forgiveness – Page 3 – Engaging Peace

Taking responsibility for one’s own behavior: Yom Kippur

Posted on October 3, 2011October 7, 2011 by kathiemm

[Note from Kathie Malley-Morrison: Today we welcome another guest post from Dr. Hilda Perlitsh, a social psychologist with expertise in the areas of organizational psychology, career development, and cross-cultural issues.]

Jews praying in the synagogue on Yom Kippur by Maurycy Gottlieb (Image in public domain)

“Yom Kippur,” Hebrew for “Day of Atonement,” instituted in Biblical times, mandated in Leviticus, is considered to be the most significant holy day of the year among the Jewish people.

This ancient, enduring observance completes a 10 day period, the High Holy Days or “Days of Awe,” which begins at the New Year, Rosh Hashanah.

During this period behaviors towards others and to G-d are examined and one engages in reflection and repentance. G-d inscribes each person’s fate in the “Book of Life” for the coming year and these decisions are “sealed” at the end of Yom Kippur.

The day itself is characterized as a “complete Sabbath” prescribing “prayer, repentance and charity,” requiring a 25 hour fast, and abstinence from labor and pleasures. The Yom Kippur service includes the recitation of comprehensive lists of sins and petitions of forgiveness.

The Jewish tradition is very clear about differentiating types of sins; petitions to relieve sins that are addressed to G-d only pertain to the individual’s relationship to G-d such as any vows made against G-d (as during forced conversions during the Inquisition). Transgressions committed against persons must be settled with those persons; G-d does not forgive sins committed against other people.

The lists of sins in the traditional prayer service address mistreatment of others especially in the use of language (e.g. falsehoods, slander, humiliations). Even if one has personally not committed any sins, redress for others in the community is prayed for.

Yom Kippur begins at sundown with the chanting of the “Kol Nidre” prayer which seeks annulment of vows against G-d, and closes with the “Ni’elah” service which signifies the “closing of the gates” for the inscriptions for the year ahead, followed by a long blast of the Shofar, a ram’s horn.

The theme of “T’Shuvah” translated as repentance, more precisely “return”, is central and interpreted as the recognition of free will and the imperative to struggle with and take personal responsibility for one’s behavior.[1] Redemption includes the tasks of: addressing the world’s oppressed, teaching compassion, giving charity for less fortunate others, being just and loving mercy.

This holy period prescribes processes that enjoin each person to chart a corrective course at the beginning of every Jewish New Year and thus provides the basic scaffold for the moral framework of Jewish civilization.

The challenges embodied in the “Days of Awe” are built on various strands of human strivings, codified into Jewish law and traditions, transmitted into and joining the civilizing thrusts of other beliefs and traditions…..towards the continuous repair of the world: “Tikun Olam”.

[1] Meditation, page 106….”.surely our deeds do not pass away unrecorded. Every word, every act inscribes itself in the Book of Life. Freely we choose and what we have chosen to become stands in judgment over what we may yet hope to be. In our choices we are not always free. But if only we make the effort to turn, every force of goodness, within and without, will help us, while we live, to escape that death of the heart which leads to sin.” Gates of Repentance: the New Union Prayerbook for the Days of Awe”. Central Conference of American Rabbis: New York, 1978, revised 1996.

Hilda D. Perlitsh, Ph.D., Clinical Associate Professor of Psychology, Boston University

Proposal: International Day for Apology and Forgiveness

Posted on June 2, 2011June 1, 2011 by kathiemm

[Note from Kathie Malley-Morrison: Today we welcome another contribution by our guest author, Dr. Majed Ashy.]

This past Memorial Day, like all Memorial days, is a good day to remember the fallen
soldiers, and an opportunity to contemplate –as individuals, communities, and
nations– ways to cultivate peace and reduce war casualties and suffering.

There are groups that have promoted the idea of an International Day of Forgiveness and a Global Day of Forgiveness.

I believe that there is an international need for an increase in education and awareness regarding apology as well as forgiveness and their roles in personal, social, and international relations.

An organization in the U.S. asked me to write a comment regarding President Obama’s speech in Cairo. In the comment I suggested the establishment of an International Day for Apology and Forgiveness. During this day, schools can discuss the roles of apology and forgiveness, do workshops on how to apologize accurately, and discuss various issues related to forgiveness.

It can be also a day for the media to present films and programs related to the topic. The United Nations and the member states might hold meetings and discussions on the roles of apology and forgiveness in world peace. States might offer apologies regarding past errors they did.

In addition, during this day, people might have the opportunity to apologize and forgive. Research showed that sometimes people are willing to apologize and forgive but they need an environment that is suitable for that–an environment that supports a peaceful mental state, and a social context that deeply understands the importance of apology and forgiveness for human progress.

Establishing such a day might contribute to such an understanding.

