1. The author discusses the difficulty of mourning for the lost Temple due to the passage of time and the vast differences between modern society and the ancient world.
2. Cultural dissonances, such as the aversion to blood rituals and monarchy, create barriers to grieving for the Mikdash (Temple) and praying for its restoration.
3. The author suggests tracing current obstacles faced by Jews back to Jewish exile and longing for national institutions that may not be fully identified with yet, envisioning a future revolution of consciousness.
The article titled "Tisha B’av: A Revolution of Consciousness" discusses the challenges of mourning for the lost Temple and the difficulties in connecting with ancient traditions and rituals. While the topic is interesting, there are several potential biases and missing points of consideration that need to be addressed.
Firstly, the article presents a biased view towards modernity and progress, suggesting that our current society is far superior to the ancient world. While it is true that we have made advancements in areas such as governance, economy, education, and healthcare, it is important to recognize that there were also aspects of ancient societies that were valuable and meaningful. By dismissing the ancient world as "yellowed and dated," the author fails to acknowledge the richness of history and tradition.
Furthermore, the article overlooks the fact that many religious traditions continue to embrace elements of the ancient world. For example, animal sacrifices are still practiced by some religious groups today. By presenting modern culture as universally appalled by these practices, the author ignores the diversity of beliefs and attitudes within society.
The article also fails to explore counterarguments or alternative perspectives on mourning for the lost Temple. While it acknowledges cultural dissonances between modern sensibilities and ancient traditions, it does not delve into how individuals reconcile these differences or find meaning in mourning for something they may view as repulsive or outdated.
Additionally, there are unsupported claims throughout the article. For example, when discussing Messianic versions foreseeing the restoration of Jewish monarchy, there is no evidence provided to support this claim or to explain why modernity views monarchy as horrifying. The author simply states these assertions without providing any context or justification.
Moreover, there is a lack of evidence for some of the claims made about our return to Jewish statehood and sovereignty dulling our grief over past tragedies. While it is true that antisemitism has decreased in certain parts of the world due to Jewish statehood, it does not necessarily follow that this diminishes the pain of Jewish suffering or the longing for a lost destiny. The author does not provide any evidence or examples to support this claim.
Overall, the article presents a one-sided view of mourning for the lost Temple, focusing primarily on the challenges and obstacles faced in connecting with ancient traditions. It fails to explore alternative perspectives, counterarguments, and evidence to support its claims. Additionally, there are potential biases towards modernity and progress, as well as unsupported assertions throughout the article.