Posted on September 24, 2025
Rejecting the Binary!
I don’t know if you’ve heard, but there is a new way that married couples communicate and share their love with one another. It is known as “pebbling,” deriving from the Gentoo penguins who woo a potential partner by bringing them a carefully selected set of pebbles.[1] We humans don’t do it with rocks, instead, we send video reels via social media platforms. Often my wife and I will be sitting across the sofa from one another, scrolling through Instagram or Facebook, and sending each other the videos we think the other will appreciate or find funny. It’s a new love language.
Worryingly, I have realized that there is a theme that keeps recurring in some of the reels that Micol sends me. They say things like: “Marriage is when you adore your husband but also find him the single most annoying person on the planet all within the same minute.” Or “I love my husband, but if he doesn’t stop snoring, I’m placing that pillow tightly over his face and holding it there.” I’m not sure exactly what she’s trying to tell me.
In our relationships, we can hold conflicting and seemingly paradoxical emotions. At one and the same time we can love our family members deeply, but they are also often the people who have the power to push our buttons and drive us crazy. Our emotions and relationships are not one-dimensional, and neither are we as people; we are a multiplicity of identities.
Judaism as a religion has always embraced the idea that we are defined by more than a single belief, trait, or identity. In Biblical times while we were united as the Children of Israel, we were also simultaneously members of individual tribes.[2] With the birth of the Diaspora, the Rabbis made it clear that the expectation was that we would live our lives according to Jewish law, but also be bound by the laws of the land.[3] As the walls came down, we embraced our dual identity as Jews and as citizens of the countries in which we lived, finding ways to balance the particular and the universal. Reform Judaism has leaned into this idea with vigor, embracing the idea that we are members of an ancient religion, but also part of the modern world, balancing that tension to create something beautiful. As a community and as individuals – we are a magnificent multiplicity of identities.
In some ways our society and our world have rejected the idea that things are binary. We have moved beyond black and white to embrace the full spectrum of colors. But in other ways I worry that we are increasingly becoming stuck and mired in binary, either-or thinking. We are becoming ever more tribal, divided into this group or that group, with no overlap, no connection, and no way of bridging the ever-increasing divide between us. Social media, which allows me to share cute videos, also curates our online experience so that the walls of our echo chamber grow taller, and we are cut off from conflicting or challenging opinions. The binary, black and white, either-or approach is pushed, reinforced, intensified; and it is destroying us.
We see the way that our political system has become ever more tribal and divided. As a foreigner, I have always found the two-party system to be an oddity of American politics. There is choice, but it is limited by design. The system creates an either-or dynamic – you are essentially forced into a box as a Republican or a Democrat. And while this has been the structure of politics since that fateful decision to abandon England (not that I’m bitter) the division, the separation, the enmity between the parties has intensified to new and frightening levels in recent years.
It wasn’t always that way. There was a time when the middle was stronger and more robust. People were not so easily divided and separated; there was more fluidity. And that strong middle required that the political parties rejected the extreme wings of their faction if they had any hope of being electable. There was a time when brave men and women, real leaders, were able to reach across the aisle and partner with people with whom they disagreed, because they recognized that above party loyalty, they had a national and a moral responsibility. They sought to find common ground, to look for compromise rather than seeking to divide and disparage anyone with whom they differed. They built bridges, not walls, they included rather than excluded, they created together instead of destroying each other.
The binary extremism of this current moment is not good for our country, not good for our souls, and it is most certainly not good for the Jewish community. I saw the current extremist climate characterized in the following way: “The right is intolerant of tolerance, and the left is tolerant of intolerance.” Those may be hard words to hear, and it is a sad articulation of the current moment, but it is a characterization that feels all too real. On either side there is ultimately a rejection of tolerance, a rejection that people can hold a contrary view, a rejection of the principle that we are all part of one nation, or even one humanity.
But perhaps there is no issue that is approached with as binary a lens as the situation between Israelis and Palestinians. People appear to have decided that this is a zero-sum game, you support Israel or you support Palestine; nuance is forbidden, it’s all or nothing. Statements that offer a perspective, that seek to see the humanity, the pain, the hopes of both sides, are shouted down by voices who refuse to hear anything other than the position they support.
And in this world of binary thinking, I am so sad to see the way in which a person’s position on the Israel-Palestine issue becomes a litmus test for admittance or inclusion in other campaigns or movements. Jews who profess even a qualified Zionism or belief that Israel has a right to exist are excluded from joining the Black Lives Matter campaign, they are prevented from marching in Pride demonstrations, and they are disinvited from speaking at rallies against neo-Nazis[4] – tolerance of intolerance. And it goes the other way as well. Two rabbinic leaders of the Progressive movement in Britain joined a demonstration for the hostages in London. After speaking out for their return, the mere mention of Palestinian suffering led to them being booed off the stage, unable to complete their speech[5] – intolerance of tolerance.
