One Jewish Parable, Two Views: A Look at How We Can React to the Iran Deal

“And God said to Abraham: 'Go from your land, your birthplace, and your father's house...'" (Genesis12:2) – To what may this be compared? To a man who was traveling from place to place when he saw a palace in flames. He wondered: "Is it possible that the palace has no owner?" The owner of the palace looked out and said, "I am the owner of the palace." So Abraham our father said, "Is it possible that the world lacks a ruler?" God looked out and said to him, "I am the ruler, the Sovereign of the universe." (Breishit Rabbah 39:1)

Upon Tuesday’s announcement of a nuclear agreement between the P5+1 and Iran, much of the world reacted like the traveler who comes upon a burning palace and is not entirely certain what to make of it. We saw the deal, learned of its details, and came to our own conclusions as to its merits and its shortcomings.

Depending on your reading of the midrash about the burning building, though, you might align yourself with one of two schools of thought – or fall somewhere along the spectrum – in reaction to the plan.

In the first school of thought, the palace is not actually on fire but is instead radiating light. The building – and indeed the world – works as it is supposed to and has a source of power at its core. It is not an empty building or a vast and formless void; rather, amazingly, it is a source of power blessed by the Holy One, the master of the universe with a concrete plan.

If you see an enlightened palace, as opposed to a burning one, then your world is different. This point of view has allowed many of us to sustain an ethos of boundless tolerance, accepting all forms of behavior as just, because at the core of every mean act lies a crying heart. This approach gives the benefit of the doubt to both the negotiators (P5+1) and the Iranians who claim their nuclear program is for energy purposes only.

This camp believes that the deal, while not perfect, is praiseworthy and will succeed in ensuring safety for Israel and the world. They believe this because they take solace in a trustworthy leadership that knows what it’s doing, one that is in control and has persuaded the world of its merit and righteousness of the path.

Yet in a different interpretation of this parable, the traveler who stumbles upon the palace sees not an edifice radiating light but instead a structure engulfed in flames. These people see a world with no clear ruler and believe that the fabric holding the world together is crumbling to total destruction before their very eyes.

Perhaps there is no leader guiding this world to a specific destination, after all. Despair sets quickly in. Those in this camp may feel that this deal with Iran is, put simply, bad – a great tragedy to befall the Jewish people and the entire world.

Those who see a palace engulfed in flames may also see a world full of bloodshed, injustice, and strife, a world in which one nation rises up to rid the world of another (as we are reminded each year in the Passover Haggadah). In this world, our enemies work continuously to demolish the palace, turning it into a tragic battlefield of untold pain and horror. This approach states clearly that when a nation openly and repeatedly calls for our total destruction, we don’t must take them at their word.

We must also consider that as the traveler watches this burning and/or lit palace, his or her eyes are opened to viewpoints and perspectives previously unaccounted for.

There are Israelis who feel that the deal is, in fact, good for Israel and is better than any relevant alternative.

Others say that this building could radiate light and be engulfed in flames.

And there are yet other important views that propose the possibility that we have only narrowly explored the options before us, and that somewhere between accepting the negotiated deal as-is and waging war, there are additional points to consider.

This week, all of us became the traveler passing by the burning palace. As we struggle to find the right reaction, let us consider:      

• By accepting this deal, do we give Iran the green light to develop a bomb (albeit slowing down the process) and in doing so, set ourselves on a path of destruction  and disaster?
• Given that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has measured all political negotiations based upon this existential issue, what does this deal mean for Israeli politics?
• What does the deal say about U.S.-Israel relations? Will Israel’s security become a partisan issue in American politics, and do American Jews place ourselves in an uncomfortable position having to possibly pick our loyalties?

In a world of waning absolutism, we must declare that there are clear rights and even clearer wrongs. Crying out for the death and destruction of both Israel and the U.S. is purely and simply wrong. Paying an unbelievably high expense – war – in order to rid the world of such evil can also not be justified.

But sometimes we are resigned to the Talmudic notion of “yes and no and it was weak in his hands" (BT Bava Metzia 14b), whereby are we are destined to live with ambiguity. Israel will continue to exist as a country with the knowledge that the inevitable will not and has not been prevented, and we, as vociferous and involved Jews, must not be silent in pushing the powers-that-be to provide answers and to clarify all obscurity in preventing potential calamity.

Abraham's encounter with God in the presence of a burning palace gave birth to the mission statement of Judaism: to be “obsessed with good and horrified by evil” (Midrash Bereishit Rabbah 39:1). Now, we must bear the sacred sense of knowing to discern one from the other.