ByMICHAEL M. COHEN

The recounting of the details of the two events are similar. In both, the protagonist rises early in the morning, saddles his ass accompanied by two servants. Three is also woven into the storytelling tapestry – in the first story the “third day” is significant, while in the second the master beats his ass three times. The first tale is about Abraham on his way to Mount Moriah for the binding/akeida of Issac, while the second tells of Bilaam ’s journey to meet Balak, king of Moab, who wants Bilaam  to curse the Israelites. The sharing of many details invites us to connect the two stories. But how? We read:

“Bilaam  got up in the morning, saddled his donkey and went with the Moabite officials. But God was very angry when he went, and the angel of the Lord stood in the road to oppose him. Bilaam  was riding on his donkey, and his two servants were with him. When the donkey saw the angel of the Lord standing in the road with a drawn sword in his hand, it turned off the road into a field. Bilaam  beat it to get it back on the road” (Numbers 22:21-23).

Why does Bilaam  beat his ass three times? In The Five Books of Miriam, Ellen Frankel writes, “Bilaam beats his ass for affirming the truth – there is a danger facing them in their path – a truth Bilaam  himself cannot see.” More and more in our world today truth is pushed to the sidelines when it comes to climate collapse, COVID-19, the democratic process, to name a few. Related, the zeitgeist’s fault lines are not between nations, religions, and cultures; rather, the divide is: fanatics vs. moderates; uber nationalists vs. human nationalists; understanding the world through simplistic reductionist glasses vs. accepting complexity; quick to judge vs. thoughtful reflection; and naysayers vs. optimists. Those in the latter outlooks and orientations must work thoughtfully and powerfully to reclaim the conversation.
In the course of the parsha (Torah portion), the Israelites are described as a group to be “terrified” (Numbers 22:3) of who will “chew up everything” (22:4) as they “cover the face of the land” (22:5); and they are “a people who dwell apart” (23:9). These descriptions characterize one way individuals and groups approach “the other,” those who are different from them. Jews know all too well the dangerous and lethal outcomes the uber-focus on the Jewish state reveals. My writings in The Jerusalem Post have long presented a very critical eye on Israeli policies vis-à-vis Palestinians as I place myself in the Ahad Ha’am-Albert Einstein camp of Zionism, mindful of the potential excesses of nationalism: Jewish, Arab, and other.

In his song National Brotherhood Week, Tom Lehrer sings, “And everybody hates the Jews.” While the song is a biting satire, we know many words of truth are said in jest. The disproportionate spotlight on the Jewish state for decades is a manifestation of that.

For example, between 2006 and 2016 there were 68 UN Human Rights Council resolutions against Israel, while only 67 against the entire rest of the world! Such a message says the Jewish state is the cause of half of the human rights violations in the world with no resolutions addressing for example the Chinese occupation of Tibet and murder of 1.2 million Tibetans, according to the Dalai Lama; and no resolutions mentioning the 7.5 million Han Chinese people who have been settled in occupied Tibet by the Chinese government or the persecution of Chinese Muslims. This week’s UN condemnation of Chinese policies vis-à-vis its Muslim population was an important step in the right direction, but is was a joint statement and not in the stronger form of a resolution as we see when it comes to Israel.

Yes, Israel has what to answer for, as do the Palestinians – even in asymmetry, both sides have agency that demands accountability. However, the singling out of Israel plays into the meme that it is OK to pick on Jews and the Jewish state. Where is BDS when it comes to China, or India and the policies of the ruling Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party? For many Israelis, in fact the very ones who need to have their minds changed vis-à-vis Palestinians, BDS, by shunning Israel disproportionately plays into their narrative that the world is against Jews and can’t be trusted. If the goal of BDS is to end the “occupation” but its tactic reinforces the opposite. That status quo is neither sustainable nor just; a political solution that is sincere, just, and righteous is required.

In her insightful book High Conflict: Why We Get Trapped and How We Get Out, Amanda Ripley writes: “Just as the enemy got dehumanized, they must be rehumanized.” In this conflict, individuals often get labeled or label themselves pro-Israeli or pro-Palestinian. Too often, those positions lead to “othering” those of a different label, as both sides harden their hearts and become blind when looking at the other. We pause and note: This week’s parsha ends with an act of zealous vigilant extremism by Pinhas.

In How to Cure a Fanatic, Amos Oz reminds us of the choice we all face: “It is about the ancient struggle between fanaticism and pragmatism. Between fanaticism and pluralism. Between fanaticism and tolerance.”

This brings us back to Abraham and the Akeida. Abraham passes the test not because he sacrifices Isaac but rather, in that moment of fanaticism and zealotry, he is able to hear the angel say, “Do nothing to your son” (Genesis 22:12).

I tell my students, “I am not objective, nor do I think, if we are honest with ourselves, any of us are; the challenge is to be passionate but always remain open to the voice, the angelic voice saying think and act differently.”

Not surprisingly, the Haftarah for this week’s parsha is Micah, with its antidote for fanaticism:

“And what does the Lord require of you:

Only to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God” (6:8).

Or as Vermont politician Kesha Ram insightfully teaches, we should be proud of who we are but we should also walk with “cultural humility.”

The writer is rabbi emeritus of the Israel Congregation, Manchester Center, Vermont, and a faculty member of the Arava Institute for Environmental Studies and Bennington College.