A Light in the Dark

We find ourselves in the middle of the Jewish holiday of Chanukah, lighting one candle a night, each night brighter and brighter with each additional candle lit. We do this for many reasons, one of which is to remind us that light can exist even in the darkest of times, when our winter days darken at their earliest. And that is why we still hope even when it seems hopeless; why we are still able to heal and be healed, even when there is no cure. So too can light exist even in the darkest of places: in a place and time of unknowable darkness, in the concentration camp of Auschwitz, an inscription was found etched into a barrack’s walls:

I believe in the sun, even when it is not shining.
I believe in love, even when I do not feel it.
I believe in God, even when God is silent.

Amen.

The Flotilla, Gaza, and Humanitarian Aid: What Happened?

On May 30th, the "Free Gaza Flotilla" left the shores of Cyprus under the guise of delivering humanitarian aid, by sea, to the people of Gaza.

Some background: Israel's unilateral withdrawal from Gaza, in August, 2005 gave Gaza's Palestinian people the opportunity of self-goverance; they freely elected to be governed, not by the Palestinian Authority (the "PA"," the governing party of Palestinians in the West Bank who have been partnered with Israel in peace negotiation and policing since the mid-1990's); but by Hamas. While similarly Palestinian, Hamas has been and is categorized by The United States, Canada, The EU, and Israel as a terrorist regime, and have frozen funds to the Hamas government since 2006, recognizing it as a terror organization. Israel is currently in a state of armed conflict with Hamas, as they launched upwards of 10,000 rockets from Gaza, bombing civiilian targets in Israel - very often with weapons that have been smuggled into Gaza via the sea.

Presently, Hamas is engaged in smuggling arms and military supplies into Gaza, by land and sea, in order to fortify its positions and continue its attacks. Under international law, Israel has the right to protect the lives of its civilians and has undertaken measures to defend itself, including the imposition of a maritime blockade to curb Hamas' rearmament. It is Israel's position that it cannot allow a sea-corridor to open to Gaza, which would allow weapons and terrorists to freely enter the Gaza Strip. 

Therefore, Israel has effected a maritiime blockade off of the coast of Gaza. Under international law, a maritime blockade is a legitimate and recognized measure that may be implemented as part of an armed conflict, including in international waters, so long as it does not bar access to the ports and coasts of neutral states. Under international maritime law, when a maritime blockade is in effect, no boats can enter the blockaded area - including both civilian and enemy vessels.

Having presented the basic underlying facts, many of us are still left with pressing questions, including: 

• Is such a maritime blockade truly warranted? 
• Why would Israel interfere with an attempted delivery of humanitarian aid? 
• Were those who organized the flotilla, launched from Cyprus, aware of the maritime blockade
• Who organized this flotilla? 
• Were they offered an alternative means to deliver their humanitarian cargo? 
• Did the humanitarian cargo make it off the boats at all? 
• Does Israel even allow humanitarian aid into Gaza? 
• If five of the six vessels chose instead to dock in Ashdod (a port city just north of Gaza), what happened on the sixth vessel? What was the nature of the violence on the sixth boat? 
• Where do we go from here?

Is such a maritime blockade truly warranted? Even those of us who closely follow Israel might not recall the "Francop" cargo ship, also purportedly carrying humanitarian aid. On November 4, 2009, the Israeli Navy intercepted this vessel as part of the same maritime blockade described above, and discovered, hidden amongst the civilian cargo, 500 tons of weapons and weaponry of Iranian origin - bound, in this case, for Hezbollah, in Lebanon. Video of the entire event can be seen here: http://www.youtube.com/watch#!v=wXDCDPPeN_Q 

So it would seem that Israel has reason to be suspicious.

Why would Israel interfere with an attempted delivery of humanitarian aid? In the words of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu:

Our policy is simple. We say: any goods, any humanitarian aid to Gaza, can enter. What we want to prevent is their ability to bring in war materiel - missiles, rockets, the means for constructing casing for missiles and rockets. This has been our policy and yesterday we told the flotilla - which was not a simple, innocent flotilla - to bring their goods into Ashdod. We told them that we would examine their cargo and allow those goods that could not be used as weapons or shielding materials for Hamas into Gaza. Five of the six ships accepted these terms without violence.