A few months ago, I was back at my parent’s home in London and going through the random drawer of my possessions that still reside there. One item immediately caught my eye. It was a metallic pin with two flags and some words underneath them. The pin said simply “justice, peace, life” and above it on the right-hand side was the blue and white Israeli flag, and on the left the red, black, white, and green Palestinian flag.
I held the pin for a few moments, staring at it and reflecting on this piece of my personal history. I thought about how I received it almost 30 years ago, at a time when there was optimism around the potential of two states for two peoples. I thought about the various demonstrations I attended in Israel, gathering in support of the peace process and dreaming of a better future for all of us. I reflected on how I could not wear the pin today because the Palestinian flag, which was once a symbol of hope for its people, has now been co-opted as a symbol waved at demonstrations that call for the removal of Jews from the land and destruction of Israel. And I thought about how in the intervening years there has been so much suffering and pain for the Israeli and Palestinian people. The dream of the pin feels almost impossible today.
I have an Israeli passport. I consider myself to be a committed Zionist. And because of this, people make assumptions about the positions I must hold, assume a disdain for the Palestinians, a rejection of their suffering, a blind support of everything that Israel does. When I mention Israeli suffering I am accused of not caring about the Palestinian plight. When I mention the suffering of Palestinians, I am questioned about my loyalty. Even when I try to avoid the binary, I find it thrust upon me by others. And in a zero-sum game, we all lose.
I pray for the return of the hostages, while I mourn the suffering of innocent Palestinians. I believe that the terrorists have the power to end this conflict if they release the hostages, and I do not understand how expanding the military campaign in Gaza will bring anything other than suffering to both sides and prolong the conflict. And I am troubled by the recognition of a Palestinian State with no peace process, because I worry that it actually emboldens the terrorists and entrenches the binary positions even further. I resonate with the words of the author Jonathan Freedland who reflected on the tragedy of the situation, writing: “Two peoples with deep wounds, howling with grief, fated to share the same small piece of land.”[6] It must be both-and, not either-or.
And I stand here, and I think about that pin. Many people know that I love a gimmick. Some shtick – a sign to hold up, a giveaway to share. I am a sucker for props. When I have the chance to share a visual aid, something that will add power to my words, I will never pass up the opportunity.
But here I am, telling you about a pin instead of showing it to you. A powerful visual that by its very existence tells a story about our challenging times and changing world. A visual that actually embodies nuance, that rejects the binary. And yet that pin remains in a drawer.
I am not in a place where I want to wear that pin; I don’t know if I’ll ever be. But I am sad that I don’t even feel comfortable or safe showing that pin on this bimah. Am I wrong? Would you have felt safe or okay? Ask yourself: How would you have felt if alongside my yellow ribbon and dog tag, I had shown that pin here [at the bimah] in here [the sanctuary]? How would it have made you feel? How would it have made you feel about me?
I have been involved and supportive of the campaign for Palestinian rights for almost three decades. I do not see it as being in tension with my Zionism, but as a complimentary part of it. And yet even saying that today feels dangerous, we have seen how speech can get a person cancelled, and in offering a position of support for Israelis and Palestinians there is the risk of being attacked by both sides. How have we allowed this binary approach to take over our world?
Do you know where binary thinking on this issue is rejected? In Israel. I recently returned from a trip there. I heard more nuance than would be possible in our American context. People who wave the Israeli flag with a love of their country, but are appalled by the actions and behavior of the current government – I can’t repeat some of the words they used to describe them. We met with Israelis who believe that as part of their commitment to their country and its ideals, they have a responsibility to do what they can to ensure that Palestinians are protected and fed, while ensuring Israel’s safety and security. And I witnessed first-hand the way in which Israel is simultaneously so strong in the face of this tragedy, but also so broken by the experiences of these past two years. And when guided by a Palestinian in Jerusalem it was clear that he similarly feels a deep commitment to his people, but has a complete disdain for Hamas and the current Palestinian leadership. I will share more about these experiences tomorrow – I assume you will all be there to hear it.
If Israelis and Palestinians can embrace nuance, why can’t we?
I refuse to live in a black and white world, where the choice is either-or, where I am put into a box. I refuse to live in a world where I am prevented from marching, campaigning, or speaking out for what I believe in, because I support the right of Israel to exist. And I refuse to live in a world where because of my connections to Israel, I am not allowed to publicly care about the suffering of innocent Palestinians.
The diversity of Jewish opinion and the multiplicity of Jewish identity are celebrated throughout the words of the Talmud. Debates, disagreements, arguments are recorded on its pages. Rabbis are not silenced for expressing contrary opinions; instead their words, their stories, their teachings are preserved and still studied almost two thousand years later. It is the ultimate rejection of binary thinking, embracing the potential for being “both-and” as a source of strength and a necessity for growth. The schools of Hillel and Shammai are celebrated as rivals who always disagreed with each other. But their diverse opinions are preserved and we are told that they found a way to “reach across the aisle” so that their children still married one another.[7]
Today is Rosh Hashanah our Jewish new year, but in a rejection of binary thinking, it is actually one of four new years that we have in our calendar.[8] We always pursue multiplicity. And even here, Hillel and Shammai found a way to disagree, debating the exact date of the new year for trees.
