Two big clues appeared Wednesday that the Saudi-Israeli peace process may not just be a political gesture -- or, if it is, it is one of those rare imaginative gestures that has established its own reality.
One the one hand, Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman appeared to contradict his foreign minister, telling Bret Baier of Fox News that he wanted to see a "good life" for the Palestinians as part of a potential deal, but stopped short of calling for a Palestinian state.
On the other hand, the White House readout of the long-awaited Biden-Netanyahu meeting mentioned the need to maintain the "viability" of the two-state solution, but did not call explicitly for a Palestinian state as a result of a deal.
This is an acknowledgment of reality. Netanyahu cannot reach a deal, and survive in power, if he accepts a Palestinian state. And the Palestinian Authority under President Mahmoud Abbas is too corrupt and violent to be a successful state, never mind a peace partner.
But it is the first real sign that the parties are serious about peace. Hold on: this could get very, very interesting in the coming weeks. I don't know what's driving it, but the chances just got a lot better.
This week’s portion launches the great story of Abraham, who is told to leave everything of his life behind — except his immediate family — and to leave for “the Land that I shall show you.”
There’s something interesting in the fact that Abraham is told to leave his father’s house, as if breaking away from his father’s life — but his father, in fact, began the journey, moving from Ur to Haran (in last week’s portion). His father set a positive example — why should Abraham leave him?
Some obvious answers suggest themselves — adulthood, needing to make one’s own choices, his father not going far enough, etc.
But I think there is another answer. Abraham (known for the moment as Abram) needs to establish his own household. This is not just about making one’s own choice, but really about choosing one’s own starting point. It’s starting over.
Sometimes we start over in fundamental ways even if much that surrounds us remains the same. Sometimes the journey we have to ...
The story of Noah is familiar; the details, less so.
Noah is often seen as an ambivalent figure. He was righteous -- but only for his generation. What was his deficiency?
One answer suggests itself: knowing that the world was about to be flooded, he built an Ark for the animals and for his own family -- but did not try to save anyone else or to convince them to repent and change their ways (the prophet Jonah, later, would share that reluctance).
Abraham, later, would set himself apart by arguing with God -- with the Lord Himself! -- against the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, saying that they should be saved if there were enough righteous people to be found (there were not).
Still, Noah was good enough -- and sometimes, that really is sufficient to save the world. We don't need heroes every time -- just ordinary decency.
Hi all -- as I noted last month, I'm going to be closing down my Locals page, at least for tips and subscriptions -- I may keep the page up and the posts as well, but I'm no longer going to be accepting any kind of payment.
Look for cancelation in the very near future. Thank you for your support!
