.@MiddleEastEye @richards1052
The original biblical Birthright was sold by Esau to his younger brother Jacob for some red lentil stew…— Mira Bar-Hillel (@mirabarhillel) July 12, 2018
Jacob & Esau
I’ve just published a new piece at Middle East Eye. It offers a historical context to the rise of Birthright in the American Jewish community.
A few stray thoughts related to this:
Mira Bar Hillel’s tweet above also adds a factor I’d forgotten in relation to the term “birthright.” The original birthright was the blessing offered by Isaac to his eldest son. Esau was supposed to receive that blessing, as he was the oldest. But Jacob, knowing Issac was blind, put animal skin on his arms to imitate the hirsute Esau and tricked his father into giving his the birthright instead. Thus Jacob cheated Esau out of his rightful inheritance. Sound familiar?
So one of the most elemental episodes of Jewish history shows a founding father was a liar and a cheat. Someone who reaped success by cheating his brother out of what was his.
Esau, in classical Jewish texts, became the progenitor of the Edomites, a tribe which had a long, contentious relationship with the Israelites, involving several wars. Though the Israelites attempted to vanquish the Edomites they never did. Just as latter-day Israel has not, will not, and cannot vanquish the Palestinians.
Birthright as a program is also based on a lie. First, Israel is not the birthright of Diaspora Jews. Our real birthright is our Jewishness. Certainly, Israel is part of our identity. But there is no “right” bestowed on us to “own” Israel in perpetuity (unless we do justly and walk humbly with God).
But if Israel is a Jewish birthright, then it should also be the birthright of Palestinians expelled during the Nakba as well. Because they too are inhabitants of the land. Birthrights must be earned and Israel has no more right to this land than its indigenous inhabitants.
The Bible tells us that the Israelites do not ‘own’ the land. They live in it under a long-term lease agreement only because it has been lent to them by God. The Biblical Prophets preach that if the Israelites behave unjustly, then they will lose that right. And they are in the midst of doing that now.
Finally, Israel has always lived amidst other nations, tribes and peoples in this region. Historically, when it has warred against them, Israel has not fared well. Yes, you may win a battle. You may even rule for generations by dint of force and power. But that does not earn longevity. In fact, the opposite. There is a lesson there.
Technically, the blessing (which Jacob stole with trickery) was separate from the birthright, which Jacob bought (admittedly driving a hard bargain, somewhat opportunistically).
But your main point is 100% on target. If the Jewish people want to keep Israel, they must earn it – and respect the rights of its non-Jewish inhabitants whose presence there predates modern Zionism. And they must also find a way to work together with their neighbours to develop and implement a workable solution to the plight of Palestinian refugees and their decendents.
In fairness to Israel, they have done many positive things, like establishing universities and building hospitals, developing innovations in agricultural science and medicine. Israel’s record is not uniformly dark. If earning the right to be there means leaving a legacy of inventiveness and useful contributions to mankind, then Israel deserves a few A’s on its report card.
Sadly, Israel has a polarizing effect on the world, with some seeing only the bad and others only the good.
But with regard to Birthright, the concept is indeed deeply flawed. The watchword should instead be Do-right. After all, only by doing right can we ever hope to be a light unto the nations.
@ Neil Douglas:
I think you’re being far too lenient in your judgment. Just the constitutional experts say that the guide to the strength of a democracy is not how it treats the majority, but how it treats the minority, the most controversial view; so a religion or nation should be judged by how it treats the minorities within, those not part of the majority (or religion). Israel fails badly on these counts. It’s relatively easy to construct a successful state along western lines with the right resources. It’s quite difficult to construct a state which treats all citizens equally and is not prejudiced against the minority within. Not to mention expelling 1-million of those minority citizens.
I don’t care how many hospitals Israel built or universities. Those institutions don’t amount to a hill of beans compared to the massive original sin of Nakba and subsequent injustices.
So you believe Israel is evil but why discount it’s successe?
I have no problem saying nazi Germany was very successful in certain things, especially science. These are facts.