Were those who organized the flotilla, launched from Cyprus, aware of the maritime blockade? Repeated requests were made to the flotilla's organizers as early as May 24, 2010. At this same link, or here, you can view such a statement made by Israeli's Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokesperson, Yigal Palmor.

Who organized this flotilla? Primarily the Free Gaza Movement and IHH. According to The Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center, IHH, which plays a central role in organizing the flotilla to the Gaza Strip, is a Turkish humanitarian relief fund with a radical Islamic anti-Western orientation. Besides its legitimate philanthropic activities, it supports radical Islamic networks, including Hamas, and at least in the past, even global jihad elements [including Al-Qaeda.] Furthermore,

“This is an Islamist charity, quite fundamentalist, quite close to Hamas,” said Henri J. Barkey, a professor of international relations at Lehigh University. “They say they do charity work, but they’ve been accused of gunrunning and other things, and their rhetoric has been inflammatory against Israel and sometimes against Jews.” 

..... On Tuesday in a bustling neighborhood in Istanbul, the Turkish organization was celebrating a strange success. “We became famous,” said Omar Faruk, a board member of the group, Insani Yardim Vakfi, known by its Turkish initials, I.H.H. “We are very thankful to the Israeli authorities.”Five times the Free Gaza Movement sailed from Cyprus, where they are based, to Gaza. Israel ultimately came to believe that a threat was evolving, fearing that ships coming into port could transport weapons. Israeli officials said they feared the prospect of Hamas being as powerfully armed as Hezbollah in southern Lebanon.

Were they offered an alternative means to deliver their humanitarian cargo? Here is an example of such a statement:video of the Israeli Navy addressing one of the flotilla's ships as it neared the Gaza shore, offering it to dock at the Ashdod Port and transfer its supplies under the ship's crew's supervision. (The ship refused to comply.) Surprisingly, even the family of kidnapped Israeli soldier, Gilad Shalit, who has spent more than three years in captivity, offered to support the international flotilla to Gaza if its participants would demand that Hamas permit various organizations to visit the kidnapped Israeli soldier and allow him to receive packages. The organizers of the international aid mission to Gaza declined the offer.

Did the humanitarian cargo make it off the boats at all? Yes, the IDF (Israeli Defense Forces) unloaded the humanitarian cargo from the Gaza flotillaand transferred the aid into the Gaza Strip through the Kerem Shalom crossing.

Does Israel even allow humanitarian aid into Gaza? Yes. Over the last eighteen months, over one million tons of humanitarian aid, from NGOs and governments including Israel herself, entered Gaza from Israel. (That's almost one ton for every resident of Gaza, roughly 1.4 to 1.5 million.) Some specifics: More than 738,000 tons of food and supplies entered Gaza in 2009. Furthermore:

In the first quarter of 2010 (January-March), 94,500 tons of supplies were transferred in 3,676 trucks to the Strip: 48,000 tons of food products; 40,000 tons of wheat; 2,760 tons of rice; 1,987 tons of clothes and footwear; 553 tons of milk powder and baby food. 

[During] the week of May 18, 2010 there were more than 100 truckloads of animal food, 65 trucks of fruit and vegetables; 22 truckloads of sugar, some 27 truckloads of meat, poultry and fish; and 40 trucks of dairy products. At holiday times, Israel increases transfers. During the Muslim holy days of Ramadhan and Eid al-Adha, Israel shipped some 11,000 heads of cattle into the Gaza Strip.

Already in the first quarter of 2010, 23 tons of iron and 25 tons of cement were transferred to the Gaza Strip.... On 13 May 2010, Israel allowed approximately 39 tons of building material into Gaza to help rebuild a damaged hospital. 

... On 24 May 2010 Israel opened the Kerem Shalom crossing to 97 trucks loaded with aid and goods, including six trucks holding 250 tons of cement and one truck loaded with five tons of iron for projects executed and operated by UNRWA.  

According to the UN report of May 2010, 120 megawatts (over 70%) of the [Gaza] Strip's electricity supply comes from the Israeli electric grid, while 17 MWs come from Egypt and 30 MWs are produced by the Gaza city power station.

