Comments regarding the sermons...email Rabbi Karp.
Click here. Rabbi Karp's Sermons ... YOM KIPPUR EVENING 2006 THE SIN OF "SO WHAT?" Typically, in Yom Kippur sermons, we rabbis call upon our congregants to consider, confront, and address their sins. Very often, we focus on particular sins which any or all of us may have committed as individuals, which we may have committed as a congregation as a whole, or which we may have committed as part of our local community, the American society, the totality of the Jewish people, or humanity in general. This evening I am going to break from that model and not call upon you to consider some sin or sins which we, as individuals or as members of a larger group, may have committed. Rather, I wish to address a sin which has been and is being committed against us, the Jewish people, and against Israel in particular. While I could have spoken about events in the Middle East on Rosh Hashanah, I chose to reserve these remarks until Yom Kippur because, after struggling to understand the forces at work here, about which I will speak, I have come to the conclusion that what we have been experiencing, and particularly what Israel has been experiencing, is indeed in the nature of a sin being committed against us. I speak of this on Yom Kippur because there are times when we need to not only look at the sins we have committed against others but also at the sins which have been committed by others against us. We need to look at them, grapple with them, and begin our journey of decision making as to how we will deal with them and with those who commit them as we march on into the future. Often it is easier for us to recognize how others have sinned against us than it is for us to recognize our own sins. However, there are times when the implications of the sins against us can so shatter our view of the world and our place in it that, perhaps as a psychological defense, we choose not to acknowledge them. I fear that this may very well be the case for many of us when it comes to the sins which have been committed against the Jewish people and against Israel. Now that I have you somewhere between slightly and completely confused, let me begin to clarify what I am talking about. As many of you know, for quite some time I have been deeply disturbed by how the world, and particularly how many of my fellow liberals, have responded to events in the Middle East and how they have treated Israel. Every new year seems to usher in a new set of offenses and abuses. Last year, for example, the hot topic was divestment. No matter what the facts are on the ground, it seems that in every situation Israel somehow or other becomes the bad guy and their adversaries - no matter what they have done - seem to get a pass. As an ardent advocate for Israel, it has been painfully frustrating and bewildering for me to try to place her case before many of those with whom we, as an American Jewish community, have allied on so many other social issues, only for them not to get it; only for them to show greater sympathy and understanding for Israel’s enemies; only for them to be so ready to condemn Israel at the slightest provocation while so unwilling to more than mildly chastise Israel’s enemies for the most outrageous of injustices and atrocities. My bewilderment and frustration at this situation reached a critical turning point during this summer’s war in Lebanon. At no time had I ever felt as alone and as isolated as an Israel advocate in the liberal community as I did during that very difficult month. Israel was under constant attack, not only by Hezbollah’s rockets, but also by countless commentators and pundits, supposed peace advocates and social moralists who daily accused Israel of brutalities and atrocities, using such terms as "disproportional response" and "crimes against humanity" while at the same time completely ignoring or significantly downplaying the facts that: a) Israel did not start this war, b) Israeli civilian centers were being intentionally targeted, and c) Israel, like any other nation, has a sovereign right to self defense. For me it was an extremely painful irony that, while driving back to the Quad Cities from our movement’s Jewish summer camp in Wisconsin, to officiate at Al Soodhalter’s funeral, being eager to listen to Israel news on the car radio, the reports on practically every station made my skin crawl and my blood boil, with certain glaring exceptions, they being the ultra-conservative commentators like Rush Limbaugh. It was a bitter pill to swallow finding that the only Israel-friendly voices on the air belonged to those radio personalities whose views on practically every other social issue, I fundamentally detest. It was at that point that I was forcibly brought face-to-face with the hard realization that informed argumentation was and would be totally ineffective in this struggle. It mattered not what arguments I presented on behalf of Israel, the responses I received from so many of those in the liberal community were basically the same - "So what?" These non-Jewish colleagues and friends did not necessarily say "So what?" in those words, but that was essentially their response. What they were saying was, "I’m not interested in your argumentation. Israel is wrong. Israel butchers the innocent." They would claim, Israel was the aggressor. I would counter: But the war did not start until Hezbollah violated the Israeli-Lebanese border, killing and kidnaping Israeli soldiers. Their response: "So what? Israel is still the aggressor." They would claim that the members of Hezbollah were not terrorists but freedom fighters, striving to regain territory illegally occupied by Israel. I would counter; But Israel did not occupy any part of Lebanon. Six years ago, after the first war in Lebanon, Israel withdrew its troops behind borders which were mutually agreed upon by Israel, the United Nations, and the Lebanese government and they have not violated those borders since. Their response: What about Sheba Farms? Are not the Hezbollah looking to recapture Sheba Farms from Israel? I would counter: But Sheba Farms was Syrian territory, not Lebanese territory, which Israel captured during the