The Cult of History
Yaacov Shavit in refers to the way Isreal treats its historical projects as cult-like in his article Archaeology, Political Culture, and Culture in Isreal. (Shavit 50). He is referring to the zeal focused around archeology and its importance to the nationalism of Isreal (Shavit 52). Archaeology connects people to the history of Jerusalem, and that history can be used to further many idealistic ends. It's interesting to look at how, in many ways, the ideology found in Isreal is even more supported by this nationalistic history than it is by religion. The personal accounts that we read provide a stark contrast between how the storytellers view history, and how they view religion.
Menachem Magador explains why, to him, the cult of history transcends religion. He considers himself a secular Jew but then wonders at why he feels so emotional on the Temple Mount. If the importance of the Temple Mount was only religiously significant, Magador would not feel the way that he does. He himself recognizes that it is because of this cult of history that he feels the connection to Jerusalem.
Sari Nusseibeh shows us that sometimes the zeal for history can inform behavior in more far-reaching ways than religion can. She discusses how religion could not be the reason for the violence over the Haram Al-Sharif. She argues that the zealotry for the land comes from a more human impulse. She connects that impulse to the historical significance, not the religious significance, of the Harim Al-Sharif.
Carlo Maria Cardinal Martini shows us how history can inform how religion itself is practiced. His reflection on the Temple Esplanade is essentially a review of its history. The history itself is what becomes religiously significant. Looking at these three examples, we get a clear picture of how far reaching the cult of history is.
Menachem Magador explains why, to him, the cult of history transcends religion. He considers himself a secular Jew but then wonders at why he feels so emotional on the Temple Mount. If the importance of the Temple Mount was only religiously significant, Magador would not feel the way that he does. He himself recognizes that it is because of this cult of history that he feels the connection to Jerusalem.
Sari Nusseibeh shows us that sometimes the zeal for history can inform behavior in more far-reaching ways than religion can. She discusses how religion could not be the reason for the violence over the Haram Al-Sharif. She argues that the zealotry for the land comes from a more human impulse. She connects that impulse to the historical significance, not the religious significance, of the Harim Al-Sharif.
Carlo Maria Cardinal Martini shows us how history can inform how religion itself is practiced. His reflection on the Temple Esplanade is essentially a review of its history. The history itself is what becomes religiously significant. Looking at these three examples, we get a clear picture of how far reaching the cult of history is.
Comments
Post a Comment