**OBJECTION: Melissa Margulies (balcony center): REY: On what grounds? MM: Objection on the grounds of CHUTZPAH.

Transcription

1 Kol Nidre Teaching 5774: God on Trial Rabbi Eric Yanoff Judge s robe, gavel and base, ALL wireless mics, speakers placement, lights ON **Note to Readers: This was not a typical sermon but rather a court case, with multiple participants (indicated in shaded gray). While the transcript is presented here, it is to be read more as an experience than a sermon. Shanah Tovah. Tonight, we are going to do something a little different. (I know, this coming from the guy who broke a vase on the bimah last week, who had you dancing in the aisles last year.) But this is different even from that: Seventy years ago, late at night in a barracks in Auschwitz, a group of Jews convened a rabbinical court to put God on trial. Elie Wiesel reported on this profound moment and clearly we cannot begin to understand the circumstances of that horrific moment in our Jewish history in which they found God guilty. But the questions raised in that dark moment are, disturbingly, still relevant today, in our lives. Indeed, we might make the argument that some of the faith that the prisoners in Auschwitz took for granted as the assumptions on which the Trial of God was premised that such faith is, nowadays, called into question even more, and for reasons not as valid as their suffering. So tonight, we are going to put God on trial. In preparation for our learning, I was advised by some attorneys from our congregation, and tonight, mine is not the only voice you will hear. Others here will present evidence that both implicates and exonerates God and so your job, as Jury, is to listen to the evidence on its merits, and to decide God s standing, vis a vis the Jewish People. (And unfortunately, you cannot cite a religious holiday conflict as a reason to get you out of this jury duty!...) **SO: ALL RISE: Oye, oye oye. All persons and matters having business before this honorable court stand forward and they shall be heard. God save this honorable court. The honorable Eric Yanoff presiding. Case number 5774: The Chosen People vs. God. **OBJECTION: Melissa Margulies (balcony center): REY: On what grounds? MM: Objection on the grounds of CHUTZPAH. Chutzpah? Yes, absolutely. But it s not blasphemy. I respectfully submit a case precedent, Abraham vs. God, some 4000 years ago, in which Abraham challenges God s authority and moral right to destroy the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. Abraham at that time asks, Ha-shofet kol haaretz lo ya aseh mishpat?! Must the Judge of the whole world not act justly?! So there is precedent to challenge God in this way. And it s been done before: In addition to that trial in Auschwitz, there has been a film made of this, multiple theologians have discussed it as a premise, and Elie Wiesel wrote a play about it. We re in good company. And the truth is, WE have already convened this court that s why we are doing this tonight, in this Season of Judgment: Because tonight, at Kol Nidre, we convene a heavenly and an earthly tribunal. True, we always assume that those two courts couldn t really interact with one another that they were parallel, non-intersecting realms. Now, usually, Yom Kippur is about looking at OUR culpability. And certainly, as several of the attorneys put forth in defense of God, we cannot overlook the fact that WE HUMAN BEINGS, with our free will, have done enough evil in this Kol Nidre 5774: God on Trial Rabbi Eric Yanoff 1 of 7

2 world, that we cannot let ourselves off the hook for personal responsibility. That is undeniably true. But I believe that nowadays, we also have a lot of questions about God, and questions FOR God. And so, tonight, in addition to calling ourselves to judgment, instead of meeting our Maker, we are asking our Maker to face us so that we can ask those questions of faith, of whether we can trust in God, and whether this relationship of Covenant has been violated. The charge here is, in a way: Breach of Contract but really, the charge is Breach of the Covenant the eternal agreement between the Jewish People and God, traditionally understood to be based on God s protection of us, and our obedience to God. The fulfillment of our covenant with God is in question. And both parties are, in some way, injured parties: We have already confessed to our breach, and we are going to do it again and again over this Yom Kippur: [SING:] Al cheit she-chatanu, we say as we tap our chests, For each of these sins that we, someone among our people, has committed We have already confessed to being imperfect in our end of the bargain. So tonight, we are going to ask, has God kept up God s end of the deal? We, the jury, will hear, through historical witness and individual anecdote indeed the sufferings (past and present) of people in this room tonight bear witness to our injury from a God Who has not watched out for us, according to GOD s end of the covenant. Certainly, we can all point to cases where God is at least an accessory, or at least allows, tremendous pain and suffering to happen. Even if we (individually or collectively) are not fulfilling our end of the contract (the mitzvot) is our suffering proportionate to our breach of the covenant? These are our questions tonight, in our court. So now, let s begin: I m reminded of George Burns, playing God in the movie Oh, God! and being sworn in as a witness, the clerk saying, Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? to which Burns, as God, responds, So help me Me. (We do have to imagine what God s response would be, in being served, subpoenaed, called to trial like this.) We ll begin with a sworn affidavit for the prosecution from someone in our community who is suffering from terminal throat cancer. Because of his condition, he can no longer speak and he could not be here tonight. He is watching on the livestream. He has written his testimony, and it will be read into the record tonight: **FOR THE PROSECUTION: Individual suffering. Andy Weinstock s testimony, in his words, presented by MICHAEL YANOFF (aka, Dad ) (back of sanctuary/front of Frankel): May it please the court: The question as I understand it is what do I think and feel about God now that I am sick and dying. If I believed that there is no God, the question is easy. There is nobody to get mad at, and nobody with whom to pray in desperation. What if I believe in God? Philosophically, this is more interesting and this is where I fit in. There is a God. How do I feel about him now in light of my situation? Some people believe we live on through our descendants. I do not feel personally connected to my great great grandparents. Even if my descendants could feel more be connected to me, that's nice, but I'm just as dead (or shortly will be). What I'd like to do, in some recognizable form, is live on forever. But this is not one of the moves allowed in the game. I don't care when it is, but at the least, dear God, I'd like to wake up again someday and somehow know it's me and get another crack at life. I believe that if you chose to, you could have set it up that way, but I don't believe you have. Kol Nidre 5774: God on Trial Rabbi Eric Yanoff 2 of 7