When people discount Israeli success in areas that has nothing to do with the conflict, it is pathetic. Even on weaponry, you don’t have to admire it, like UAVs or iron dome. But to say they don’t work is childish.
Lior, Israel’s successes do not compensate for its failure, sorry, sabotaging, of the peace process, and mass slaughtering Palestinians.
@ Lior Azar:
OK, here are some comment rules you neglected to read though the clear instructions before you posted insisted that you read and respect them: rule 1: don’t put words in my mouth. rule 2: don’t lie about what I believe. rule 3: if you want to claim anything you must support it with evidence.
So far, you’ve broken all of those rules: I do not believe “Israel” is evil. I believe Israeli leaders are evil and committing evil acts. That is not the same as “Israel” being evil.
Ah, what we have here is another Moshe Feiglin. Another Israeli who admires Nazis. Great. But your facts are, as usual, false. Germany was not successful at “science.” If it had been it would have won the war, but it lost. It failed to make an atomic bomb. It failed to produce the armaments it needed to defeat the Allies. If being successful at science means the Nazis were good at exterminating Jews, I guess in some perverse way you’re correct. IS that what you meant?
I do not allow commenters to commend Nazis. Therefore, you have been moderated. Only future comments which respect the comment rules will be published.
No, to say Iron Dome doesn’t work isn’t childish. It’s accurate. What I mean by that is that Iron Dome is far less successful than the IDF has acknowledged. Moti Shefer, an Israeli rocket engineer advanced this argument, not I. MIT Prof. Ted Postol, a world expert on rocket engineering, also agrees. Before making stupid remarks why don’t you bother to read the posts I’ve written on the subject?
As for UAVs, I don’t admire weaponry that causes immense bloodshed not only in Palestine, but around the world.
I see your point and I agree. But with a lot of discussions in relation to the good things that Isreali Jews have accomplished in Isreal seems to make the Palestinians invisible. Had the partition of Mandate Palestine not occurred, and allowed to become independant from Britain, it’s very possible that both Palestinians and Jews could have worked together to accomplish just as much, if not more.
The separation of the two, in my eyes, was the continuation of the famous British mechanism of divide and rule, which in this case, has gone horribly bad for both Jews and Palestinians.
I strongly believe that, at the time, if a different tact was attempted; independance rather than the partition, we would see a much different Middle East right now.
@ Theo Anonis:
This is what Judah Magnes and Brit Shalom believed as well. For his trouble, he was called a traitor and lost his job as president of the Hebrew University.
I never understood why anyone would admire Jacob or be proud of their supposed connection with him. As you said: just a common thief and liar. A fraudster.
“Birthrights must be earned and Israel has no more right to this land than its indigenous inhabitants.”
The Jews are the indigenous inhabitants of the land, insofar as there are no other peoples, precedent.
The Arabs living in Israel-Palestine, are indigenous to the Arabian peninsula.
They left the Arabian peninsula and settled in the Levant, same as Europeans left Europe and settled in the Americas, which had had it’s own indigenous peoples.
http://www.palestine-family.net/index.php?nav=6-20&cid=28-245&did=2544
Peg: “The Jews are the indigenous inhabitants of the land, insofar as there are no other peoples, precedent.”
I hate to break it to you, but since you have your historic knickers in a twist, here is some reality.
It is not the Jews who are the indigenous inhabitants of Palestine, but only the handful of Jews who were living there already when the European Jews arrived.
Furthermore, those indigenous Jews were sharing the land with Arabs who living there also when the European Jews arrived.
Wherever those indigenous Jews and indigenous Arabs came from is irrelevant, they were living in Palestine when the European Jews arrived and ethnically cleansed Palestine.
In conclusion therefore, the European Jews were NOT, and never have been, indigenous to Palestine, just like the African Jews, Chinese Jews, Indian Jews, and all the other Jews, were NOT indigenous to Palestine. The European Jews with their Zionist (= racist) state project, cannot therefore lay claim to Palestine, and can at most claim a spiritual, religious link.
Hi Klaas,
You wrote:
“In conclusion therefore, the European Jews were NOT, and never have been, indigenous to Palestine”
Okay, then where did European Jews come from?
