Earlier this week,
I delivered the eulogy at the funeral of a woman I knew my entire life, Helen
Levy, and whose children—one slightly older and one slightly younger than
myself—I’ve also known forever. I mention that because I want to retell here a
detail about Helen’s parents, Jacob and Bertha Bloch, who had the unimaginable
experience as newlyweds of living through the greatest of life’s joys and the
most horrific of life’s disasters on adjacent days in 1926. On the first of
those days, both in mid-March, Bertha gave birth to twin daughters. Helen and
Rebecca were their first children, and I’m sure Jacob and Bertha experienced
the same indescribable happiness we all feel as our children—and particularly
our first children—are born. But the babies were preemies and they met with
entirely different fates: Rebecca lived for one day and then died, whereas
Helen lived into her tenth decade and died in her nineties last week. As a
rabbi, I’ve made the observation countless times to people I was trying to help
through analogous situations that the heart is a wide thing that can
accommodate all sorts of emotions concurrently…and specifically including
emotions that feel as though they shouldn’t be able to co-exist in the same
space. And that, although a cup of coffee can only be hot or cold but
not both, the human heart therefore somehow can be happy and sad at the
same time. And, most of all that there’s no percentage in feeling obligated to
choose between discordant emotions that both feel equally real to the person
experiencing them: you can just be both those things—happy and sad, joyful and
miserable, accepting and angry—and leave it at that. So it’s a contradiction, I
often finish up by pointing out…so what? Not everything has to be so logical!
I mention that
story today in this space because I find myself bringing the same set of
emotions to the twin “yom ha’s” that Israelis and Jewish people
everywhere observed this last week: Yom Ha-zikkaron, Israel’s memorial day for
the fallen of the IDF (as well as those who died in the struggle leading up to
statehood in 1948), on Wednesday, and Yom Ha-atzma·ut, Israel Independence Day,
on Thursday. Like twin panels in a medieval diptych, these two days function as
separate entities commemorating different and distinct things…but are only
fully intelligible in each other’s light. They are two, therefore, because they
are two: two adjacent days with two names that do two different things.
But they are also the same thing, and in just the same way that silence and
sound are the same thing, and light and shadow. They exist, obviously, on their
own. But what they truly mean, or should mean, to all who see in the creation
of an independent Jewish state in the Land of Israel a tangible harbinger of redemption
only comes to the fore fully when they are viewed in each other’s light. And,
of course, also each other’s shadow.
In a world in which
Israel’s very right to exist as a Jewish state is still routinely brought into
question by all sorts of people who should know better—and who would never
dream of wondering if Iran has the right to self-define as an Islamic republic
or if Pakistan or Afghanistan do—the juxtaposition of Yom Ha-zikkaron and Yom
Ha-atzma·ut feels particularly ominous.
In all, 23,477
individuals—men and women, young and old, draftees and volunteers, native-born
and immigrants—are recognized as have given their lives in the struggle leading
up to independence and in the wars Israel has had to fight, including the War
of Independence itself, since independence was declared on May 5, 1948. This
figure includes regular soldiers of the Israel Defense Forces, but also members
of the Shin Bet and the Mossad, the Israel Police Force, the Israel Prison
Service, and the Jewish Brigade that fought with the British during the Second
World War. Each was a universe, a world of potential extinguished by an enemy
bullet or by a terrorist’s bomb. Each died al kiddush ha-shem, as an act
of martyrdom suffered for the sake of the Jewish people and the Jewish state. And
each, by definition, did not live to see how the world would or would not react
to his or her death, and thus to know with certainty that he or she did not die
in vain. To tell each of their stories would take a lifetime, obviously. And
yet, taking them together as an aggregate also seems slightly wrong…not
insulting, to be sure, but also not entirely accurate because, in the end, they
weren’t members of some club or players on the same team, but disparate
individuals brought together in our collective Jewish consciousness only
posthumously. The figure mentioned above, by the way, specifically does not include
Israeli victims of terror attacks against civilians, who are also memorialized
in Israel on Yom Ha-zikkaron in a different set of ceremonies, and who are now
said to number over 3,700 individuals. (That figure includes those who died at
the hands of terrorists since 1920.)
It's easy to wax
lachrymose in contemplating these numbers. Indeed, it would be hard not to feel
that way…and particularly for those of us who have family and friends in Israel
whose children serve in the IDF and who bravely put their lives on the line
daily to keep their nation safe and secure. And yet regret alone cannot be the
antidote to the kind of melancholy inspired by the contemplation of loss on
this scale. Particularly for those of us on the sidelines—whose children do not
serve, whose nation is too well established in the forum of nations for anyone
to doubt its right to exist, and who never wonder as we get onto a bus or a
train if there just might possibly be among our fellow travelers someone
planning to kill us—it feels wrong to allow regret to constitute our sole
response to Yom Ha-zikkaron. Israelis, of course, do move on: they transition from
Yom Ha-zikkaron to Yom Ha-atzma·ut with a national torch-lighting ceremony that
formally marks the end of national mourning and the onset of national
rejoicing. But how exactly should those of us ensconced in the diaspora
respond?
