Who is the Hero of the Garden of Eden Story?

The Garden of Eden story in Genesis chapters 2 and 3 is a slightly complex weaving together of origin stories, myths explaining features of human life.

Genesis Chapter 2

1. Man himself (just the male of the species) is explained - he was fashioned by Adonai-God, dust from the earth, and then brought to life by Adonai-God's breath. This is the origin story of human life.

(I intentionally name the God-character in the story as Adonai-God - as the storyteller does - in order to make it clear that I am talking about a character in a tale rather than a philosophical abstraction.)

2. Shrubbery was created, including the Tree of Moral Consciousness whose fruit the Man was forbidden to eat. This is the origin story of vegetation. It is also the origin story of obedience to commandments (or failure to obey).

3. The man, the shrubbery, and the aforementioned Tree were at the junction of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, that is, in Babylon (now Iraq). This is the origin story of the center of civilization.

4. In response to the man's loneliness, Adonai-God then formed the beasts and birds from the dust of the ground (contradicting Genesis 1 and any type of science), and the Man names each species, but his loneliness is not cured. This is the origin story of animals and language (names of things).

5. Adonai-God fashions a Woman from the Man's rib. The Man is suitably impressed and utters a lovely hymn in praise of the invention. This is the origin story of sex and marriage.

Genesis Chapter 3

6. A Serpent Which Can Talk suggests to the Woman that she and her Man will not die if they eat from the forbidden tree, rather, they will become godly through receiving Moral Consciousness.

1. This turns out to be completely true.

2. Neither the man nor the woman has a name, yet.

7. After the Woman and Man eat the forbidden fruit, Adonai-God is not pleased that the Man has indeed acquired Moral Consciousness and thus become godly, though Adonai-God acknowledges that is the case.

8. In rapidly cascading fashion, we are given the origin decrees or stories for:

1. Guilt and Shame

2. Slithery Snakes

3. The Subjugation of Women to Men

4. Clothing

5. Pain in Childbirth

6. (Eventual) Death of Humans

7. Suffering from Toil 

8. Death of Animals

Who Is The Hero of the Story?

It is my opinion that the elevation of human beings to the status of godliness through Moral Consciousness is not an unfortunate outcome in this story. The story is ambiguous and ambivalent to be sure. That is what has made it such a fascinating subject for study throughout the ages. However, I think most religious thinkers agree that what makes human beings special as a species is Moral Consciousness, wherein lies our capacity for godliness. The eating of the fruit, therefore, was the point and goal of the story. It is the origin story of how human beings broke through the boundaries to become Adonai-God's children in the fullest sense. Not infant senseless children with no imagination or will. Rather, children with the capacity for maturity, on a journey toward godliness.

I could possibly elect the Serpent as the hero of the story. Only he told the Woman the truth, enticing her on to greater consciousness at the cost of security and incoherent obedience. 

I could possibly elect the Woman as the hero of the story. (I can't yet call her Eve / Chava.) She heard about the Tree essentially what the Man had heard, but something called to her in a way that it had not called to him. She heard the enticing possibility that her "eyes would be opened" and she would gain a new kind of Consciousness. She could not possibly have understood what that might mean. She just knew that it beckoned her. She wanted what those words implied, she reached out and she took hold of it. Through her life-changing curiosity, courage, and leap of forbidden faith, she took the step that made human beings human.

Yes, I guess the Woman gets my vote.

God-Talk (Five Points of Jewish Theology)

 Our ninth-graders at the school where I teach hear from five guest speakers each year, who address the same pre-arranged five points of theology and answer questions. I haven't actually given such a speech (I am the teacher, not the guest), but I have thought about what I'd say if asked, as you might imagine. And I've written it up here. In my day-to-day speaking about these subjects, I am somewhat equivocal and less blunt. I have to allow people wiggle room to disagree. But, sometime before I retire or die, I hope I will have the opportunity to express these views plainly and unapologetically. My opinions were hard-won, difficult to discover, and are valuable to me. I guess most people feel the same way about theirs.

============

GOD TALK: FIVE POINTS OF THEOLOGY

Introduction - King Josiah and the Torah Scroll he Discovered

King Josiah (יֹאשִׁיָּהוּ‎) was the sixteenth king of Judah, fourteenth in line from King David. He ruled approximately 640–610 BCE, and his son Zedekiah (צִדְקִיָּהוּ) went into exile in Babylonia as the last king of Judah.

