As the fruit of becoming whole = accepting all of myself, I desire:
to live and explore and evolve   L O V E   in my personal life
and to play my part in creating the conditions for Heaven-on-Earth
by radiating grate-full-ness, zest-full-ness and full-fill-ment
on the actors in my individual life-drama and on all human beings!

How ironic,
that Kara Feder has written a book:
"Let's make Peace!"

I hope it's not ironic,
that at this very moment
(after having completed the sculpture above)
I read two notes about the Peace-Conference
between Clinton, Natanyahu and Abu Mazin
(on the background of "Settlers"
who demonstrate against it....)

The incredible work, which Jonathan Jacobi invested in organizing this tour,
whom we would meet and where we would sleep and - sometimes - eat,
the logistic of transport and planes, etc., can be guessed from the schedule,
which Rushdi and I received at our arrival - with no time for jet-lags etc:

Radio Show, Life, in San Jose, with questions from the audience. The interviewer could not understand until the very end , how Rushdi could be both, Palestinian Muslim and Israeli

Notes : Preparing for "Capitol Hill" - Washington, in the home of Rut Dayan

Sadaat and Begin , though they did not yet set "a relationship of partnership" as a goal of policy,
demonstrated two important principles of P. (or confirmed two of our assumptions):
once Begin gave credit - trusted - to the  r a t i o n a l   o p e n i n g   in the enemy's statements, so many things changed.
Suddeny all the irrational actions, statements and attitudes of the past had no bearings any more.

Sadaat proved, that by his initiative
(and it was the "defeated" who started, not the "victor",
which proves again, that in this area and in this time there are no victors, there are only defeated parties)
he could - overnight - humanize the image of the Egyptian Arab in the eyes and the hearts of the Jews.
If overnight 30 million devils can be perceived as human beings
who act According to the same laws of human nature According to which the Jews act,
certainly the devils of the Israeli government or the devils of the PLO can be perceived as human beings
who act According to the same laws.

(to add to "Listening")
: to be rational means
to perceive the reality of what I am
and of what the enemy or the adversary is:
that my interest is not to prove that I am right,
but to solve my problem,
and that the enemy or adversary is not a devil -
with whom I, of course, cannot fight,
but a person or persons
who act According to the same laws of human nature as I do,
and who can therefore be won over as partners,
if I only invest enough effort and sophistication in proving to him,
like Sadaat did with Israel,
that we have the same interest,
in helping Israel to trust him,
that he really believed this and in demonstrating by this very act,
that there is indeed equality of self-respect.

To end:
To make this offensive work -
to stress again two principles;
the static thinking,
which discusses geopolitical objectives like borders and territories,
has been proved to be ineffective,
since neither nation has so far been able to accept responsibility for the fact,
that in order to carry out its dream
it has to convince the other nation that this dream serves their interest.

Also: once the goal of policy is set
- the strategies and the geo-political solutions will follow out of it organically.

On our last day , 1980_02_21 ,
I made notes about how we had become used
to present our cause to groups, media and V.I.Ps

Rushdi:
His poem in Arabic and English about the two peoples which were destined for leadership of humankind, but are "blind" to each other,

Jonathan:
Introduced himself, "Partnership", Rachel and Rushdi,
gave some back-ground about the sufferings of both the Jews and the Palestinians,
adding some details about the Palestinians inside Israel
(policy of "the Arabs - a fifth column" until 1964,
and until today "a stranger in their own land".)

Parable: A man works on the fifth floor and a fire breaks out.There is no other way out than jumping out of the window, so he jumps, and falls right on top of a passer-by.

Now this one shouts:

" Why did you jump on me, you had  n o  r i g ht  to do that",

while the other man shouts back:

"of course I had a right to do that, don't you see, I had no choice?"

And so they argue about who was right and who was rong instead of coping with the situation in which they both are in now.

