HENT DE VRIESDrawing on Rabbis for Human Rights’s miscellaneous intellectual resources in differ-
ent strands of Jewish law and philosophical thinking, as well as in human rights literature
and a general humanist philosophical outlook, Prato also spells out the specific theological
motifs behind the legal and humanitarian activities of this group, which cuts across the
left-right political spectrum of contemporary Israeli politics and even across the historical
secular-religious divide. These motifs range fromtikkun ha olam, or ‘‘repair/care of the
world,’’ to the biblical notion of the creation of humansb’tselem Elohim, ‘‘in the image
of God,’’ in the writings of Maimonides and Saadiah Gaon, and to the Levinasian idea of
responsibility as an immediate responsiveness to ‘‘the presence and needs of others/
strangers rather than delegating that response to the institutions of formal politics’’ (p.
561), a responsiveness expressed, for example, in his notion of ‘‘dwelling’’ (a concept
forcefully interpreted in Derrida’sAdieu to Emmanuel Levinas^171 ).
Against this backdrop, Prato raises the question of ‘‘whether the religious appropria-
tion of human rights discourse may generate opportunities for transgressing the exclu-
sionary loyalties that trauma-laden identity narratives seem to encourage in today’s Israel’’
(p. 560). The group under consideration does so, she explains, by establishing ‘‘a viable
niche for its pursuit of justice on behalf of Palestinians and marginalized Israelis,’’ while
it refrains from advocating a non-Jewish Israeli state (p. 561). The rabbis’ group thus
does not seek to ‘‘replace Zionist narratives,’’ but rather ‘‘works in counterpoint to these
narratives’’ and ‘‘actually exists only thanks to these narratives and the state of Israel as a
Jewish state’’ (p. 561). Prato interprets this strategy as one of ‘‘limited, practical resistance
to the ‘ontological closures’ of political Zionism,’’ which sterner opponents have charac-
terized in explicitly theologico-political terms as ‘‘Constantinian Judaism,’’ thereby sug-
gesting a ‘‘ ‘state of emergency’ Judaism,’’ which compromises itself to ‘‘justify rights
violations for the sake of a pure Jewish space, where state and citizens may bear witness
in isolation to their exceptional fate of trauma and redemption’’ (p. 569).
The question remains what the alternative view, explored by Prato, might entail,
especially when it is formulated in somewhat abstract terms, namely, those of ‘‘a Zionism
respectful of the rights of Palestinians’’ (p. 572). Prato goes on to tease out and evaluate
the subtle discrepancies between this neither right-wing religious nor left-wing secularist
conception and the equally ambiguous practices of solidarity that the group demonstrates
in its engagement with the Palestinian population (by defending homes targeted for de-
molition and rebuilding them, replanting uprooted orchards, harvesting and selling prod-
ucts, protesting the wall of separation, etc.). She suggests that it may articulate a viable,
albeit ‘‘imperfect,’’ possibility, for the time being. ‘‘The result is a multiplicity of small
acts that engage people as bearers of relative power ‘to do,’ pushing the limits of ethno-
national, trauma-laden identity fromwithin, rather than frombeyondthe discourse and
institutions of ethno-national ontology, toward a politics neither of recognition nor of
love, but rather of cautious togetherness, occasional friendship, and respectful distance’’
(p. 562). Interestingly, she concludes that a reciprocal initiative concerning forms of to-
PAGE 7474.................16224$ INTR 10-13-06 12:34:29 PS