HaRav Shach zt"l had a standard approach to evaluating new
suggestions: "Whenever we raised new ideas . . . he would
always involve us in his decision-making. His analysis . . .
always followed the same path: First, was there any prospect
of harm arising in the future from what was being proposed?
Second, might there be any harm in the present? Third [even
if it will do no harm], would the proposal be positively
beneficial? Only after considering these questions, would he
arrive at his verdict." ("Father Of Moreshes Ovos: HaRav
Shach and the Teshuvah Movement," by Yisroel Friedman,
Yated Ne'eman (Bnei Brak), Yisro 5762)
It very much seems that the order of the analysis is
significant: It is important to consider possible harm before
considering possible benefit in order to give it the weight
it is due. All too often, once one has considered the
possible benefits, their dazzling attraction will be so
strong as to not allow one to consider the possible harm with
the seriousness that it deserves. Therefore it is important
to consider the harm that may result from a particular policy
before thinking about the benefits. Just imagine: if gamblers
thought about their possible losses before dreaming about
their possible winnings, they might lose a lot less money.
A special Israeli Ministerial Committee to Restore Jewish
Property, led by the Minister of the Diaspora Natan
Scharansky, is preparing to discuss a report that assesses
the value of all the private property of the 3.5 million
Polish Jews — more than 90 percent of whom were
murdered — on the eve of the Holocaust. Jews made up
about 10 percent of the Polish population at the time.
Reportedly their personal property was valued at more than
$30 billion, and that does not count the thousands of
community buildings that the Jewish community owned
throughout Poland.
This is only one modern effort among many. There is also, for
example the "Operation: Last Chance" effort of the Simon
Wiesenthal Center that is active in nine European countries
including Germany. It offers a monetary reward for
information about suspected Nazi war criminals who were never
brought to justice, all of whom are in their 70s, 80s or even
90s by now.
We want to back up through the questions of HaRav Shach as
applied to these programs. (Since the backers of these
programs are so effectively promoting them, we cannot leave
the benefits for last.)
Granted, the Polish property is rightly still owned by the
original Jewish owners and their heirs. Certainly it is not
proper that those who murdered them, nor those who
collaborated with the murderers, should enjoy this wealth. No
doubt it is simple decency that it should be given over to
any living heirs and, since most of those murdered died along
with their heirs, the rest should be given to the Jewish
people for communal projects including memorializing the
martyrs (though we certainly have different ideas of an
appropriate memorial than secular Jews).
And yes, any living murderers should be brought to justice,
even if they have lived exemplary lives for the past 60 years
since those awful days. No amount of peaceful living can
cancel out a horrible crime.
Those are the positive benefits that are expected from the
two programs: restoration of property to its rightful owners
and justice to murderers.
However, might these plans do harm in the present?
The Israeli Foreign Ministry is firmly opposed to any
involvement of the Israeli government in the issue of Jewish
property. It says that the dynamics of such involvement can
bring serious diplomatic strains between the governments,
which can complicate many other modern issues that are far
removed from the sixty-year-old property.
The latest and probably last country in which "Operation Last
Chance" was introduced is Germany, but the local Jewish
community is not cooperating. They say that all the earlier
efforts in the Baltic countries have produced only two cases
that may go to trial. The campaigns make a lot of noise and
stir up antisemites, but do not produce results. The local
communities say that it complicates their relationships with
their good neighbors and enrages others.
And finally, might harm arise in the future?
In both instances, the impressions that these sort of
campaigns leave can linger for years. To those who wish to
believe ill of the Jews, both of these initiatives can be
misused to criticize the Jewish people in ways that are
obvious to those who hate us, but that we have no wish to
repeat.
We believe that if our holy ancestors, Hy"d, could
communicate with us, they would say: Don't waste your time on
our money, and leave the settling of scores to the Heavenly
Court.
The true concern for the heritage of all the earlier
generations requires us to implement their spiritual legacy:
we must live with dedication as Jews faithful to our Divine
mission in the world.
