Last night Sarah and I had a lengthy talk about what the different types of connections people have to this land. The idea that people approach the topic of a Jewish or Palestinian state from either an emotional or academic mindset was a theme that kept reoccurring. As an agnostic individual I definitely consider the identities and structure of the Holy Land in a much different way than religious, spiritual and cultural persons.
I’m beginning to realize that an integral part of understanding Jerusalem is having a personal connection to the city, something I will never have. Sure, I’ll look back fondly on this summer, but Jerusalem is not part of my core identity. From an outsiders point of view it is easy to point out the problems on both sides (although I don’t have any solution to offer). Piggybacking on what Kamilah said, even if I am able to be a fair listener and question everything equally, there are still unspoken connections that I cannot comprehend.
In our discussions I’ve noticed this theme. All lecturers have revealed their struggles balancing their logic and guilt. For example, in our discussion with students from al-Quds University one student was emotionally proclaiming that Palestine is his land, but other times he took a more academic approach and stated there was the possibility for all Muslims, Jews, and Christians to live as “brothers”. I think what makes Jerusalem such a contested space is this dilemma of loyalties. Is it more important to be systematic and removed or stay true to your collective identity? I also wonder when and how the lens through which we study and exist in Jerusalem shifts.
Nick
Blogs ou should be reading
[…]Here is a Great Blog You Might Find Interesting that we Encourage You[…]…
Awesome website
[…]the time to read or visit the content or sites we have linked to below the[…]…