My reactions to the statements from the Imam have ranged from initial disbelief and a withholding of judgment to a feeling of a betrayal. That is a powerful word, but an appropriate one.
One of the reasons for this is, as a Jewish man, I have always had good relationships with the Muslim community. I share their outrage at the conduct of the Israeli government at times. And, like the Jewish community as a whole, I have stood with my Muslim brothers through their darkest times in this community.
For me, the fact that the Imam said what he said hurt a lot less than the fact that many people at the Islamic Center of Davis, whom I consider my friends and allies, said nothing. It took Hamza’s courage to speak up to convince me that the worst here was true and, while I went to the press conference as a reporter, I also went as a Jewish man and as someone for whom an apology was not going to be enough.
Mayor Davis spoke for me when he asked “is it enough” and offered the answer “no it is not.”
What happened in the next 18 minutes is that my heart was moved not just by the words of Imam Shahin, but by the words of Bruce Pomer of the Jewish Community Relations Council and Rabbi Seth Castleman. My belief was cemented by the words of my friend, Pastor Bill Habicht.
I spent all day, it seemed, on Facebook sharing my experience and discussing with the community my reactions. For many, they were not willing to forgive. What was spoken could not be unspoken. Some suggested that the Imam must step down in order to cement the view that he is sincere in his apology.
I debated long and hard in my mind as to whether to ask that question in this column, but I have decided that is not my call. Instead, I will use my space today to explain why, for me, I am willing to give the Imam a chance but acknowledge that Robb Davis is right – it is not enough to be sorry.
As Rabbi Castleman put it so eloquently, “As you know as well as I, apologies are only as worthy as the actions that follow.” He said, “So I call upon you, I implore you to follow up those words with actions.”
We are a forgiving people in this nation and we are willing to forgive people who make mistakes if they are sincere and forthright in their apologies.
For many, they argued that the Imam is only sorry he got caught. But they did not watch him speak as his hands were shaking. They did not hear the contrition and hurt in his voice.
As Bill Habicht told me, “When he came back, he had tears in his eyes.” For the Pastor, he saw sincerity and contrition.
What we learned yesterday is that, for several days and a number of hours, the Imam and the leadership of the Islamic Center met with the Jewish community leaders, and in effect what we had was a restorative justice process.
The first step in this process was that the Imam had to understand that harm was done by his words. He caused harm to the Jewish community. He caused harm to the Davis community.
As Rabbi Castleman explained, seven or eight of them had met for hours and talked and discussed the situation. The apology came out of that process.
Don’t believe the words of the Imam? Then listen to the words of Bruce Pomer, chair of the Jewish Community Relations Council who said that when he first heard the remarks, “I was so angry.”
But HIS heart was changed by this process.
As he said, “through the process of the last several hours and days, as I worked with the Muslim community to bring about this event, the process of dealing with the problem, coming together, has created a good deal of hope in my mind and made me realize that we have the foundation to keep working together and make that relationship – and it is so important now that we be together because of the forces we face.
“We’re allies most of the time,” he said. “And when we got done preparing for this event, we were allies again.”
Then read the words of Seth Castleman, who accepted the Imam’s apology.
He said, “The world that we have today is in fact broken, as Mayor Robb Davis spoke of,” he said. “In Judaism we say it’s made up of broken shards of the earth and hidden sparks of divinity. To heal the world to me means putting those broken pieces back together and finding those hidden sparks.”
In the process of meeting, he said, “we found that we agreed on far more than we disagreed.”
And in the process of meeting they were able to start putting the broken pieces together.
If those men who were very angry and hurt can come out of this process and accept his apology, we at least should give him the same chance.
This is at the heart of restorative justice.
My early lessons on restorative justice came both from Mayor Robb Davis but also from a speaker we had, Sujatha Baliga. Ms. Baliga, in her 2013 MLK speech in Davis, talked about this restorative justice process she had in Florida where a young man murdered his fiancé, but her family decided that his crime should not sever him from humanity, and through that process they reached a resolution to pick up the pieces and restore the vision of their daughter.
