It is appalling
to see the silencing of “men or women of God” or other voices of conscience
when they are advocating for justice or compassion. I am not denying that
there are scoundrels, who cloak themselves in righteousness or clerical robes
and promote cruelty or foolishness. However, this blog focuses on the
thwarting of people like artists, journalists, cartoonists and clergy, in their
roles as social critics. The people who are supposed to be the brakes on the
darker impulses of the powerful and the many, are prevented from playing their
vital role in speaking for virtue, the weak and the few. This is like players
in a sport turning on the referee.
This calls for
some clarification: I would like to emphasise that I am not concerned
about people offering alternative views. What concerns me is when they attack
the legitimacy of credible people with whom they disagree.
According to one
scholar, this is the meaning of a peculiar expression in the Talmud relating to
Joshua, the prophet. Joshua was one of twelve spies, who returned to the desert
from Canaan (1). He dissented from the views of ten of his fellow spies, who
were opposed to God’s plan for the Israelites to go to the Promised Land.
The majority were not content to argue their case on its merits. Instead,
according to the Talmud (2), when Joshua tried to speak, they shut him up with
the following statement: “Will this severed head speak?!”
According to one
commentary (3), the strange phrase was an attack on Joshua’s status and
legitimacy or standing in the discussion. Moses had added the letter Yud
(Y), which is the first letter of God’s name, to Joshua’s name, changing it
from Hoshea, to Yehoshua (4). This name change symbolised his special status as
being one of two spies, deemed aligned to God (5). The other spies sought to
dismiss Joshua’s special status with the suggestion that the “head of his
name”, the additional Yud from the name of God, was disconnected or severed
from the rest of his name and not legitimately part of his name at all. The
technicalities in this case are quaint but the tactic is all too common today.
One response to
the tactic is often for social critics to get creative in order to get people’s
attention, using click bait or humour. Another strategy that is quite risky, is
for the social critic to give the impression that s/he agrees with the mob, but
then, when s/he gets their attention, to say what s/he really thinks. Caleb,
Joshua’s fellow dissenting spy, tried that approach with limited impact (6).
Often this leads
to frustration on the part of the social critic. “Joshua the son of Nun and
Caleb…tore their clothes” to express their grief (7). They continued to
speak their truth while no one was listening. The catastrophe they sought to
prevent, came to pass, with the Israelites’ anticipated entry into the Promised
Land delayed by a generation. Failure, at least some of the time, comes
with the territory.
Fortunately, in
some cases, there are at least partial victories that protect some people or
preserve some principle. Those of us who find ourselves in roles advocating for
compassion and justice, need to be prepared for our opponents to try to sever
our “heads”, to deny our legitimacy. We need to ensure that our egos do not
cloud our judgement - it is not about us - and that our emotions are
managed well. Then, we need to get in there and do what we can.
For all of us,
the message is that good “followership” is just as important as good
leadership. If we are ever tempted to discredit people we know to be good,
albeit imperfect, people, let us instead listen to their arguments on their
merit, instead of trying to silence them, if they are saying what we don’t want
to hear.
Notes
(1) Numbers 13
(2) Talmud Sota 35a
(3) Maharsha, (Rabbi Shmuel Eliezer Edeles,
lived 1555-1631) on Sota 34b and 35a, building on what he deemed a forced
explanation by the Aruch.
(4) Numbers 13:16
(5) Maharsha explains that, while God would have
preferred just two spies to gather practical information, the people had insisted
on a broader mission for the spies to determine if they should proceed with the
conquest of Canaan at all. This expanded purpose required representatives from
each of the twelve tribes.
(6) Talmud Sota 35a
(7) Numbers 14:6
No comments:
Post a Comment