Sukkah No.3: Lulav Languages
לוּלָב הַגָּזוּל וְהַיָּבֵשׁ — פָּסוּל. שֶׁל אֲשֵׁירָה וְשֶׁל עִיר הַנִּדַּחַת — פָּסוּל. נִקְטַם רֹאשׁוֹ, נִפְרְצוּ עָלָיו — פָּסוּל. נִפְרְדוּ עָלָיו — כָּשֵׁר. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: יַאַגְדֶנּוּ מִלְמַעְלָה. צִינֵי הַר הַבַּרְזֶל — כְּשֵׁירוֹת. לוּלָב שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ שְׁלֹשָׁה טְפָחִים כְּדֵי לְנַעְנֵעַ בּוֹ — כָּשֵׁר.
MISHNA: A lulav that was stolen or that is completely dry is unfit for use in fulfilling the mitzva of the four species. The lulav of a tree worshipped as idolatry [asheira] and a lulav from a city whose residents were incited to idolatry, which must be burned along with all the city’s property, are unfit. If the top of the lulav was severed or if the palm leaves were severed from the spine of the lulav, it is unfit. If its leaves, although still attached, were spread and are no longer completely joined to the spine, it is fit. Rabbi Yehuda says: In that case, one should bind the lulav from the top, to join the leaves that spread to the spine. A lulav from the palms of the Iron Mountain are fit for use, although it differs from one taken from a standard palm tree, in that its leaves are shorter and do not cover the entire spine. A lulav that has three handbreadths in length, sufficient to enable one to wave with it, is fit for use in fulfilling the mitzva.

וְרַבָּנַן לְטַעְמַיְיהוּ, דְּאָמְרִי: אָדָם יוֹצֵא יְדֵי חוֹבָתוֹ בְּסוּכָּתוֹ שֶׁל חֲבֵירוֹ, וְקַרְקַע אֵינָהּ נִגְזֶלֶת, וְסוּכָּה שְׁאוּלָה הִיא.

And the Rabbis conform to their reasoning, as they said: A person fulfills his obligation with the sukka of another. And since land cannot be stolen and the sukka is merely a borrowed sukka and not a stolen one, the robber fulfills his obligation, despite the fact that he committed a reprehensible act.

The Book That Incited a Worldwide Fear of Overpopulation

Charles C. Mann


‘The Population Bomb’ made dire predictions—and triggered a wave of repression around the world

Left Coast Political Ecology: a manifesto

Ashton Wesner, Sophie Moore, Jeffrey V Martin, Gabi Kirk, Laura Dev

Left Coast Political Ecology (LCPE) is a network of undergraduate and graduate students, postdoctoral scholars and faculty engaged in a collective practice of political ecology grounded in strong connection to the "Left Coast" of North America. In this manifesto, we build on successful 2015 and 2018 workshops on the practice and value of political ecology today to communicate our origins, efforts, and ideas towards building a community of praxis amid the urgencies and uncertainties of our time. We first articulate those organizing and theoretical lineages that influence and inform our work. We trace the evolution of LCPE through diverse genealogies and cross-pollinations-from the "Berkeley School" to Black, Indigenous, feminist, and decolonial studies, through political struggles within and beyond the academy. In grappling with the challenges of our institutional histories of settler-colonial, capitalist, and racist dispossession, we then propose a "coastal epistemology", one that troubles the notion of a settler-colonial or neoliberal "frontier" while finding value in encounter, conversation, and emergence. We seek to make transparent our positions of relative privilege as well as the precarious contexts in which we work and live, while mobilizing and embodying political ecology's long-standing normative and liberatory aims. Next we share some of the diverse methodological approaches employed by our members and collective, with the aim of providing inspiration and solidarity to others contending with similar challenges. Ultimately, we suggest a vision for what a political ecology adequate to our moment might look like and require: a necessarily collective and hopeful project, amid processes of colonial violence, capitalist inequity, and climate catastrophe. The Left Coast Political Ecology network invites you to dream and organize with us, to share resources, experiences, and community, and to help push our field and our institutions toward more socially just and ecologically sustainable futures.