3 I am disappointed and frightened of you and of death, plus a little scared of the pain. But the pain is a topic for another day. Even if I believed that for this world, you set it up so that it would work out okay in the next world, I would still be frightened. I love you, but I'm scared to death. I don't like being so scared. God help me but I wish I could believe that one better. God I wish I really could. Now, in addition to my role as judge to facilitate tonight s proceedings, it is my job as your Rabbi to affirm that there are no response, no rebuttals, no answers, that will provide both comfort and a rational, meaningful reply to the challenges presented by the suffering we have just heard. Certainly, there are many people in this room who are suffering, or whose loved ones are suffering. And in the face of such suffering, responding with fear or anger is more than justifiable. In fact, being angry at someone still constitutes being in a relationship with that someone. If we are angry at God, we have not dissolved our relationship with God. In many ways, that suffering and anger and grief re-affirms the relationship. Often, in our darkest hour, that is when we call out to God despite any prior ambivalence we may have toward the whole concept of God and religion. We have heard in this testimony a very STRONG connection to God, in fact. FOR THE PROSECUTION: Collective Suffering [Eric Weitz] (floor sanct/choir side) May it please the Court - - At the outset, let me be clear, we as a people admit that, at times, we have broken the covenant. We prayed to a golden calf, we tried to build a tower to reach God, and daily, we fail to fulfill the communal mitzvot. After all, that is exactly why we are here tonight. But our transgressions are not the issue. We are HERE, standing accountable for our violations, but what about God? Wasn t the Covenant an agreement with mutual obligations? Or, in other words, a quid pro quo? What about God s violations? God promises a homeland, descendants and redemption in exchange for our promise to obey. Did we ever really get a homeland? The evidence shows [from the World Bank], that next to Saudi Arabia, Israel spends the highest percentage of its Gross Domestic Product on defense simply to exist. While our neighbors are rich in resources, the land we were given is relatively barren. Since inhabiting Israel, we have been forced to defend our claim from an endless onslaught of different groups throughout history. Can we really comfortably say that this we have been given a homeland? And what about the promise of descendants. We remain a very small portion of those that populate this planet. We have been plagued by a great flood, death in slavery, an inquisition, crusades, pogroms, a Holocaust of unimaginable magnitude and even genetic disorders that affect only those of Jewish descent. If the shoes were reversed, would God accept this legacy as our fulfillment of the covenant? And then there is redemption. I predict that my able opponent will argue that there are so many nice and good things in the world. But, is there anyone here among this jury who awakes each morning feeling secure and comfortable knowing that the next flood, middle east war or holocaust can happen in the blink of an eye and without warning. Is that a good faith definition of redemption? I ask again - - We stand here accountable, but what about God? REY TRANSITION: So: Not only our individual suffering, but the entire flow of our history of persecution, seems to implicate God. After a speech like that (!), I think the prosecution rests. Now, for the defense: Kol Nidre 5774: God on Trial Rabbi Eric Yanoff 3 of 7