My understanding is that some Roman citizens did convert to Judaism, but that many more Jews were brought from Palestine to Rome as slaves, following the destruction of Jerusalem.
My understanding is that there was a gradual Northern migration pattern from Italy to France, and than from France into the Rhineland.
Did I miss something?
Hi Peg, yes you missed an important point. The European Jews did NOT come from the Middle East, they came from eastern Europe. Ultimately they may have been Khazars who converted to Judaism in the 8th century.
But the relevant issue is that when they invaded Palestine they had no presence there, the only Jews there at that time were Palestinian Jews, Arab Jews if you like.
Finally, the bible is not title document for land – see my own comment above.
“Ultimately they may have been Khazars who converted to Judaism in the 8th century.”
Klaas, I don’t think you and I are going to convince one another of anything.
So…..Byeeeeee.
@ Klaas Vaak: I think you overstate your case. I believe that European Jews originate from a number of sources. Some undoubtedly come from the ancient Near East. Some were converts added to the mix after Jews migrated out of ancient Palestine. The Khazars contributed to the mix as well. I don’t think it’s a good idea to issue blanket statements on matters that are this complex.
The “complex” argument is always used when Israel is criticised. There is nothing complex about these matters.
World Jewry did not approve of the Zionist proposal to create a “Jewish state” because they saw it as antisemitic. And even now the majority of Jews don’t want to live in Israel, do not feel Israeli. Israeli Jews are getting out of Israel; heck, there are 1 million Israeli expats living in the US, and god knows how may elsewhere.
The Zionists went ahead with their project anyway, based on the false premise that the Jews had been there and in charge for 3000 years, therefore were the original inhabitants, therefore were entitled to that land, therefore the Arabs could be removed by cleansing or murder.
The false argument went even further by stating that the European Jews, the creators of the project, originated in Palestine.
You acknowledge to Peg that that argumentation is specious.
The spiritual link could be honoured by letting the Jews visit and pray at the holy sites. So where is the complexity?
@ Klaas Vaak:
Beware of anyone who tells you that a problem that has claimed tens of thousands of lives and lasted for nearly a century is “not complex.” As for conflating me with Israeli apologists, I resent you doing so. There are few whose criticisms of the Israeli government are as strong as mine.
Your “history” of the Zionist movement is also imprecise. I don’t think there is any such thing as “world Jewry” have a uniform opinion on anything, let alone Zionism. What you would have said had you wanted to be accurate was that Zionism was a controversial concept in some quarters in the Diaspora, especially among American Jews. However, by the end of WWII, American Jewry had converted to the Zionist cause.
As for Israeli emigrating from Israel, this is true. But the numbers are mixed. While Jews are leaving, Diaspora Jews are arriving. Overall the outflow is matched by the inflow. While native population growth is also occurring.
I really don’t need lectures from you about the history of Zionism. I know far more about the history than you and have been studying it far longer.
What I argued, and what you have not refuted, is your claim that all Jews come from the Khazars. This is bizarre conspiracy theory advanced by a certain class of anti-Zionist and even some neo-Nazis.
Next time you want to create a straw man, don’t make it me. I’m no one’s straw man. Pay close attention to what I’ve written and address that. Do not add extraneous claims that have nothing to do with anything I wrote.
@Richard: I don’t know if your rules only apply to commenters or also to you as a moderator; in any case you broke your own rule 1: don’t put words in my mouth. You did not just put words in my mouth, you twisted them. Let me explain.
I clearly stated:
You stated:
Furthermore, I agree that there are few whose criticisms of the Israeli government are as strong as yours. But when you use the concept of “complexity” in Israel’s context I believe you are, perhaps unconsciously, apologising. After all, I doubt you would argue the extermination of 6 million Jews by Nazi Germany was a complex matter, it was brutal murder on a massive scale, pure & simple. Similarly, the extermination of 10s of 1000s of Palestinians by Israel is not a “complex” matter either, it is brutal murder on a massive scale, pure & simple.