וְקַרְקַע אֵינָהּ נִגְזֶלֶת.

and land is not stolen. When one seizes land, the land remains the property of its original owner, even if that owner has despaired.

The Local Lulav

Rakia Sky Brown , Gabi Kirk, Noah Rubin-Blose, Miriam Saperstein

WE ARE A GROUP of Jews from across Turtle Island (what is currently known as the United States) who came together to create diasporic lulavim, made from plants that grow in the places where we live, and that have deep meaning to us in the places we call home. In creating our lulavim, we asked ourselves what a radical, ethical practice of Sukkot looks like in our various homes. Last year, we explored this question in The Book of Lulav, a zine that’s full of reflections, tips, and resources about creating your own diasporic lulav.

(ט) נִסּוּךְ הַמַּיִם כֵּיצַד. צְלוֹחִית שֶׁל זָהָב מַחֲזֶקֶת שְׁלשֶׁת לֻגִּים הָיָה מְמַלֵּא מִן הַשִּׁלּוֹחַ. הִגִּיעוּ לְשַׁעַר הַמַּיִם, תָּקְעוּ וְהֵרִיעוּ וְתָקָעוּ. עָלָה בַכֶּבֶשׁ וּפָנָה לִשְׂמֹאלוֹ, שְׁנֵי סְפָלִים שֶׁל כֶּסֶף הָיוּ שָׁם. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, שֶׁל סִיד הָיוּ, אֶלָּא שֶׁהָיוּ מֻשְׁחָרִין פְּנֵיהֶם מִפְּנֵי הַיָּיִן. וּמְנֻקָּבִין כְּמִין שְׁנֵי חֳטָמִין דַּקִּין, אֶחָד מְעֻבֶּה וְאֶחָד דַּק, כְּדֵי שֶׁיְּהוּ שְׁנֵיהֶם כָּלִין בְּבַת אַחַת. מַעֲרָבִי שֶׁל מַיִם, מִזְרָחִי שֶׁל יָיִן. עֵרָה שֶׁל מַיִם לְתוֹךְ שֶׁל יַיִן, וְשֶׁל יַיִן לְתוֹךְ שֶׁל מַיִם, יָצָא. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, בְּלֹג הָיָה מְנַסֵּךְ כָּל שְׁמֹנָה. וְלַמְנַסֵּךְ אוֹמְרִים לוֹ, הַגְבַּהּ יָדֶךָ, שֶׁפַּעַם אַחַת נִסֵּךְ אֶחָד עַל גַּבֵּי רַגְלָיו, וּרְגָמוּהוּ כָל הָעָם בְּאֶתְרוֹגֵיהֶן:

(9) With regard to the rite of water libation performed in the Temple during the Festival, how was it performed? One would fill a golden jug with a capacity of three log with water from the Siloam pool. When those who went to bring the water reached the Gate of the Water, so called because the water for the libation was brought through this gate leading to the Temple courtyard, they sounded a tekia, sounded a terua, and sounded another tekia as an expression of joy. The priest ascended the ramp of the altar and turned to his left. There were two silver basins there into which he poured the water. Rabbi Yehuda said: They were limestone basins, but they would blacken due to the wine and therefore looked like silver. The two basins were perforated at the bottom with two thin perforated nose-like protrusions. One of the basins, used for the wine libation, had a perforation that was broad, and one, used for the water libation, had a perforation that was thin, so that the flow of both the water and the wine, which do not have the same viscosity, would conclude simultaneously. The basin to the west of the altar was for water, and the basin to the east of the altar was for wine. However, if one poured the contents of the basin of water into the basin of wine, or the contents of the basin of wine into the basin of water, he fulfilled his obligation, as failure to pour the libation from the prescribed location does not disqualify the libation after the fact. Rabbi Yehuda says: The basin for the water libation was not that large; rather, one would pour the water with a vessel that had a capacity of one log on all eight days of the Festival and not only seven. And the appointee says to the one pouring the water into the silver basin: Raise your hand, so that his actions would be visible, as one time a Sadducee priest intentionally poured the water on his feet, as the Sadducees did not accept the oral tradition requiring water libation, and in their rage all the people pelted him with their etrogim.