Rachel:
The question is,
what stops people from coping with their problem,
what stops them from seeing their real self-interest
and from seeing their strength to achieve it?

What is involved, are   f e e l i n g s , and we have to finally deal with them.

(Another question is, what stops US, who DO cope, from being effective?
The answer is: we would be more effective, all of us, citizens, organisations and institutions, political or non-political, who work for "peace", if we would come to an agreement about at least three things:

- to propose an overall goal of policy

- to deal effectively with our internal adversaries, not antagonizing them

- to get support for ourselves, dealing with our own feelings, in order to neither get worn down nor radiate anger)

We came here - not to discuss another geo-political solution - but rather to point out a new choice for a goal of policy and a new choice for a way of reaching this goal, and all this based on the thinking and acting of the last five years.

((I came to the conclusion, that in future the f i r s t step of developing the theory has to be - to make people understand, that "to be masters of their destiny, to be free" - means to take responsibility for being dependent on others.". Only after they have internalized this consequence of the only value that I never found questioned by anybody whom I met so far -   f r e e d o m   or self-determination - can they go on seeing more choices for coping with the conflict. But below I quote the presentation that we used so far:))

A. A new Choice of a Goal of Policy:

1) Redefinition of problem

2) Three options to solve it, that did not work

3) Best option for a relationship between any two people as well as between these two peoples: being equal, partners.

4) The static concept of "peace" (illusions)
versus the dynamic concept of a   "r e l a t i o n s h i p ", like marriage, like partnership

5) The  c o n d i t i o n s  for bringing this relationship about and then fostering it.
the 3 conditions.
(to emphasize, that "anybody who sees  h i s  o w n self-interest in removing this threat from the world" would h e l p - not blame, nor presssure, nor force - those two peoples to see their common interest and to create trust between each other in attitudes, words and actions, instead of supporting one side against the other.)

Rushdi:
(Following the explanation of "equality of self-respect" - as based on the fact, that everybody is unique and limited - Rushdi demonstrated this first - by pointing out to Rachel and himself:
because he is limited in English, - knowing his uniqueness as a teacher of Arabic and Hebrew - Rachel talks about the  c o n c e p t  of partnership, while he talks about the actions, the projects.)

He then talked about how he applied his personal experience of learning self-respect ((which he told in detail in earlier presentations)) to the level of his Palestinian nation.

Then he gave details about the mobile workshop with the Kibbutz Movement's high-school students and the Arab students - in a kibbutz, a moshav, a city and Neve-Shalom, elaborating on our exercises to bring about self-respect and the results of this first step. He then mentioned briefly the Herzliya summer camp and other activities, exspecially his work in one of the seminaries where pupils are taught Zionism and where Rushdi is a lecturer. In the end he told about the need of generating facilitators and counselors, in order to meet all the demands for such experts, that come to us already from the outside, - our 10 day Course of Jewish and Arab Partnership Facilitators in Nes-Ammim in August 1979 etc., and he ended up with telling numbers about the organization.

Rachel:

After pointing out the difference between the concrete models on the grassroot-level
and th e   s c o p e   of Partnership,
I returned to the concept and repeated the "goal of policy" and the conditions.

So far we talked about ,   w h a t   has to be done in general.

B. Now we need to ask,  w h o  has to do it.

The audience opened page 4 of the pamphlet, that was distributed:

"Check for yourself, if you agree with us on the first two assumptions of P-approach, because this will be the basis of working together.

Pointing out the first and second assumption,
"Now - what do I do with all these people on whom I am dependent?
Here comes in a new choice of a way.

Example of how so often, let's say, a Jew could talk to an Arab, but not to his internal adversary.
Then formulatiing the P-way with concern to all adversaries and friends, citizens, governments and nations on whom we are dependent.

C: Having pointed into a new direction of coping -
we can have a closer look at the problems

The difference betweeen objective problems and psychological barriers.

