Spinoza, writing in the 17th Century, is one of the world's all-time great philosophers. He is comparable to Darwin in his impact of turning upside down previous mediaeval thinking. As a Jew, he still presents problems for modern classical Judaism. A recent apologist, Andrew Gluck (Various Theories Explaining Why Jewish People are Special) writes in 2017, Spinoza destroys the traditional idea of election…… For Spinoza, God is the foundation of a system of complete necessity. Therefore, He could not choose Israel for anything. Israel must have chosen God.

In 1657, the Portuguese-Jewish community of Amsterdam excommunicated him. His significance was recognised by Ben Gurion, who belatedly tried to recruit him to the cause of modern Israel and asked the religious authorities to overturn his excommunication. They refused on the grounds that no subsequent authority can overturn the decision of a previous one. This is in itself a significant insight into traditional Jewish thinking. It is not possible to discontinue being a Jew. Under duress Jews became Christian but they were still Jews. The rise of the nation-state in the 19th century. allowed an individual to choose their nationality. This set the model for being able to confess a religious affiliation and allowed the development of Reform Judaism.

Spinoza's statement that Israel must have chosen God opens up the way to 20th century psychological insights and in particular the mechanism of interpersonal projection. An individual attributes to another qualities which are an expression of their own desires, to which they are blind themselves and the reason why antagonism ensues.

Chosenness expresses an inner wish. It is understandable in the context of wanting to be as close as possible to parents. It offers safety, specialness and eternal protection, alongside which are truth, divinely inspired, and power, a platform from which to destroy rivals. Self-preservation is a priority in primitive societies which go to the length of slaughtering family members in order to safeguard succession. This is a massive problem when twins are born. Sibling rivalry becomes lethal.

Genesis chapter 27. The Saga of Jacob is a useful focus.

Isaac, the son of Abraham, is dying. He and Rebecca have twin sons, Jacob and Esau. Esau is born first, followed by Jacob holding his heel. Some years later, Isaac, now blind and decrepit, needs to pass on his inheritance. He calls Esau and bids him go out hunting and bring him venison, so that I can give you my blessing. Rebecca has overheard and secretly intervenes. She bids Jacob go out and get venison, from which she will make Isaac's favourite savoury dish. Jacob demurs. Despite his blindness, his father will recognise him, resulting in a curse rather than a blessing. Rebecca has a ready answer. Let the curse fall on me. Furthermore, she has kept back Esau's best clothes to put on Jacob. She knows that his hands need to be disguised and covers them with goatskin.

Jacob now plays his part.
 

I am Esau, your eldest son.Isaac says, How have you come so quickly?
Jacob plays the God card. It is what the Lord your God put in my way.
Isaac plainly still has doubts. The voice is the voice of Jacob but the hands are the hands of Esau. He is finally convinced by the smell of his clothes. Ah, the smell of my son is like the smell of the open country. Jacob receives the blessing and exits.
Esau enters. Come, father, and eat of my venison, so that you may give me your blessing.
Who are you? asks Isaac.
I am Esau, your elder son.
Then who was it that........ ? I ate it all before you came and I blessed him and the blessing will stand.
Loud and bitter cry. Bless me too, father. Your brother came treacherously and took away your blessing. Have you kept back any blessing for me?
Isaac responds: I have made him lord over you. Your dwelling shall be far from the richness of the earth, far from the dew of heaven and you shall serve your brother.

The abbreviated version here serves to emphasise the literary and dramatic quality of the original.

Modern liberal scholarship from both a Christian and a Jewish perspective will say that the narratives in Genesis are not history as we understand it. The narratives divide themselves into sagas, as here, of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. There are repetitions between them, no one was there to record what was said, the personages relate to locations and the various relationships between them reflect tribal movements and fortunes. Jacob, like Abraham before him, is father to the Israeli nation, while Esau is an outcast in the line of Ishmael and, as I have heard it from Muslims themselves, their ancestor.

The Jacob saga is plainly stage drama as Isaac's responses build anticipation. Will Jacob be recognised? We, the audience know the answer before it is played out. For the writers, the priority question is how to explain the beginning of history. The indication that the Jacob-Esau story is a creation myth parallel to the Adam and Eve saga is in Rebecca's everlasting call, Let the curse fall on me. Woman is to blame for all the consequences that befall future generations.