Robb Davis shared with me that many in the community do not have a clear understanding of what restorative justice looks like.
“If you do not believe that people can be changed, if they are beyond redemption, if they are evil, then you really don’t have a place to invite them back into the community after they have admitted error,” he told me. “That is the challenge. Is the Imam beyond redemption? I say ‘no.’”
Betrayal is in many ways considered the worst of sin of all. In Dante’s Inferno, we see that the worst sinner, the lowest of all lows, was reserved for Judas Iscariot for the sin of betrayal of Jesus.
But if betrayal is the lowest sin, then the flipside of that is the notion of redemption – the act by which someone can restore themselves after committing a grievous error.
I deeply and firmly believe that people can change. As I fight for criminal justice reform, I must also fight for the idea that people can redeem their past mistakes and learn from them. That people who become aware of their shortcomings, and are honest about them, can gain understanding and learn from those mistakes.
We are all fallible humans and we all make mistakes. The best among us are the ones who take those mistakes and become better people because of them.
Yesterday, I had a long discussion with a friend of mine with whom I often agree, but who saw this situation differently. From his perspective, the Imam must go through a process of thinking and a few days is not sufficient. He believes that the Imam should step down in order to fully acknowledge his errors.
I reserve judgment on that. What I will say is that there was a lot of damage done and many people are not ready to forgive and not willing to believe that someone could state something like this without the words being in their heart the truth.
For me though, moments of anger can cloud better judgment. The key for me is not what he said or whether he meant it at the time, but whether he truly at this time understands that what he said was wrong and can commit to be a voice for change in this community and this world.
As Rabbi Castleman said, the Imam needs to follow up his words of apology with actions: “Nothing less than that will satisfy the community that you serve and I serve.”
—David M. Greenwald reporting
Thanks, David, for your thoughtful articles on this topic. My family and I are members of Congregation Bet Haverim and I appreciate and trust the approach that Rabbi Castelman and the CBH Board have taken toward this matter.
Personally, however, I am very hurt and distrustful now. I donated to the mosque after the bacon incident and “betrayed” pretty much sums up how I feel now. I also feel angry and scared for my kids. I know that these feelings will mellow in time and that forgiveness is a positive path forward, but I can see it being a slow and rocky process.
If Ammar Shahin were just another Davis resident – say, a Muslim shopkeeper who ran Jewish kids out of his store with a racist rant – then I would agree with David’s “give him another chance” approach. But this guy purports to be a religious leader – a moral authority who sets the tone for his whlole congregation. He must be held to a higher standard. In the current anti-Islamic political atmosphere, the Islamic Center would be well-advised to sever ties with this not-ready-for-prime-time imam.
I’m not sure I would. Is that something that has even happened in the U.S. recently?
From article: “But if betrayal is the lowest sin, then the flipside of that is the notion of redemption – the act by which someone can restore themselves after committing a grievous error.”
What I’m failing to understand is why anyone thinks that this incident is the result of one man’s individual “error”, as if he (alone) “invented” the underlying views out-of-the-blue. Is “browbeating” this one leader the “answer”?
“For me, the fact that the Imam said what he said hurt a lot less than the fact that many people at the Islamic Center of Davis, whom I consider my friends and allies, said nothing”
Betrayal was not in reference to him
Regardless of that individual reference, my primary question remains.
Just wondering – did you ask your friends and allies why they said nothing? Did you tell them how you feel? (Sorry in advance for the “touchy-feely” question.) 🙂
The answer is complicated and not one I’m going to get into yet
Understood. (After I wrote that, I was thinking that this might be trending toward an online public therapy session!)
I think I’ll also avoid asking more about the underlying problems which led to this. (It’s simply too sensitive of a topic to discuss online. It’s much like discussing racism in an honest manner.)