4 You should know: When I sent this out to the lawyers who met with me to prepare this it was much more difficult to get volunteers to DEFEND God than to prosecute God. Elie Wiesel, in his play, has a character who is a reluctant defense attorney, who explains his reluctance by saying, I don t want to be God s defense attorney. What if I lose the case?! But now we have a few brave souls. **FOR THE DEFENSE: Debbie Epstein Henry: (Either balcony choir side, or floor below) May It Please the Court: Your Honor As I see the issue before us, it raises questions both with respect to the Jew as an individual and the Jewish people as a collective whole. I propose to defend G-d s role with respect to both the individual and the collective. First, with respect to the Jew as an individual, in order for an individual person to truly experience beauty and happiness, one must also experience suffering and sadness. Indeed, it is the contrast in life that gives us the true appreciation of meaning and depth. Without the suffering, one cannot see the beauty or the extent of it. We see this when someone miraculously survives a rare cancer and beats the odds and how that makes that person and his or her family appreciate their life in a way they had not had the appreciation of before. Also, through suffering and pain, great generosity and goodness emerge. For example, after the Newtown tragedy, the outpouring of generosity and incredible sense of community that developed is not one that would otherwise have formed. Second, with respect to the Jewish people as a whole, while our collective suffering has been very real, we are still here. Many of the communities that tried to expunge us whether it be the Romans, the Babylonians or the Nazis we have prevailed and history reflects our victory despite our tremendous losses. And, while some would argue that we as Jews have faced a disproportionate degree of suffering, I would argue that we have also benefited from a disproportionate degree of privilege and good fortune. Whether it be our people s great intellect, stature, material success or recognition for our contributions to society, we have benefited from playing an extraordinary role in the world at large. Your Honor I will leave you with the premise that as individuals and as a collective Chosen people, we cannot expect to live the extraordinary without experiencing the hardship. The two go hand in hand. Indeed, it is not fair or noble to expect to only be the Chosen for the good and not the Chosen for the bad. Thank you for your Honor s thoughtful consideration. REY TRANSITION: Rabbi David Wolpe comments on exactly this point when he says, When I visit a person beset with tragedy, I often hear, Rabbi, how is it possible that God could allow this happen to me?! Rabbi Wolpe remarks, In all my years as a rabbi, I have NEVER met someone who just who just experienced a miracle, who exclaims, Rabbi, I just won the lottery! How is it possible that God could allow this to happen to me?! I have a friend and colleague who once commented to me about people s frustration with God: If we only come to God to blame God in times of difficulty, and not to thank or bless God in times of good fortune no wonder so many people dislike or mistrust God! We re only seeing one side of it all. Kol Nidre 5774: God on Trial Rabbi Eric Yanoff 4 of 7

5 It s like the joke about the guy who is driving around downtown, late for an important interview. He can t find a parking spot anywhere. Finally, in desperation, he cries out, God, if You provide for me a parking spot, I promise I ll be a good Jew, I ll go to shul, I ll give tzedakah Immediately, three cars pull out, and he has his choice of parking. So the guy looks up and says, God, forget what I said about the parking; I got this one taken care of myself. If we only see God in times of misfortune, we are only seeing half of God. **MOTION TO DISMISS: Bob Friedel: (front center) Your Honor, at this time, I d like to present a motion to dismiss, on the basis of failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted. REY asks, on behalf of the court, all of us with a Law and Order education in courtroom procedure, what that phrase means. BOB explains with the birthday party invitation example. REY invites Bob to go on: What if the covenant was never meant to be an expectation that God will make our lives free of suffering? If so, the existence of trouble, disease, war, etc. is indeed entirely consistent with the covenant, and so that there would in fact be no breach? Perhaps this is more problematic for the people to consider, because it would shake the foundations of what they had always believed God s job to be (as part of the covenant). Perhaps God s job is not to protect life from taking its course of ups and downs, of births and deaths, of happiness and sadness, of kindness and cruelty. Perhaps God instead is there to help us keep putting one foot in front of the other no matter what hardships we are facing; to allow the widow and orphan to keep living another day in the hope that things will get better; to encourage those more fortunate to help their neighbors. Perhaps God has no hands with which to reach down and cause things to happen or not happen other than our own hands the hands of all humans on earth and it is up to each one of us to do our best to do good, to help each other, to spread love to our neighbors throughout the world, every day. REY: MOTION DENIED because the sermon is not over. We re not done. (Sorry folks ) There is one more way of getting God off the hook here and it s one that is even more relevant now than seventy years ago, when the prisoners in Auschwitz put God on trial: **LEN BERNSTEIN: (Floor, lift side) Friends, suffering in this world is sad and ongoing. However we cannot lay fault on God s doorstep for failure to abide by his covenant, because simply stated, the covenant is no more. The statute of limitations on expecting adherence to the covenant by God or by the Jewish people has run, meaning that the covenant is an anachronism, is old, and not enforceable anymore. Think of how irrelevant many commandments are today: how many of us never wear t fillin, even though we sing the v ahavta in the shma prayer all the time and repeat the commandment to wear the commandments next to our heart and our head? How many of us keep kosher today, does eating a cheese steak make one less Jewish? After Pesach, the torah tells us to count the Omer, an agricultural commandment related to the harvest- how many here care? When was the last time anyone here slaughtered an animal as a sacrifice to God, even though we read in the Torah extremely detailed commandments about how to do so? Jewish Sociologists point to trends of the next generation of Jews that even a modern Jewish disaster like the holocaust is no longer an effective motivation to move people closer to Judaism and its commandments. Kol Nidre 5774: God on Trial Rabbi Eric Yanoff 5 of 7

