(ד) מִדַּרְכֵי הַתְּשׁוּבָה לִהְיוֹת הַשָּׁב צוֹעֵק תָּמִיד לִפְנֵי הַשֵּׁם בִּבְכִי וּבְתַחֲנוּנִים וְעוֹשֶׂה צְדָקָה כְּפִי כֹּחוֹ וּמִתְרַחֵק הַרְבֵּה מִן הַדָּבָר שֶׁחָטָא בּוֹ וּמְשַׁנֶּה שְׁמוֹ כְּלוֹמַר אֲנִי אַחֵר וְאֵינִי אוֹתוֹ הָאִישׁ שֶׁעָשָׂה אוֹתָן הַמַּעֲשִׂים וּמְשַׁנֶּה מַעֲשָׂיו כֻּלָּן לְטוֹבָה וּלְדֶרֶךְ יְשָׁרָה וְגוֹלֶה מִמְּקוֹמוֹ. שֶׁגָּלוּת מְכַפֶּרֶת עָוֹן מִפְּנֵי שֶׁגּוֹרֶמֶת לוֹ לְהִכָּנַע וְלִהְיוֹת עָנָו וּשְׁפַל רוּחַ:
(4) Among the ways of teshuvah are for the penitent to constantly shout before God with crying and pleading; and to do tzedakah according to his ability; and to distance himself very far from the thing in which he sinned; and to change his name, meaning to say “I am someone else and I am not the same person who did those things;” and to change all of his actions for good and onto the straight path; and to go into exile, because exile atones for sins since it forces him to bow and to be humble and of low spirit.
עברות שבין אדם למקום, יום הכפורים מכפר. עברות שבין אדם לחברו, אין יום הכפורים מכפר, עד שירצה את חברו.
Yom Kippur atones for transgressions between a person and God, but for a transgression against one's neighbour, Yom Kippur cannot atone, until he appeases his neighbour.
אֲפִלּוּ לֹא הִקְנִיט אֶת חֲבֵרוֹ אֶלָּא בִּדְבָרִים צָרִיךְ לְפַיְּסוֹ וְלִפְגֹּעַ בּוֹ עַד שֶׁיִּמְחל לוֹ.
לֹא רָצָה חֲבֵרוֹ לִמְחל לוֹ מֵבִיא לוֹ שׁוּרָה שֶׁל שְׁלֹשָׁה בְּנֵי אָדָם מֵרֵעָיו וּפוֹגְעִין בּוֹ וּמְבַקְּשִׁין מִמֶּנּוּ. לֹא נִתְרַצָּה לָהֶן מֵבִיא לוֹ שְׁנִיָּה וּשְׁלִישִׁית. לֹא רָצָה מְנִיחוֹ וְהוֹלֵךְ לוֹ וְזֶה שֶׁלֹּא מָחַל הוּא הַחוֹטֵא.
If his fellow doesn't want to forgive him, he brings a group of three of his friends and they approach him and request [forgiveness] from him; if he [the wronged party] is not appeased, he should bring a second and third [group]. If he [still] doesn't want [to forgive him], he may leave him, and the one who refuses to forgive is the sinner. But if [the wronged party] was his teacher, he should go and come to him for forgiveness even a thousand times until he does forgive him.
The National Apology to the Stolen Generations
13 February 2018 marks the 10th anniversary of the National Apology by then Prime Minister Kevin Rudd
to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people also known as The Stolen Generations, who suffered as a result of past government policies of forced child removal and assimilation. In addition National Sorry Day is held on 26 May each year to acknowledge and recognise members of the Stolen Generations.
Aboriginal responses to the National Apology:
"I feel great. I'm on top of the world, I'm floating on air. It's a big weight off my shoulders… It's the closure I need."
—Archie Roach, 52, Aboriginal singer and songwriter and member of the Stolen Generations
"The apology will help to heal the scars but it will never heal my pain and hurt."
—Mary Farrell-Hooker, 50, member of the Stolen Generations
"I fully welcome the apology to the Stolen Generation as a lot of people will now know what took place."
—Alec Kruger, 83, member of the Stolen Generations
"I'm really encouraged and buoyed by the chance that has been taken here to really open the door to the process of healing."
—Dr Alex Brown, Aboriginal doctor
"The word 'sorry' doesn't come near what [my father] went through. They can apologise in a thousand different ways without saying sorry. Actions speak louder than words."
—Norman Stewart, son of a Stolen Generations member
"To me, our Prime Minister's apology is saying to my granny and the thousands like her, their children, grandchildren and great grandchildren, that we understand your pain and we acknowledge this long-ignored chapter in our history."
—Che Cockatoo-Collins, head of the Indigenous Sports Academy, Port Adelaide
"I am inspired by this apology as an act of true reconciliation towards Indigenous Australia."
—Mick Dodson, co-chairman of Reconciliation Australia
"Kevin Rudd's eloquent and culturally sensitive words undoubtedly facilitated the lifting of the heavy emotional load from the frail shoulders of those beautiful, resilient Stolen Generations victims."
—Stephen Hagan, Aboriginal academic
Talking to Ourselves "among the Innocent Dead": On Reconciliation, Forgiveness, and Mourning - Heidi Grunebaum, 2002 [In response to the South African Truth and Reconciliation Report (TRC) ]
What debt do reconciliation and forgiveness pay to the dead and to the survivors? And what debt is annulled?
[...]. Operating through discourses of morality, theology, and inter- and intrasubjective notions of "healing," reconciliation discourse relies on unproblematized identities of victims and perpetrators.[...]
Although highly restrictive in its definitions of who constituted a victim, the TRC was envisaged as a victim-centered institution,[...].
Part of the importance of the TRC hearings was their public and institutional acknowledgment of experiences that had been officially denied in the past.[...][But actually]the moral responsibility of reconciliation and forgiveness is placed on the shoulders of those who have been denied full humanity because of skin color, the classification of race-transferred onto the shoulders of any one not considered "white" who has been dispossessed of all forms of expression of selfhood: political, social, economic, linguistic, cultural.
"Liberate yourselves from victimhood," people are told, and then they are provided with the terms, the conditions, the language, and the mode of doing so, but not the material or economic means.
"Forgiveness is not about forgetting," it is claimed in the report; rather it "is about seeking to forego bitterness, renouncing resentment, moving past old hurt, and becoming a survivor rather than a passive victim" (1: 116). This claim equates the expression of bitterness, resentment, and hurt with passive victimhood as opposed to equating it with a victimhood that has the moral right and agency to define the processes of dealing with trauma and incommensurable harm, a right and agency that are fundamental conditions for self-restitution and for being, precisely, a survivor.Forgiveness in this context is, then, very much about forgetting. [...]. Forgiving relates to memory and recognition, then, not as a right, a claim, or a demand but as the deferred outcome of a long process that includes mourning the loss, honoring the dead, restitution of the land, and reclaiming the language of resistance and survival over the silence of abjection, trauma and despair.[...]
Before forgiveness, before reconciliation, there is an obligation of recognition: recognition as the suspension of expectation, as the move toward a reciprocity that may be endlessly deferred. For all conditions, terms, modes, and vocabularies of possible endings, healings, and closures have to be made by the historically victimized.[...]For the victimized and survivors whose anger, trauma, and poverty do not end, reconciliation risks functioning as a silencing, censoring discourse that devalues the experiences of the tens of thousands of people.[...]