The Jacob vignette is not a promising foundation on which to build a heritage. In 20th century terms, this is a highly dysfunctional family who are prime candidates for individual-group-family-marital therapy. Father is far enough distant as to be absent, which is probably understandable given the trauma of having faced ritual sacrifice by his own father. Mother has had to hold together the role of father and mother, which she can only do by deception. Their youngest son, Jacob, is a deceiver from the beginning. Only Esau, who has innocently suffered total loss, comes out of it with integrity. Mother has one favourite, father another; the two sons inherit sibling rivalry both by nature and by nurture. The unit is seeking to receive or witness blessing but what they receive is total curse|: Esau because he is disinherited, Rebecca because she calls the curse upon herself, Jacob because he is defined by deception and Isaac because he has set in train an irresolvable sequence.

Spinoza's foundational statement is that it is not God choosing man but man choosing God. Jewish tradition is not alone in its belief of chosenness. The Church adopted the claim and presented itself as more chosen than the Chosen. The Western Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church each claimed God-given validity for themselves to the point where they dusted off the soles of their feet to each other in St. Sophia. The Protestant Reformation claimed its own divine truth. Chosenness has become part of our national identity: This sceptred isle; And did those feet; I was Glad; Rule Britannia; Nimrod; D-Day; Le Carré; James Bond.

To be chosen by God is a winning formula. What could be more winning? Self-validation is a unique selling point. It is surprisingly not too difficult to achieve. The character of myth is that it is repetitive and played out in real time without being recognised for what it is. Trump attributes his salvation to divine purpose in order to save democracy. A single distant incident can constellate the latent energy of multitudes of believers. Liberal Christian theologians have their own task of analysis in their own backyard before or, at least at the same time as, venturing out to analyse others.

The dialogue continues. David Novak published Zionism and Judaism: A New Theory (CUP 2015). He picks up on Ben Gurion's initiative to re-instate Spinoza with the rationale that later in life, in his Tractatus Theologico-Politicus, Spinoza speaks of the possible establishment of a state for Jews. Novak's argument is weakened by the fact that Spinoza was writing in the 17th cent. when the demographics were quite different. A 21st cent. Jewish state in the process of being completed at the cost of the expulsion of an existing population is at odds with an enlightened philosopher's fundamental assertion that the individual must be allowed to choose for themselves. Novak's case is further undermined by his reference only to the first half of the Balfour Declaration and using it to validate the current State of Israel.

The aim of a state where each feels themselves to be intimately close to the divine is laudable. It is a state where parents speak openly and trustingly to each other. Children learn that each is uniquely special to their parents without the need to devalue the other. This impossible paradox dissolves in the experience of holding, caressing, loving unremittingly, face to face, person to person. Living involves living with uncertainty and the unknown, recognising that there can be a state of anxiety which is lethal to oneself and others. The prophet Micah does indeed embody humanity when he speaks of doing justice, loving mercy and walking humbly where each man dwells under his own fig-tree, undisturbed.

Novak re-states Jewish tradition, which taught that morality needs religious justification. This requires the supernatural intrusion of God through revelation to a particular time in a particular place (p.30). Spinoza reverses it. It is religion which needs moral justification. History has shown over the past centuries that the Church has moved at a glacial pace in adopting values required by secular society. A most recent example has been the Church's last-ditch efforts to resist secular standards of safeguarding, achieved only by public outcry. Only with extreme difficulty is the Church leadership being pressurised to recognise the claims of Palestinians as equal to those of Israelis. Traditionally, religious institutions have seen themselves as purposed to redeem the world. This is the time to call up Spinoza again unhesitatingly and take full grasp of his inversions. It is that the secular world, in so far as it sees it as a worthwhile task, is to bring redemption to traditional religion.

Isaac's commiseration to Esau is, The time will come when you grow restive and break off the yoke from your neck. (27.40). We have arrived at that time now, when the cause of Palestine has been recognised by the world's highest court and when a woman is the candidate for the world's most powerful office, breaking now and for all succeeding generations the curse inflicted upon womanhood from the beginning.

Peter Liddell, Diocesan Director of Pastoral Counselling, St. Albans 1980-2005. Click Here for Peter's bio.

25th July 2024. Copyright.