In his September essay for Mosaic, Meir Soloveichik provides a moving analysis of how the Sephardi High Holy Day liturgy makes use of the metaphor of God as loving father. Moshe Taragin here takes a closer look at a less common set of images:

Though God is most often compared to a father, there is a singular moment (Psalms 131) when King David likens Him to a mother. In his quest for inner peace and tranquility, David acknowledges: “I have composed and quieted my soul; like a weaned child rests against his mother, my soul is like a weaned child within me.” A baby, in its pure dependence, doesn’t even have the self-awareness to recognize its own danger. It simply seeks comfort, warmth ,and attention.

Taragin cites the exegesis of his rabbinic mentor, the late Aharon Lichtenstein:

What does the suckling infant think while in his mother’s embrace? Does he regard her as the one who will save him from crisis? . . . First of all, he turns to his mother because he wants to be close to her. At that moment, he is not preoccupied with future plans, nor is he anticipating the fulfillment of visions or promises. He knows only one thing: the world is a cold, frightening place, but here with his mother there is warmth and security! The mother, in turn, caresses him and comforts him. Over and above any response on her part, simply being in her presence gives him life and strength.

Yesterday I saw an unconfirmed report that the Biden administration has offered Israel a massive arms deal in exchange for a promise not to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities. Even if the report is incorrect, there is plenty of other evidence that the White House has been trying to dissuade Jerusalem from mounting such an attack. The thinking behind this pressure is hard to fathom, as there is little Israel could do that would better serve American interests in the Middle East than putting some distance between the ayatollahs and nuclear weapons. Aaron MacLean explains why this is so, in the context of a broader discussion of strategic priorities in the Middle East and elsewhere:

If the Iran issue were satisfactorily adjusted in the direction of the American interest, the question of Israel’s security would become more manageable overnight. If a network of American partners enjoyed security against state predation, the proactive suppression of militarily less serious threats like Islamic State would be more easily organized—and indeed, such partners would be less vulnerable to the manipulation of powers external to the region.

[The Biden administration’s] commitment to escalation avoidance has had the odd effect of making the security situation in the region look a great deal as it would if America had actually withdrawn [from the Middle East].

Alternatively, we could project competence by effectively backing our Middle East partners in their competitions against their enemies, who are also our enemies, by ensuring a favorable overall balance of power in the region by means of our partnership network, and by preventing Iran from achieving nuclear status—even if it courts escalation with Iran in the shorter run.