According to the Bible's book of Kings, during Josiah's reign, "the book of the Torah" was discovered in the Temple. The book gave words of Moses from hundreds of years earlier, that no one had known of before,  and it is now part of the Torah as we study it today. This story shows that the past is not always what you think. Sometimes the past can be re-imagined and altered.

I. What Happened at Mt. Sinai?

According to the story told in the book of Exodus, the Ten Commandments were given at Mt. Sinai. According to the story told in the book of Deuteronomy, the Ten Commandments were given at Mt. Horeb. These may be different names for the same place, or different places, or no known place. The versions of the Ten Commandments in Exodus and Deuteronomy are moderately but significantly different from each other. Even the slightest difference should be surprising if the Ten Commandments were really written on stone by the finger of God.

The early Hebrew tradition was largely oral although the priestly class had some literate members. Eventually the tradition came to include stories and cultural memories about its own origins. Some stories centered around a lawgiver named Moshe. Eventually (like in the Josiah story), priests produced teachings and texts which presented themselves as coming from Moshe.

What do I think happened at Sinai? Sinai-Horeb is the mythical origin story for the religious tradition of the Jewish people. The story is a dream. The Jewish people and our culture are real. Am Yisrael chai (עַם יִשְׂרָאֵל חַי).

II. What Happens After We Die?

The Jewish Bible takes shockingly little interest in the notion of an afterlife. The Tanakh accepts death at face value.

I do not think that the individual survives the death of the body and the cessation of brain function. Consciousness is an effect of the brain. If your hand were amputated, you might survive, and you might even write the next great novel or symphony. If your head were amputated, given current technology, you would not survive, and you would not be writing any novels.

We are members of a species - the human race - which was here before we were born and will continue long after we die. The species is immortal, or relatively so. The adaptation of the species, generation to generation, is the key to evolutionary success. The immortality of the individual would not be advantageous and is not to be desired. The individual's knowledge and values may possibly be passed on to the next generation through communication, culture, language, and memory.

III. How Does God Act in the World?

Semantically, I understand the word "God" to mean, "The Power or Intelligence Behind All That Is." Anything that happens is God's doing. "How does God act in the world?" Always, in everything.

A. Is God Personal?

In the Bible, God is certainly portrayed as personal. But in life as we experience it, the power behind what happens does not seem to be personal. It does not respond to our attempts to interact with it in personal ways. 

We human beings are personal, we are conscious, and we have purpose and intention. Primitive people projected those qualities onto the physical universe and thus onto God. Even modern people do that.

B. Does God Control Our Lives?

Most of the fabric of my life came into being without my choice. I do have some ability to change my circumstances. I can learn a new language, settle in a new country, adopt a new culture, educate myself, choose a profession, adopt good or bad health habits, and cultivate good or bad relationships. I can work to make a positive difference in society, or be destructive, or be ineffectual. As Rabbi Yisroel Ciner put it: We do not control the cards we are dealt, but we control how we play them.

C. Do we have Free Will or is our Fate Predetermined?

Jewish tradition, as represented by Moses Maimonides, places great emphasis on the idea of moral responsibility. All the rest of life may be beyond a person's ability to choose, but the moral shaping of oneself is always up to the person.

Our circumstances are a complex interaction of our own actions, the actions of others in our communities and in society at large, and the phenomena of nature. Since we do not fully understand or control these patterns of cause and effect, we might see them as destined or predestined. We should neither minimize nor overestimate the amount of influence we have over our own circumstances.

IV. Why Do Bad Things Happen to Good People?

What is a bad thing? It seems like a stupid question. A bad thing is something which is destructive to human life; something which causes pain from which there is no benefit. How do bad things come into our lives? In three ways.

First, through bad actors. That is, human beings acting destructively, whether through bad intention or neglect. Why doesn't a god intervene and stop destructive actions from being destructive -- stop bad actions from being bad? Because that would be a fantasy world and good and bad would be meaningless terms. Good actions produce good, wholesome, enjoyable, constructive, healthy results. Bad actions are destructive. If actions had no consequences then no actions would be bad or good.

Second, we can be bad actors toward ourselves. Often self-destructive behavior is the source of most of our unhappiness.