If five of the six vessels chose instead to dock in Ashdod (a port city just north of Gaza), what happened on the sixth vessel? What was the nature of the violence on the sixth boat? Sadly, Israeli Naval personnel were met with violence and there was loss of life. Militants onboard the Mavi Marmara [the sixth vessel] attacked Israeli naval personnel with live fire and light weaponry including guns, knives and clubs. Numerous Israeli soldiers were injured as a result of the extremely violent ambush, Two of them seriously while three are in moderate condition. The final number of militant fatalities has yet to be released, but initial reports place it at nine. Once again, those vessels that reacted peacefully to the operation were escorted unharmed to Israel, as had happened with previous vessels that tried to violate the maritime blockade. Unfortunately, it seems that the attack on the Israeli soldiers was premeditated. The weapons used had been prepared in advance. 

Huwaida Arraf, a flotilla organizer, foreshadowed the violence with her statement that: "They [the Israelis] are going to have to forcefully stop us." Bulent Yildirim, the leader of the IHH, one of the primary organizers of the flotilla, announced just prior to boarding: “We are going to resist and resistance will win." The militants whipped up the boarding crowd by chanting "Intifada, intifada, intifada!"

Where do we go from here? Where can we go from here? We might give ear to the words of two contemporary, Israeli thinkers and authors, Rabbi Donniel Hartman, Ph.D., of the Shalom Hartman Institute, and Amos Oz, the author and lecturer. 

Rabbi Hartman writes:

It is time for all those of decency to declare, "Enough." It is time to begin a new conversation, one in which legitimate acts of self defense on Israel's part are no longer labeled automatically as acts of aggression and war crimes. Nor should attempts to better the plight of Palestinians, including those affiliated with Hamas, be labeled by definition as anti-Israeli and political....

People of decency can disagree. Decent people can make mistakes. It is only, however, if we recognize that decency can be found on both sides that a different future will become possible. 

Amos Oz writes:

Even if Israel seizes 100 more ships on their way to Gaza, even if Israel sends in troops to occupy the Gaza Strip 100 more times, no matter how often Israel deploys its military, police and covert power, force cannot solve the problem that we are not alone in this land, and the Palestinians are not alone in this land. We are not alone in Jerusalem and the Palestinians are not alone in Jerusalem. Until Israelis and Palestinians recognize the logical consequences of this simple fact, we will all live in a permanent state of siege — Gaza under an Israeli siege, Israel under an international and Arab siege. 

...I do not discount the importance of force. Woe to the country that discounts the efficacy of force. Without it Israel would not be able to survive a single day. But we cannot allow ourselves to forget for even a moment that force is effective only as a preventative — to prevent the destruction and conquest of Israel, to protect our lives and freedom.

And I write:

Injury and suffering ought to be prevented, and loss of life is tragic, particularly when unnecessary, and that is always the highest price, regardless of the stakes. 

This entire incident reminds me of that math problem from 5th grade: If train A is traveling west, and train B is traveling east.... does it really matter how fast they're going? Would it help if either train warned the other, if neither chose to alter their set course?

The two trains will meet. But trains don't just "meet." They collide.

They always collide.

Peace and Pizza in Jerusalem

The following is a very good piece which furthers the Israel-Palestinian discussion (although it suffers from an incendiary title): "Will Obama Ignite the Third Intifada?"

The author, Rabbi Dr. Daniel Gordis, is an American-born (Conservative) Rabbi and Ph.D who immigrated ("made Aliyah") with his family in the late 90's. He was the first Dean of AJU's (formerly UJ) Ziegler School of Rabbinic Studies, his movement's rabbinical school/seminary on the West Coast.

He makes many good points (although he's a little hard on Israel's political Left). Before I comment on his political observations (in a forthcoming entry), I'll first share some memories brought forth by the article.

He mentions the Jerusalem neighborhood of Gilo; I knew a woman who still lives there with her (very secular) family.

He mentions what came to be known as "Camp David 2," when Ehud Barak, Arafat, and Clinton met to hammer out a deal. It's well-known that Barak offered as much as Israel had ever offered (sharing Jerusalem, etc.). Arafat infamously declined, repeatedly. Shortly thereafter, (with his and Fatah's, the still-dominant Palestinian political party, blessing and direction,) the Second Intifada erupted. I was living in Jerusalem at the time.

