|
B"H
Internal Conflict - Contradictions of the Heart
When The Egyptian army was drowning at the Red Sea, the ministering angels wanted to sing praise to god. But the almighty said: my handiwork are drowning in the sea, and you, the ministering angels, want to sing My praise? Talmud Sanhedrin 39B
As we peruse the biblical narrative, we are taught to behave in a manner that leads us down a slippery slope. Often, what we believe to be correct is deemed inappropriate and morally repugnant while matters we imagine are inappropriate are deemed to be morally and ethically correct. Even the spiritual world is not exempt from this paradigm, the angels who are programmed to act in compliance to the will of the almighty, still at times, behave in a manner that is contrary to His will.
Yet, immediately prior to the castigation of the angels, God Himself acts in a manner that (to our progressive thinking) is inexcusable. The tenth and final plague is the killing of the first born; every family in Egypt suffers from the death of a child and animal. Infanticide is an act so heinous that the United Nations would bring the case against God to the Criminal Court in The Hague. He would be accused of the targeted killing of defenseless children. And more than likely, no respectable law firm would taint their stellar reputation and act as his defense team. The ASPCA would join other animal rights groups to protest against God for the collective punishment of the innocent livestock of Egypt who were brutally annihilated during the ten plagues. The vociferous pretrial rhetoric advocated by the media would make it nearly impossible to find a jury. No justification or extenuating circumstance would ever excuse the collective punishment against the innocent. And for those who may demand a jury of his peers, the courts would excuse all God fearing world citizens who would be subservient to a deity by insisting all who participate as jurors are card carrying atheists.
I now shudder with fear as irate fundamentalists question my legitimacy. Will they allege that my questions may facilitate heretical thinking? Will they worry that God fearing individuals will begin to question their lifelong belief system? Why is God getting a pass? Why isn’t He held to the same standards that we demand for ourselves? Even the most diehard pro-Israel advocates cower in fear and offer lame apologies every time the IDF causes the innocent to suffer. We are programmed to believe that the fault lies with the perpetrators of the crime and the death of innocent civilians is never acceptable.
Perhaps the Biblical narrative is offering what God perceived to be the correct moral imperative? Perhaps it is modern thinking that has it wrong? Perhaps one life is so precious and significant that it must be protected even if doing so causes numerous others to be harmed? Perhaps the innocent aren’t innocent? Perhaps our leaders’ policies are based on an accepting mass who are comfortably entrenched in a state of oblivious ignorance? Perhaps if we held citizens accountable they would rise to the occasion and stand up against tyranny and oppression? Perhaps no one is ever innocent when living in a corrupt system?
The Jew perceives a German citizen of 1940 with disdain even though they may not have been a Nazi. Hitler's ascent to power didn’t come from Nazi voters; it came from innocent civilians that were nonchalant or uncaring and decided to vote for change. Those who were not the target of his venomous diatribes didn’t worry and didn’t want to rock the boat. They are in no doubt guilty, albeit, less that the perpetrators. What God is teaching us is that morality requires people to stand up against tyranny and that a lack of proactive involvement in the crime does not render one innocent. Guilt by association is still guilt.
However, being guilty and deserving of punishment doesn’t necessitate that we lose focus on the fact that even the guilty are still human beings. They are creations of the Almighty that have to be dealt with in a sensitive and compassionate manner. As creations of God we must empathize with their predicament. Understandably, those in the midst of suffering may indeed breathe a sigh of relief upon realizing that they are no longer under threat. They may even offer up a prayer to God, thanking Him for His assistance. However, that is limited only to those going through a life and death situation. Everyone else, including the ministering angels, don’t have the moral authority to forgive or absolve them of their guilt but can’t sing praise to God in the midst of suffering of His handiwork. We must differentiate between the justification of punishing those who deserve punishment and the realization that even the guilty parties are humans who deserve our sympathy.
Indeed, there are situations that have no simple solution and even the most compassionate people face a moral conundrum. As Jews and students of history we know the world kept quiet at our expense and we can never excuse the attitude that led to the death of too many Holocaust victims. The immigration policy of liberal democracies were anything but liberal. European Jewry was cast off in the sea of bureaucracy ensuring they would never stay afloat long enough to survive. The inhumanity of the western governments was a shameful stain on that generation and leaves an indelible mark on the morally corrupt that can never be whitewashed or forgotten.
However, as we fast forward eighty years, we find ourselves in our own current moral dilemma. How do we address those that seek to emigrate to our country? It may be the Syrian refugee or the Vietnam boat people. It may be people from Honduras or Guatemala seeking a better life. It may be the homosexual or young women from Saudi Arabia trying to escape an Islamic Sharia system that murders homosexuals and treat women as chattel. Opening our borders to allow everyone in may seem morally correct but we realize that too is untenable. Do we lower our standard of living to give others a higher standard of living. Do we take a page out of the Robin Hood story and take from the rich and give to the poor? It is a never ending dilemma.
I don’t envy the politicians as they seriously can’t have a solution that works for all. Whatever they ultimately decide will be too generous for some and much too little for others. However, even the most liberal have their limits. No one is willing to take over the liabilities of socialist inspired dictators. Nor are they interested in absolving the corrupt dictators of Venezuela and Cuba by giving all their citizens access to the United States. And the most conservative realize that those DACA children have no other home but the United States. We are the only culture they know and returning them to their parents’ country of origin is inhumane and un-American. And even the most conservative must be cognizant that in certain dire situations the rules of law have to be overlooked.
Thus, I will offer no position other than following the dictates of this week's Torah portion. Although it is unfeasible to consider that all Venezuelans, Cubans, Nicaraguans, and Hondurans be granted sympathetic rights to emigrate to the United States, it still behooves all Americans to be sympathetic to their pain. And we should demand from our elected officials that they do their utmost to alleviate suffering. We may differ about how many refugees to accept and the amount of financial aid the American taxpayer should offer but we should never have a philosophical debate about the need to be human beings. That aspect of morality supersedes all others. As my mother used to say to me: koidem kol, zai a mensch, regardless of everything else, be a decent human being.
Shabbat shalom,
Rabbi Jack Engel
|