'It's cultural genocide': inside the fight to stop a pipeline on tribal lands

Sheila Regan

The Line 3 route traverses land that Native American pipeline opponents say is protected by US treaties with Ojibwe nations

City of Berkeley, Native American tribe lose appeal to stop development of sacred site
Rachel Hatzipanagos

Bay Area developers have scored a major legal victory in their push to build on the West Berkeley Shellmound site, a ground that is sacred to the Ohlone tribe.

(ג) דָּבָר אַחֵר, וְכִי יָמוּךְ, הֲדָא הוּא דִכְתִיב (משלי יא, יז): גֹּמֵל נַפְשׁוֹ אִישׁ חָסֶד, זֶה הִלֵּל הַזָּקֵן, שֶׁבְּשָׁעָה שֶׁהָיָה נִפְטַר מִתַּלְמִידָיו הָיָה מְהַלֵּךְ וְהוֹלֵךְ עִמָּם, אָמְרוּ לוֹ תַּלְמִידָיו רַבֵּנוּ לְהֵיכָן אַתָּה הוֹלֵךְ אָמַר לָהֶם לַעֲשׂוֹת מִצְוָה, אָמְרוּ לוֹ וְכִי מַה מִּצְוָה זוֹ, אָמַר לָהֶן לִרְחֹץ בְּבֵית הַמֶּרְחָץ, אָמְרוּ לוֹ וְכִי זוֹ מִצְוָה הִיא, אָמַר לָהֶם, הֵן. מָה אִם אִיקוֹנִין שֶׁל מְלָכִים שֶׁמַּעֲמִידִים אוֹתָן בְּבָתֵּי טַרְטִיאוֹת וּבְבָתֵּי קִרְקָסִיאוֹת, מִי שֶׁנִּתְמַנֶּה עֲלֵיהֶם הוּא מוֹרְקָן וְשׁוֹטְפָן וְהֵן מַעֲלִין לוֹ מְזוֹנוֹת, וְלֹא עוֹד אֶלָּא שֶׁהוּא מִתְגַּדֵּל עִם גְּדוֹלֵי מַלְכוּת, אֲנִי שֶׁנִּבְרֵאתִי בְּצֶלֶם וּבִדְמוּת, דִּכְתִיב (בראשית ט, ו): כִּי בְּצֶלֶם אֱלֹהִים עָשָׂה אֶת הָאָדָם, עַל אַחַת כַּמָּה וְכַמָּה. דָּבָר אַחֵר, גֹּמֵל נַפְשׁוֹ אִישׁ חָסֶד, זֶה הִלֵּל הַזָּקֵן, שֶׁבְּשָׁעָה שֶׁהָיָה נִפְטַר מִתַּלְמִידָיו הָיָה מְהַלֵּךְ וְהוֹלֵךְ עִמָּם, אָמְרוּ לוֹ תַּלְמִידָיו רַבֵּנוּ לְהֵיכָן אַתָּה הוֹלֵךְ, אָמַר לָהֶם לִגְמֹל חֶסֶד עִם הָדֵין אַכְסַנְיָא בְּגוֹ בֵּיתָא. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, כָּל יוֹם אִית לָךְ אַכְסַנְיָא, אָמַר לָהֶם, וְהָדֵין נַפְשָׁא עֲלוּבְתָּא לָאו אַכְסַנְיָא הוּא בְּגוֹ גוּפָא, יוֹמָא דֵין הִיא הָכָא לְמָחָר לֵית הִיא הָכָא. דָּבָר אַחֵר (משלי יא, יז): גֹּמֵל נַפְשׁוֹ אִישׁ חָסֶד וְעֹכֵר שְׁאֵרוֹ אַכְזָרִי, אָמַר רַבִּי אֲלֶכְּסַנְדְּרִי זֶה שֶׁמַּגַעַת לוֹ שִׂמְחָה וְאֵינוֹ מַדְבִּיק אֶת קְרוֹבָיו עִמּוֹ מִשּׁוּם עֲנִיּוּת. אָמַר רַבִּי נַחְמָן כְּתִיב (דברים טו, י): כִּי בִּגְלַל הַדָּבָר הַזֶּה, גַּלְגַּל הוּא שֶׁחוֹזֵר בָּעוֹלָם, לְפִיכָךְ משֶׁה מַזְהִיר אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל וְכִי יָמוּךְ אָחִיךָ.

