On things French (and Hasidic)

Ha! And you thought the recent Obama v. Clinton rivalry was hot, that the upcoming Obama v. McCain tussle will be rough and ready. Pshaw! You’ve not been paying attention if you think these political struggles are the most virulent around. Try the recent contest for Chief Rabbi of France. Now there, mon Dieu, is a struggle of epic proportions fought in hit-below-the-belt ferocity. I grant that it doesn’t sink quite to the level of the recent Zimbabwe debacle, but still…

The incumbent was Joseph Sitruk a 63-year-old Sephardic rabbi originally from Tunisia known for his common touch. The challenger was 56-year-old Gilles Bernheim, an Ashkenazi philosopher from Alsace who is the rabbi of Paris’ largest synagogue. As in Israel, Sephardi Jews had felt under appreciated and sought a greater voice in communal affairs. This was achieved in 1987 when Sitruk was elected Chief Rabbi. Bernheim challenged his reelection in 1994 (the post is for seven years) and lost in the usual “Ho-hum-the-communal-leaders-are-choosing-another-figure-head” election. Now, however, the gloves are off. Blame the internet. Martine Cohen, an expert on French Judaism at the National Center for Scientific Research in Paris does. She argues that “This is the first time such an election draws so much attention…The new technology allows many more people to ‘connect’ and to have rumors spread on the Internet.” Fortunately that sort of thing never happens here.

Someone calling himself “an indignant rabbi” posted what was purported to be Bernheim’s candidacy announcement in which he appeared to be making disparaging remarks about Sitruk. But it was a fake, a French swiftboating. Another charge floating around was that Bernheim was spending too much time with Catholics. In France this is hard not to do. But then the accusatory piece went further, seeming to justify the crucifixion of Jesus. Gevalt. Catholics took note and were displeased. The election, which took place on June 22, is not a democratic one. Three hundred rabbis and local communal leaders from around the country meet in conclave. It’s not quite a white smoke affair, but it’s along the same lines. (So that the suspense won’t kill you, Bernheim won the election 184 to 99.)

Rabbinical infighting takes place in America, too, but in a localized fashion. In Brooklyn, amongst the Hassidim there are two on-going disputes. In the Satmir community two brothers vied to succeed their father as grand rabbi and even brought their conflicting claims to the American legal system. The Chabad movement is split over whether the late Rebbe Menachem Mendel Schneerson is or is not the messiah. The group that controls the basement synagogue of the iconic 770 Eastern Parkway headquarters, argues that he is, the group that controls the upper floors vehemently argues that he’s not.

Last week French President Nicolas Sarkozy was in Israel. He was greeted warmly as a friend by all factions. In his speech before the Knesset he said all the right things:

Israel and France share deep friendship that has stood test of time
French ties with the Jewish people has enriched France’s culture
French people will always stand by Israel when it is threatened
France is committed to the struggle against terrorism
France will stop anyone who calls for Israel’s destruction
Israel is not alone in its battle against Iran’s nuclear ambitions
France is ready to aid in efforts to free abducted IDF soldiers

On some other points, there can be disagreement:

Palestinians have a right to a viable state of their own
Peace is not possible without the immediate end to Israeli settlement activity
There can be no peace without a solution to problem of Palestinian refugees
Jerusalem must be recognized as the capital of two states as a condition for peace

Jerusalem as a dual capital is a suggestion whose practicality I question. The Palestinian refugee problem is a thorn. These poor people have been living in a virtual no-man’s land ever since 1948. Is it Israel’s fault that their Arab brethren didn’t absorb them the way Jewish refugees were absorbed into Israel? Whether they left the territory that became Israel voluntarily or by force, it is impossible to repatriate them without Israel losing the essential nature of its mission. Arabs claim a right of return. It’s not going to happen in any but a symbolic way. That Sarkozy chose to bring this issue up is unfortunate, but placed within the context of his overall message, that France stands with Israel, Zionists can be reassured of France’s position.

tribute to a friend

Each morning I wake up and throw a stone. An early first century rabbi suggested this and as his advice was generally humane, I follow it. Being as I am without sin (except possibly of hubris) I keep my record clean by aiming at an inanimate object, often a photo of a politician or a terrorist. Duty done I retrieve the stone, not wanting to be accused of the sin of untidiness and go forth onto the world at large.

It’s not that I don’t confess sin; I do that annually. But those confessions are mumbled sotto voce. The problem is that I haven’t actually committed any of them and some I would never think to commit. Nevertheless, based on the theory that someone somewhere did these things I repent of them, beating my breast with the strings of my tallis wrapped around my fingers.

I mention this because of a discussion in my schul last week. My rabbi, Alvan Kaunfer, is retiring from the pulpit (again—he’s done this once before to head up the Schechter School, but this time I fear it’s for real). In his penultimate d’var torah he led a discussion: “When someone commits any wrong toward a fellow, thus breaking faith with the Lord, and that person realizes his guilt, they shall confess the wrong that they have done and shall make restitution” (Numbers 5:6-7).

He then presented three commentaries. Maimonides says this confession must be in words spoken to the offended party accompanied by a promise not to commit such an offense again. A contemporary went one step further explaining that with the oral confession the person “will become careful not to do the same thing again; and as a result, becomes reconciled with his Creator.” In fact, says a still earlier commentary, “If a person is guilty of a transgression, and makes a confession but does not change his behavior…it is to no avail.”

The question Rabbi Kaunfer posed to the assembled was, “How important is confessing/admitting to wrong, in the process of changing one’s behavior? How important is it to do this verbally?” Hands flew up (but under the circumstances not mine, of course). We talked about sins against God and sins against people and debated the different means of obtaining absolution, or even if absolution was possible. One congregant whose professional life puts him in contact with violent criminals, people who have been convicted of rape, murder, armed robbery, etc. said that in such circumstances restitution is impossible; the only way to atone is to show publicly one’s genuine remorse. But I wondered at the relevance of this. I’m pretty sure that most of the people in my congregation do not commit, nor would they think to commit, such heinous sins. We promise something and forget to deliver; or we add a dubious deduction onto our tax return and if challenged will pay up; I know a fellow who took a pen home from the supply cabinet at work; and a pad of paper as well. These are the sins I imagine most people in that room capable of committing. Murder? I think not.

Then someone suggested what I’d been thinking. Maybe we do more harm by confessing than by keeping quiet. If against all odds I sinned against someone and they don’t know about it (which was the premise of the Torah statement) why tell them? A silent vow not to repeat accomplishes the same object without injuring again, though differently, the party sinned against. Back and forth the ideas flew. As they did, I remembered the 2004 presidential election. Mr. Bush was asked if he had made any mistakes in his first term. He essentially responded, “no.” He was asked if he’d ever made a mistake and replied certainly in letting Sammy Sosa get away when he’d owned the Texas Rangers and possibly in some of his sub-cabinet appointments, but he didn’t say whom. Apparently George Bush believes that if he did it there’s nothing to atone for. I’m not so sure.

Last Sunday there was a festive gathering to honor Rabbi Kaunfer, in case this really is his final departure from Temple Emanu-El. By count 613 people came to hear his praises sung and to concur in the encomiums. He will be missed; thought provoking discussions such as we had last Shabbat are but a small reason. If ever someone deserved the honorific “mensch” it’s Alvan Kaunfer, my friend, who never lets an opportunity to do good pass.