We Hold the Highlighter

Thirty years ago, I was sitting in an English literature class and I raised my hand at one point, as other people were doing, to offer an idea about a poem that the professor was discussing.  And he said to me, “just like a broken clock.”  And I said, “sorry?”  And he said, “Even a broken clock is right twice a day.  If you keep on offering that idea, eventually it will apply.”

I didn’t say very much else in that class.  But I continued to listen.  He was a good professor, if slightly acerbic.  One day he gave us his "highlighter theory." There was one novel in particular that we were reading which he said could be subject to multiple interpretations.  He said, you can take a highlighter and highlight certain parts, and then the novel reads like a very optimistic embrace of life.  You can highlight other parts and it comes across very cynical.

So, with due deference to my professor, I want to say something similar about the Torah.

A lot depends on what you do with your highlighter. 

Highlight certain parts and you have a tradition about taking care of the vulnerable, about showing mercy and giving the benefit of the doubt.

Highlight other parts and the thrust is about war and violence, about clearing a path for your people even at the expense of others.

The answer to the question “is the Torah a book about hostile takeovers or compassionate outreach?  is yes. 

Our ancestors have always read the Torah with their own highlighter in hand.  They have identified certain passages, or chosen to understand certain passages, in order to maintain a particular point of view.

The Torah says that a rebellious child, who doesn’t listen to his father or mother, should be put to death by the inhabitants of the city. 

Centuries later, rabbis examined this law carefully.  They decided to interpret it in such strict terms that it was never actually applied.

We need to do that, too.  We need to take responsibility for how we interpret Torah, which parts should be emphasized, which parts should be reconsidered.  We hold the highlighter.

As the Conservative movement maintains, in each generation rabbinic leaders interpret Jewish law according to their understanding of the Torah, written and oral, the situation at hand, and the community that they lead and serve.

Rabbis and communities hold the highlighter.  We determine, through careful assessment of current reality and a commitment to an age-old process of interpreting the Torah, how we will respond to the current reality.

Our embrace, for example, of the full participation of women in religious life has involved our highlighting those aspects of Biblical and rabbinic tradition that emphasize equality and interpreting the tradition through that lens. 

Recently, we have taken a similar approach regarding diversity of sexual orientation, seeking to encourage all people to find sacred companionship, regardless of their orientation. 

When the State of Israel approaches a modern dilemma, the experts, whose guidance it seeks, determine what aspects of the tradition they are going to highlight in keeping with certain larger values.

I would argue that those scholars who were asked to create a code of ethics for the Israeli Defense Forces several decades ago chose to highlight those aspects of Biblical and rabbinic tradition that call for maintaining appropriate boundaries in military situations.

In a lecture he gave in2008, Professor Moshe Halbertal, one of the drafters of the code, identified two major principals of just warfare that are supposed to govern the conduct of IDF soldiers.

In his lecture, Professor Halbertal maintains that the principle of proportionality justifies the use of force by army personnel only in proportion to the mission s/he is assigned.  Actions have to be related to the mission. He goes on to say, however, that determining the extent of the threat at any given point is difficult and so discernment is necessary to continually determine the conditions of the situation and the nature of the mission. 

The second principal is restriction. The restrictive principle forbids the targeting of non-combatants even when it is proportionate with the completion of the mission. 

The problem here, he suggests, is that in modern warfare against terrorist groups the distinction between combatant and non-combatant is difficult to discern, especially if the terrorists deliberately try to blur those distinctions.

On September 20, before our Selihot service, we will look more carefully at these issues.  But I will say, in this context, that Moshe Halbertal and his colleagues chose to highlight the Biblical and Rabbinic passages and impulses that call for as much restraint as is possible, rather than those that call for wholesale destruction.

My final example.  Anyone who has tried to raise children holds a highlighter all the time.  We determine how to respond in certain situations which can be difficult for many reasons.  For one thing, regarding many significant issues that emerge as children grow up, you can find experts that give opposing advice.

Always comfort a crying baby.  Let babies cry it out, especially at night.

Give your teenager space to let loose at home.  Make sure your teenager doesn’t take liberties at home.

Give your young adult child specific guidance about career and relationships.  Keep your mouth shut.

Naturally, there is much middle ground in all of these areas and others.  But a parent needs to hold the highlighter, to determine what tone to set, how to act in various situations, and I suspect that most of us lean in a particular direction on all of these issues, even if we are not entirely consistent.

The tradition, the scripture, the expert advice, often contain multiple perspectives and so communities, nations and families need to find their way, to highlight the tendencies that resonate most for them and to create a framework of behavior on that basis.

To do that, we need to use discernment, we need to have courage, and we need to take responsibility.

That’s what the ancient rabbis did when they said, in effect, no child is going to be given capital punishment. 

That’s what modern rabbis did when they reexamined issues of gender and sexual orientation.

That’s what the framers of the IDF code did when they said, though it’s very complicated, and though IDF soldiers will surely make mistakes, we will craft a code that mandates proportionality and restraint.

That’s what all of us who are involved in raising children do in all kinds of situations.

Discern the situation.  Marshall the sources using our own highlighter.  And admit that this is what we’re doing, because to be a human being is to discern, measure, highlight and take responsibility.

Let’s pray for what the Talmud calls לב מבין Lev mevin – a heart that discerns, that helps us bring the best our tradition has to bear on every aspect of our lives. 

Hopefully we’ll get things right far more often than a broken clock.

Originally delivered at Temple Israel of Great Neck on September 6, 2014