Judaism favors non- violent protest

By Rabbi Leonard Rosenthal

Rabbi Leonard Rosenthal
Rabbi Leonard Rosenthal

SAN DIEGO — On Tuesday during one of my Community Jewish High classes, we discussed the recent events in Baltimore in the context of Judaism’s attitude toward civil disobedience. We talked about Freddie Gray’s death while in police custody and the public response to it. While the line between non-violent and violent protest is pretty clear, sometimes the line between appropriate and inappropriate non-violent protest can be murky, such as when protesters block intersections and freeways.

In the Bible, one of the first recorded acts of civil disobedience was  the action of Shifrah and Puah, the two midwives who ministered to Israelite women in labor when we were slaves in Egypt. Pharaoh commanded the midwives to kill all newborn baby boys. “The midwives, fearing God, did not do as the king of Egypt had told them; they let the boys live.” (Ex. 1:17)

Shifrah and Puah disobeyed Pharaoh. They risked their own lives to fight murder and injustice. The protest of the midwives is but one of the times when our tradition has lauded those who peacefully stood up to unjust authority.

Judaism would clearly defend those who have peacefully protested against what they perceive as racism and the overreaction of some members of law enforcement in Baltimore, Ferguson, New York, etc. Peaceful protest allows the public to express its feelings, while at the same time allowing the legal system to investigate and determine whether or not there has been misconduct. Violence is another story. Violence undermines not only the pursuit of justice, but the safety and well-being of those on whose behalf they allegedly campaign.

A few of my students held out little hope for positive change, at least in the near future. They believe that racism, prejudice, and violence are inherent in human beings and little can be done to change human nature or behavior. I was saddened that they have already become so pessimistic, but given the world they are growing up in, I can understand their cynicism.

I pointed out that one of the primary tenets of Judaism is that t’shuva, repentance and change, is possible and our quest as Jews is to make tomorrow better than today. Even if we don’t believe in a personal Messiah, we can still work toward a future informed by the Messianic ideal, a day upon which nations will forge their swords into plowshares and no longer wage war.

This week we read a double parasha: Acharei Mot – Kedoshim. These titles turn out to be a meaningful combination of words. Acharei Mot means “after death,” referring to the deaths of Aaron’s sons, Nadav and Avihu. Kedoshim means “holy,” referring to the Holiness Code, the laws telling how to live morally, which follow. However, we can also understand this combination of words as meaning, “After death, holiness must follow.”

We have experienced too much death in this country. I am not only referring to the deaths of Freddie Gray and Michael Brown, but also the senseless murders of innocents and the gang, drug, and crime-related killings that continue each day. We must find a way to turn from the desecration of life to the sanctification of life. Despite the seemingly insurmountable challenge, we as individuals and as a society must find a way to bring about the progress and changes necessary to transform a culture of violence into a culture of sanctity.

*
Rabbi Rosenthal is spiritual leader of Tifereth Israel Synagogue in San Diego.  Your comment may be sent to leonard.rosenthal@sdjewishworld.com or posted on this website provided that the rules below are observed.

__________________________________________________________________
Care to comment?  We require the following information on any letter for publication: 1) Your full name 2) Your city and state (or country) of residence. Letters lacking such information will be automatically deleted. San Diego Jewish World is intended as a forum for the entire Jewish community, whatever your political leanings. Letters may be posted below provided they are responsive to the article that prompted them, and civil in their tone.  Ad hominem attacks against any religion, country, gender, race, sexual orientation, or physical disability will not be considered for publication. There is a limit of one letter per writer on any given day.
__________________________________________________________________