I lived in downtown Jerusalem, across from the Tattoo Parlor and pizza place that served sausage, shrimp, and pepperoni. (I loved that, in the middle of Jerusalem, there was a relatively vibrant and young counter-culture.) Anyway, as I'm watching the news' coverage of Clinton's concluding press-conference, as he's telling us how disappointed he was in Arafat (and, it's assumed, his own evaporated hopes for a peace-treaty crowning glory for his second term,) the pizza delivery-guy rang the doorbell. (No, no pepperoni.)

As I'm paying him, he looks at the television, and says, in his well-accustomed to this kind of thing tone of voice, in Hebrew: 

"Ain shalom....Mah la'asoat?" 

"No peace. What're you gonna do?" 

And that was that. I paid, he left, I ate the pizza, and weekly suicide bombings began shortly thereafter.

Building in Jerusalem

Recently, the planned enlargement of a north-eastern neighborhood of Jerusalem, Ramat Shlomo, has been the subject of some debate. Home to nearly half of Jerusalem's Jewish population. It doesn't abut Arab neighborhoods, and is just a couple of miles from downtown Jerusalem (where I've lived). The accusations that this is "settlement expansion" is utterly false, misleading, and incorrect. 

A word about the West Bank. The West Bank is also known as Judea and Samaria. Jordan "renamed" that area as such in 1950, one year after their united Arab attack of 5 countries, on Israel, began in 1948 with Israel's declaration of existence. Jordan annexed that land, although not officially incorporating it within Jordanian borders. Non-Jordanian Arabs who lived in that area, now referred to as Palestinians, were, in fact, never welcomed into Jordan's borders or society. It was in 1967, again defending herself against invading Arab armies, that Israel not only succeeded in self-preservation, but captured land previously occupied, such as eastern Jerusalem and what had become known as the West Bank. It is overwhelming Arab, and almost certainly the future Palestinian state. One ought to remember that, again, the land was retaken by Israel in it's own defense. Nation-building and its wars often lead to territorial enlargement. Just look at Texas or California.

A word about "Palestine." The Roman Emperor, Hadrian, renamed what was known as Israel (or Judea) as "Palestina," following Rome's successful suppression of the Jewish revolt led by Bar Kochba in the 3rd century C.E. Rome often renamed defeated territory to, in effect, add insult to injury. "Palestine" is probably based on the name of the Philistines, an equally ancient, non-Jewish and Arab (although certainly not Muslim, until Islam's existence in the 7th century C.E.)  population of the area.

Back to Ramat Shlomo and it's planned expansion. Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. Jerusalem was unified following the six-day war of 1967, only after Israel pushed back attacking and invading Arab armies. Today, anyone can live anywhere in Jerusalem. (Although the Ultra-Orthodox neighborhoods are, without question, an entity unto their own and do not welcome residents who are unlike them.) An Arab Muslim, or an Arab Christian, can live where he or she likes, and can afford (Jerusalem real estate and rent is, in fact, not cheap). The same is true for an Israeli, Jewish or not, as well as those with appropriate visas. (I lived in Jerusalem as a student, twice, renting apartments.)

Construction in Jerusalem, whether east or west, is therefore not only justified, but also necessary. Why? In part, because of the construction freeze in the West Bank.

"The housing shortage in Jerusalem has become more acute in recent years, especially in ultra-Orthodox areas, pushing thousands of ultra-Orthodox families a year to the Haredi cities Betar Ilit and Modi'in Ilit, in the West Bank. The West Bank construction freeze has increased the pressure to create more housing in Jerusalem."

Neither Jerusalem, nor any part of it, is a settlement on occupied land.

What an Honor...

