ethics – Jewish Relationships Initiative

Pincus-From Righteousness to Self-Righteousness: The Peril of Unchecked Zeal

How do you respond to the following: We will destroy Hamas even if we must sacrifice every remaining hostage and countless thousands of Palestinian women and children?

For some, this is a statement that requires no analysis. For some, this is a righteous stand; for others, it is self-righteousness.

There is a moment when a subtle but important shift can happen within us, a transition from genuine righteousness to the often-destructive path of self-righteousness. It is a journey from trying to do what is right according to a higher calling to becoming convinced that we are inherently right, unwilling to consider anything else. Often, this occurs without our awareness.

Pinchas in this week’s Torah Portion offers timely insight into today’s tense social environment. Pinchas was zealous for God. In a moment of crisis, he acted decisively with deep conviction. He kills Zimri, the blaspheming Israelite, and the Midianite princess/seductress/ and lover, catching and killing them in the act, so to speak. In response to these gruesome murders, the plague that was decimating the Israelites comes to a halt, and God recognizes Pinchas as righteous.

We have struggled with this text. Was Zimri righteous, or someone deranged or delusional? But the text is clear that he acted rightly. This extreme example prompts us to ask ourselves a similar question: How do we know if our actions are righteous, or if they are self-serving? How can we distinguish between selflessness and self-righteousness? Does the greater good drive our response, or ego and selfishness?

To answer this, I try to step back and ask myself, How am I reacting and why? What does this moment require from me?

It’s so easy to lash out, especially when we feel threatened. That primal “fight or flight” reflex can make us feel trapped, and the only option may seem to be to attack and fight our way out. But even in those moments of intense pressure, thoughtfulness and strategy are essential. What do I want to achieve right now? Am I the conciliator, seeking understanding and resolution, or the vanquisher, determined to win at all costs? Or is the right path somewhere in between?

Understanding my motivations makes all the difference. Whether it’s a heated issue like the Israel-Palestine conflict or something more personal like a disagreement with a family member, we need our inner compass to guide our outward actions and help us make decisions about the best way to proceed.

Finding our shared values often helps us find common ground. This is a powerful tool for navigating disagreements.

For example, we all agree that hunger is bad—everyone should have enough food to eat. There is the value we share. But we can differ on how to achieve this goal. Some will take the “give a man a fish” approach, others will opt for the “teach a man to fish” method. This is a question of process. We are arguing about the method to achieve the goal. We are not vilifying the person offering an opinion. We can be respectful even when we disagree with each other’s ideas. Otherwise we can lapse from righteousness to self-righteousness.

Zeal can be misleading and deceptive. Do zealots truly hear God’s word, or are they only hearing their own amplified voices inside their heads, mistaking them for divine commands? Pinchas is shown as hearing God’s command, but history also provides many examples of those who, in their zeal, caused great destruction—like the Sicarii, whose self-righteous fervor led to the destruction of the Second Temple, the tragedy of Masada, and the slaughter of Israelites. Their conviction was unwavering, but they profaned God’s name, and their actions resulted in ruin. Some of us might rationalize this behavior instead of taking the time to analyze the issues critically.

Patriotism and love for America can sometimes make it hard for many of us to recognize when harmful actions are justified in its name. Consider the dark chapters of our nation:

The attacks of 9/11 triggered a wave of revenge, transforming us both at home and abroad. Our history is replete with other examples, including Japanese internment camps, ethnic cleansing of Native Americans, turning away Jews fleeing the Nazis, and more.

And as Jews, we grapple with settler violence in the West Bank and the prosecution of the Gaza war. Perceived righteousness can blind us to the humanity and legitimate grievances of the other side.

Anger, fear, insult, anxiety, and even joy—our emotions are triggered in the moment. But our reactions don’t have to be reflexive. They can’t be.

This brings me back to the core question: What are my values, and how are they shaping my life right now? Reflecting on this calls for a mindful pause—a moment to breathe and assess my position before facing a challenge. It’s important even in everyday, mundane moments. That’s why I avoid writing emails directly in the app when the stakes are high. Instead, I open a word processor and draft my message. I review the draft to make sure it clearly communicates what I want to say. If it aligns with my values and is likely to produce the outcome I want, I then copy and paste.