Six-Day War. Besides, Hezbollah has consistently claimed that its goal is nothing short of the destruction of Israel. Their response: "So what? The members of Hezbollah are still freedom fighters." They would claim that Israel was guilty of a grossly disproportionate response to the Hezbollah attacks. I would counter: How do you do the math? What in your minds would be a "proportionate" response? Is a proportionate response one-for-one? One dead for one dead? One wounded for one wounded? Considering the fact that Israel’s enemies outnumber her 60 to 1, those who seek the destruction of Israel would be more than happy with a one-to-one ratio, for in the end there would be no Israel and there still would be 59 living adversaries for every dead Israeli. A one-for-one proportionate response is just a politically correct way of calling for Israel’s total annihilation. However, if you take the 60-to-1 ratio into account, then you are right that Israel’s response was disproportionate, but not in the way you claim. For that would mean that for the 160 Israelis who were killed in the war, in a proportionate response Israel could have inflicted as many as 9,600 casualties upon her enemy, which would have been eight times greater than the 1,187 Lebanese who were killed. And as far as the wounded go, once again Israel’s response was disproportionate, even by the one-to-one standards, for more Israelis were wounded in this war than Lebanese; 4,801 Israelis as compared to 4,054 Lebanese. And if one were to make their calculations of proportionality based upon the 60-to-1 ratio, in order for Israel’s response to be proportionate, she could have wounded as many as 288,060 Lebanese! Their response: "So what? Israel’s response was still brutally and inhumanly disproportionate." They would claim that in targeting civilian areas, Israel was guilty of crimes against humanity. I would counter: Who is truly guilty for the death and wounding of Lebanese civilians? Is it Israel or is it Hezbollah? After all, it was Hezbollah who hid and fired its missiles from deep within civilian population centers. Israel has been able to produce an enormous amount of photographic evidence which clearly demonstrates this; pictures of rocket launchers in the midst of apartment complexes and the like. It was Hezbollah who used these civilians as human shields. Even so, Israel still followed a policy of dropping leaflets on towns and villages which they suspected of being Hezbollah bases, prior to their attacks on those sites, warning the civilians and calling upon them to evacuate to safety. While on the other hand, Hezbollah intentionally targeted their missiles against Israeli civilian centers like Haifa; missiles whose primary purpose was to kill and wound Israeli civilians. So who is truly guilty of crimes against humanity? Israel who warned Lebanese civilians to get out of the line of fire or Hezbollah who used Lebanese civilians as human shields and who intentionally targeted their missiles against Israeli civilians? Their response: So what? Israel is still guilty of crimes against humanity. They claimed that Israel was being extremely brutal in dismantling the Lebanese economy by destroying the Lebanese infrastructure - the roads, the bridges, and the airports. I would counter: But those roads, bridges, and airports were being used to channel weapons to Hezbollah from its sponsor, Syria; weapons which were being used against Israeli civilians. By destroying them, Israel was cutting Hezbollah off from its source of arms, and without arms, Hezbollah would eventually be unable to continue it attacks. Their response: So what? Israel has no right to destroy the infrastructure. They claimed that Israel was responsible for perpetuating the cycle of violence in the region. I would counter: But it was Israel which withdrew from Lebanon six years ago in order to promote peace; which withdrew from Gaza last year in order to promote peace; and which, before this war, was looking to withdraw from at least sections of the West Bank, also in order to promote peace. It was Israel which has entered into and has maintained successful peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan. And it has been Israel which has welcomed and responded to every attempt at a brokered peace with the Palestinians. However, with the exception of Egypt and Jordan, no other Arab state has been willing to consider making peace with Israel, and as for the Palestinians, while they have signed agreements with Israel such as the Road Map to Peace, they have consistently failed to implement their provisions. As far as this war is concerned, the attack upon Israel was unprovoked by a terrorist organization which unashamedly declares as its mission the destruction of Israel, while Israel’s response was an act of self defense. Can you honestly claim that those who protect themselves from attackers who proudly proclaim that they wish to annihilate them are guilty of perpetuating the cycle of violence? Their response. So what? In invading Lebanon, Israel perpetuated the cycle of violence. Mark Twain once astutely described this mentality of "So what?" when he said, "My mind is made up. Don’t confuse me with the fact!" Indeed, it is strikingly obvious that the minds of these so-called liberals are made up about guilt and responsibility for all the evils of the Middle East, and the culprit is Israel. Whether or not the facts support or belie their position matters not one bit. Now we are talking here about intelligent, sensitive, ethically motivated people. Yet the degree of their close mindedness on this subject gives one serious cause to pause. Why would such people refuse to consider a whole body of evidence in their decision making? Why does logical argumentation have little or no impact upon them? These people purport themselves to be evenhanded devotees of the principles of peace and justice. So why are their positions so one-sided? Why are they so ready to condemn Israel’s actions at the drop of a hat, yet so resistant to challenge such horrendous misdeeds as rocket attacks on civilian targets and homicide bombings of restaurants, buses, shopping malls, and discotheques? Why do they choose