I'm honored to have been mentioned in a blog posting by my mentor and friend, Rabbi Paul Kipnes, Rabbi of Congregation Or Ami in Calabasas, CA. I served as Rabbinic Intern for Rabbi Kipnes for two years (while a rabbinical student at Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion, Los Angeles Campus): 2002-2003 and 2007-2008. I recently wrote the following in celebration of Congregation Or Ami's "Bar Mitzvah" (their thirteenth year) Celebration:

A photo and a memory: Rabbi Kipnes and I, draped in our tallitot, Torah Commentary in our hands, following verse by verse, as the week's portion was chanted aloud on Shabbat. This scene plays itself out in countless synagogues — but what has made Or Ami, and my internship, different? One hebrew word with many meanings: ruach [רוּחַ]. Commonly translated as wind, soul, spirit, or breath, it also conveys intellect, passion, direction, and courage. As an intern over two years (2002-2003 and 2007-2008), you and your families, Rabbi Kipnes and Cantor Cotler, you nourished my soul, stimulated my intellect, strengthened my direction, and renewed my courage. I was given opportunities to teach every age, lead services, and deliver sermons. I studied under the careful, supportive, and exacting tutelage of Rabbi Kipnes. I say to you, Or Ami, what a child says to a parent, "If it weren't for you, there would be no 'me.'" A photo and a memory. One hebrew word with many meanings. One synagogue, with many defintions. Congregation Or Ami, thank you.

"They Don't Really Need Me...They Need What I Do"

Religion demands of us both courage and humility: a recognition of who we have yet to become is married to the hope, promise, and challenge that a refinement of oneself is both possible and necessary. 


And what is true humility? Rabbi David Wolpe, in his new book, Why Faith Matters, recounts his wife explaining just this to him, as a young rabbi overwhelmed and intimidated by his first "deathbed" visit. 

Rabbi David Wolpe, Why Faith Matters (2009), pg. 111:

That night I came home and my wife asked me how it went. I told her I felt like a fraud, that I had an overwhelming sense that I was not up to shepherding a soul in its final moments on earth. Who am I to do this? I felt unworthy. ‘You are right,’ she said. ‘You are unworthy. Anyone would be unworthy. But it is OK, because you are not doing it. It is being done through you.'

A similarly powerful sentiment is articulated by Bruce Springsteen, in which he recounts life after 9/11, and his experience with Americans' need for him to return to the music scene as both a source of artistic strength and a conduit of collective sentiment.

Bruce Springsteen, Rolling Stone Interview, 10/14/2004:

Interviewer: So you feel the call from your heart?

Springsteen: Yeah, I can hear the bells chiming. I’ve had a long life with my audience. I always tell the story about the guy with “The Rising”: “Hey, Bruce, we need you!” he yelled at me through the car window. That’s about the size of it: You get a few letters that say, “Hey, man, we need you.” You bump into some people at a club and you say, “Hey, man, what’s going on?” And they go, “Hey, we need you.” Yeah, they don’t really need me, but I’m proud if they need what I do. That’s what my band is. That’s what we were built for.

Humility, expertly explained by a rabbi's wife and a guy named Bruce.

You can read the full text of the Springsteen interview here:

"Bruce Springsteen Talks About His Conscience..."

---

[Wenner, Jann S.  “Bruce Springsteen Talks about His Conscience and the Nature of an Artist and His Audience.” Rolling Stone. 14 Oct 2004. 26 Dec 2009. http://www.jannswenner.com/Archives/Been_Misled.aspx ]

Months, Weeks, Days to Live

One of this week's most emailed New York Times article is "Hard Choice for a Comfortable Death: Sedation," which chronicles and details some of the issues encountered by Hospice caregivers, patients, and their loved ones: how does, or can, one die peacefully, comfortably, free from pain, torment, and discomfort - safely, effectively, ethically, and legally?

This question is a familiar one to those of us in the field of Palliative Care. As a Rabbi, Spiritual Counselor, and Spiritual Care Coordinator of The Skirball Hospice, I experience these very questions, every day, with virtually every patient and family. It is, of course, far from easy, with a seemingly unending list of variables and facets. But there remain constants: our primary goal is to keep our patient as pain-free, comfortable, and as safe as possible. One must also remember that our unit of care is not just our patient - we are meant to care for the patient's family, loved ones, and friends.

As a program of the Los Angeles Jewish Home for the Aging, we are Los Angeles' only Jewish Hospice, and our Spiritual Counselors specialize in in facing these issues, and more, from a Jewish perspective. (We, of course, treat patients of every religion, race, and nationality.)