Third, unfortunate things happen because nature operates oblivious to our happiness. We ascribe personality to Nature, although it has none.  It does not favor us and it is not hostile to us. Natural selection in a competition for survival is the engine for the process of evolution. Obstacles, dangers, scarcity, injury, illness and mortality are all extremely unpleasant to us, but without them human beings would not exist.

V. What is the meaning of prayer and mitzvot (specifically the mitzvot of Shabbat and Kashrut)?

Prayer. Prayer as meditation is very meaningful to me, as a way of seeing myself in relationship to a greater reality. Every morning I say "Modeh Ani'' to enter into a mindset of gratitude. Then I say the Shema which connects me to my people of all places and times who reached toward the Ultimate. Through the Shema I am reminded that the world does not revolve around me as an individual. I say the V'ahavta and I am also reminded of the other V'ahavta, וְאָהַבְתָּ לְרֵעֲךָ כָּמוֹךָ - "and you shall love your neighbor as yourself." I learn to cherish myself as I learn to value others.

Prayer in an assembly of worshippers is also meaningful to me: It binds me to the community, and the poetic music of the synagogue service is comforting and uplifting.

I do not believe in prayer as a means for changing the operations of the world outside. My observation of the world tells me that things sometimes happen as we hope, and sometimes happen as we fear, but prayer makes no difference in the outcome. Sometimes a favorable outcome emerges against the odds, and people speak of a miracle. I understand God as the Power behind what happens, all the time, not just miracles and favorable events. In my own hours of desperation, out of concern for myself or a loved one, I may plead my case to God. It's a natural human reaction, but my intellect does not support it.

Mitzvot. I believe that morality is anchored in the nature of social reality, and is not arbitrary. Doing to others as you would have them do to you is good for you, good for your relationships, and good for society. The opposite is true as well. I do not believe that the moral ideas advocated in the Torah are completely correct and wholesome. We must use our best ethical insights to critique the Torah, sometimes learn from it, but sometimes discard or even repudiate certain teachings.

Kashrut and Shabbat. I consider myself a Participating Jew rather than an Observant Jew. I derive great pleasure from activities that connect me to Jewish culture, whether religious or not. I enjoy Jewish music, trips to centers of Jewish culture including Israel, Jewish cuisine whether Kosher or not, synagogue services (if not too long), Shabbat meals with all their rituals, and Jewish learning.

I do not attempt to follow the Shabbat restrictions on activities. I recognize that many people find Shabbat rest to be liberating and uplifting. I enjoy positive aspects of Shabbat - the Shabbat meals, the Shabbat evening service and about half of the Shabbat morning service, Hebrew singing, and joining with family and friends. 

My family of origin never kept Kosher, although my mother was a master of Ashkenazi Jewish cooking. The disciplines of Kashrut have the effect of keeping Jews living in close communities, so that Kosher food will be available. I consider that a good thing. Kashrut also has the effect of keeping Jews and non-Jews from getting too close, because it forbids Jews from eating the cooked food of Gentiles. I don't consider that a good thing. I think that life is enriched by experiencing cultures in all their varieties, and a significant part of culture is cuisine. Kashrut limits life in a way that I don't think it should be limited.

Intellectually, I think that a Vegan diet is the healthiest and most ethical way to eat, and if I had the self-discipline, I think I would be Vegan. But my few attempts at vegetarianism have never lasted.

Conclusion

I believe that there is comfort and perspective to be gained in seeing ourselves in the grand scheme of things. Sometimes I call the grand scheme of things, God. I don't think that God has a human-like personality, communicates verbally, or responds to human words. We have to use our critical thinking and capacities of imagination to search for the best way to live and increase happiness in the world.

Morning Yoga

A few weeks ago, a friend asked about others' personal yoga practices for the morning. I knew he was interested in physical exercises, stretches and such, and I do not do that, so I did not reply, but I've continued to think about the topic.

For years I've found two relatively short prayers very helpful for my morning focus. In the extended sense, they are my morning yoga. The two prayers are Modeh Ani ("I am grateful"), and the Sh'ma / Ve'Ahavta ("Hear O Israel" / "You Shall Love"). It so happens that the amount of time necessary for saying those prayers is exactly the time it took me everyday to walk from my front door to breakfast at my previous school. Nowadays I say the prayers on my morning dog walk, and fill in the rest of the time with other thinking and singing.