to withhold their praise of any actions which Israel takes to promote the peace process, and to withhold their condemnation of any actions Israel’s adversaries take to derail it? There is something that is simply not kosher here. To quote Shakespeare, "Something is rotten in the state of Denmark,"1 and it is not just a collection of cartoons. It has been in the midst of my struggling with these questions that I have come to the conclusion that what we are dealing with here is a sin; a sin committed against the Jewish people and particularly against Israel. For no matter what explanation I come up with, the result is the same. These positions are not based upon reason, but upon prejudice. Let me share with you some of the explanations I have arrived at: Explanation number 1: These people have a double standard when it comes to Israel and the Arabs. To their way of thinking, Israel is a Jewish state and Judaism is the parent faith of the Judeo-Christian tradition. Also Israel is a western democracy. Therefore, on both counts, they believe that Israel, like America and Europe, is intrinsically superior to its Arab neighbors. Islam is an inferior faith and Muslim society is primitive. While it is perfectly natural for Arabs to behave like savages, it is unacceptable for Israelis to engage in violence, even in self defense. Obviously, such an explanation is disgustingly patronizing toward the Muslim world. It reeks of a colonial mentality. As far as the Muslims are concerned, it goes hand-in-hand with their belief that the West has absolutely no respect for their faith and culture. As far as the Israelis are concerned, they are left holding the bag. They are the ones who these people would willingly sacrifice on behalf of their illusions of western cultural superiority. Explanation #2: Whether or not these people would openly admit it, they believe in their heart of hearts that Jewish blood is cheap. History demonstrates that the role of the Jew is that of victim. When Jews die, that is nothing new. That is the natural order of the universe. However, when Jews rise up and resist, when Jews choose to fight, that is an intolerable violation of that natural order. Jewish children being murdered in their beds is cause for neither concern nor protest, but Arabs dying by Israeli bombs because within their midst are active rocket launchers is nothing less than a crime against humanity. This explanation would seem to indicate that antisemitism has never really died. It has just gone underground since the Holocaust. But now it is able to once again see the light of day, disguised in the socially acceptable garment of anti-Zionism and sympathy for the victims of so-called Israeli oppression. Explanation #3: These people have decided that Israel is to be judged by the company it keeps rather than by its actions and the situation it finds itself in. If the political and religious conservatives of our country support Israel, then it becomes almost a given that the liberals must oppose it. The concept of common ground is an ideal embedded in the rhetoric of both sides of this American political struggle, but patently denied in practice. There is no common ground. Liberals and conservatives are blood enemies. Any issue and every issue offers a potential battleground in their struggle for power. You say it’s black. I say it’s white. Let’s fight. End of story. With this explanation, Israel is but a pawn in a chess game. Issues of right and wrong, justice and injustice, no longer matter. All that matters is power and control. In the process, if Israelis suffer injury or death, it doesn’t matter, for as mere pawns, they have been stripped of their humanity. I am sure that there are other explanations, but I strongly suspect that whatever they may be, the outcome will be the same. Justice is merely a word boldly thrown around but meaning nothing. And as for the Jews, as for the Israelis, whatever they do, they are wrong, except when they die. Such is the sin of "So What?". As I stated earlier, Yom Kippur is not just about addressing the sins we commit but also about considering the sins committed against us. The counterpart to atonement is forgiveness. What must we do to earn the forgiveness of others and what must others do to earn our forgiveness? As a people, there are those who sin greatly against us. Because they continually lend their support to those who would destroy us, so many of our brothers and sisters in Israel have suffered and died. And they will continue to do so, as long as these people continue to sin; as long as these people continue to deny us justice and pervert the pursuit of peace. While we can and should continue to strive to convince these people of how just are Israel’s actions and of how evil are the actions of her adversaries, we need to realize that our efforts may very well be in vain; that their minds and their hearts may forever be closed to reason; that they may continue to see Israel as the ultimate villain and that they may continue to aid and abet those who wish to destroy her. If the time ever arrives when they recognize how wrong they have been; when they come to acknowledge Israel’s right to exist and to protect herself; when they come to appreciate all Israel has done and continues to do in the pursuit of peace, then it will be a time for us to open our hearts in forgiveness of their sin against our people. But until that time arrives, as harsh as it may seem, we have to acknowledge that according to the teachings of our faith, which are part of the lessons of this very day of Yom Kippur, there can be no forgiveness without atonement. There can only be an openness and a willingness to forgive once atonement is made. In the meantime, we must embrace the friends of Israel, whoever they may be, and appreciate how precious they are to us, regardless of how deeply we disagree with them on other issues. In the meantime, we have to recognize that if Israel is to be protected and survive, no matter who stands with us, that task rests primarily on our shoulders and no one else’s. Friends come and go - friends of our people and friends of Israel. But we are not friends. We are family. We are forever. AMEN |
