I realized something the other day. The Jewish view on the messianic age, heaven, the world to come, whatever you want to call it is based on national redemption. I was talking about this with some students recently. A big difference between Judaism and Christianity is the notion of heaven. For Christians, heaven exists. It's a place to which you have to gain admittance. But, it's an individual place. If a Christian has faith that Jesus died for his or her sins and acts upon that faith, he or she will have a place in heaven regardless of what is happening in the rest of the world.
But Jews are different. Our view of heaven is not that it is a place that exists but rather a place that we must create. It's what we pray for in the Aleinu. More importantly, we can't get there alone. Regardless of the life I lead as an individual, the reward of "heaven" or the perfect world only can happen if everyone gets there together. That's a really important difference.
Then it occurred to me that on the other end of the spectrum, revelation, the difference between individualism and nationalism also is what differentiates the Jews. Judaism is one of the only (perhaps the only) religion based on national revelation. God didn't appear to an individual. God revealed the overall plan to the nation of Israel at Mount Sinai.
I guess that's why we need a minyan to pray. It's why we hear the sound "nu" in so many of our prayers ("nu" is the possessive pronoun "our").
We got the vision as a people and we can only achieve it as a people. We are all connected. It doesn't matter how good we are as individuals. I can be a good person yet, that's not enough to create heaven. That really changes the stakes, doesn't it?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Interesting post. I'm learning a lot here, thanks.
I wonder what you mean by "national" redemption and revelation? Didn't god first appear to Abraham as an individual? Wasn't it only later, after Judaism existed as a set of practices and a faith, that god appeared to implement the nationalistic approach you describe?
Moreover, just a quick reminder that for Christians, the idea of what heaven means varies tremendously. There are some sects, mostly born-again Christians, who believe that enacting a "personal" relationship with Jesus can gain them salvation. But there are other types of Christians for whom heaven is more abstract, and collective. For example, there are some more "radical" Catholics who take Jesus' supposed words, "the kingdom of heaven is here," to mean that humans, together, create the kingdom and what it means.
On a larger point, I understand that it can be useful to illustrate what a concept like heaven means by showing how one faith's understanding (in your case, Judaism's) differs from others. By using this relational approach, one can emphasize key elements of a faith's identity.
But in defining something in opposition to something else, don't you risk reproducing the way of thinking (in your case, about heaven) that you seem to want to dismantle? In short, is it only Jews who are responsible for joining together to create heaven, as you seem to be suggesting? What about everyone else?
Thanks for your comment.
The issue of national revelation plays an important role in Judaism but it is sort of murky. It's true that Abraham had a personal relationship with God. However he didn't become the conduit of God's message. In fact, Abraham's contribution was monotheism - the worship of one God. That is the basis of Judaism but it is also the basis of Islam and Christianity. The laws that the Jews follow are the ones that were revealed to them at Mount Sinai which is where the idea of national revelation comes from. God spoke to the entire people to make the covenant.
The contrast would be with other religions where an individual hears from God and delivers the instructions, rules, laws, etc. to the people.
The idea of national redemption is something that I was toying with as sort of a bookend to the national revelation.
For your last question, it comes down to the meaning of the word "responsible" which I think is sometimes what gets Jews in trouble. The answer is that if you sign up for Judaism then you assume the responsilbity to repair the world as it is commanded. However, that doesn't preclude others from doing so as well, they just aren't commanded. In fact, unless everyone else does take responsibility it can't happen. The Jews can't do it alone. My understanding is that the Jews were supposed to take responsiblity to push the idea. It doesn't mean they are better, more qualified, etc. It just means that was part of the deal they struck. The other interesting thing is that repairing the world doesn't require everyone to become Jewish.
I sort of liken it to joining the Sierra Club. When you become a member of the Sierra Club, you take on some added responsiblity of caring for the environment. You have joined a group that has taken resposilbity to try to promote and drive improvements to the environment. This doesn't mean that people who aren't in the Sierra Club can't take care of the environment nor does it mean that all of the important environmental advocacy will come fromt he Sierra Club. As with the earlier example, the Sierra Club members can't do it alone yet. The envionment can be "saved" without everyone joining the Sierra Club in order to fix the environment.
Post a Comment