Good point Ron, they all sat there listening and as far as we know they never objected or said anything. If not for MEMRI we as a community would have no idea that it occured. Once outed the response was deflection, denial and blaming the messenger. According to MEMRI this wasn’t the first time either.
I didn’t know much about him except for some of his comments in the Enterprise but I now have a lot of respect for Hamza Nakhal.
Keith: Discussions regarding religion are even more sensitive than discussing politics!
In all honesty, I don’t know enough about Islam (and/or the various forms of it?) to comment (and to avoid being attacked, myself).
I think Tia and Todd made some good points, yesterday. (And yes – you have a point regarding a type of “political correctness” that surrounds these discussions.)
I have enough problems discussing growth/development on this site. Not looking for any more! 🙂
You know – I actually do have one other thought that I’d like to share.
“Political correctness” often stands in the way of honest discussions. That point is reiterated in my question regarding the public “browbeating” that’s occurring, regarding this one leader. That leader (and those like him) are responding to something broader. It’s not entirely an “individual mistake”.
On the other hand, the public “browbeating” might enable that leader (and those like him) to realize that such views and comments cause pain and concern for others (whom they might know and care about).
“If not for MEMRI we as a community would have no idea that it occurred. “
Now that is an interesting point. If anyone not at the speech did not know it had occurred, would any harm have been done ? I do not know the answer. Just curious about your thoughts.
Tia I feel you’re trying to make a point in the form of a question as you often do.
I feel hate speech is harmful especially when being sermoned to a group even if it’s kept under wraps.
So Tia, a question for you. Do you feel MEMRI caused harm to the community by devulging the Imam’s words? Do you feel MEMRI is at fault here?
From what we know, it is difficult to fault MEMRI in this particular case.
Hamza El-Nakhal… a sign of respect to get someone’s name right… and yes, he and his family are honorable community-based people, and have the profound respect of many in town…
Thanks Howeed, I’ll remember that.
Nonsense. MEMRI has an intention – the “Jewish activists” made the most clear comment about this in their op-ed – that it neither apologizes for or even acknowledges.
Another example of attack the messenger even if the messenger was telling the truth.
. . . and yet that is exactly what the initial response was.
The initial response was a distrust of the source and they reputation.
And it’s amazing that we still have people faulting them.
A view from someone in no way directly affected. What stands out for me as someone who has no formal religious affiliation, is that the majority of the comments seem to be based on individuals stance and relationship to their own religion, as David says “As a Jewish man”. This is difficult for me conceptually, because it seems to be at the heart of the issue. Loyalty to religion seems to provide an inflexible framework through which one sees the words of those of another faith. I see this as always perilous since all such framing makes it harder for us to “see” into the heart of an individual whose “framing” is different from our own. When we accept our own position as “truth” it is that much harder to appreciate the “truth” of another.
I make no judgement about what kind of “penance” or “restitution” is sufficient, but would say that neither should those who are prone to judge harshly.
You use the word “loyalty” when I would use the “term” identity and for me, it’s a cultural identity more than anything else, I’m not religious in any way, shape or form.
Many people who identify as Jewish are not religious.
David, you seem to be rather religious about getting up early and adding new posts to the ‘Vanguard….
Indeed
If the words were taken in context, and I will never claim to know for sure one way or the other, they called for a people to be wiped out. This is also known as genocide. Such speech goes way beyond “causing harm in the community”.
Being Jewish goes far beyond religion for most of us who claim that affiliation. I hate to ever invoke Hitler, but in this case it is appropriate: Hitler would not have cared if I was religiously Jewish or not. Although hard to verify, I was told about half of the Jewish family name was wiped out in Hitler’s genocide. That was only 75 years ago, three generations.
We, Jews, religious or not, do not take such words lightly.
Another approach:
If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.
But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every charge may be established by the evidence of two or three witnesses.
If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the community.