I did not create a straw man, I merely presented an argument to make a point. As for “paying close attention to what I’ve written and address that”, I will certainly do so, but I suggest you do the same and don’t misquote me or even twist my words. Thank you.
I will not comment on your remarks re the emigration/immigration balance, nor on those about the history of Zionism.
@ Klaas Vaak: When you appear to account for all Jews in the world as originating in places other than ancient Israel, you open yourself to the sort of wild conspiracy theories rampant in certain circles. Clearly, Jews have some connection, however defined to the land of Israel. It’s a connection that is complex and certainly no one should make the sorts of claims which arch-Zionists make about this connection. It doesn’t entitle Jews to any territorial rights that supercede any other inhabitants of the land. BUt the connection exists and should be credited. I’m perfectly happy with your articulation saying there is a religious-spiritual connection, though I would add historical as well. Though admittedly, this is open to debate and should not be overstated.
As for ‘complexity,’ my use of the term has nothing to do with what you assert. That is an idea/connection you have conceived yourself and has nothing to do with my own use of the term. I never said the Holocaust was complex. I never said Occupation or deaths of Palestinians was complex. So once again, you’re creating an argument out of thin air that isn’t based on anything I’ve written. I said the issue of the origins of Jews is complex because there have been thousands of years of history plus migrations throughout the world spurred by violent conquest and other factors, not to mention mass conversion. That, and only that, is what is complex.
Let’s end this debate here. We’ve both said & written enough on the subject.
@ Peg: European Jews don’t necessarily trace a direct line back to ancient Israel. Did you know that 10% of all Jews living in the ROman empire were converts? In other words, they had no direct connection to ancient Israel. Though you dismiss the Khazar hypothesis, Yehuda HaLevi notes it as historical fact. He doesn’t claim that all Jews come from Khazars as those who spin wild conspiracy theories do. But the Khazar conversion is an important historical event.
@Klaas Vaak:
Precisely, but do not diminish this aspect of a Jewish claim. It is important and resonates for many Jews. I would argue that such a spiritual-religious claim does not trump an actual ownership claim by indigenous Palestinians who lived in the land for centuries or longer. But it is a claim that needs to be addressed and respected.
@ Peg:
Your claim is wrong on many counts. First “Jews” are not indigenous inhabitants of the land. Even speaking on your terms, Israelites were the indigenous inhabitants. That is not necessary the same as “Jew” since a great deal happened to the Israelites on their way to becoming Jews. Second, even Israelites are not indigenous to the land. For that, you’d have to go back to all the previous tribes inhabiting that land, many of which the Israelites exterminated in terrible acts of genocide and ethnic cleansing.
I cannot trace my bloodline back to ancient Israel any more than you can. The claim that my ancestors lived in this land and that this gives me a superior right to it than a Palestinian or Bedouin whose lived there for centuries or even millenia is preposterous.
You have no idea what the Palestinians are indigenous to. I wrote a blog post herre about a convincing Israeli documentary which noted the distinct possibility that Palestinians are related to the Jews who remained in Palestine after the Roman conquest.
I am repulsed by this racial argument that territory belongs to a people by dint of bloodlines.
Firstly, I never made any argument that the land belongs to Jews by dint of bloodline. Second, I am not a Jew. Third, I admitted that Roman converts added to ancient Jewry and did many others non-Israelites. Read my comment, supra.
Finally, it wouldn’t surprise me a bit if many of today’s Palestinians share Jewish blood.
BTW, giving Jews a claim to indigeneity does not preclude giving Palestinians a claim to the land as well.
https://forward.com/scribe/372978/are-both-jews-and-palestinians-indigenous-to-israel/
Getting back to the crux of the issue, whether Jews have an ‘indigenous status’, I suggest you consider the checklist of the anthropologist. José Martínez Cobo, the UN’s special rapporteur on discrimination against indigenous populations,
https://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/224254/bellerose-aboriginal-people
“I cannot trace my bloodline back to ancient Israel any more than you can”
Maybe Khazars did intermarry. That should be easily determinable via DNA. Why don’t you take the ’23 and Me’, DNA test?
https://www.23andme.com/en-int/
@ Peg: Saying that Jews are indigenous to the land and therefore have sole right to it; and saying that they have this right by dint of the fact that they have a pure bloodline running all the way back to the ancient Israelites, IS arguing that it belongs to us because of bloodlines.