(3) Another Thing: 'But if he is impoverished', here it is written, "The merciful man does good to his own soul (Proverbs 11:17)," this [refers to] Hillel the Elder, who, at the time that he was departing from his students, would walk with them. They said to him, "Rabbi, where are you walking to?" He said to them, "To fulfill a commandment!" They said to him, "And what commandment is this?" He said to them, "To bathe in the bathhouse." They said to him: "But is this really a commandment?" He said to them: "Yes. Just like regarding the statues (lit. icons) of kings, that are set up in the theaters and the circuses, the one who is appointed over them bathes them and scrubs them, and they give him sustenance, and furthermore, he attains status with the leaders of the kingdom; I, who was created in the [Divine] Image and Form, as it is written, "For in the Image of G-d He made Man (Genesis 9:6)," even more so!...

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: סוּכָּה גְּזוּלָה, וְהַמְסַכֵּךְ בִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים — רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר פּוֹסֵל, וַחֲכָמִים מַכְשִׁירִין.
§ The Sages taught: With regard to a stolen sukka and with regard to one who roofs a sukka in the public domain, which is tantamount to robbing land from the public, Rabbi Eliezer deems these sukkot unfit for use in fulfillment of the mitzva, and the Rabbis deem them fit.
הָהִיא סָבְתָּא דַּאֲתַאי לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב נַחְמָן, אֲמַרָה לֵיהּ: רֵישׁ גָּלוּתָא וְכוּלְּהוּ רַבָּנַן דְּבֵי רֵישׁ גָּלוּתָא בְּסוּכָּה גְּזוּלָה הֲווֹ יָתְבִי. צָוְוחָה וְלָא אַשְׁגַּח בָּהּ רַב נַחְמָן. אֲמַרָה לֵיהּ: אִיתְּתָא דַּהֲוָה לֵיהּ לַאֲבוּהָא תְּלָת מְאָה וְתַמְנֵי סְרֵי עַבְדֵי צָוְוחָא קַמַּיְיכוּ וְלָא אַשְׁגְּחִיתוּ בַּהּ?! אֲמַר לְהוּ רַב נַחְמָן: פָּעִיתָא הִיא דָּא, וְאֵין לָהּ אֶלָּא דְּמֵי עֵצִים בִּלְבַד.
The Gemara relates: There was a certain old woman who came before Rav Naḥman. She said to him: The Exilarch and all the Sages in his house have been sitting in a stolen sukka. She claimed that the Exilarch’s servants stole her wood and used it to build the sukka. She screamed, but Rav Naḥman did not pay attention to her. She said to him: A woman whose father, Abraham, our forefather, had three hundred and eighteen slaves screams before you, and you do not pay attention to her? She claimed that she should be treated with deference due to her lineage as a Jew. Rav Naḥman said to the Sages: This woman is a screamer, and she has rights only to the monetary value of the wood. However, the sukka itself was already acquired by the Exilarch.

The Book of Lulav

byRakia Sky Brown , Gabi Kirk, Noah Rubin-Blose, Miriam Saperstein

The Book of Lulav is not yet sealed…
We are a group of Jews who came together virtually to offer this diasporic guide to lulav to our community. What values guided us?