And if he refuses to listen even to the community, let him be subject to world-wide social media, as an object of scorn.
This is an approach that is approximately 180 degrees different from the current situation. At least, apparently.
The general approach was taught by a Jewish guy, often considered as ‘rabbi’, nearly 2000 years ago.
What would Jesus do? In a world of social media?
How about a 1,000,000 bail than apology ?
I myself find it hard to see how someone could say what he said without believing it to some extent. And what he said reflected not just a small prejudice, but something much deeper and malicious. Beliefs like that don’t go away in a day or two, or on their own. Apologies are good, but if the belief is still there, then I have a hard time forgiving and moving on.
“Tia I feel you’re trying to make a point in the form of a question as you often do.”
I feel that you have chosen to make the form of my question the issue rather than addressing the question as you often do. I think that there could be said to have been harm done by both the Imam’s words, and the way in which those words were disclosed. It is entirely possible for both sides to have some responsibility in the harm done.
“If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.”
The problem here is the assumption that your brother has actually committed a sin against you as opposed to that merely being your opinion. What it does not address is how to handle the case in which you believe a wrong has been done you, but your brother does not agree even after listening to you. Let’s suppose for a moment that if your brother did not actually do the act in question, or there were mitigating circumstances. If you insist upon your brother’s confession and contrition in that circumstance, is it not you that is creating the problem ?
Do you understand what a”sin” is Tia? It is not a ‘crime’… it is a ‘failure to love’… an “indiscretion”, a “hurt”, an ‘offense’… one can sin against God (rare, particularly if you are atheistic, agnostic) or you can ‘sin’ against a brother or sister…
Is the failure to recognize that same sex couples are entitled to marry and find happiness a ‘sin against one’s brother’… a ‘hurt’? Is the failure to recognize that an abortion, natural or medically induced abortion can be justified and appropriate a “hurt”? An ‘offense’?
Perhaps I should have worded it differently… if someone offends your sensibilities, your ‘world view’, should you not talk to that person first about your perceived ‘offense’ (in some translations, ‘sin’=’offense’)? Or do you post it on social media first?
Agnostics and atheists can be more “pious” than the most ardent ‘fundamentalists’… that’s real. And I will not accuse of anyone being ‘pious’… they have to look into their ‘hearts’, minds, and…
There’s a large category between people of faith and “agnostics and atheists.” And those who are secular tend to watch these debates about sin, forgiveness, etc., with a feeling that you all are speaking a whole different language.
There is a strong connection, obviously, between beliefs, emotions, and behavior. I have no problem at all believing that the imam believed what he said in the prayer, that his behavior was governed by his emotional reaction to events in Jerusalem coupled with his core beliefs about other faiths, and that he also believes what he said in his apology. Those things are not in conflict with each other. I think he was genuinely angry about what led to his prayer, and genuinely upset about the reaction that it caused.
It is very possible to have a strong reaction and bias against another tribe, and then find it tempered when you meet actual people in that tribe and interact with them in your own community. When you meet actual people who are ‘other’ it is hard to sustain a generalized bias: it is harder to generalize to the particular, as they say.
To change his behavior and moderate his future sermons, he will need to develop better emotional control, greater empathy with people of the faiths that he has been trained to revile, and will need to continue to change his beliefs about those of other faiths or no faith. Changing beliefs takes time, but it can be done.
A cognitive approach would involve disputing the irrational beliefs in the face of an emotional reaction: when confronted with news about what is happening in the mosque in Jerusalem, recognize that your disagreement is with the government, not the people, not the faith of those people. That is just politics. He was even making that point earlier in his sermon, so he understands the separateness of the civil disputes and the religions involved.
People who are skeptical of his sincerity can simply watch his future behavior. He can perhaps take steps to help put them at ease: continue the dialogue with other faith leaders, even perhaps address this issue in a future sermon and post that (in English) online. It isn’t necessary to phrase this in terms of forgiveness, which is a rather specifically religious concept. Rather than ask if the community is ready to forgive him, I would ask: Is the community ready to accept that he is trying to change?