Traditionally, one says "Modeh Ani" while still in bed, just as soon as one is aware that s/he is awake. It makes a big difference to transform waking up into waking up on purpose. Then the discipline is to get out of bed with enthusiasm, without delay, to begin the day. Subjectively, I don't "wake up" until I head out the door so I've modified the practice to fit my temperament.

The two prayers bear different messages for me, day by day, but generally "Modeh Ani" is a moment to embrace my life, my special circumstances. "Sh'ma" is a moment to embrace a larger reality in which I am not the center, and "Ve'Ahavta" is a moment to dedicate myself to its service.

I can't claim that those rituals get my head put on straight, day by day, but I think they help me be happier and more peaceful than otherwise. Not as a chore, a rule, a should, or a have-to. Just as a natural part of my waking-up process, as often as I do it. Since I find it a naturally reinforcing experience, "as often as I do it" ends up being almost every day.

I could go on about how those two or three basic thoughts make for a good mindset for me. There are many "Golden Rules" that embrace those  affirmations that (1) Each of us individually is God's child; and (2) None of us individually is God's *only* child - everyone is equally special, sacred, wondrous, or, as Yoda said, "luminous."

Jesus famously said that the Torah could be summarized as (1) Love God; (2a) Love your neighbor (2b) as yourself.

Hillel gave my favorite Golden Rule when he advised, "(1) If I am not for myself, who will be? (2a) And if I am only for myself, what am I? (2b) And if not now, when?"

I really like the Albert Einstein quote that has become very popular through a recent book (Naomi Levy, Einstein and the Rabbi, 2018): "A human being is part of the whole, called by us 'Universe,' a part limited in time and space. He experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separate from the rest, a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. The striving to free oneself from this delusion is the one issue of true religion. Not to nourish the delusion but to try to overcome it is the way to reach the attainable measure of peace of mind."

That is what my little "yoga" means to me. Devoting a moment to thinking gratefully about the part that I am. Devoting a moment to thinking and caring about the whole. Then living out the day with as much vigor, love, lightness and happiness as possible.

Leaving Providence

השגחה פרטית – Individual Providence

I am afraid to say that this has been the year in which my wobbling faith in individual providence completely collapsed. "Afraid" because it is ingrained in me to feel guilty to say or even think anything that could be construed as critical of G-d. Perhaps a notion can be good or bad, worthy or unworthy, but above all it must be accurate!

The believer clings to the notion that s/he is somehow immune to the vicissitudes of life, because of divine protection. The belief in such a specifically-intervening G-d is a basic mark of the religious life.

Psalm 91. ⁷A thousand may fall at your left side, ten thousand at your right, but it shall not reach you. ⁸You will see it with your eyes, you will witness the punishment of the wicked. ⁹Because you took the Lord—my refuge, the Most High—as your haven, ¹⁰no harm will befall you, no disease touch your tent.

ז יִפֹּ֤ל מִצִּדְּךָ֨ ׀ אֶ֗לֶף וּרְבָבָ֥ה מִֽימִינֶ֑ךָ    אֵ֝לֶ֗יךָ לֹ֣א יִגָּֽשׁ׃ ח רַ֭ק בְּעֵינֶ֣יךָ תַבִּ֑יט    וְשִׁלֻּמַ֖ת רְשָׁעִ֣ים תִּרְאֶֽה׃ ט כִּֽי־אַתָּ֣ה ה' מַחְסִ֑י    עֶ֝לְי֗וֹן שַׂ֣מְתָּ מְעוֹנֶֽךָ׃ י לֹֽא־תְאֻנֶּ֣ה אֵלֶ֣יךָ רָעָ֑ה    וְ֝נֶ֗גַע לֹֽא־יִקְרַ֥ב בְּאָֽהֳלֶֽךָ׃

For a long time I have felt that, though these and similar words are not literally true, they may be true in a general sense. In a general sense, good deeds bear good fruit; bad deeds bear bad fruit. I still hold by that generality, otherwise "good" and "bad" would be meaningless terms.

However, the notion that G-d protects the believer or good people, specifically, is so untrue as to be obscene. חותמו של הקב"ה אמת - The seal of God is truth. We must speak the truth.