תָּנָא: יָבֵשׁ — פָּסוּל, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה מַכְשִׁיר. אָמַר רָבָא: מַחֲלוֹקֶת בְּלוּלָב, דְּרַבָּנַן סָבְרִי: מַקְּשִׁינַן לוּלָב לְאֶתְרוֹג, מָה אֶתְרוֹג בָּעֵי ״הָדָר״ — אַף לוּלָב בָּעֵי ״הָדָר״. וְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה סָבַר: לָא מַקְּשִׁינַן לוּלָב לְאֶתְרוֹג. אֲבָל בְּאֶתְרוֹג — דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל הָדָר בָּעֵינַן.
§ It was taught in the Tosefta: A dry lulav is unfit. Rabbi Yehuda deems it fit. Rava said: The dispute is specifically with regard to a lulav, as the Rabbis hold: We liken the lulav to the etrog, based on their juxtaposition in the verse. Just as the etrog requires beauty, so too, the lulav requires beauty. And Rabbi Yehuda holds: We do not liken the lulav to the etrog. However, with regard to an etrog, everyone agrees that we require beauty [hadar] as the verse states: “Fruit of a beautiful tree” (Leviticus 23:40) and a dry etrog does not meet that criterion.

(יד) רַבִּי מָנֵי פָּתַח (תהלים לה, י): כָּל עַצְמֹתַי תֹּאמַרְנָה ה' מִי כָמוֹךָ, לֹא נֶאֱמַר פָּסוּק זֶה אֶלָּא בִּשְׁבִיל לוּלָב, הַשִּׁדְרָה שֶׁל לוּלָב דּוֹמָה לַשִּׁדְרָה שֶׁל אָדָם, וְהַהֲדַס דּוֹמֶה לָעַיִן, וַעֲרָבָה דּוֹמָה לַפֶּה, וְהָאֶתְרוֹג דּוֹמֶה לַלֵּב, אָמַר דָּוִד אֵין בְּכָל הָאֵיבָרִים גָּדוֹל מֵאֵלּוּ, שֶׁהֵן שְׁקוּלִין כְּנֶגֶד כָּל הַגּוּף, הֱוֵי: כָּל עַצְמוֹתַי תֹּאמַרְנָה.

(14) Rabbi Mani opened, "'All of my bones shall say, "Lord, who is like you"' (Psalms 35:10). This verse was only stated for the sake of the lulav (the four species). The spine of the palm branch is similar to the spine of man. And the myrtle is similar to the eye. And the willow is similar to the mouth. And the etrog (citron), is similar to the heart. David said, 'In all of the limbs, there are no greater ones than these, as they are compared to the entire body.' This is [what is meant] by 'All of my bones shall say.'"

