Translated from Hebrew by S. NAthan

l'ilui nishmat Esther bat mordechai

 
  In one way or another, the Holocaust has touched and continues to play in the consciousness of every Jew. And as in the wake of every confrontation with the inconceivable, particularly the inconceivably horrible, Man struggles to re-orient himself and to re-acquaint himself with a reality that he once thought he knew. A half-century after the fact, Jews as individuals and as a nation, despite the research and analysis, the documentation, books, films, and memorials, still cannot quite digest the indigestible. Our unique struggle to relate, to understand, and to act, continues. In this regard, an examination of the broad spectrum of responses to the Holocaust can itself provide insight into the nature of our condition. To gain this insight, however, we need the help of our Jewish sources.

      Responses to the Holocaust commonly fall into two generic categories. In the first category, the event is understood to have occurred within the realm of human experience, and therefore was, and is, comprehensible and controllable. This line of reasoning leads to the conclusion that correct behavior on the part of the victims could have averted disaster, and that correct behavior today will prevent a re-occurrence. The prescription for correct behavior takes various forms, and has secular and religious varieties. The secular perspective usually involves a critique of the behavior of pre-war Jewish communities of Europe with regard to developments that were taking place and goes on to embrace Zionism and the safe harbor of the State of Israel as the antidote for the revisitation of another tragedy. The religious version of this approach also places full responsibility on the individual, but in a different light. From this perspective, the relationship between Man and G-d is defined by an implicit contract. Developments in the world reflect how successfully Man is fulfilling his contractual obligations. Good behavior coaxes forth the Divine plenty and bad behavior brings out Divine wrath. Everything occurs within the parameters of the contract and depends on what Man decides to do. Given this assumption, even an event of the tragic proportions of the Holocaust can be reduced and explained. The Jewish nation, as a result of sinful behavior, caused it, and the nation can prevent another one by observing the mitzvos.

      In the second generic category of responses to the Holocaust, the event is understood to have occurred outside the sphere of human understanding, control, and responsibility. The secular version of this response assumes that no connection can be made between the historical event and the life a Jew leads today. Our capability, according to this outlook, is limited to studying what happened at a unique time, in a unique place, toward which we can feel or think something, but about which we can do nothing. From the religious perspective, this approach leads to dismissing any attempt to introduce the Holocaust into today’s religious consciousness. In this view, the world of cause and effect is in the hands of G-d, and beyond the understanding and responsibility of any single Jew. Even according to halachah, the argument continues, it is impossible to reduce the Holocaust to a tangible calculation of reward and punishment. No crime, from a halachic perspective, justifies such punishment and desecration of human life, and to interpret the horrors that occurred as a Divine punishment profanes the name of G-d. It follows from this line of thought that the relationship of the post-Holocaust Jew to Torah and to the world at large is no different than the relationship of the pre-Holocaust Jew to the Torah and to the world at large. Our job is to do mitzvos, and what happens beyond this is not our business.

      These two generic dispositions to the Holocaust, one seeing it as comprehensible, controllable, and something for which each Jew bears responsibility, and the other seeing it as incomprehensible, uncontrollable, and something for which no Jew bears responsibility, are themselves the product of basic and opposite tendencies in human nature. In one sense, each individual needs freedom. He wants to assert himself and feel that his fate lies within his hands. In another sense, there is a human need for belonging. The individual wants to submit, to become part of a larger reality, to diminish the self and personal responsibility. Understanding the basis of this apparent contradiction in human nature, and resolving it, will yield insight into the human condition. This insight can then be used to synthesize the two generically opposed responses to the Holocaust into a single, positive approach. The key to this resolution lies in the Torah, and requires an understanding of the basic elements of human development as revealed in Sefer Bereishis and Sefer Shemos.

      Concerning the nature of the relationship between Man and G-d, the Book of Bereishis and the Book of Shemos are distinguished from each other in the following ways: Bereishis shows the process whereby a human being may incorporate the Divine truth within himself; Shemos shows the process by which that truth may be retained and passed on from generation to generation. The focus of Bereishis is human initiative. It depicts how the individual, when acting with absolute integrity, can perfectly fulfill his role in the world. The focus of Shemos is Divine initiative. It shows how a Divine perspective, totally outside of human experience, was added to the world in order to objectivize and to standardize the achievement of the Avos, and to place this achievement within the grasp of every Jew.

      Adam’s original state was perfect but intolerable. He had an exclusively passive role to play – simply to not disturb what already existed. However, Man who does not disturb, who lives exclusively within the confines of what already exists, is not Man. Therefore G-d “contracted” His omnipresence in order to give Adam an active role to play in creation. An active role meant an original role – no script. The former static equilibrium was replaced by a new dynamic equilibrium whose maintenance depended on the human being making his own original contribution. Man would now exert a relative influence on the objective state of affairs in the world. How would this be achieved?