1. An example for "objective problems": conflicts of interests over land, in general between Palestinians and Israel, and in particular, inside Israel.
Pointing to the model of Bir'am.

2) People mostly are unable to cope with the   o b j e c t i v e  problems; unless they first cope with the psychological barriers.

I mention three:

fear
(the emotional phonographic record on the Jewish side:
" Palestinian>PLO>terrorists>holocaust>2000 years of persecution."
"and everybody goes numb,
nobody can think about his own interest,
leave alone see the strength in himself to reach it)

humiliation
(record on the Pal. Side:
" Zionists>British>Turks> 400 years of oppression and humiliation"

powerlessness = the biggest enemy of both
(we Jews.., we Palestinians, ... we citizens versus government)

If we want to help people cope with the objective problems, we have to help them first, differentiate between their feelings and their ability, to    n o t   a c t  on these feelings, but rather see their own self-interest, see also, that the other person (or nation or government) is not a devil (with whom I, of course, cannot cope) but a human being that acts According to the same laws as as I do,

((these are three aspects of "reality",
and seeing reality in this way we defined as "rationality".
I never explained, what I mean be "laws of human nature",
so I'll mention just one:
" everybody needs to respect himself and be respected by others.))

to give the audience a glimpse of   h o w   we overcome psychological barriers,
- I taught them as "a first step" (in addition to what Rushdi said about self-respect):
L i s t e n i n g (knowing that what comes up very often in the other person's objections and antogonizing attitude are feelings, and with those it's no use to argue

3 gains by listening:

- having expressed some of the hurts and fears and feelings of powerlessness,
   the other person is more able to see "reality" (as defined above)

- by listening I gain trust

- by listening I gather information -

a) about the irrationality of the person (citizen, minister, government or representatives of     a nation), where he is most hurt and I'll not deal with this in the beginning.

b) about "the rationial   o p e n i ng ", the breach in the wall, where he believes something     has to be done and can be done or even he could do it and then concentrate on that.

(example on the top-political level:
Begin who gave credit to the rational opening of Sadaat's "I want to come".
Example for how people can perceive the enemy as human beings; Saddat could humanize the image of the E g y p ti a n Arab in the eyes of the Jews over night)

(Sometimes I added:
to be able to listen,
I first have to be listened to,
I have to deal with my own feelings, time and again,
this is the third most important criterion for effectiveness,
that all those people who already  c o p e ,
take responsibility for getting emotional support,
so as not to get worn out and not to radiate anager,
but being able to help others with  t h e i r  feelings)

The question is again not only, with   w h a t   problems do we have to cope, but

(3) w h o   is going to cope

Then pointing out the "crux of efficiency and effectiveness:
training people, who would then be able to help others to cope with the objective and the psychological barriers.

-to help them talke responsibility for being dependent on others,

- to help them see more choices

-to help them aquire tools for dealing with feelings and then tools for coping with objective problems ((like coming up with solutions for conflicts of interests over land, in a way that the interests of the Arabs are being met and the interests of the Jews not being harmed, so as not to reverse the problem)

To give them a glimpse of what's involved;
a pilot in the Israeli army has to learn and practice for 6000 hours, 10 hours a day for 2 years.. the same effort, time, money, skills are needed to train the people, who would help others to cope in the way outlined above)

D. The purpose of our tour: to start an over-all offensive:

Our models - like a scientist wants to prove a theory, that it can be done.
No illusions, that by just building the   i n f r a - s t ru c t ur e   towards this goal of "a relationship of partnership" would win the race against time.

On this tour - we not only   l i v e  partnership, but confront people with our thinking, so as to include in an overall offensive
- everybody who already sees his  o w n  self-interest in removing this threat from the world, ((to point out, that one does not have to be a Jew or an Arab to see one's self-interest))

or a challenge to his   o w n   creative powers, to work for solving this conflict

Again a military example: to win a war -
not just one tank~~~ not just on one front~~~always alternative plans in the drawyer, always people in charge who are used to think creatively.

