"Fondly do we hope, fervently do we pray, that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue until all the wealth piled by the bondsman's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said "the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether."
Pro
(13) And He said to Abram, “Know well that your offspring shall be strangers in a land not theirs, and they shall be enslaved and oppressed four hundred years; (14) but I will execute judgment on the nation they shall serve, and in the end they shall go free with great wealth.
(21) And I will dispose the Egyptians favorably toward this people, so that when you go, you will not go away empty-handed. (22) Each woman shall borrow from her neighbor and the lodger in her house objects of silver and gold, and clothing, and you shall put these on your sons and daughters, thus stripping the Egyptians.”
(35) The Israelites had done Moses’ bidding and borrowed (yishalu) from the Egyptians objects of silver and gold, and clothing. (36) And the LORD had disposed the Egyptians favorably toward the people, and they let them have their request; thus they stripped the Egyptians.
(1) וישאלו איש מאת רעהו ואשה מאת רעותה כלי כסף וגו', the meaning of שאלה here is not the same as when women “borrow” kitchen utensils and the like, it being understood that these will be returned to the lender. G’d, i.e. Moses, commanded the people to ask for these trinkets, garments, etc., as outright gifts. G’d would see to it that the Israelites asking for this would be considered by the Egyptians as deserving of this so that they would gladly part with the items in question. This did not involve any misrepresentation on the part of G’d, the Egyptians being perfectly aware that nothing they would give their Israelite neighbours could even remotely compensate them for the wages these people had never received during all these years. In that connection, consider that a Jewish servant (for whose services his master paid six years’ wages in advance to the servant’s creditor) at the end of his 6 years of service must be given an ex gratia payment by his master so that he can establish himself economically. (Deuteronomy 15,13-14). How much more so would the Israelites be entitled at this time to a small installment of all the money owed them for 210 (or 86) years of slave labour!
(12) If a fellow Hebrew, man or woman, is sold to you, he shall serve you six years, and in the seventh year you shall set him free. (13) When you set him free, do not let him go empty-handed: (14) Furnish him out of the flock, threshing floor, and vat, with which the LORD your God has blessed you. (15) Bear in mind that you were slaves in the land of Egypt and the LORD your God redeemed you; therefore I enjoin this commandment upon you today.
וְכֵן הַחוֹבֵל בַּחֲבֵרוֹ וְהַמַּזִּיק מָמוֹנוֹ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁשִּׁלֵּם לוֹ מַה שֶּׁהוּא חַיָּב לוֹ אֵינוֹ מִתְכַּפֵּר עַד שֶׁיִּתְוַדֶּה וְיָשׁוּב מִלַּעֲשׂוֹת כָּזֶה לְעוֹלָם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (במדבר ה ו) "מִכָּל חַטֹּאת הָאָדָם":
...Even he, who injures his friend or causes him damages in money matters, although he makes restitution of what he owes him, finds no atonement, unless he makes verbal confession and repents by obligating himself never to repeat this again, even as is said:...
קדמוניות היהודים ליוסף בן מתתיהו, ספר שני י"ד:
והמצרים כיבדו אותם במתנות, אלה כדי שימהרו, ואלה מתוך ידידות של שכנים, שהיו רוחשים להם, והם יצאו, והמצרים בוכים ומתחרטים שנהגו בהם ברשע.
TOMORROW, ON TUESDAY AT 5:00 P.M. AT “MOGRABI SQUARE” AN ANGRY RALLY AND DEMONSTRATION OF GRIEF WILL BE HELD AGAINST HAVING ANY DISCUSSIONS WITH THE GERMAN MURDERERS.
OUR DEMAND: WITHDRAW THE DISGRACEFUL DELEGATION AND HONOR WILL THEREBY BE RETURNED TO THE MEMORY OF THE MILLIONS.
THE NATION OF ZION WILL ROLL BACK THE GREAT SHAME OF REPARATIONS.
ATTEND THE RALLY IN GREAT NUMBERS!
WHEREAS unspeakable criminal acts were perpetrated against the Jewish people during the National-Socialist regime of terror AND WHEREAS by a declaration in the Bundestag on 27th September, 1951, the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany made known their determination, within the limits of their capacity, to make good the material damage caused by these acts AND WHEREAS the State of Israel has assumed the heavy burden of resettling so great a number of uprooted and destitute Jewish refugees from Germany and from territories formerly under German rule and has on this basis advanced a claim against the Federal Republic of Germany for global recompense for the cost of the integration of these refugees Now THEREFORE the State of Israel and the Federal Republic of Germany have agreed as follows: Article 1 (a) The Federal Republic of Germany shall, in view of the considerations hereinbefore recited, pay to the State of Israel the sum of 3,000 million Deutsche Mark. (b) In addition, the Federal Republic of Germany shall, in compliance with the obligation undertaken in Article 1 of Protocol No. 2 this day drawn up and signed between the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany and the Conference on Jewish Material Claims against Germany, pay to Israel for the benefit of the said Conference the sum of 450 million Deutsche Mark ; the said sum of 450 million Deutsche Mark shall be used for the purposes set out in Article 2 of the said Protocol.