6 Make no mistake, Judaism s history, customs, and morals constitute a beautiful heritage and community. That is why most of us are here. But the covenant is a relic fading in the rear view mirror. This court cannot find that God fails to abide by a covenant when most of the covenant s obligations are ancient and to most, irrelevant. Instead, let s appreciate all of God s creation and focus on the future by praying for a better world. So: Now, in addition to evidence for and against God, we have an argument that maybe the statute of limitations on God has run out that past suffering, even the Holocaust is no longer a motivation for the next generation, for us to call out to God. Maybe many of us just no longer care about the covenant. How does that feel to us, as we sit here on Kol Nidre evening? Does that get God off the hook?... Okay Now: Counsel for the Defense of God: Does the defense rest? (Len: We do, your Honor.) At this time, I M going to take the closing argument: In order for this court that we have convened here on this Kol Nidre evening to CONVICT God, we must prove God s guilt, God s breach of our covenant as God s People, beyond a reasonable doubt. And even with all of the suffering, the feelings of abandonment, the challenges we face: We have NOT proven anything beyond a reasonable doubt. All we have here is doubt, and questioning. And so, I have no choice but to declare a MISTRIAL. I know it seems incomplete, unsatisfying but you know something? I actually think it s the best possible outcome. Because a mistrial keeps alive the potential for more trials, more questioning, more struggling with God on these really important, perhaps unanswerable questions. This teaching tonight brought up enough material for a dozen more sermons! (I ll spare you for tonight ) But the most important lesson I want us all to take away from tonight is that this struggling is not blasphemy. If you were uncomfortable with any part of tonight s proceedings well, good. Because this is not easy stuff. But if you were offended I implore you: DON T be offended. Instead, be challenged. Even if it is tremendous chutzpah, these challenges of God are what define us as Jews. We are called B nai Yisrael the Children of Israel Israel, the name Jacob earns after wrestling with God. We are Israel and do you know what the name Yisrael, or Israel means? It means we, who struggle with God. We, who wrestle, and challenge, and even try God in open court. THAT is who we are. These proceedings and all past such proceedings, and God-willing, all future such trials and questioning that is who we are, as the People of Israel, Yisrael. And so we need to leave this open-ended so that our continued questioning of God will never cease to both engage and enrage us, to challenge us to our core. Just one question remains for us here in our proceedings: What do we think God would say about this? I mean it s only fair; usually the Defendant is given an opportunity to speak on his own behalf! Well, there is a story in the Talmud that I had the pleasure of learning with some of you a couple of weeks ago, in which several rabbis are debating a point of Jewish law, and a heavenly voice sides with one rabbi, Rabbi Eliezer but the opposing counsel, Rabbi Yehoshua, tells God to butt out of the debate. Now THAT is chutzpah! But the epilogue to that story comes in a scene in which Elijah the Prophet, who sits at God s side in Heaven Elijah is asked how God responded to the proceedings, how God responded to being told to step aside and let humans, rabbis, take responsibility for interpreting Judaism. In that scene, Elijah reports that God was not angry at all; rather, God laughed and rejoiced, saying Nitzchuni vanai, nitzchuni vanai My children have surpassed Me, My children have surpassed Me! Kol Nidre 5774: God on Trial Rabbi Eric Yanoff 6 of 7

7 In this moment, God is like a parent and any good parent wants for his or her child to do better, go farther, achieve more, than in the previous generation. God rejoices at having been on the receiving end of our chutzpah. And I can only imagine that, with our challenging topics tonight, God is similarly laughing proudly, saying, nitzchuni vanai My People are still doing it, still having the chutzpah to challenge Me and even surpass Me. I want to thank all those who participated this evening and I want to thank all of you, who continue to challenge ME, as your Rabbi, with the important questions we raised this evening. These are difficult questions and that is what makes them worth continuing to struggle for an answer that helps us understand our world, our human condition, our faith, and our God. I pray that we have many more opportunities to work through our questions and our challenges, for many years to come but for now, court is adjourned. [GAVEL] * * * Transition back to prayers: At the end of film version of the Trial of God in which, in Auschwitz, they declare God guilty: The guards are coming for them, you hear the dogs barking. One of the witnesses for the prosecution asks a judge: What do we do now? - Now that they have declared God guilty and absent. Judge s response: NOW, WE PRAY. This is Jewish strength: Despite our questions, our doubts, our anger, our ambivalence: Still, we pray. And so we continue with our service, page Kol Nidre 5774: God on Trial Rabbi Eric Yanoff 7 of 7