The room is full of people talking to each other, and there’s a buzz of active conversation. What’s going on here? Welcome to “Disagreement for the Sake of Heaven,” an approach to talking about controversial issues. Based on a time-tested model of Jewish learning called “havruta,” a roomful of discussion partners is reading Bible, rabbinic commentary, and contemporary sources about the qualities of argumentation.
The word “havruta” derives from the three-letter Hebrew root for “friend.” A pair of people who learn together in havruta are spiritual friends whose conversation includes themselves and Divine presence. Sometimes havruta partners agree and sometimes they don’t. Their disagreements allow them to sharpen their thinking as true partners. Together, they elevate their discussion to the level of prayer.
In Missoula, the Missoula Interfaith Collaborative (MIC) has adopted this approach as one way to build relationships among participants in our interfaith community. We realize that our ways of practicing and observing our traditions have both great similarities and differences, and we seek a way to listen to each other respectfully and glean wisdom from the spiritual vitamins of our neighbors.
People are also reading…
In April, we gathered at Congregation Har Shalom to read rabbinic text about Hillel and Shammai, great rabbi-scholars of the first century BCE and first century CE. They were known to disagree with each other fiercely on many matters of religious practice. The following is a quote from Talmud (Babylonian Talmud, Eruvin 13b):
“For three years Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel disagreed. These said: The halakha (the established way of Jewish practice) is in accordance with our opinion, and those said: The halakha is in accordance with our opinion. Ultimately, a Bat Kol (Divine Voice) emerged and proclaimed: Both these and those are the words of the living God.”
From this text we learn that the disagreement of Hillel and Shammai is a constructive disagreement because they seek a solution that honors the Divine. The Bat Kol declares that their argument is holy! So, we learn from this that some arguments have inherent sanctity.
But are there unholy disagreements? Well, yes. In contrast, we read a text in the Book of Numbers, Chapter 16, about Korah, who challenges the leadership of Moses and Aaron. Korah says that Moses and Aaron have misled the ancient Israelites to wander in the desert, unjustly removed from the comforts of civilization and sustained by lowly manna. Korah is motivated by ego. He wants the power of the anointed priests, and he questions Divine imperatives. Ultimately, Korah and his followers are swallowed by the earth in a supernatural act that signifies Divine disapproval of their actions. From this text, we learn that jealousy and a desire to advance oneself above the common good constitutes unholy disagreement.
So, what does reading ancient texts teach us about our daily lives now? Many of us live in echo chambers where everyone affirms the same ideas, theologies, and politics. Especially in the polarizing political environment of an election year, finding a way to talk to each other across our differences is a precious tool for establishing common ground and affirming neighborly love. We may not always agree, but we can see each other’s humanity and begin to understand our differences in a caring, respectful way. Our common ground is wonder, devotion, gratitude, and the desire for fellowship and service.
Rabbi Laurie Franklin can be reached at rabbilauriefranklin@shalommontana.com.