This year I have seen yet another sweet, innocent friend, die prematurely. A young woman in our congregation was killed by a stolen car fleeing police, as she was leaving Yom Kippur services. Victims of hurricanes, earthquake, and mass-murder. Surely among all those victims there was at least one to whom the above promise should have applied. No, I can't support that rhetoric any more. It's cruel. Powerless to avert tragedy, we light candles, recite Psalms, agonize before an Intervenor whom we imagine exists or we hope exists. Almost any concretely helpful action would be more significant.

If I were to offer up a prayer of my own, I would ask a deity to grant my species the ability to adopt a dignified, responsible, and caring exuberance toward living, rather than a quavering, dependent vigil awaiting death. To recognize that nature has neither a preference for our species nor a bias against it takes only a little courage." -- James Randi, The Faith Healers

I am sure that with time, my map of reality will adjust and redraw itself. Some form of faith, now badly damaged, will return. I still live in a world full of wonder that I did not create. I still feel gratitude that I want to express. My heart still sings. עם כל זה, אני מאמין – on some level, I still believe. What I do not believe in is a remote-controlled Deity. Goodness, the human race and I have witnessed enough experiments to know that prayer makes no difference "out there." It may make a difference "in here." It's a hard habit to break. I hope I'll have the courage, consistency, and conviction not to insult God with requests It will not answer and obeisance It does not demand. I'm not sure what will be left.

Jewish Values VS. Torah Values?

Understanding Jewish Values means more than citing chapter and verses (or, daf and amud).

Jewish cultural values and the values of Torah and tradition are often in harmony but sometimes are at odds. Ambivalence toward our traditional religion is part of our cultural heritage. Rabbis and apikorsim, devout and secular, all are part of the Jewish experience; and the Jewish experience is what makes Jewish values, Jewish.

A value is simply that which an individual holds as valuable. That which a person will work to achieve, or to avoid losing. That for which a person will trade their life-energy. Generally, a value will be expressed by an abstract noun, such as Love, Community, Family, Honesty, Dignity, etc. A big screen TV can be a value, I suppose, but we would normally speak of Entertainment or Status as the values (worthy or unworthy). The big screen TV is the instrument for obtaining those values.

Values that are informed by the Jewish experience can, usefully, be called "Jewish values." Values which are intended to enhance Jewish survival and happiness are also "Jewish values." Since there are many Jewish individuals, there can be diverse and even contradictory Jewish values. Individuals' appraisals of the value of the Jewish traditional religion will differ and contradict as well.

Values taught in the Torah tradition and otherwise supported by Jewish experience will, of course, be Jewish values. There may be values taught in the Torah tradition that are not validated by the larger Jewish historical experience. In other words, there may be a Torah value that is not a Jewish value – at least not for some Jews. I assert that this is the case. The area of partial non-intersection between Torah values and Jewish values is the impetus for this article.

The values expressed in the Torah tradition were, of course, indicative of a certain sector of the Jewish experience at the time they were articulated. With the march of time, those experiences gained a larger context and those values may need to be revised.

Anyone but the most cynical must acknowledge that there is an area of overlap between religious values and rational values. The perceived size of the overlap will vary from appraiser to appraiser.

Also, even the hyper-rationalist or hyper-religious can acknowledge that there is a vast realm (everything outside the diagram) of bad, unworthy, irrational and untraditional values.

For the present discussion, we are most concerned with the realm of Traditional Values (i.e., values of the Torah tradition), which fall outside the realm of Rational Values (i.e., values borne out by experience).

Example #1. Genocide. Through long experience of persecution culminating in the Nazi holocaust, the Jews as a people have developed the value that Genocide is undesirable and should be prevented when possible. This differs from the values of the Torah which advocated the complete annihilation of several "nations" of Canaan.

Example #2. Freedom of Religion and Thought. Through long experience of religious persecution which ended only with the appearance of a free State with pluralism and freedom of religion, the Jews as a people have come to cherish the value of religious freedom, not only for ourselves, but for everyone. (G-d bless America.) Indeed, we tend to cherish freedom of thought in general. This differs from the values of the Torah which advocated the death of idolaters and seducers to idolatry, and of the Tradition which advocated the corporal punishment or excommunication of heretics and rebellious community members. To affirm the old values of the Torah tradition would be to transgress values of the Jewish people based on a fuller bank of experiences.