As I previously posted in "All It Takes Is One," human life is of absolute primacy in the Jewish Tradition. Judaism insists that we endeavor to cure with the patient's well-being as our goal, and, traditionally, forbids the hastening of death. At the very same time, we must not prolong the dying process. The codified compendium of Jewish Law, The Shulkhan Arukh, states that, "One in a dying condition is considered living in all respects.” We call this patient, who is typically within 72 hours of death, a Goses (גּוֹסֵס), one who is moribund, unable to swallow; his life is like "a flickering candle." (A Goses exists in a state of gessisah.)  It is forbidden to treat the Goses as if he is already dead. It is forbidden to actively hasten his death, as he is alive and this would be considered murder. However, according to Rabbi Isserless’ (16th c., The Rema) gloss on this religious law (his gloss elucidates Ashkenazic Jewish Practice, as it differs from Sephardic custom), it is permissible to remove that which is hindering his death. In the words and time of the text:

It is forbidden to do anything to hasten the death of one who is in a dying condition... If, however, there is something that causes a delay in his death, for example, a nearby woodchopper making noise; or if there is salt on his tongue - and these prevent his speedy death [lit: "delay the soul's leaving the body"] - then one can remove them, because this does not involve any action at all, but rather, is only the removal of the preventative obstacle (to death). [Author's emphasis] [S.A., Y.D. 339:1-2] [Transl. Elliot Dorff, Matters of Life and Death, JPS: Philadelphia (2003) p.199 and Louis E. Newman, "Woodchoppers and Respirators: The Problem of Interpretation in Contemporary Jewish Ethics," Contemporary Jewish Ethics and Morality, A Reader. Oxford University Press: new York (1995. p. 145]

We've been introduced to the legalistic response to impending death. What of the narrative response? We might to turn to the Talmudic tale of "Rabbi Judah's Handmaid:"

On the day that Rabbi Judah [Rabbi Judah Ha Nasi, 2nd C. CE, editor and redactor of The Mishna, the foundational rabbinic text] was dying, the rabbis [his peers and students].... offered a prayer for heavenly mercy [so he would not die]. Rabbi Judah's handmaid, instead, went up to the roof, and prayed [so that he would die]. The rabbis below kept on with their prayers that he might continue to live. From the roof, she took a jar and threw it to the ground below, interrupting their prayers. As they stopped their praying, Rabbi Judah died. [Transl. based upon Louis E. Newman, "Woodchoppers and Respirators: The Problem of Interpretation in Contemporary Jewish Ethics," Contemporary Jewish Ethics and Morality, A Reader. Oxford University Press: new York (1995. p. 141-142.]

The above story was interpreted by Rabbeinu Nissim (11th c. CE), as meaning:

Sometimes one must request mercy on behalf of the ill so that he might die, as in the case of a patient who is terminal and who is in great pain. [Commentary to BT Nedarim 40a; Transl. based upon Louis E. Newman, "Woodchoppers and Respirators: The Problem of Interpretation in Contemporary Jewish Ethics," Contemporary Jewish Ethics and Morality, A Reader. Oxford University Press: new York (1995. p. 142.]

If we return to how we started, with, "Hard Choice for a Comfortable Death: Sedation," we read the words of Dr. Edward Halbridge, a Hospice Medical Director, who states: 

“Do I consider myself a Dr. Death who is bumping people off on a regular basis?... I don’t think so. In my own head I’ve sort of come to the realization that these people deserve to pass comfortably.”

And so we see, in this extremely abbreviated form, Jewish Tradition's different responses to death and dying: As pertaining to Halakha, or Jewish Law, which relies on precedents and analog; theory and general principles; moral intuition, conscience and specific decisions; and the larger societal, and medical influences. [See Aaron L. Mackler, "Cases and Principles in Jewish Bioethics: Toward a Holistic Model," Contemporary Jewish Ethics and Morality, A Reader. Oxford University Press: new York (1995. p. 177-193.]


Now what? Prepare yourself. Visit the following sites for valuable resources:
Create Your Advance Directive
Download a Legal Guide for the Seriously Ill
"End-of-Life: Jewish Perspectives," by Rabbi Elliot N. Dorff, PhD
National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization
The Hospice Foundation of America