We could, of
course, just mimic the Israelis and move on too from being weighed down by loss
to being buoyed by a sense of gratitude to God that we live in the right age to
experience the reality of an independent Jewish state. And, of course, to a
certain extent that is what we do. But the transition is never fully real, at
least not to me. Just as the Blochs cannot possibly have separated their
emotions as they prepared to bring their one daughter home and to bury the
other, and thus must simply have had to learn to live with both sets of
emotions, so do I feel it impossible to separate my emotions entirely and
simply to live through the one and then move on to the next. That sounds like
it would be the rational way to proceed. It probably would be the rational
path forward. But, at least for me personally, it just doesn’t work.
Looking on things
from this specific vantage point of the nexus point between these two days of
remembrance and celebration, I feel more than ever how true the ancient oracle
was that characterized Israel as an am badad yishkon, as a people set
apart. I feel this in a thousand different ways, each distinct yet part of a
larger picture.
Israel is subjected
to criticism of many kinds never leveled at other nations, its representatives
so regularly treated with contempt in the press and on college campuses that
most incidents go unreported in the mainstream press.
Israel’s effort to
defend itself against a bloodthirsty enemy eager to cause as many civilian
casualties as possible with ceaseless rocket attacks specifically targeting civilian
centers is derided as excessive by citizens of countries who would never, not
in a million years, tolerate that kind of violent aggression against its citizens.
Despite the fact
that it was the Palestinians who walked away from the Oslo Accords at Camp
David, and thus from the very autonomy they now insist Israel is somehow
withholding from them, the onus for the ongoing stalemate in the Middle East is
somehow always placed on Israel and only rarely, other than by Israelis, on the
Palestinian leadership. In this thought, I include many of our own political
leaders and those in countries we reasonably consider to be our allies.
Despite the fact
that Iran has openly and shamelessly proclaimed its interest in wiping Israel
off the map and murdering its citizenry—and despite the fact that any other
country in the world that openly expressed its interest in annihilating some other
country among the family of nations would be pilloried as an enemy of world
peace and then fully or at last partially ostracized, Israel’s vehement
objection to last year’s agreement that will lead directly, and long before
children born this week will graduate high school, to an Iran unfettered in the
fulfillment of its obvious wish to acquire a nuclear arsenal, was mocked by
many, including many of our co-citizens in this country, as were those who
spoke out against it.
Despite the fact
that the world is rife with countries shamelessly pursuing aggressive, hostile
policies against neighboring countries or against their own civilian
populations, the United Nations seems incapable of focusing its attention
anywhere at all other than on Israel and its alleged misdeeds. To say that the
United Nations has long since squandered whatever moral capital it once
possessed is surely true…but contemplating its hypocrisy does not undo the
effects of its policies or make its double standards any more palatable.
Despite the fact
that Israel has integrated immigrants from more or less every country on earth
and made them into proud Israelis, Israel is characterized not as the
world’s most successful melting pot society, but rather as the heirs of South
African apartheid…and specifically because they do not wish to allow people
pledged to their own annihilation enter the country at will and mix freely with
the civilian population, a policy that is specifically not applied to
Israel’s Arab citizenry who face no special restrictions at all in terms of
where they go, with whom they assemble, and what they say. There is even an Israeli
Arab on the Supreme Court of Israel, Salim Joubran. I do not recall there being any black judges on the Supreme Court for as long as it existed under real
apartheid in South Africa.
For all these
reasons, I feel a certain mix of pride and ill ease as I join together with all
right-minded Americans, and with friends of Israel in every country, to
celebrate the sixty-eighth anniversary of Israeli independence. As my readers
must all know by now, the only home Joan and I own is in Israel. To the extent
that the purchase of an apartment can be considered a kind of political
statement, it was one we were and are both proud and pleased to make. It isn’t
much, our two-bedroom on Gad Tedeschi Street, but it’s ours and we feel happy
and secure when we’re there. Similarly, our tiny State of Israel, the 149th
largest nation in the world (right after El Salvador in terms of square mileage),
isn’t much either in terms of size, but it is nonetheless the single greatest
accomplishment of the Jewish people in the last two thousand years…and that is
surely something for all Jews, and all who would call themselves their friends,
to celebrate. There is every reason to feel uneasy as we pass from Yom
Ha-zikkaron to Yom Ha-atzma·ut this year. But, in the end, I suggest we allow
ourselves to get over that…and to join all people of good will everywhere in
celebrating the independence of the Jewish State. If the State of Israel were
an Israeli citizen, it would be gearing up to retire and access its pension at age
sixty-eight. But that’s only how it works for people: the State itself at
sixty-eight is just attaining the fullest flower of its potential—and that,
surely, is something to celebrate with unconflicted emotion. May the Rock of
Israel bless the State of Israel and ever keep it strong, safe, secure!
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.