Many years ago, while teaching in a Jewish day school, I remember a conversation that I had with the principal who had sat in on my class. One of the ideas that had arisen was the “chosen-ness” of the Jewish people, which I had presented as the special responsibilities that Jews were given in order to serve as an “Ohr LaGoyim” (light unto the nations— see Yeshayahu 42:6; 49:6.) My supervisor remarked that he didn’t think that this was the standard explanation for the concept, obviously preferring the idea that Jews were inherently special and superior as a result of their chosen-ness. Following this interchange, I wrote to a Rav whom I deeply respected, asking him his opinion of the perspective that I had shared with my students, noting that personally, I am resolute regarding my view, but if he would inform me that he disagreed, then I simply would no longer make my understanding of Jewish chosen-ness public, adopting the more traditional stance whenever I needed to address the issue. Although I never received an answer from him—approximately ten years later, when we met, he said, “I think I owe you a letter”— I continue to maintain my approach to this idea both privately and publicly.

The most thorough and far-reaching reflection on how the chosen-ness of the Jews should and must not lead to the delegitimization of others and their beliefs, was published by R. Jonathan Sacks in 2002, in a book entitled, The Dignity of Difference: How to Avoid the Clash of Civilizations. While this is a theme that R. Sacks has addressed in various forms over the years, today I came across a succinct statement of his views on this topic (it was included in the reference notes of R. Hayyim Angel, in the chapter “The Chosen People: An Ethical Challenge” of his book Creating Space: Between Peshat and Derash) in the form of the transcript of an address that R. Sacks gave on May 8th, 2001, titled “Jewish Identity—The Concept of a Chosen People.” Like in The Dignity of Difference, R. Sacks stresses in his lecture a number of key points:

  1. The Tower of Babel incident in Parashat Noach demonstrates how God Wishes man to engage in diversity rather than universal organization under the rule of a single imperial empire, Judaism serving throughout history as a “protest against empires and imperialism”;
  2. The fact that Judaism is not interested in missionizing and contains the idea of how Tzadikei Umot HaOlam (the righteous of the nations of the world) earn entrée into the World to Come, qualifies it uniquely among world religions as a “particularistic” rather than “universalistic” monotheism;
  3. Judaism is counter Platonic in the sense that instead of moving from the particular to the universal, the bible proceeds in the opposite direction, opting for the promotion of a single family that over time becomes a nation, living and therefore exemplifying before all others moral truths and values;
  4. Throughout the bible, God specifically Chooses the weak, the excluded, the downtrodden and the minority, all qualities that have applied to the Jews at one time or another, not in the interests of Declaring their superiority, but rather in order to “level the playing field” and demonstrate that they too will be chosen, along with others who are more naturally viewed as privileged and important.

During the question-and-answer session transcribed at the end of the transcript, one individual brought up the dreams for the Messianic period which could be understood as a return to universalism. R. Sacks agreed that there were such intimations but deflected the question by stating that this utopian period has yet to be realized. I have responded to this issue over the years in a different manner. In a passage in the Talmud, there is an implication that even during the Messianic era, at least according to some, not all peoples will adopt Judaism as their religion:

Berachot 57b

If he sees a place from which idolatry has been uprooted, he says: “Blessed be He who uprooted idolatry from our land; and as it has been uprooted from this place, so may it be uprooted from all places belonging to Israel; and do Thou turn the heart of those that serve them to serve Thee.” (See my blog posting “The Vision Articulated in the Prayer ‘Aleinu LeShabeach’” where Reuven Kimmelman observes that in the Aleinu prayer, the hoped-for gentile outcome is for people to change their ways rather than to be destroyed.)

(Tanna Kamma says:) Outside Palestine it is not necessary to say: “Turn the heart of those that serve them to serve Thee,” because most of them are idolaters.

R. Shimon b. Eleazar says: Outside Palestine also one should say this, because they will one day become proselytes, as it says, (Tzephania 3:9) “For then will I Turn to the peoples a pure language.”

While R. Shimon b. Eleazar thinks that everyone will eventually convert to Judaism, the Tanna Kamma does not make such a claim. Although he is reflecting on the current circumstances during the Tannaitic period, even if people eventually will adopt monotheism, he does not insist that they will all become Jewish in that future time.

Furthermore, Avraham’s goal was not necessarily to cause everyone to become Jewish (although according to one interpretation of RaShI on Beraishit 12:5, both he and Sara were engaged in missionizing to some extent), but rather to discredit their idolatry and get them to accept a monotheistic belief system.

In my view, R. Sacks’ arguments should receive widespread exposure if not for the benefit of the non-Jewish world, then at least for contemporary Jews, especially during the current extremely contentious times for the Jewish people.