      The formula was crystallized through Rivka: “And the children struggled within her, and she said: ‘If so, wherefore do I exist?’” From a state of the Absolute, Rivka brought forth its relative components, good and evil. She protested against this role because she suspected and feared that she would become the vehicle for establishing and legitimizing the presence of evil. God taught her, however, that evil is an essential component of the world, and the key to perfection lies in the way Man relates to it and uses it. “And the one nation shall grow mighty from the other nation, and the elder shall serve the younger.” For what is evil after all? It is the mechanical, undirected force of nature, the amoral interaction of cause and effect. When man fulfills his role – to relate to the mechanical/quantitative forces of nature through his uniquely qualitative essence – then the forces of nature obey him. Quantity becomes the container for and the expression of quality. “When the voice is Yaakov’s voice, then the hands that are Esav’s hands have no control.” If, however, Man chooses to abrogate the creative responsibility bestowed upon him by virtue of the Divine “contraction” then he himself falls victim to the inscrutable natural forces.

      “You shall love the Lord, your G-d, with all your hearts…” With all your hearts? Man achieves his place when he uses his yetser hara to serve his yetser hatov; he plays his role in creation when he imposes his Divine, uniquely original self upon the forces of nature, and the latter becomes the instrument through which the former is expressed.

      This perfection was achieved by the Avos. In Egypt, however, it was nearly lost. A new dimension was then needed to objectify man’s existential condition, to provide him with a Divine hook on which to hang his hat, so to speak. This new dimension is introduced in Sefer Shemos. “There arose a new king over Egypt, who knew not Yoseph.” Although the Avos had demonstrated that “superhumans” such as they, could, on their own initiative, achieve perfection, this was still too fragile a state of affairs, and too tenuous a base on which to build a world. For the average mortal, the independent realization of inner potential and the attainment of perfection is only a theoretical ideal. “And G-d heard their groaning.” The Sisyphean cries of anguish that pour forth when Man feels that his fate is beyond his grasp were heard in Heaven. The desire “To Be” remained intact, but the means “To Be” had been shattered, and they cried out to G-d to grant them a Divine yet tangible bridge that would lead them back to themselves.

      Pharoah himself sensed this new development, and he became suspicious and afraid. His symbiotic relationship with the foreigners had paid high dividends as long as they continued to play their special role in Egyptian society. Jew and Gentile had prospered when Egypt’s natural resources had been managed by Yoseph’s creative genius. However, when Pharoah could barely distinguish the Jews from their Egyptian neighbors, he realized that the qualitative contribution made by his foreign guests was now lost. The forces of nature, which had heretofore submitted to the power of creativity, would again prevail as a result of human default. Egypt would return to its power politics and the Jews would submit and become victims of the fate they had unwittingly chosen. The spirit remains intact, however, and they cried out.

      “And G-d remembered His covenant with Avraham, with Yitzchak, and with Yaakov.” The truth that had been discovered unilaterally by our forefathers, and that had now become obscured to ordinary men, had to be standardized, and placed within the reach of every Jew. This feat would be accomplished by the addition of a new aspect of the Divine omnipresence to the world. “I am the Lord, and I appeared unto Avrhaham, unto Yitzchak, and unto Yaakov as G-d Almighty, but by My name Yud Kay Vav Kay I made Me not known to them.” In Sefer Bereishis there are no miracles. The Divine task is accomplished without the dazzle of burning bushes, parting seas, or manna from heaven. In Sefer Shemos there are only miracles. G-d’s Hand crashes through and overturns nature’s predictability in order to re-awaken and to remind every Jew that the unique creative spark upon which the success of his forefathers was built, and upon which he needs to build, is itself rooted in G-d.

      A lesser person than Moshe might not have appreciated what he was witnessing, in the bush that was burning but not being consumed – a unique event. He might have remained unmoved, assuming that with additional data, this unusual but entirely natural occurrence could be explained. On the other hand, he might have interpreted it as an exclusively supernatural event, miraculous and unexplainable, but of no particular significance in a world filled with the inexplicable. When G-d saw that Moshe was not the victim of either of these two caricatures of the human condition – believing that everything can be explained, or believing that nothing can be explained – then He approached him. “Here am I.” A clearer, bolder Divine omnipresence was being added to the world, yet it would be expressed through, and intimately intertwined with nature.

      Making Kiddush on Shabbos, we say zecher lima’aseh bereishis, “in remembrance of the creation,” and zecher liyetzias Mitzrayim, “in remembrance of the exodus from Egypt.” In the zecher lima’aseh bereishis we are recognizing the basic omnipresence of G-d, of which we are all naturally a part, and which we actualize by establishing our place in the world. In the zecher liyetzias Mitzrayim, we are recognizing the new dimension that G-d added to the world for our benefit. This is the outstretched hand, the miracles, the sense of His presence that we vitally need, but would never know had it not been for His decision to respond to our cry for help. Each Jew is obliged to be aware of and to develop both aspects of his relationship with G-d. To ignore one or the other will produce distortion.