To exemplify, what we mean by "offensive",
I made a movement with my two arms, one pointing to "building the infrastructure from the bottom", the other pointing "to work from the top",

so as to   h e l p   (not force, pressure or blame), the leaders of Israel, the Pal., the US and maybe of Egypt as a mediator:

- to face the fact that each one - in order to carry out his own dream - is dependent on    the other nation, and then accept responsibility for proving to the other that my dream    serves his interest too.

- to see more choices than just reacting emotionally, as most governments and nations do   today (also with regard to problems like Iran and Afghanistan)

- to rediscover the strength in viewing the achievement of a relationship of partnership as a goal of policy   and then to   r e a c h   this goal.

Sometimes I pointed out 3 targets of this offensive;

-generating - by training - as many people as possible who then would be able to cope and help others to cope...
- the ideas of the WELLS
[everyone has not only problems in his life, but the strength in his being,
to turn problems into challenges, like there is ground water even in the desert, but each one has to dig a well to his own ground water]

- turning into partners all those people, politicians and non-politicians who already sow the seeds, which will make the desert bloom, once the rain comes, and to help all of us to become more efficient and effective, According to the 3 criteria mentioned in the beginning.

- building a strategy - According to the --approach - to reach the leaders,
((two criteria for setting priorities:

-to check, on  w h o m  I am most dependent, in order to solve my problem?

- who among those, on whom I am most dependent, are the most "rational" people (as defined above).

Example: everybody is a potential partner, but some people are more rational then others, let's say in the Israeli government or in the PLO ((in case the PLO should be the potential partner on whom Israel is  m o s t  dependent)). I will then work with these people, and they will either be able to win over the more irrational leaders, or at least manipulate them into a direction which serves the interest of all.

By telling people, what to do, it is very important to make them understand, that all our suggestions are just ideas to help their own vision. What's important is, to make them see the importance of a   s u p p o r t i ve   f r a me - w o r k , so as to guarantee co-ooperation   a n d   continuity:

A new format of a workshop:
a) goal:
to work out concrete steps, and strategies

- like what do we, as a group, want to do

- or developing a proposal for solving one of the objective problems

- or finding out, what any individual would like to do According to his own skills    and creative power, so as to guarantee that everybody relates to his work as a    painter towards his painting, not doing a favor to the world, but creating    something meaningful.

b) Process:
to internalize the approach - how to accept responsibility,
how to see the infinite choices and how to choose the best in any given situation.

c) Leaning; how to deal with feelings, my own and those of others.

One last thing; whenever the static thinking of people: bi-national, secular, etc. comes in the way:
To state dynamic thinking, process, creating conditions for a much more optimal solution than any of us can envision today - versus discussing objectives~~~

End

Like my partner started his poem in Arabic, I want to end in Hebrew.
What we say is not new, it's the message of double responsibility,
phrased 2000 years ago by the Jewish sage Hillel:

"If I am not for myself - who will be for me,
but if I"m only for myself - what am I?"
- if I don't take responsibility for being dependent on others and then turn this dependency from something that harms me into something that benefits me - what have I done for M y s e l f ?

"and if not    n o w,     w h en?"

I woke up last night to the sound of laughing and realized I'd fallen asleep with the TV on. It was 3 AM and I knew it was Jon Stewart but I had to fumble around for my glasses to see who his guest was. Unbelievable! It was Jesus, in his robe and all. His nose was bigger than I thought, his skin a lot darker, but his eyes were more piercing than I'd ever imagined. It was like light came out instead of going into them.

Jon was making some joke about both of them being Jews and Jesus, after laughing harder than I thought he would, said quite seriously to Jon, "Yeah, that's one of the weirdest things, isn't it? How could they forget that?"

