Pesach 5773 - 18/03/2013 - Federation Of Synagogues

Frontal Courtesy
By Alan Finlay
The story is told of Rabbi Moshe Feinstein
zt’l and Rabbi Yaakov Kamenetzky zt’l,
both Torah giants of American Jewry,
who, following a convention, were
waiting in a hotel lobby for their driver.
The two were engrossed in deep conversation
and the other conference delegates
wanted to know what
intricate talmudic matter, what
detailed halachic issue, they
were discussing. The delegates
approached to discover that
they were working out which
one of them was going to be dropped off first by the driver so that
that person could sit in the back seat and not leave the driver
unattended in the front seat for the remainder of the journey. Such
sensitivity for the feelings of another is a lesson to us all.
I recently spoke at the Chevra Kadisha dinner which the Federation
Burial Society holds annually to express its appreciation for the work
carried out by the volunteer ladies and gentlemen of the Chevra.
Quoting from Parshas Shemini, I said that Moses officiated as the
Cohen Gadol (High Priest) for the first seven days of the inauguration
of the Tabernacle and on the eighth day, he stepped down in favour
of his brother Aharon.
Rabbi Bernstein zt’l links this event with the episode at the burning
bush where Moses has a dialogue with Hashem, over seven days,
about leading the Bnei Yisrael out of Egypt. Moses’ objections result
in Hashem becoming angry and, as stated by Rashi, Moses is told
that had he accepted Hashem’s call, he, not Aharon, would have
been Cohen Gadol permanently.
As Rabbi Bernstein says, if someone says to you “I was going to make
you a king but I have changed my mind”, you will think “I do not
know what it means to be a king.” But make me a king for seven
days, let me enjoy the power and the majesty and then say that I
can no longer be king, I will know what it means to be a king and
will know what I have lost.
And so, when Moses at the burning bush is told by Hashem that he
will not be Cohen Gadol, he does not know of what he is being deprived.
But make Moses a Cohen Gadol for seven days and then tell
him that he has to step down in favour of his brother, he will fully
understand his “punishment.”
Rabbi Bernstein, quoting the Medrash Shmuel, links the same idea
to the concept, quoted in Ethics of the Fathers, where after certain
sins have been enumerated, the mishna says that these “remove a
person from the world”. Says the Medrash Shmuel, this refers to the
Ho’olom Habo, the World to Come. Say to a Jew that you will not
be going to Ho’olom Habo, we do not know what it means. Let a
Jew see what he could have had and then take him out for the rest
of eternity, he will know what he could have had and what he will
never have.
In carrying out the tahara, the preparation of the body for burial,
the ladies and gentlemen of the Chevra Kadisha treat every mais
with respect and sensitivity, whether the deceased has been a good
person, a wicked person or an average person. Every deceased Jew
enters the World to Come. How long he or she stays there is not for
us to judge, in truth because as we do not know what reward is
given for each mitzvah. Treating everyone with sensitivity and respect
is an honourable aim, whether the person is alive or dead.
I hope that I have upheld this ideal during my tenure as Federation
President. However, being responsible for an organisation the size
of the Federation, it is inevitable that there are, on occasions, disagreements
and conflicts.
I have developed a theory called Frontal Courtesy. Ever been behind
a driver who allows every car to come out from a side road, or waits
for a pedestrian three yards from the zebra crossing to approach and
cross over, or slows down on approaching a green traffic light? What
a considerate driver to the needs of others! But such drivers show
concern only for the people in front; never mind the three-mile tailback
of frustrated drivers behind. That is what I call Frontal
Courtesy.
Notwithstanding our desire to be respectful and sympathetic to the
person in front of us, the Honorary Officers also have a legal and
moral responsibility to the membership as a whole and are obliged
to make decisions or take certain courses of actions, even if this
means that someone is upset. Being respectful and sympathetic
does not mean that we are a “soft touch”, having to agree to whatever
somebody demands. We would always prefer to settle disputes
but if that cannot be achieved, then we are forced to end up in
litigation whether before a Beis Din or in the secular courts.
So, if one of our kashrus licensees has outstanding license fees, we
are entitled to take legal action to recover the outstanding debt.
That money is needed for the running of our kashrus operation. We
may be sympathetic to individuals’ personal circumstances but a
debt has been incurred which needs to be pursued.
Another example. The Federation owns various properties jointly
with individuals. At the time of writing this article, one co-owner
claims that his proportion of the relevant property is higher because
of work which he has previously carried out, although without the
knowledge or prior consent of the Federation. The Honorary Officers
cannot gift any of its assets, either legally or morally, because they
are held for the benefit of the whole membership. Okay we say, but
show us the invoices for the work that has been carried out so that
we can obtain a revised valuation and take a view. Invoices have
not yet been submitted and the individual is upset that we have not
agreed to his demands.
This is my last term of office. Whether I have upheld the highest
principles of Yiddishkeit is for others to judge. But I can say that I
have always treated everyone with courtesy and respect, whatever
the provocation. Who knows who we might end up meeting after
120 years in the World to Come?
My colleagues in Head Office join with me in wishing you and your
families a happy and kosher Pesach.
Page 6 Hamaor / April 2013