Reflection is our safeguard. It creates space for righteousness to emerge, rather than fostering a rigid, unforgiving sense of self-righteousness. It encourages us to be passionate about what is truly good while remaining open to understanding, compassion, and the shared humanity that connects us all.

Let us all strive to stand up for what is right, to embrace the humanity of others, and to act with humility, guided by honest assessments of our hearts and motivations. Shabbat Shalom.

#BringThemHomeNow

Two questions to each of us

What do you stand for?

What are you willing to do about it?

Knowing who we are and the values we believe in is the first part of a critical two-step process. The second step is knowing what you will do to realize them.

Sadly, we have grown accustomed to thinking we have done our part by voicing our opinions in public spaces. We have also shifted responsibility to the government without demanding accountability. However, only by engaging in the work can our opinions become a constructive force.

If you believe in feeding the hungry, for example, giving to a food bank in both time and money will help bring food to those in need. Advocating for them by reaching out to those in power over the public funds is another. Merely Saying you are against hunger on social media is a hollow gesture and a waste of time.

Decide what issues are significant enough that you will engage. Most of us only have enough time to work on one or maybe two. But in focusing and doing the work, you become a change agent. We are empowered to champion the values we believe in only if we are willing to commit in tangible ways to them.

Being Canceled

In response to the Bryn Mawr Film Institute’s decision to cancel the showing of the film The Child Within Me, I make the following statement:

To the Board of the Bryn Mawr Film Institute

You squandered an essential moment of leadership.

Until this decision, you were a cultural icon and an important voice in our community. But instead of devotion to keeping culture accessible through film, its thoughtful curation, and presentation, you cowed in the face of political pressure. You canceled a film thoroughly unrelated to the war. The only controversy about this film is your decision to condemn it because the Israeli Film Festival sponsors it. Shame on you.

People protesting against the showing of a film is an act of free speech. It does not automatically devolve into violence, and using that as a pretense for canceling is a sign of it is either fecklessness or outright bias against Jews (also known as Antisemitism) and Israel.

Protesters are loud and obnoxious, but they are not violent. Those who attend the festival would find them uncomfortable, but they are not a physical threat. Further, the police of Lower Merion would have done an excellent job of keeping the peace even in this potentially testy situation.

BMFI was an important institution, one I enjoyed participating in and supporting. However, I am deeply disappointed that you have focused on other aspects, neglecting the crucial role of bringing influential films into our community. This decision has undermined the basis for our relationship. I resign from my membership and call on everyone in our community to do the same.

Sincerely

Rabbi David Levin

Whose side would you be on?

As I engaged with Parshat Korach this time around, I found myself asking an interesting question: If I were there, which side would I have been on?

With the benefits of Torah and hindsight, it is clear that Moses’ was the winning side of the argument. Moses did more than actually prevail, God had Korach and his followers swallowed by the earth. But up until the final moment, Korach was making a persuasive argument about the appropriate leaders of B’nai Israel. Would I have been swayed?

Korach makes a compelling case. He charges that Moses and Aaron have usurped power that rightfully does not belong to them. Now that the Hebrews are free, they should have right leaders, the Levites for the priestly matters and the descendants of Reuven as the true political leaders of the people. We believe that Korach had ulterior motives and saw the opportunity for personal power, but he made a cogent argument, on the surface at least, and many people were likely swayed. As uncomfortable as it might appear, initially there were likely good people on both sides. But just because an argument sounds good on the surface, does not mean it is acceptable without first digging deeper.

The return of leadership to Reuven is in keeping with the concept of primogeniture. And the return of the Levites is consistent with their status as the priestly class. But even before God stepped in placing Moses and Aaron as the leaders, we have seen primogeniture is not automatic and leadership is based on character and deeds before anointing takes place. Before anyone could ultimately align with Korach, a deeper understanding of Korach’s motives and the relationship to the Divine had to be probed. It was not enough that Korach was persuasive. It was not enough that Korach’s agenda aligned with our own. We are also obligated to think in terms larger than our own self-interest. In other words, we are responsible for determining what is right for ourselves and for the greater good and taking a stand toward making that possible.

