaganda that the attack was prompted by seizure of Palestinian property, but which is actually much closer to a landlord-tenant rent dispute being adjudicated in one of the fairest judicial systems in the world, and indisputably in the entire Middle East.
For future leaders of Jewish communities to express a litany of complaints against Israel for defending its people while rockets were still falling, without making a single reference to Hamas’s provocations, is unprecedented and inexcusable.
We have a problem, and it is not just due to external threats from our traditional enemies.
The intent of those who hurl slanders and libel at Israel by accusing it of apartheid, genocide and ethnic cleansing is to portray it in a way that makes Israel seem morally repugnant, rendering the defense of its people seem unwarranted and unjustifiable.
Jews should not adopt the positions or language of those who undermine Israel’s legitimacy. How dare they spread the malicious lies of those who denigrate our people?
When our fellow Jews are under attack, we should be character witnesses on their behalf. As Gil Troy wrote, these charges are “inaccurate and insulting, counterproductive and self-destructive. It hardens hearts and polarizes positions. And in demonizing the Jewish state, it encourages hooligans who target the Jews living in that state and the Jews living everywhere else, too.”
The 11-day conflict between Israel and Hamas unleashed a torrent of cries of “Death to the Jews,” and attacks on Jews, Jewish institutions and even just places of business owned by or associated with Jews around the world. Synagogues throughout the world were targets of anti-Semitic acts of desecration because those who hate Israel do not make a distinction between Jews and the Jewish state.
By way of comparison, and to illustrate this point: When Russia attacked and invaded Ukraine, there were no calls for violence at Russian Orthodox churches; no need for increased security at their houses of worship.
Anti-Semitism takes many forms, not just blatant hateful comments and acts. It can be more subtle, such as denying or downplaying its existence. Last May, a Stanford University town hall was Zoom-bombed with racist and anti-Semitic messages and images. The perpetrators were equal-opportunity offenders, as they used the N-word and swastikas. But, so as not to overshadow the anti-black racism of what happened, the report of the university’s diversity committee omitted reference to the anti-Semitic aspects of the incident.
The time has come for us to demand greater accountability from colleges. A high percentage of Jews attend university. Other than one’s home, it is probably the largest expense a family has. We have a right to demand that our children not be subjected to vicious verbal assaults or prejudice. We must demand that institutions of higher education take measures to ensure that Jewish students are not bullied, intimidated or ostracized for joining Jewish organizations, supporting Israel or just for being Jewish.
If ever there was a time for clarity and Jewish unity, a time to stand with fellow Jews in the face of such an outpouring of blatant anti-Semitism and danger, it is now. Yet sadly, some have chosen not to stand with their people.
Motivated by attacks on Jews around the world, Elisha Wiesel sought to galvanize a unified Jewish response to the rising tide of anti-Semitism with a rally called No Fear this summer in Washington, D.C. Conscious efforts were made to be as inclusive as possible, to make the tent as big as possible and to invite groups from the right and the left to be sponsors.
Because the rally in solidarity with the Jewish people referred to the right of Jews in the United States and Israel to exist in peace and security, a number of organizations with the word “Jewish” in their names, which purport to speak on behalf of Jews (for the most part, the very same ones who objected to the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism), declined to participate in or support it because the platform referred to Israel.
Lest anyone question or think I am not aware of it, I recognize that Israel is not perfect; nor is it above criticism. But I do not love Israel because it is perfect. Nor does Israel need to be perfect for me to love it.
A story about a king who commissioned a painter to paint a portrait of him puts it in perspective. Upon meeting him for the first time, the artist said, “Your Majesty, I see that you have scars from childhood acne, and I want to be sure you will not be upset if I capture the blemishes since my style is to paint what I see.” The king replied, “You are welcome to include the blemishes. I only ask that you not neglect to paint my face.”
I do not love Israel because it has no blemishes.
In the early 20th century, a member of the House of Lords of Great Britain asked Zionist leader Chaim Weizmann, when he was working for the establishment of the State of Israel, “Why do you Jews insist on Palestine when there are so many undeveloped countries you could settle in more conveniently?”