Majed Ashy, Ph.D., assistant professor of psychology at Merrimack College and research fellow in psychiatry at McLean Hospital/Harvard Medical School

In honor of President Lincoln: Moving towards freedom

Posted on February 10, 2011February 13, 2011 by kathiemm

[Note from Kathie Malley-Morrison: Today we welcome the first of several contributions by our guest contributor Majed Ashy. Dr. Ashy is an assistant professor of psychology at Merrimack College and a research fellow in psychiatry at McLean Hospital/Harvard Medical School. He was born in Lebanon and is a Saudi Arabian. He earned his B.A, M.A, and Ph.D. in psychology from Boston University. His research in psychoneuroimmunology and political psychology focuses on childhood experience of adversity and its psychobiological consequences. He authored the Saudi Arabia chapter in State Violence and the Right to Peace: An International Survey of the Views of Ordinary People Greenwood Publishing Group / Praeger series. He is contributing several chapters to two volumes to be published by Springer Publishing Co.: Handbook on War, Torture, and Terrorism, and Handbook on Protest, Peace, Reconciliation, Apology, and Forgiveness.]

By Majed Ashy, Guest Author

Two arguments are presented repeatedly in discussions of the evolution of democracy in the Middle East: “Arabs are not ready for democracy,” and “If Arabs get more democratic rights, then some Islamic extremists will come to power and that is a threat to the whole world.”

Army trucks surrounding Tahrir Square, Cairo (Photo by Ramy Raoof; licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic; from Wikimedia Commons)

I heard similar alarmist arguments against women’s suffrage, African American civil rights movements, and Black liberation in South Africa. President Lincoln, whose birthday is this week, did not accept the arguments against freeing the slaves in America, but millions of people still lack freedom.

With advancements in communication technologies, Internet resources, social networks, media, satellite TV stations, and international travel, the evolution in individual empowerment and the rise of social collective awareness are natural consequences. Masses of people are rejecting as self serving and racist the “old” narratives about the necessity of oppression.

One of the problems faced in the Middle East is the communication gap between governments and the general populations. Many Middle Eastern governments are still using a “language” that does not speak to people who are educated, aware, and able to see through the narratives of oppression. The image of men on camels and horses in Tahrir square in Cairo beating protesters summarize this divide.

We have in the Middle East youth who represent the future, are linked through the Internet to people all over the world, watch satellite TV stations from almost every country, and call for human rights. On the other side we have people who come from the ancient past and deal with their problems by riding camels and beating people up.

The current conflict in the Middle East is about narratives. One narrative that has not been given a chance yet is that the Middle East can evolve into a responsible democracy that takes into account human rights, international law, and democracy. All lovers of freedom and democracy should respect and help sustain this effort.

Majed Ashy

Exonerating or pardoning the victim (Moral engagement, part 9)

Posted on December 16, 2010December 22, 2010 by kathiemm

The form of moral engagement that we call “exonerating or pardoning the victim” is in many ways a logical outgrowth of perspective taking and empathy. If you are able to put yourself in the shoes of another, you become more able to understand the ways in which people who behaved inhumanely may be no more inhumane and evil, and have no more desire to kill and maim, than you.

Failure to pardon can have disastrous effects. After World War I, there was no exonerating or pardoning of any of the people in the Axis powers by the Allies. Instead, the heavy load of reparations, imposed poverty, and humiliation of all Germans–whether they had been directly involved in the war or not–contributed directly to the rise of Hitler and World War II.

After World War II, the victorious powers proved that they, for at least that one generation, had learned the lesson of World War I, and avoided acting on desires for punishment and retaliation, working instead to rebuild Japan and Germany.

Perhaps the highest level of moral engagement can be found in individuals who were themselves victimized but have found the courage to forgive their oppressors; a perfect example of this level and type of moral engagement can be found in Nelson Mandela. In a later post, we will provide a review of the film Invictus, a powerful illustration of Mandela’s forgiveness program, carried out in the context o f preparation for a World Cup rugby match.

The following movie review by our guest blogger, Mimi Maritz, illustrates these themes of exonerating and pardoning in another film.

Review of “Forgiving Dr. Mengele”
This documentary tells the story of Holocaust concentration camp survivor, Eva. Like her twin sister Miriam, Eva was subjected to excruciating and nearly fatal experiments by Dr. Mengele, the notorious prison camp doctor, yet she came to pardon her former oppressors.

Through her search to help Miriam discover which drug Dr. Mengele injected to stunt her kidney growth, Eva met face-to-face with other Nazis involved in the Holocaust. Her search led her to realize that the only way to move forward and live life without regret was by forgiving those who had harmed her and millions of others.

Eva argues that to avoid being victims for the rest of their lives, the survivors of victimization must free themselves from suffering, and that the only way to do this is by accepting the past and forgiving the transgressors.

By forgiving, Eva does not mean forgetting; she is continually spreading her story to all who will listen. When another survivor says to Eva “I am unable to smile deeply from my heart… I do not know how to be happy,” Eva declares that we have the right to live without pain and we do not need permission to start healing our hearts.

Kathie Malley-Morrison, Professor of Psychology, with Mimi Maritz