Converts came from many places, not just Rome. And there were many over time.
You argue that Jews have the only legitimate claim to the land because they are the only indigenous people there. Now you argue that Palestinians have a claim to the land though you claim they came from Arabia. Something doesn’t compute here.
Tabloid Magazine is not a credible source. So please don’t bring any links from it and expect me to credit them as serious. You really quoted Ryan Bellerose, Israel’s ‘bought’ Native American as a credible source on this subject?? Really?
Store-bought DNA tests aren’t reliable. Nor do I care whether I have Khazar, Israelite, Moabite or Roman blood. Or Chinese or African, for that matter. This racial purity stuff is disgusting.
If there were still Neanderthals or Cro Magnons running around you’d argue that Jews are pure homo sapiens and therefore, what? I still can’t figure out what.
Please respect the three comment a day rule which I invoke in order to avoid any one commenter monopolizing the comment threads at any given time.
Do not comment further in this thread.
Peg Jews were indigenous inhabitants of EGYPT, where the religion named Judaism was founded and cult did get its first members. Jews were a small religious cult in the delta of Nile. As you remember the Jews moved to Palestine from Egypt and that Palestine was not empty even then. So calling present days Jews as the indigenous inhabitants of Israel is simply stupid and pure religious/nationalistic propaganda. Especially after thousands of years of mixing with “others” and numerous religious conversions.
It is hilarious when the Israelis became full of rage when their Egyptian origin is revealed. It is as amusing when Israelis and their religious supporters claim that God gave them Israel is countered that it means that the same gave the rest of the planet to us non-Israelis. When I had once an argument with an American “Israeli” who had used the “God gave us defence” and he defended his right to live in New York, because he was born there. When I reminded of the birth place of Palestinians and their rights he decided to end the discussion.
When Israelis decide of the Nation-state Bill and Jews only communities it gives us the moral right at least to demand “Judenfrei” communities on our territory. What will Israel supporting Jews say when they are recommended/commanded by non-Jews to move to a “pure” Jewish Ghetto in western countries? What is OK in Israel should be OK in Europe? It is impossible to understand why Israelis so eagerly create their own Nazi-state which dangers all Jews around the world.
The bible is not recognised by any country or official organisation as a real estate title document with legally binding conditions, except by the Zionists, who are non-religious but have hijacked an honourable religion for their depraved objectives.
The biblical narrative can be, and has been, easily debunked. Leaving the biblical debunk (yes it exists) aside, I would like to point out a few archeological facts that also help debunk the Zionist narrative from 1 source (https://www.globalresearch.ca/history-and-biblical-scholarship-al-quds-is-not-jerusalem/5646150) among many others:
Jewish Israeli archaeologist, Israel Finkelstein, the director of the Sonia and Marco Nadler Institute of Archaeology at Tel Aviv University, states in his book “The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology’s New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of its Sacred Texts”, co-authored with Neil Asher Silberman, archaeologist and historian, that many biblical stories had never happened but were written by what he calls “a creative copywriter” to advance a political agenda. He disputed the biblical description of Israel as a great empire with Jerusalem as its capital, where King Solomon had built a splendid temple, and stated that Jerusalem was just a small village with a small tribe and a small temple.
Jewish Israeli archaeologist Ze’ev Herzog, a professor in the Department of Archaeology and Ancient Near Eastern Studies at Tel Aviv University, together with Yigael Yadin, an Israeli politician, military official and archaeologist, conducted many excavations throughout Palestine. Finding no evidence of the alleged Jewish roots in Palestine he eventually agreed with Wellhausen’s findings* and argued that the Exodus from Egypt probably never happened, the Ten Commandments were not given on Mount Sinai, and Joshua never conquered Palestine. He casted serious doubts on David’s and Solomon’s monarchies, stating that if they existed they were probably no more than tribal chieftains.