דָּבָר אַחֵר, פְּרִי עֵץ הָדָר, אֵלּוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל, מָה אֶתְרוֹג זֶה יֵשׁ בּוֹ טַעַם וְיֵשׁ בּוֹ רֵיחַ, כָּךְ יִשְׂרָאֵל יֵשׁ בָּהֶם בְּנֵי אָדָם שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהֶם תּוֹרָה וְיֵשׁ בָּהֶם מַעֲשִׂים טוֹבִים. כַּפֹּת תְּמָרִים, אֵלּוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל, מָה הַתְּמָרָה הַזּוֹ יֵשׁ בּוֹ טַעַם וְאֵין בּוֹ רֵיחַ, כָּךְ הֵם יִשְׂרָאֵל יֵשׁ בָּהֶם שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהֶם תּוֹרָה וְאֵין בָּהֶם מַעֲשִׂים טוֹבִים. וַעֲנַף עֵץ עָבֹת, אֵלּוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל, מָה הֲדַס יֵשׁ בּוֹ רֵיחַ וְאֵין בּוֹ טַעַם, כָּךְ יִשְׂרָאֵל יֵשׁ בָּהֶם שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהֶם מַעֲשִׂים טוֹבִים וְאֵין בָּהֶם תּוֹרָה. וְעַרְבֵי נָחַל, אֵלּוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל, מָה עֲרָבָה זוֹ אֵין בָּהּ טַעַם וְאֵין בָּהּ רֵיחַ, כָּךְ הֵם יִשְׂרָאֵל יֵשׁ בָּהֶם בְּנֵי אָדָם שֶׁאֵין בָּהֶם לֹא תּוֹרָה וְלֹא מַעֲשִׂים טוֹבִים, וּמָה הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא עוֹשֶׂה לָהֶם, לְאַבְּדָן אִי אֶפְשָׁר, אֶלָּא אָמַר הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא יֻקְשְׁרוּ כֻלָּם אֲגֻדָּה אַחַת וְהֵן מְכַפְּרִין אֵלּוּ עַל אֵלּוּ, וְאִם עֲשִׂיתֶם כָּךְ אוֹתָהּ שָׁעָה אֲנִי מִתְעַלֶּה, הֲדָא הוּא דִכְתִיב (עמוס ט, ו): הַבּוֹנֶה בַשָּׁמַיִם מַעֲלוֹתָו, וְאֵימָתַי הוּא מִתְעֲלֶה כְּשֶׁהֵן עֲשׂוּיִין אֲגֻדָּה אַחַת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (עמוס ט, ו): וַאֲגֻדָּתוֹ עַל אֶרֶץ יְסָדָהּ, לְפִיכָךְ משֶׁה מַזְהִיר לְיִשְׂרָאֵל: וּלְקַחְתֶּם לָכֶם בַּיּוֹם הָרִאשׁוֹן.
Another explanation: "The fruit of a beautiful tree" - these are [referring to] Israel. Just like this citron (etrog), which has taste and has smell, so too Israel has among them people that have Torah and have good deeds. "The branches of a date palm" - these are [referring to] Israel. Just like this date, which has taste and has no smell, so too Israel has among them those that have Torah but do not have good deeds. "And a branch of a braided tree (a myrtle)" - these are [referring to] Israel. Just like this myrtle, which has smell and has no taste, so too Israel has among them those that have good deeds but do not have Torah. "And brook willows" - these are [referring to] Israel. Just like this willow, which has no smell and has no taste, so too Israel has among them people that have no Torah and have no good deeds. And what does the Holy One, blessed be He, do to them? To destroy them is impossible, but rather the Holy One, blessed be He, said "bind them all together [into] one grouping and these will atone for those." And if you will have done that, I will be elevated at that time. This is [the meaning of] what is written (Amos 9:6), "He Who built the upper chambers in the heavens" (indicating his elevation). And when is He elevated? When they make one grouping, as it is stated (Ibid.), "and established His grouping on the earth." Hence Moshe warned Israel, "And you shall take for yourselves on the first day."
דָּבָר אַחֵר, פְּרִי עֵץ הָדָר, זֶה הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא שֶׁכָּתוּב בּוֹ (תהלים קד, א): הוֹד וְהָדָר לָבָשְׁתָּ. כַּפֹּת תְּמָרִים, זֶה הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא שֶׁכָּתוּב בּוֹ (תהלים צב, יג): צַדִּיק כַּתָּמָר יִפְרָח. וַעֲנַף עֵץ עָבֹת, זֶה הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא, דִּכְתִיב (זכריה א, ח): וְהוּא עֹמֵד בֵּין הַהֲדַסִּים. וְעַרְבֵי נָחַל, זֶה הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא, דִּכְתִיב בֵּיהּ (תהלים סח, ה): סֹלּוּ לָרֹכֵב בָּעֲרָבוֹת בְּיָהּ שְׁמוֹ.
Another explanation: "The fruit of a beautiful tree (ets hadar)" - this is [referring to] the Holy One, blessed be He, as it is written about Him (Psalms 104:1), "You were dressed in splendor and beauty (hadar)." "The branches of a date palm" - this is [referring to] the Holy One, blessed be He, as it is written about Him (Psalms 92:13), "The righteous One flourishes like a date palm." "And a branch of a braided tree (a myrtle)" - this is [referring to] the Holy One, blessed be He, as it is written (Zechariah 1:8), "and He is standing among the myrtles." "And brook willows (arvei nachal)" - this is [referring to] the Holy One, blessed be He, as it is written about Him (Psalms 68:5), "praise the One that rides in the skies (aravot), with His name of the Lord."