It is necessary to articulate these principles, lest, by teaching classical Jewish texts to young people, we give them the erroneous impression that the texts are to be believed and practiced, uncritically. G-d forbid I should play a part in so binding the conscience and restricting the developing mind of those who are our future. On the contrary, we share with them the heritage of our cultural experiences (including religion), along with what we and humankind have learned about critical thinking and political philosophy. Our youth will then be in a position to lead us forward into better days when wise values can be nurtured and achieved, and unworthy values can be rejected and supplanted.

Yarmulke

Why I Usually Don’t Wear a Yarmulke / Kippah

The Kippah is an expression of the vertical metaphor about G-d. It is a sign of submission to that which is above the wearer. G-d is above; I am below. G-d is authority; I am submissive. G-d is King; I am subject. G-d is the Commander; I am obedient. G-d is Creator; I am creature. And so on. Most likely my friend who wears a yarmulke knows that those metaphors are not literally true, and I know the same thing. Nevertheless, those vertical metaphors resonate for my friend; and they do not resonate for me.

When I think of G-d, I think of a level of reality that is deep within me and all that is; also surrounding me and all that is. G-d is Life; I am alive. G-d is closer than my breath. G-d is that to which I give expression when I am being my best and most inclusive self. G-d is the Self of the Universe of which I am an expression. Rather than think of G-d as my Commander, I think of G-d as my Inspiration. This is the depth metaphor.

In my mind, as a person for whom the depth metaphor resonates, wearing a kippah adds nothing and is actually somewhat inappropriate. As a symbol, it elicits attitudes and conceptions that are unhelpful. If I wanted to place the yarmulke where its symbolism would be most appropriate for me, I would swallow it (so it would be within me), or wrap myself in it (so it would surround me), but not place it on my head.

[For more elaboration on these metaphors see writings of Arthur Green, sh’lita, for example, Seek My Face, a Jewish Mystical Theology, p. 9.]

Now, I know that the depth metaphor is, after all, a metaphor and not literally true. I am not so bound to it that I feel the need to refrain from wearing a yarmulke, in protest, when attending a traditional synagogue where the head covering is customary. I have no axe to grind and no banner to wave. When in a situation where the kippah is socially expected, I have no problem wearing it.

However, given the choice to dress in a way that expresses the beliefs that most move me, I will not wear a yarmulke or kippah. Unless, on a given day, in a certain context, it does move me and give me meaning. In that case, I will put it on.

The Source of Value of Jewish Values

In a blog widely read on the internet last week, a “ba’al teshuvah” from Jerusalem wrote:

The big flaw and the unsolvable problem of Reform Judaism is that it does not acknowledge the divinity of the Torah and the obligation of a Jew to follow Jewish law (halachah) accordingly. If the Torah is not from G-d and G-d is not real, then why be Jewish? What’s the point?

For the aforementioned blogger, the divine Torah is his primary object of interest and value, and the rest of Jewish life is of interest and value only derivatively. That derivative value is strong enough that he has moved to Israel, sired seven children there, presumably fought in the army, and in general lived what I’m sure is an admirable Jewish life – all because he believes that G-d told him to. I do not want to denigrate this person at all. However, I cannot believe that he finds no value in Jewish life apart from a command of G-d. I cannot believe that if his faith in the “divinity of the Torah” should waver tomorrow, that the next day he would leave Israel, disown his wife and children, stop speaking Hebrew, and in every way abandon the whole array of culture, wisdom, religion, history, experience, and existential feeling called “Yiddishkeit.”

In contrast, for me, it is the Jewish people, our history, culture, values, music, food, languages, struggles, triumphs, and intense belonging with each other that is the primary object of interest and value, as far as religion is concerned. The Jewish people have an historic religion, partly based on but in no way limited by the Torah. To me the Torah (divine or not) has derivative interest and value, the primary interest and value for me being the Jewish people themselves. Like the blogger, my derivative values can be quite intense. I am intensely interested in the religious heritage of the Jewish people, including the part he considers the divine Torah. I study it a lot, and value it a lot. The fact that it is a derivative value for me does not mean at all that is of slight value.

To sum up:

• Jerusalem blogger values an idea about the Jewish religious heritage, and therefore values the Jews.
• I value the Jews and therefore our religious heritage.

G-d bless us both. For me, his point of view would be tremendously unstable and unsatisfying, relying as it does on a mere concept. My point of view makes much more sense to me. Maybe my brother in Jerusalem, if he tries hard enough, could understand why.