The importance of the article by Dr. Zeev Magen, "On
John Lennon and Love", which appears in No. 8 of the journal Tchelet
(end of 1999), lies in its concentration of arguments that in our
period must serve as a point of departure for any discussion of Hebrew
culture. At the same time, despite the fact that this article purports to
be a great innovation, actually there are no great innovations in it. The
notion of "preferential distinguishing love" has already been discussed by
Erich Fromm and others before him and after him, and today it is even
discussed in marital guidebooks for ultra-Orthodox Jews. On the danger
that love poses according to Christian doctrine we have already heard from
A. A. Kabak in his book The Narrow Path. The dilemma of equality
and pluralism has already been discussed in a midrash on Adam that
points out that while several coins can be minted in one mint, not all
will come out the same. All of us were created in the form of the first
man, Adam and yet, no person is similar to the other (Sanhedrin 38).
On these and similar issues I can accept Dr. Magen's
ideas, but not his statement concerning the possible existence of two
truths. In an article by Dr. Amnon Shapira, "There Is More than One Truth"
(HaZofeh, May 19, 2000), this concept is similarly founded on a
logical defect. Truth is congruence between a statement and a fact, and it
is impossible that on the same plane and on the same issue two
contradictory statements can conform with one established fact. The human
inability to identify the one, sole truth with certainty cannot serve as
evidence for the existence of two truths on the same plane and on the same
issue.
No doubt Dr. Magen's point that a Jew can live as a
Jew only in his original, national culture is well taken, and it is
unfortunate that his arguments are not persuasive. Different languages can
be learned thoroughly, but the culture that is behind them cannot easily
be absorbed by someone who already has a culture of his own. A culture is
created only by a collective of a tribe or a people, is a manifestation of
their inner nature, and thus is suited to act only upon the tribe or the
people who possess this same nature. Culture is also influenced by
geographical, historical, religious, and other environmental factors,
which in fact are absorbed during the time of childhood. Later on, an
individual can absorb only a language and some outer layer of a culture,
but not its inner nature. It is the pretense that a culture acquired later
is an organic culture that leads to Levantinism. This is well emphasized
in the story by B. Tammuz, "A Confined Baby", which discusses an actor who
speaks perfect English like an Englishman and perfect French like a
Frenchman, but is regarded by cultured English and French people as a
prostitute of culture. Because the learning of a language still does not
indicate full conversance with the culture, which cannot be attained by
will, there is no comparability between the cultures that a person becomes
familiar with and the national culture, which always has a preferential
exclusivity. It is unfortunate that Dr. Magen did not relate to these
points, and did not provide us with persuasive arguments.
It is also a pity that Dr. Magen belittles the reader
in attempting to sell him concepts that contradict each other, and to
expose him to the style of an American subculture that he introduces into
Israeli public discourse, despite claiming that his whole purpose is to
defend Hebrew culture. The article should have been improved and made more
congruent with the declared aims of the journal Tchelet in which it
appears.