Parting Ways: Jewishness and the Critique of Zionism
Judith Butler

Judith Butler follows Edward Said's late suggestion that through a consideration of Palestinian dispossession in relation to Jewish diasporic traditions a new ethos can be forged for a one-state solution. Butler engages Jewish philosophical positions to articulate a critique of political Zionism and its practices of illegitimate state violence, nationalism, and state-sponsored racism. At the same time, she moves beyond communitarian frameworks, including Jewish ones, that fail to arrive at a radical democratic notion of political cohabitation. Butler engages thinkers such as Edward Said, Emmanuel Levinas, Hannah Arendt, Primo Levi, Martin Buber, Walter Benjamin, and Mahmoud Darwish as she articulates a new political ethic. In her view, it is as important to dispute Israel's claim to represent the Jewish people as it is to show that a narrowly Jewish framework cannot suffice as a basis for an ultimate critique of Zionism. She promotes an ethical position in which the obligations of cohabitation do not derive from cultural sameness but from the unchosen character of social plurality. Recovering the arguments of Jewish thinkers who offered criticisms of Zionism or whose work could be used for such a purpose, Butler disputes the specific charge of anti-Semitic self-hatred often leveled against Jewish critiques of Israel. Her political ethic relies on a vision of cohabitation that thinks anew about binationalism and exposes the limits of a communitarian framework to overcome the colonial legacy of Zionism. Her own engagements with Edward Said and Mahmoud Darwish form an important point of departure and conclusion for her engagement with some key forms of thought derived in part from Jewish resources, but always in relation to the non-Jew.

Butler considers the rights of the dispossessed, the necessity of plural cohabitation, and the dangers of arbitrary state violence, showing how they can be extended to a critique of Zionism, even when that is not their explicit aim. She revisits and affirms Edward Said's late proposals for a one-state solution within the ethos of binationalism. Butler's startling suggestion: Jewish ethics not only demand a critique of Zionism, but must transcend its exclusive Jewishness in order to realize the ethical and political ideals of living together in radical democracy.