The people were fearful. Moses ascended the mountain and the anxiety of a slave people feeling abandoned when he did not return was overwhelming. The mob mentality took over and Korach exploited that. Unfortunately, the people went astray. But that could not absolve them of the responsibility to return to rationality and make thoughtful correct choices. I too might have been swept up in the initial emotions in the moment, but then it would be incumbent on me to soberly reflect on whether I was indeed pursuing the right course. This is the burden of freedom.

But there is more to this story, and it gets even more interesting. There is actually a third side to the situation. What about the people who did not take sides? Usually, in arguments, there are the traditional two camps, but there is also a third group. This group remains uncommitted to either side, preferring instead to wait on the sidelines to see who actually wins. And then they throw in with the winning side, never losing and also never risking. These people are more insidious than the losing or wrong side Doing nothing is feckless at best, or likely even more conniving than Korach himself. Nechama Leibowitz’s commentary on Korach references our Sages condemning this kind of opportunistic behavior (Korach 3, Studies in BaMidbar).

Driven not by a belief in something but instead a desire to be on the winning side, to survive and thrive without ever risking anything. These people are more than rootless, they are not to be counted upon for loyalty or sacrifice for a greater good. These opportunists undermine any cause that requires a measure of devotion, as they are devoted only to themselves. They would be the voices that would undermine the report of the spies, they might be among the spies themselves, not appreciating the opportunity offered by Joshua and Caleb, only seeing the personal risk involved. In many ways, this group is the more dangerous one. Focused only on themselves, they fight for nothing. Sometimes it is apathy, sometimes it is selfishness, but it always keeps us from moving forward towards what could be, mired instead in the safety of being nameless in the crowd. Hoping to land on their feet, they are little more than mercenaries, fair weather friends who ultimately cannot be trusted to do anything other than enjoy the fruits of someone else’s labors.

At the end of the day, there was only one side-to align with Moses in service to the Divine. Today these issues confront us in sometimes subtle but often blatant ways. Determining who we are as a people and nation require taking an active and bold stand, championing our values, speaking truth to power and speaking truth to those desirous of power.

Which side are you on?

Rabbi David Levin is a second career rabbi. Trained at Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion, Rabbi Levin’s rabbinate focuses on outreach to seekers of meaning, bringing Jewish Wisdom to their life journey. Rabbi Levin’s work is trans-denominational, embracing and drawing knowledge from all aspects of Judaism. He is a member of the CCAR (Reform Rabbinical Association), OHALA (Renewal Rabbinical Association), NAJC (Neshama, Association of Jewish Chaplains), a Fellow of Rabbis Without Borders, serves on the regional board of NIF (New Israel Fund), and is a volunteer on the Disaster Spiritual Care Team of the American Red Cross.

Rabbi Levin currently teaches subjects including Ethical Wills Re-imagined, Mussar at the Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy, Introduction to Judaism for the URJ, “Kavod v’Nichum, Understanding Jewish end-of-life rituals”, and the acclaimed series “L’Chaim, Jewish Wisdom for the End of Life Journey” with two esteemed rabbinic colleagues. Rabbi Levin officiates in complex lifecycle events including non-traditional burial and works with interfaith couples. Rabbi David leads interfaith trips to Israel through the CLAL Stand and See project. Rabbi Levin is the organizer of Death Café of Greater Philadelphia

Rabbi Levin is a teacher and speaker appearing nationally and is available to be with your congregation.

Constancy in the face of Change

The election has many of us anxious, unsure of what will happen to us next, fearful that strides we have made will be stripped away.

The ground did shift underneath us all last week. But the tremble did not cause us to fall. I am no different from who I was last week in the matters that count. Last week I stood tall, aspiring to create a nation of dignity, equality, opportunity, safety and security for all our citizens. This week I stand perhaps taller and more firmly in those ideals and values. There is a greater sense of urgency in my posture today, but this is a good thing. Our movement forward has never been easy. The fight for human rights and inclusion, a nation freer from prejudice, hatred and fear have been an ongoing struggle. But our commitment remains, our resolve undiminished even if the challenge might be greater.

Today I wear a safety-pin on my lapel to let people who are fearful know that they are not alone. As an American, a Jew, and a Rabbi, I stand with them and I will continue to do my part as an advocate, and that we continue to stand side by side. We march forward dedicated to bringing America’s blessings to all.

Joining hands we move forward together toward a brighter future. We are the change we envision.