The Zionist leader replied, “That is like me asking you why you drove 20 miles to visit your mother last Sunday when there are so many other nice old ladies living on your street?”
More than our historical ties to the land, the Israel I know and love is the country that has risen out of the ashes of the Holocaust and is the one place in the world where someone from Poland and Yemen can live together and have a common heritage, language and destiny.
It is the nation that rushes to send humanitarian aid halfway around the world when natural disaster strikes. It is the people who, while fighting for survival, defiantly resists the temptation to succumb to the repression of freedom and democracy, as is the case in the countries surrounding it.
It is the country that rescues those rejected by every other nation and, despite economic problems of its own, doesn’t hesitate for a moment to absorb millions of poor Jews from the Soviet Union or to airlift tens of thousands of black Jews out of Africa to come home to Israel.
It is the startup nation that shares its medical and technological discoveries with the world—the place where the heads of Pfizer and Moderna, who came up with the vaccine to combat COVID-19, studied.
I could go on, for wherever we have lived—whether in Israel, or Iraq, not just in the realm of Jewish life, but in cultural, financial, academic and other areas—Jews have contributed disproportionately to better the lot, not just of Jews, but of everybody.
This is the story we need to tell and be proud of.
There is a midrash about an old man who spends his days prowling the streets of Sodom and Gomorrah crying out against the abuses and depravity that was so pervasive and that he saw all around him. One day, a person came up to him and asked, “Old man, don’t you realize that there is no way you can change these people?” He answered, “Long ago, I gave up any hope of changing them. Now I speak out against the injustice and immorality, so that they don’t change me.”
Let us speak out, so that those who denounce Israel so loudly, non-Jew or Jew, do not change us or diminish our unity or love for our people.
At the end of my aforementioned meeting with Sharansky, I told the assembled diverse group that when we are united, we can do great things. We came together and succeeded in freeing Soviet Jews, which ultimately led to the downfall of the Iron Curtain. And then, putting my hand on Sharansky’s shoulder, I said, “And we got this guy out of solitary confinement in the Soviet gulag.”
In one of his many conversations when making the case for the establishment of the State of Israel in its ancient homeland, Weizmann asked British Foreign Secretary Lord Balfour, “If you were offered Paris instead of London, would you take it?” Balfour replied, “But London is ours,” to which Weizmann responded, “Jerusalem was ours when London was a marsh.”
God tells Abraham in the book of Genesis: וַאֲבָֽרְכָה֙ מְבָ֣רְכֶ֔יךָ וּמְקַלֶּלְךָ֖ אָאֹ֑ר” וְנִבְרְכ֣וּ בְךָ֔ כֹּ֖ל מִשְׁפְּחֹ֥ת הָאֲדָמָֽה. “I will bless those who bless you and curse those who curse you, and all the families of the earth shall be blessed through you.” Let us hope this will soon come to pass—that all on earth, including ourselves and our fellow Jews, will recognize the blessing of being a Jew.
Let us hope that we live to see the day when the blessings we recite over fruits will no longer be the prayer that the plots of our enemies will be annulled. Let us hope that we will one day be able to just say the blessings that ask that we will be fruitful, and that our merits and mitzvot shall be multiplied, like the seeds of the pomegranate.
And may we then be able to enjoy the fruits of peace and security, so that the vision of the prophets may come to pass “and none shall be afraid.”
Rabbi Stuart Weinblatt is the founding rabbi of Congregation B’nai Tzedek in Potomac, Md. He has served as the head of the Jewish National Fund’s Rabbis for Israel and is the founder of the Coalition of Zionist Rabbis for Israel.
This article is the Yom Kippur sermon that the author delivered to his congregation on Sept. 16.
Be a part of our community
JNS serves as the central hub for a thriving community of readers who appreciate the invaluable context our coverage offers on Israel and their Jewish world.
Please join our community and help support our unique brand of Jewish journalism that makes sense.