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״עַרְבֵי נַחַל״ — הַגְּדֵילוֹת עַל הַנַּחַל, פְּרָט לְצַפְצָפָה הַגְּדֵילָה בֵּין הֶהָרִים. אָמַר רַבִּי זֵירָא, מַאי קְרָאָה: ״קָח עַל מַיִם רַבִּים צַפְצָפָה שָׂמוֹ״. אֲמַר לֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי: וְדִילְמָא פָּרוֹשֵׁי קָא מְפָרֵשׁ — ״קָח עַל מַיִם רַבִּים״, וּמַאי נִיהוּ — צַפְצָפָה! אִם כֵּן, מַאי ״שָׂמוֹ״? אָמַר רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ: אָמַר הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא: אֲנִי אָמַרְתִּי שֶׁיְּהוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל לְפָנַי כְּ״קָח עַל מַיִם רַבִּים״, וּמַאי נִיהוּ — עֲרָבָה, וְהֵן שָׂמוּ עַצְמָן כְּצַפְצָפָה שֶׁבֶּהָרִים. אִיכָּא דְּמַתְנֵי לַהּ לְהַאי קְרָא אַמַּתְנִיתָא: ״קָח עַל מַיִם רַבִּים צַפְצָפָה שָׂמוֹ״. מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַבִּי זֵירָא: וְדִילְמָא פָּרוֹשֵׁי קָא מְפָרֵשׁ ״קָח עַל מַיִם רַבִּים״, מַאי נִיהוּ — צַפְצָפָה! אִם כֵּן — מַאי ״שָׂמוֹ״? אָמַר רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ: אָמַר הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא: אֲנִי אָמַרְתִּי שֶׁיְּהוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל לְפָנַי כְּ״קָח עַל מַיִם רַבִּים״, וּמַאי נִיהוּ — עֲרָבָה, וְהֵן שָׂמוּ עַצְמָן כְּצַפְצָפָה שֶׁבֶּהָרִים. תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: אֵי זֶהוּ עֲרָבָה וְאֵיזֶהוּ צַפְצָפָה? עֲרָבָה, קָנֶה שֶׁלָּהּ אָדוֹם, וְעָלֶה שֶׁלָּהּ מָשׁוּךְ וּפִיהָ חָלָק. צַפְצָפָה, קָנֶה שֶׁלָּהּ לָבָן, וְעָלֶה שֶׁלָּהּ עָגוֹל וּפִיהָ דּוֹמֶה לְמַגָּל. וְהָא תַּנְיָא: דּוֹמֶה לְמַגָּל כָּשֵׁר, דּוֹמֶה לְמַסָּר — פָּסוּל! אֲמַר אַבָּיֵי: כִּי תַּנְיָא הָהִיא, בְּחִילְפָא גִּילָא.
The Sages taught an additional baraita: “Willows of the brook” is referring to those that grow by the river, which comes to exclude a tzaftzafa, which grows among the mountains and not near a brook. Rabbi Zeira said: What is the verse from which the fact that the tzaftzafa is unfit is derived? It is derived from the reprimand that is written: “He placed it by great waters, and set it as a tzaftzafa (Ezekiel 17:5). The Jewish people were planted like a willow on great waters, but ultimately became like a tzaftzafa. Apparently, a tzaftzafa does not grow on great waters. Abaye said to Rabbi Zeira: And perhaps the second part of the verse is merely explaining the first part, and it means: He placed it by great waters, and what is it that He placed there? It is a tzaftzafa. Rabbi Zeira answered: If so, and that is the meaning of the verse, what is the meaning of the term “set it”? Rather, the verse means that the willow branch was transformed into a tzaftzafa. That is how Rabbi Abbahu explained the verse, as Rabbi Abbahu said that the Holy One, Blessed be He, said: I said that the Jewish people should be before Me as a plant placed by great waters, and what is that plant? It is a willow. And they set themselves as a tzaftzafa of the mountains. Some taught this verse as the conclusion of the baraita and Rabbi Zeira raised the objection, and the response to his objection is unattributed: He placed it by great waters, and set it as a tzaftzafa. Rabbi Zeira strongly objects: And perhaps the second part of the verse is merely explaining the first part, and it means: He placed it by great waters, and what is it that He placed there? It is a tzaftzafa. The Gemara rejects this suggestion: If so, and that is the meaning of the verse, what is the meaning of the term “set it”? Rabbi Abbahu said that the Holy One, Blessed be He, said: I said that the Jewish people should be before Me as a plant placed by great waters, and what is that plant? It is a willow. And they set themselves as a tzaftzafa of the mountains. Apropos the defining characteristics of the willow branch, in contrast to similar species that are unfit, the Sages taught: What is a willow and what is a tzaftzafa? With regard to a willow branch, its stem is red, and its leaf is elongated, and the edge of its leaf is smooth. With regard to a tzaftzafa, its stem is white, its leaf is round, and the edge of its leaf is serrated like a sickle. The Gemara objects: But isn’t it taught in a baraita: If the edge of its leaf is serrated like a sickle it is fit, but if it is serrated like a saw, whose teeth are uneven in both size and sequence, it is unfit? Abaye said: When that baraita was taught, it was referring to a particular type of willow called ḥilfa gila, whose leaves are serrated. However, all other types of willow branches have leaves with a smooth edge.
ואתרוג ישן משנה של אשתקד פסול לשנה הבאה (זו) דאי איפשר שלא נתייבש דשיעור יבישות פירוש הראב"ד שאינו מוציא ליחה ע"י חוט. ואפילו נכמש שקורין וועלק פסול וש"י כנ' אחיך יעקב הלוי: