Feature Tidbit Hero or Goat or...? First of all, my apologies to the people who looked for the continuation of the page 1 and page 2 tidbit and couldn't find it. The reason might have been that there was no continuation. There was one, sort of, in the email version and on the website, but it was left out of the hard copy. I hope the point was gotten anywayfrom what was there. The striving for Kedusha and Tahara involves more than "just" the performance of mitzvot; attitude and commitment and many other things are involved. As to this week, I debated between a calm dvar Torah and idea heavily related to Parshat Balak vs. a "heavy" topic that is only marginally connected to the sedra. The latter won out. I hesitate to write the following piece because I don't want to be misunderstood. But I'll try to be clear, sort of... Back in Parshat Shlach, I mentioned that Rabbi Menachem Zemba HY"D was one of the last rabbis in the Warsaw ghetto and that he had given rabbinic approval to the uprising. The Encyclopedia Judaica refers to "an insiring address" in which Rabbi Zemba said, "Of necessity, we must resist the enemy on all fronts... We shallno longer heed his instructions... Sanctification of the Divine Name manifests itself in varied ways... (now) when we are faced by an arch foe whose unparalleled ruthlessness and program of total anihilation know no bounds, Halacha demands that we fight and resist to the very end with unequaled determination and valor for the sake of Kiddush HaShem." Okay, that's part one. Comments later. Here's part two. I received fax from a TT reader. He writes, "You wrote something in the Sh'lach edition which many would consider mistaken... Gaon Rebbe Simcha Bunim Lieberman, a Warsaw ghetto survivor now living in Tzfat... his recent book is Sefer Bishvilie HaAvoda about his past(during the Holocaust). ...he wanted to try to put right the generally mistaken notion that the uprising was a victory for Klal Yisroel. In fact, he and many other religious survivors vigorously disagree that it was a victory and decry it as a useless act that only brought more and quicker death and destruction upon KlalYisroel. ...it is not at all clear that Rav Menachem Zemba tzl was at all consulted, nor gave his sanction to the uprising." The fax included an English translation of the introduction of the abovementioned book, which touched upon the following argument: Secular Jews point to the Warsaw ghetto with a certain pride that says, see our bravery, see our heroism?! These same people (some of them) look at the more typical "story" of the Holocaust with disappointment and shame that Jews seemed to go to "the slaughter like lambs". The author expresses his doubts as to whether Rav Zemba HY"D actually sanctionedthe act of "suicide" of those who fought against the Nazis with no chance at all of winning, and of doing that which resulted in many more deaths than might have been. At this point, let me editorialize. I am not claiming that what I am about to say is what actually happened. But as a hypothetical, if should help make my point. If religious Jews see a Kiddush HaShem in people singing and dancing on the way to the gas chambers on Simchat Torah, with a show of brave defiance of the Nazi oppressors that says, "you have no hold over our souls" - and if secular Jews cannot see past what they perceive to be an inability to do anything to save themselves(this is a long sentence already, and will get longer before it's over - reread it if you have to to get my point), then each "side" will tend to dismiss that which the other "admires" in order to "defend" their attitude, perceived or real. Kiddush HaShem comes in many forms. Sometimes it comes from giving up one's life or risking one's life in a YEIHAREIG V'AL YAAVOR (be killed rather than violate) situation. Sometimes it results from saving one's life or attempting to, in a YAAVOR V'AL YEIHAREIG (violate, rather than be killed) situation. To act in the oppositeway that is called for would probably result in a Chilul HaShem. Either intentional or Shogeg (inadvertent). That's all fine in black and white situations. But what if there are circumstances that are possible to interpret either way. Catch-22 situations with a real "on the one hand, on the other hand" possibilities? And what if the action was correct but it caused a negative result in a later stage of a sequence of events thatwas beyond the control of the one who acted (or didn't) in the first place? I thought I had a clever way of tying this to Balak and to Shlach, but I'll pass on that. The fax I received made me think, and I wanted to spread that around a bit. Enough said now. [The Balak Homepage]
|