Jon was all over him with questions from the daily news. What was his take on the whole Mosque/Ground Zero fiasco? Jesus said he'd seen some newscasts on the story and couldn't believe the drama and fear it was bringing up. "They want to build a public building for prayer, education and community gathering. That's a good thing. A better thing perhaps, would be the construction of an interfaith building, There's room for everyone, and it's these distinctions between religions that's causing all the problems in the first place."

Jon looked incredulous. "An interfaith building??"

"Yes, a multi-tasking mosque, with a synagogue, chapel and meditation hall in it. A building where people of different faiths come together to make a better world together. That's the point of religion right? It's not about doctrine. It's a plan for action, an opportunity to be a communal force for good. Religion is just the map. Faith is the real adventure."

"I don't know...." said Stewart, making one of those funny mouth movements he does after hearing a strange idea.

Jesus pipes in, "What could be better in that spot than a building that represents, by its very structure, a coming together, a new vision that goes beyond religious borders? It's like taking a good idea and making it great. The real prophets of the day know this. Where are their voices? Why aren't you interviewing them?"

"Hmm, I thought I was," says Stewart, tapping his pencil on the desk.

"You know why you have border issues here? Because you believe the borders are real, like they MEAN something. Muslin against Christian, Mexican against American, Republican against Democrat--all those borders are made up. You put up walls to defend your ideas--and not even your OWN, but ideas passed down to you from someone else--and then you make other people look like demons. It's no wonder this country is in a state of collapse. You don't even get it how connected you are. You're like five fingers on a hand who think they're separate and make up reasons why not to get along."

Jon sat there with his mouth open.

"You're like children playing war games. You spend all your time, all your energy attacking the "other side" instead of realizing you need to bridge the two sides in order to get across to a higher level of thinking. Even news shows are at war. Look at how you make fun of FOX. What light does that add to the world? All the time you could be giving to real visionaries, all the ways you could be role-modeling good behavior, showing the audience how it really WORKS to bring great and opposing minds together, and you sit there poking fun at another station. That's really enlightened, isn't it?"

This was the first time I'd ever seen Jon Stewart speechless. He looked like an embarrassed 6th grader. No pencil tapping now. More like a puppy with his tail between his legs.

"What in the world are you people doing? The ones who call themselves "religious" are often the most immature, the most judgmental and intolerant. What is THAT about? That's exactly the opposite of what every religion teaches. And I mean EVERY religion,"
Jesus said, as he looked away from Stewart and spoke right to the camera.

"All the religions say two basic things," he said, holding up his fingers in a peace sign.
"First, there is no distance between you and this one you call God. God is the creative force behind all things. It's invisible, but you are the manifestation of it. I'm telling you, the Sistine Chapel should have been a mirror."

The audience laughs, but Stewart stares into those deep eyes of the Nazarene.

He goes on, " You are the eyes, the hands, the feet of that creative force. That energy is in you. It's called your breath." He holds up his index finger and taps on it a few times. "That's the first thing. Don't think there's some man out there pulling strings. Grow up. This civilization--if you can call it that--is YOUR creation. This earth, it is not a bunch of resources to be exploited. It is not to be owned. It is your mother, the womb that you sprang from. You are its consciousness, its neural cells. The whole earth is the organism that you belong to. You did not come down to earth, you came up from earth, as I did. Its well-being is in your hands. Can you be proud of what you're doing? Are you going to be the ones who kill it off, after all that talk about pro-life?"

Jesus was getting a little worked up, like that day he stormed through the temple turning over the merchants' tables. Jon cut to a commercial, "And we'll be right back to hear the 2nd basic thing from our guest tonight, ladies and gentlemen, the Jewish prophet Jesus of Nazareth. Stay tuned..."

They were laughing about something when they returned from the commercial, Jesus stretched out in his chair with his long lanky legs covered by his tunic, his sandaled feet hidden under the desk.