(6) The LORD passed before him and proclaimed: “The LORD! the LORD! a God compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, abounding in kindness and faithfulness, (7) extending kindness to the thousandth generation, forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin; yet He does not remit all punishment, but visits the iniquity of parents upon children and children’s children, upon the third and fourth generations.”
(16) Parents shall not be put to death for children, nor children be put to death for parents: a person shall be put to death only for his own crime.
The Gemara asks: And are children not put to death for the sin of the fathers? But isn’t it written: “Visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children, unto the third and unto the fourth generation” (Exodus 34:7)? The Gemara answers: There, the verse is referring to a situation where the children adopt the actions of their ancestors as their own. If they do not behave like their ancestors they are not punished for their ancestors’ sins. This is as it is taught in a baraita: The verse: “And also in the iniquities of their fathers shall they pine away with them” (Leviticus 26:39), is referring to a case where they adopt the actions of their ancestors as their own. Do you say that it is referring specifically to a case where they adopt the actions of their ancestors, or perhaps it applies even where they do not adopt their ancestors’ actions? When the verse states: “Every man shall be put to death for his own sin,” the Torah explicates that one is not put to death if he did not sin. Therefore, the verse in Leviticus is clearly referring to a case where they adopt the actions of their ancestors as their own.
The Gemara asks: And are descendants not punished for the sins of their ancestors unless they adopt their behavior? But isn’t it written: “And they shall stumble one upon another” (Leviticus 26:37)? This verse is homiletically interpreted to mean that the Jewish people shall stumble, one due to the iniquity of another, i.e., they are punished for each other’s sins, which teaches that all Jews are considered guarantors, i.e., responsible, for one another. The Gemara answers: There, in the verse in Leviticus, the reference is to a case where others had the ability to protest the sin but they did not protest. Consequently, they are punished for not protesting, regardless of any familial relationship they may have with the sinner.
רפוי הכהו חייב לרפאותו וכו': [ת"ר] עלו בו צמחים מחמת המכה ונסתרה המכה חייב לרפאותו וחייב ליתן לו דמי שבתו שלא מחמת המכה אינו חייב לרפאותו ואינו חייב ליתן לו דמי שבתו ... כדתניא הרי שעבר על דברי רופא ואכל דבש או כל מיני מתיקה מפני שדבש וכל מיני מתיקה קשין למכה והעלה מכתו גרגותני יכול יהא חייב לרפאותו ת"ל רק מאי גרגותני אמר אביי נאתא כריכתא מאי אסותיה אהלא וקירא וקלבא
§ The mishna teaches: How is payment for medical costs assessed? If one struck another, then he is liable to heal him by paying for his medical costs. The Sages taught in a baraita (Tosefta 9:4): If growths appeared on the injured area due to the injury, and the wound reopened, then the one who caused the injury is again liable to heal him by covering his medical costs, and is liable to give him the value of his loss of livelihood while he recovers from the reopened wound. But if the growths that appeared are not due to the injury, he is not liable to heal him by covering his medical costs, and he is not liable to give him the value of his loss of livelihood....The Master said: One might have thought that this is the halakha even if the growths were not due to the injury. Therefore, the verse states: “Only he shall pay for his loss of livelihood,” to teach that he is exempt in this case. The Gemara asks: Is there a need for the verse to teach that he is exempt in the case of growths that were not due to the injury? The Sages say: What did the baraita mean when it said that the growths were not due to the injury? As it is taught in a baraita: In the case of one who violated his doctor’s instructions and ate honey or any type of sweet food, which the doctor had instructed him not to eat because of the fact that honey or any type of sweet foods are detrimental to the recovery from the injury; and his injury developed necrosis; one might have thought that the one who caused the injury should be liable to heal him by covering his medical costs. Therefore, the verse states: “Only,” to teach that he is exempt in this case.
Broach the topic of reparations today and a barrage of questions inevitably follows: Who will be paid? How much will they be paid? Who will pay? But if the practicalities, not the justice, of reparations are the true sticking point, there has for some time been the beginnings of a solution...
A country curious about how reparations might actually work has an easy solution in Conyers’s bill, now called HR 40, the Commission to Study Reparation Proposals for African Americans Act. We would support this bill, submit the question to study, and then assess the possible solutions. But we are not interested.
John Conyers’s HR 40 is the vehicle for that hearing. No one can know what would come out of such a debate. Perhaps no number can fully capture the multi-century plunder of black people in America. Perhaps the number is so large that it can’t be imagined, let alone calculated and dispensed. But I believe that wrestling publicly with these questions matters as much as—if not more than—the specific answers that might be produced. An America that asks what it owes its most vulnerable citizens is improved and humane. An America that looks away is ignoring not just the sins of the past but the sins of the present and the certain sins of the future. More important than any single check cut to any African American, the payment of reparations would represent America’s maturation out of the childhood myth of its innocence into a wisdom worthy of its founders.