      Rabbi Shimon Bar Yohai and his son once sought refuge from the Romans by sequestering themselves in a cave. According to our sages, they spent their time in seclusion learning Torah day and night, taking their only nourishment from a carob tree and a nearby stream. When they emerged after seven years, they could not comprehend why people were wasting their time working the land and earning a living. A voice from heaven called to them, sending them back to the cave for another seven years in order to re-incorporate the perspective they had lost: One may not have the spiritual without the material.

      Pharoah, at the opposite extreme, believed that there was no such thing as the spiritual: He was certain that he himself ruled the world and wielded absolute control. However, G-d said: “I will get Me honor upon Pharoah, and upon all his host, and Egypt shall know that I am the Lord.”

      Rabbi Chanina Ben Dosa understood this. It was said of him, “The whole world is being fed due to the merit of Rabbi Chanina Ben Dosa.” He knew that Man must relate to the law of nature, but that Man can never forget that G-d is behind the law of nature. Practically speaking, the greater the extent to which a human being exercises his uniquely original quality – relating to the natural world through this quality, which is his own exclusive territory – the greater the control he exercises over the natural world, i.e. the more the world dances to his tune. Thus when Rabbi Chanina Ben Dosa lacked the oil with which to light his Shabbos candles, he lit vinegar instead, and the candles burned...

      However, when the human being moves out of his exclusive territory, he becomes, by default, part of the natural stream. He becomes the effect to a cause that is out of his hands, over which he has no control. G-d intended for man to control and to direct the natural world. But in order to fulfill this role, he must remain attached to the Divine, and actualize his uniquely original quality. “Make your will His will, so that he will make His will your will.”

      Let us now examine the opposite tendencies of human nature – the one, a need for freedom and control, and the other, a need to belong and to submit – from this perspective. We can see clearly that when these tendencies are expressed through a Divine perspective, they direct man to his right place in the world. The greater the extent to which we belong and submit to the Divine, the more freedom we achieve in being our true, creative selves, and the greater the extent to which the forces of nature submit to, and reflect our will. Conversely, the lesser the extent to which we attach to the Divine, the less creative we will be and the more we will submit to, and become a function of our natural environment.

      Truth, as crystallized through Judaism, requires that man recognize and incorporate into his personality all the aspects that are found in his world, putting each aspect into its proper place and perspective. Any aspect that is overlooked or denied will result in a deficiency and a distortion. We cannot be free exclusively, nor can we submit exclusively. Rather, we must recognize the true reality of both, and become free by submitting to G-d. Similarly, it is not Man’s task to eliminate evil from the world. It is his task to embody truth by controlling evil and using it as the means through which good is expressed.

      How does this relate to our original questions regarding the Holocaust? We must reject a viewpoint that maintains that we fully comprehend what took place, and that we are fully responsible for it, and that we therefore know precisely how to prevent another disaster. We must equally reject a viewpoint that denies all understanding and responsibility, and defines Jewish piety as passive acceptance. The former viewpoint has forgotten zecher liyetzias Mitzrayim. An attempt to place G-d’s omnipresence within the boundaries of a contract that we understand and control could create the conditions that lead us, G-d forbid, back to Egypt. The Jew, as we discussed, is bound and obligated to relate to the world, and to assume a fundamental responsibility for its condition. But he can only achieve this when he acts as a vehicle for G-d. Among Mankind, he must be true to his unique talents and capabilities. Among nations, he must be a Jew. And he cannot forget the Divine presence that was added to the world to remind him that neither his successes nor his failures belong totally to him.

      The latter viewpoint, passive acceptance, has forgotten the zecher lima’aseh bereishis. It has forgotten that the special place that G-d created for Man to occupy requires that he use his individuality and creativity in order to fulfill his destiny. To forget “hashgachah pratis,” the personalized relationship that exists between G-d and Man, is to undo the personal achievements of the Avos. Each Jew is obligated to relate to and to digest the entire spectrum of his own personal and national experience, and to use this information to affect and influence his own condition. The Holocaust is, for every Jew, a part of this experience, and he must introduce it into his consciousness. Although the Divine plan is beyond our grasp, we are obligated to relate to the event with the information we do have. Our sources tell us: “It is a known law that Esav hates Yaakov.” Inimical forces do not emerge out of historical peculiarity or mystical serendipity. They exist factually in the world, and they are subdued and transformed through the positive expression of a creative and uniquely original Jewish presence. “When the voice is Yaakov’s voice, then the hands that are Esav’s hands have no control.” The combination of the personal, creative contribution of every Jew with the awareness and acceptance of the Divine omnipresence bestowed upon the nation as a whole, will cause the hostile waters before us to part.