"OK," Jon says, "You were saying there were two things. Let me see if I got this right. There's no bearded guy up there on a cloud. That God we talk about and fight over is the creative force inside us and around us? It's invisible and we're like....(a long pause) its shadow?"

"Not exactly," says Jesus. We're like the physical form of the same energy. The ice cube version of water or steam. Same elements, different form. The sea and the iceberg. You're all icebergs in the Sea of God," he said, half-laughing at his own quaint metaphor. "But the problem is you don't realize that underneath it all, you're all connected. There's just one big iceberg with a lot of tips. The truth is, you're Creation continuing the co-creation of Itself."

"Oh my," says Stewart. "Let's leave that discussion to Bill Moyers, What about number two? What's the number two thing we're supposed to know?"

Jesus holds up his two fingers again, tapping the tip of his middle finger. The camera zoomed in so closely on him I could see a scar on his forehead. "It's not so much what you need to know--that's part of the problem, all these peoples' belief systems. That's what gets you in trouble. No one has to believe in me to get to heaven. A...there is no heaven to get to and B, it's not what you believe but how you act that matters. If anyone learned anything from reading that Bible they should have picked up that one. There's 3000 references to helping the poor in there. But let me get back..."

"Yes," says Stewart. "The second thing.."

"The second thing is this: forget everything you ever learned in any holy book and just treat everyone like a brother and a sister. I mean that literally. If it were your brother coming across the border...your sister with cancer and no health care....your child unable to get an education....your mother with no food in her house. And even further, your brother who was gay or hated gays, your sister who was a corrupt politician, your brother who bombed an abortion clinic, your sister who got an abortion. What does it look like to love unconditionally? To bridge differences, to come together over what we can agree on? Can you get through one day without thinking you're better or less than another? That's the thing to strive for. That is living faithfully."

"But...but..." says Stewart. "What about the Tea Partyers, the terrorists, what about Fox News and hate crimes?"

"If you think they are so different from you, be the opposite of what you think they are and enact that powerfully in the world. Don't focus on who's wrong. Just be a greater force for good."

"Not focus on who's wrong? How could I do my show?"

"Exactly. Remember what Gandhi said? Be the change you want to see in the world?"

"Sure. I have that quotation on my refrigerator."

"Well, it's time to take it further. You're evolving as a people. You've come through the Dark Ages, the Middle Ages, the Renaissance, the wrongly named Period of Enlightenment. You're now in the Information Age. You are growing your consciousness. In the physical world, you have Olympic marathon trainers who run 10 miles or more a day. They spend every waking hour in training, eating the right foods, researching the right clothing and equipment, working out, following a discipline. And in the metaphysical world, the spiritual world, you have people doing the same--they are your mystics and prophets--engaging in spiritual practice, accelerating their wisdom, expanding their consciousness, transcending judgment and radiating love into the world. You might be in that category.,."

Stewart does one of his choking, ahem things, putting his hand over his mouth. "Out of the question," he says frankly. "I thrive on judgment."

"Good to know yourself. You're all evolving at different rates. In the fall, when you look at a maple tree, you see leaves that are green, yellow, orange and red. They don't all change at the same time. And that's what makes life exciting. You all know different things. That's why you need each other. Like that guy Ken Wilbur said, "You're all right, only partly so."

Stewart nods his head in agreement, tapping his pencil on the table again.

"But back to Gandhi. I agree with what he said, but I'll say it a different way, just to shake things up a bit, which I love to do. By the way, it'd make a great bumper sticker:
Be the God you want to see in the world."

"Oh-oh, sounds blasphemous to me," says Stewart.

"You know as well as I do, every good idea starts out as a blasphemy."

"OK, great, we're out of time," says Stewart, as the camera swings over for a shot of the audience. They're all standing, some crying and laughing at the same time, the most incredible look of collective awe I've ever seen. And Jesus walks over like Jay Leno and starts shaking hands with them. What a night!"

Jan Phillips
September 3, 2010