On Being Jewish

 

Why the thumb-sucking introspection, the solemn navel-gazing which appears to leap at one from the pages of declaratory writings, of activity outlines, of goals and achievements? Why is it always so necessary for the writer (for his/her benefit or that of the pre-supposed readers) to declaim Jewishness? As though, by the very fact of being Jewish, there is a subtle (for most) unmistakable entree into the world of goodness, sensitivity, concerned activism, sterling achievements, scholasticism, modesty and intelligence. Is the fact of Jewishness tacitly acknowledged then, as the catalyst for particular sentience and achievement? Would the genetic imprinting and early environment of this person sans Jewishness not have resulted similarly?

Why is it that we metaphorically outline, underline, capitalize on, shout to the world, Jewish! Is it like a child's game proclaiming Head Start?

There's a kind of security blanket of comfort for most in 'belonging' to any group, for we are basically gregarious in character as biological organisms. We derive comfort from 'company'. Biologically we are also somewhat xenophobic. The comfort which we derive is not a bad thing in and of itself. Some individuals feel the need to delve completely into groups comprised of like individuals, all demonstrating (or professing to) similar tendencies. For others, it is merely enough to identify at a distance, taking some comfort from the satisfaction of knowing the group is there, and selecting one's 'contacts' with the focus on tribe being a secondary consideration to others perhaps more compelling in the context of modern society.

The deleterious component of this identification is the smugness involved in feeling oneself part of this 'distinguished' group, which excludes all others (unworthy) from the circle of its intimacy. The degree of smugness can range from a tiny inner feeling of being 'part of', all the way to overt symptoms of personality-elevation - social and moral superiority.

If one believes in old adages, behavioural precepts, morals and biblical injunctions, one should be aware that the Chosen People were a random choice scripturally selected to demonstrate to the world at large moral fibre and uprightness, consideration for the fellow man, and a willingness to live as one with all others.

True, the original goal was to diminish the ranks of those 'not chosen' (anyone outside the immediate tribe). Proselytization was soon recognized as being no means of achieving the goal, but example was. By the very goodness of their behaviour the tribe was meant to gradually impress upon all others its sterling mode of living and values until peace reigned through the prime observation of 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you'.

Someone, or some far-seeing group with an enhanced sense of universal responsibility and idealism must have reasoned that surely goodness would prevail eventually. The original precept, during the early cultural evolution of which we speak, was quickly subverted to reflect other, far less laudatory imperatives. We haven't come very far, since then.

If, however, the original precept was the unifying factor (however since translated) which held the tribe together, it is nothing short of amazing that these ancient precepts (subverted and often gone badly awry in many respects to be sure) still adhere. But the germ of the idea of 'chosen' and the moral responsibilities incumbent upon a people to render sterling example exists still, however subliminally, within the understanding and the psyche of the group. How much is due to the original purposeful catalyst and how much to intervening happenstance of history, encumbered by tradition, culture, social awareness and an 'idea' of a common root, is a moot point. History and culture remain, of course, the unifying ingredient.

Which brings me right back to my original query... One feels intrinsically 'special' as a Jew. With no affiliations to specific Jewish organizations, no religious acknowledgement, adherence to custom or anything remotely (on the surface, in any event) unifying, one has this gift of existence and it is generally perceived to be very precious indeed. And if one feels that to carry the gift with one honourably one must obey the original injunctions to the best of one's ability, all the better; we have, doubtless, a better human being. Surely not at all better than a Muslim, a Protestant, a Buddhist, a Catholic with similar sensibilities however derived, but a better person withal.

So why insistence on overt identification? All too often one's name, facial features, manner of address, proclaim all too clearly to the world the obvious; why trumpet it out additionally, if not for the purpose of raising the barriers of sensitivity. To ensure the world knows with a certainty that one is proud, unique, and has few equals outside the tribe? Why not be assured the goal at onset can be achieved without diminishing the value of others? It seems obvious that this critical redundancy continues through an errant sense of arrogance, a self-perceived group superiority.

And it is just quite possible that such a distinction has become a great aid at times of need, a comprehensive assurance to one's self that the world outside the tribe which has rejected The Jew -- at times culturally and socially dismissively, and on other occasions with ferocious group violence -- selectively seen as an outlier in any mainstream society where the diaspora has taken them, is a mode of defiance, a declaration of 'We're here -- deal with it!!' And they do.