The binary agenda is being pursued by the extremists on both sides of the debate. They shout with certainty that they are right, and that the other side is wrong at best, and evil at worst. They pursue their agenda in a way that creates enmity and division. They want to divide us, they want to reduce us to labels, they want us to see the world as black or white – just like they do.
Perhaps we Jews are targeted by the extremists on both sides because we do not fit neatly into their boxes. Judaism has always been a religion of both-and, a community that balances competing identities, a place where disagreement and debate are not just welcomed, but elevated to be considered divine.
A rejection of binary thinking is unfortunately countercultural in today’s society, but we Jews have never been afraid to oppose the dominant culture when it is wrong, when it is dangerous, when it is leading us down the wrong path. Social media may be great for sharing cute videos, but it is awful as a source of news, opinion, and ideology. We are living in a world where echo chambers are amplified and where debate is rejected and replaced by soundbites and statements.
Extremists wake up each day with a fervor, ready to advance their cause; we moderates, embracing nuance and building bridges, need to follow their example.[9] We need to wake up with a fire in our belly and a determination to combat extremism and to promote a strong and robust middle. A place where debate and disagreement is possible, where there is less certainty and more curiosity, where people talk to each other rather than shout at each other. We can build bridges that allow people to reconnect with those with whom they disagree, replacing echo chambers with an open marketplace for ideas and conversations.
We need to get back to Jewish basics and set an example for others to follow, once again fulfilling that idea of being a light unto the nations. How can we know what another person thinks or believes if we refuse to speak with them? Judaism has always encouraged conversation and discussion, not because it is easy, not because we always agree, but as a way to deepen our understanding of an issue and to refine our own thinking. The analogy of studying together is that steel sharpens steel.[10] We need to embrace our diversity to bring people together to talk to those with whom they disagree. It can begin in our own families and community – we are not necessarily all aligned politically or in relation to events in the Middle East – but we must find ways to talk to each other. And perhaps set an example for others to follow.
And we must reject binary thinking and approaches wherever we find them. We have never let others tell us what we believe as Jews or what causes we can support, and we are not about to start. Our Jewish values are thousands of years old and they call us to pursue justice, to act with empathy, to fight for peace. We have always been too complex for the boxes into which the world has tried to squeeze us, and we will not be squeezed today. We will remember the beauty of God’s rainbow, when a promise was made for all humanity to thrive and survive – not just for a specific group – a universal commitment that we continue through our particularist lens.
We are living through difficult times as the extremists around us seek to pursue division and enmity, and we Jews unfortunately often find ourselves on the front lines. But while the world tries to put us on the front lines as targets, we have the power to instead be on the front lines as the first responders, the builders. The Or L’Goyim, the light unto the nations that illuminates the way forward. Through thousands of years we have rejected binary thinking, objected when people are viewed as labels, and stood against the forces of hate and division. We are called upon to do it again. How will we answer this call? What does this moment require? Where will we tear down walls? And how will we build bridges? Shana Tova.
[1] You can read more about “pebbling” here: http://yahoo.com/lifestyle/always-sending-memes-to-your-loved-ones-its-called-pebbling-heres-why-experts-say-the-trend-has-its-pros-and-cons-100021620.html
[2] This had the potential for tension as seen in Numbers 32, when the tribes of Reuven and Gad wanted the grazing land on the other side of the Jordan, but had an obligation towards the Promised Land as members of the Israelite community.
[3] The principle is dina de malchut dina – the law of the land is the law. More can be read here: https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/dina-de-malkhuta-dina
[4] An example of the Black Lives Matter movement’s rejection of Israel is available here: https://www.npr.org/2021/06/07/1003872848/the-complicated-history-behind-blms-solidarity-with-the-pro-palestinian-movement
The New York City Dyke March banned Zionists from participating: https://19thnews.org/2025/05/dyke-march-2025-new-york-city-zionists-ban/
Rabbi Ari Jun was disinvited from an anti-neoNazi rally: https://www.timesofisrael.com/progressive-cincinnati-rabbi-disinvited-from-anti-nazi-rally-over-support-for-israel
[5] Rabbis Josh Levy and Charley Baginsky were booed off the stage in London: https://www.timesofisrael.com/progressive-rabbis-booed-off-stage-at-uk-hostage-rally-after-backing-palestinian-state/
[6] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/oct/27/tragedy-israel-palestine-conflict-horror
[7] This is referenced in Mishnah Yevamot 1:4 and the discussion is continued in the Talmud Yevamot 14a.
[8] Mishnah Rosh Hashanah 1:1
[9] I am inspired by Daniel Lubetzky’s Ted Talk – Why the world needs more builders — and less “us vs. them” – https://www.ted.com/talks/daniel_lubetzky_why_the_world_needs_more_builders_and_less_us_vs_them/transcript
[10] This idea goes back to Proverbs 27:17.