A reporter once asked Jewish Agency Chairman Natan Sharansky why he wears his signature green hat everywhere, and, in typical Sharansky fashion, he gave a simple yet brilliant reply: In 1986, upon arrival in Israel, Sharansky felt he owed a debt to everyone who had prayed and worked for his freedom. He knew that they had done so regardless of religious or political affiliation. Wearing a kippah, or not wearing one, would have sent a clear message, identifying him more with one part of Israel than the other, and that was a division that Sharansky could not stand. So rather than being seen as religious or secular, he chose to wear the hat so he would be seen as a Zionist, embracing the symbolism of his life and his release. The hat allowed him to be embraced by everyone who loves Israel, regardless of whatever else they love or hate. I don't know if this story is true, but I choose to believe it because it is beautiful, and because I identify with its message. Zionism is a collective term encompassing love for Israel. The different ways in which people choose to demonstrate that love and the theories they use to justify it tend to vary, from Left to Right and high to low. But anyone who aligns themselves with this collective term contributes to all of us who love Israel and want it to prosper. I welcome even those who aggravate me, because as long as Zionism lives and breathes, I know the Jewish world is living and breathing. I should confess that I don't care too much about the Western Wall. To me, it is a parking lot beneath the real thing -- a retaining wall to the Temple Mount that once held our holiest site. I don't believe in the magical powers of notes stuffed into a wall, nor do I think that we, as a people, should engage in the type of idolatry it represents. But at the same time, I very much understand and respect the symbolic value of this place and the dangers of making it a pawn in some kind of sordid internal power play. It is important to note that an egalitarian prayer area already exists in the Robinson's Arch area, a continuation of the Western Wall. Egalitarian prayers are being conducted there every day. The recent government decision to withdraw the compromise plan was not about removing that area or ending egalitarian prayer, but about going back on an earlier promise to change the management of, and entrance to, the egalitarian prayer area. The reversal of the earlier decision was a direct result of pressure from ultra-Orthodox parties in the ruling coalition. I point this out not to take sides in the conflict but rather to shame both sides of it, using what I would like to refer to as the Sharansky rule. If we care about the Jewish state, if we want as many people as possible to feel connected to it and invested in it, we should be careful not to alienate Jews on the basis of religious observance. I personally tend to disagree with the Reform movement, the Women of the Wall and the political views that usually go with their alliances. But since the defense of my political position is deeply rooted in Israel's status as the region's only democracy, I am fiercely protective of its democratic values, regardless of whether they favor me or those with whom I differ. I don't wear tefillin or don a tallit (prayer shawl) and I do not lead prayers because doing so is not part of my religious practice and does not cohere with my view on Jewish law. I want my Orthodox practices to be allowed at the Western Wall, but as a believer in the brilliant seesaw of Jewish and democratic values that characterize the State of Israel, I do not want my exact religious practice to have a monopoly on religion in Israel, because logically at some point my strain of Judaism will be deemed insufficient to some other special interest or group. So by guaranteeing that others are protected, I am essentially protecting myself, and by that logic, both sides in this conflict need to sacrifice their egos in the interests of protecting Israel. To most Jews in the Diaspora, the Western Wall is not a religious place but a symbol of an entire country and a landmark representing a dream. We should want that, as it helps all of us. Narrowing the definition of the Western Wall means a narrowing the spectrum of the Jewish world and those who support it. Part of Sharansky's brilliance is that he realized that he should not be owned by any specific group or interest, and he allowed himself to be a vessel for Zionism, channeling myriad struggles and dreams. The Western Wall must never become a special interest plaza, not for the Women of the Wall nor for the ultra-Orthodox. The Western Wall should mirror our world, the Jewish world, in all its infuriating complexity, with every voice represented, from ultra-Orthodox to Reform. Sharansky understood that sacrifice, made for the good of his people, and so should we. No one can own a dream, because the moment it is owned it becomes abused and misrepresented. So we borrow it, for a moment, and then share it with the world. Annika Hernroth-Rothstein is a political adviser and writer on the Middle East, religious affairs and global anti-Semitism. Twitter @truthandfiction.
Embracing the symbol
מערכת היום
מערכת "היום“ מפיקה ומעדכנת תכנים חדשותיים, מבזקים ופרשנויות לאורך כל שעות היממה. התוכן נערך בקפדנות, נבדק עובדתית ומוגש לציבור מתוך האמונה שהקוראים ראויים לעיתונות טובה יותר - אמינה, אובייקטיבית ועניינית.
