By Rabbi Moti Rieber
Guest Columnist
Recently the issues of free speech and academic freedom have been prominent in the news and in our conversations. In response to a heartfelt but intemperate tweet from a KU journalism professor, the Kansas Regents came up with a social media code which seems to many to be unduly restrictive and, frankly, ill-thought-out.
This issue led me to think about the Jewish attitude toward free speech. The best example of Judaism’s support for free inquiry is, I think, the Talmud — that compendium of argumentation that is the very source of our post-biblical religion. Throughout its volumes, rabbis from different regions and even different generations argue about what exactly is the meaning of this or that law, or word, or practice, or story.
There is even a character in the Talmud who is described as a heretic — a former rabbi who has fallen into sin — but who is also considered to be the teacher of the great Rabbi Meir, who continues to learn from him even in his fallen state.
To me, the verse that speaks to this most directly is from Tractate Eruvim: “A divine voice came and said, ‘These and these are the words of the living God, and the law is according to the House of Hillel.’ ” To me this is saying, as long as we’re struggling from a place of love and honest striving, our words are godly.
That’s why I’m so disturbed by the limitations on speech that I see growing in Jewish communal institutions when it comes to the issue of Israel. Many Jews are concerned, as am I, about the direction the government of Israel is going — its endless expansion of settlements, footdragging on the peace process with the Palestinians and attempts to undermine President Obama’s diplomacy with Iran. Now, you may disagree with me on some or all of these issues, but I would hope that you would recognize that I am certainly not saying these things out of a desire to harm Israel.
Yet the national Hillel organization, in its efforts to make sure that Hillel continues to be supportive of Israel, has put forward speech codes that are so broad as to exclude not only opponents of Israel, but people who simply do not toe the party line — by, for instance, sponsoring testimonials from former soldiers, or advocating boycotting products from Israeli businesses based in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.
Even so prominent an Israeli as Avram Burg, former speaker of the Israeli Knesset and scion of one of Israel’s founding families, was prohibited from speaking at the Hillel at Harvard because the event was being co-sponsored by a Palestinian student group. How can we make peace if we aren’t even allowed to talk to one another?
I want to be clear: I do not and will not support academic boycotts. I think free speech and free inquiry are not only core American values — they are core Jewish values as well. Yet as with the KU professor, the problem is that when you restrict speech for what you consider valid reasons, you never know who is going to enforce those restrictions or what criteria they are going to use. You may intend to exclude only supporters of academic boycotts, and end up excluding Avram Burg.
At the very least I would say, we do no service to Israel if we stifle those in our own community who are — rightly I think — concerned about the path it is on.
Moti Rieber serves as rabbi of the Lawrence Jewish Community Congregation.
