I Notes on Protocol
II More Feedback
III A Brief Response
I Protocol - The flurry of activity following last week's piece had several readers ask about this list's protocol.
A) In order to maintain brevity and relevance, I ask that all responses be sent back to me first. I am always happy to get responses and am very interested in passing them on to the readers as well. My choice in what to pass on is dictated by what I feel suits the general interests of the readership.
B) I would like to assume that anything sent can be passed on. I have not sent anything on in the past without specific permission. In the future, anyone who is writing strictly for my personal reading should indicate as much.
C) The articles are written for general dissemination and can be passed on without need to ask permission. Likewise, any new subscribers are welcome to the list.
II More Feedback
>From Jeremy Schiff:
Theological inquiry into the holocaust is certainly legitimate, and some individuals may well find a particular response convincing, and not be forced to just bow their heads in acceptance of divine will. But I think that for anyone for whom the holocaust is a personal tragedy as well as a communal one, the explanation HaRav Yosef gave (following the Satmar Rebbe) is highly offensive. To spell it out: even if my grandparents were reincarnations of the most hideous resha'im, for my Mother, who mourns for them daily, they were wonderful, loving parents. And it is beyond my Mother's ability on the one hand to say "Kel malei rahamim", and on the other to think that God overlooked her parents' ma'asim tovim in this gilgul to punish them for the sins of previous ones.
The explanations of the holocaust that revolve around a communal shortcoming, such as not doing enough to prevent mass assimilation, ignoring the Zionist movement or whatever, do not suffer from the same problem. The element of blame is attached to the community as a whole, not to individuals, and we have less of a problem understanding that even the righteous can be punished in such circumstances. As far as I know, no-one suggests that each of the six million died because of their individual sins, as this would be clearly offensive. The gilgul neshamot idea waters this down a little by saying that the six million came to the world with a minus in their heshbon; but the message that they were not good enough people in their current life remains, and for the loved ones of those individuals this is obviously insulting.
The outrage his comments caused, though, was not really anything to do with this, neither was it (as you suggest) because he trespassed on secular understanding of the holocaust. The real reason was that there is something hutzpadik about the figure-head of the sefardim talking about the great tragedy of the ashkenazim in the way he did. Unfortunately, I have to say I feel this was feeling was somewhat justified.
>From Gary Bradski:
I'm bothered by two things, the first is perhaps a theological difference I have with you, the second is a more general problem.
1) I don't like any drift that calls evil good. Some take it to that extreme, I won't name names, but I had an argument with a well known Rav in Jerusalem and his position was something like: God killed the pious so that their souls would ascend to heaven rather than allow their souls to be lost by the creeping assimilation that they'd experience had they escaped to America. Saved by murder... Now, I grant that R. Yosef wasn't this crude, and in classical theology, I'll grant that the Nazi's evil isn't diminished because they were playing a roll in a grander scheme. But jimminy, 1M children were atoning for present sins?? Or for sins in their past lives??? You can construct whatever theological system you want, but, as in any theory, when the hand waving necessary to make it fly gets wild, I question the theory before I question the reality. ...
By a process theology view, the world is free by God's choice or (my view) as an integral function of God's nature (needs the poll of growth which requires freedom). Evil stays evil and is always a shame, God attracts the world towards good, but cannot compel either good or evil. This just sits much better with the world I see.
2)Repent for what? Who is the prophet who "knows" that God was punishing Jewry for massive assimilation? It could have been for many different reasons. Was the sin simply assimilation, then the answer is more devotion. ...If it were lack of outreach, more outreach. Perhaps it was by being too insular, not self-supporting enough... Certainly one problem was in being politically naive. It makes a difference what you repent for, one possible repentance could be entirely ritualistic or mystical, another would change institutions, practices...
III A Response
Like Rav Lichtenstein in the article everyone received last week, I considered the blame placed on Yeshayahu for denigrating the Jewish people. I humbly suggest that there is a difference between constructive criticism, no matter how harsh, and seemingly purposeless demeaning of G-d's nation. In that same article, Rav Lichtenstein demonstrates the same thought process that I spelled out concerning R. Yosef. In fact the premises are very strongly held in the orthodox world, and even more so in the rabbinic world.
While there were tremendous tzadikim and a very intensely Jewish culture in pre-war Europe, it was very much a sick society. While a combination of piety and nostalgia may prevent us from coming to this painful conclusion, I return to the Rambam and present the alternative as ultimately more problematic. We need to more seriously explore what went wrong before the war and why it is that our civilization started burning like a house of straw as soon as it was exposed to the fire of modern Western culture.
In response to Nati Helfgot and Gary Bradski, the Holocaust is not the first major tragedy to befall the Jewish people after the closure of prophecy. Whether we speak about the fall of Judea at the hands of the Romans or the Spanish inquisition, the primary response of the Jewish people was to search out their own misdeeds. Lack of prophecy creates less clarity in pinpointing the causes, it does not alter the basic theological response.
In response to Jeremy Schiff, I thank him for giving me more insight into the personal feelings of those upset by the words of R. Yosef. I categorically reject, however, Ashkenazi ownership of the Holocaust. If non-European Sepharadim were less personally effected, the Jewish nation as a whole was the ultimate victim.
(The views expressed in this essay do not necessarily reflect the views of Tzemach Dovid)
Post to Discussion Board