And will those who reacted so strongly acknowledge their own emotional reactions and how possibly those weren’t the healthiest responses, either? I saw some pretty disturbing comments on this issue, and feel that there are some others in the community who would benefit from introspection as well.
Don: I think you’ve summed it up pretty well.
How true.
How true, but one has to want to change. I give the odds of changing deep-held core beliefs up there with the odds of kicking heroin. I speak generally, not in this case, especially as I’ll never know for sure what was really meant by the words or what was in the heart of the speaker.
How does another “side” have responsibility here? What does that mean in this context? It wasn’t a fight, it was a speech.
I with you here Alan, I’m really no getting this line of reasoning, it just sounds like more deflection to me.
“Many people who identify as Jewish are not religious.”
As is true for many who identify as Christian, and also for those who identify as Muslim ( I was married into a secular Muslim family). I am not sure that it is the religion per se, but the cultural adherence and degree of feeling of tribal identity that causes the issues that I was referencing. I think both religious adherence and tribalism can have the same effect.
I don’t agree that it is the same. I have Christian religion in my ancestry. — I would never identify as part of the “Christian People” or “Christian”. I absolutely identify as part of the “Jewish People” and Jewish. So it is for many.
I couldn’t comment on how Muslim would be defined by those who identify.
Wow – that’s quite a question! Makes one think. (And, a very un-PC type question, at that. Perhaps you should apologize for it.) 🙂
Trolling? You?
The point was (for anyone who actually thinks) if something bothers you about what someone says, tell him/her about it… if I had your e-mail address, I’d put it to you personally… but I don’t… but I won’t put this comment out on the greater social media… not the world-wide web… at least not intentionally…
MEMRI might…
Me? No. I thought your initial (and subsequent) comment was reasonable, as well. Tia just added something to think about (which may not even be directly related to the reaction regarding this particular incident).
The larger point might be to question oneself, if you “require” someone else’s apology to get over an incident. (Again, perhaps doesn’t apply to this particular incident.)
I’m starting to think you “owe” me an apology, for implying that I was trolling! Just kidding.
“Hey, good morning, your call for the genocide of my people really offended me. Meet for coffee at Petes?”
I don’t think so.
I really don’t know the context or intent and I never will. This isn’t about meeting with a particular person who made a speech to a group I’m not a part of, and I don’t care about forgiveness towards someone I don’t know personally.
It’s no secret that a deep-seated hatred of Jews exists in some people’s hearts, just as it is no secret that a deep-seated hatred of Muslims exists in some people hearts. Either one viewed in the context of an entire people is vile.
Forgive? Not the issue. Forgiveness is a personal thing, and I don’t know this person.
Trust? That has been lost.
Healing? That’s up to everyone.
I am not surprised by the Imam’s rhetoric. The conversation about the trees informing on the Jew hiding behind it is a Koranic verse. Maybe ignorance is bliss, if MEMRI hadn’t translated what the man said, would there have been any insult or hurt felt by the community?
As for being religious, I grew up as an agnostic and my most enjoyed courses in school were history, foreign language and comparative religion. When my family had a problem with a Muslim family next door in Davis (2012 – David perhaps you remember?) we were the victim of a domestic problem between a Muslim convert wife and her Moroccan husband regarding the behavior of the wife and their two children in public, integrating with the community. Their problem spilled out on the community when the wife wanted to remove her hijab and send her children to public school (they had been homeschooled all their lives. We had them in our home (never the man) and shared food, birthdays etc. However, when push came to shove and the elder of the two girls was bullying our daughter constantly (because she was jealous of the friendship our daughter and her little sister both aged 5 – had) and we expressed disdain for that- the man next door attacked us and accused us of being against Islam. HE said that. I could only refer to my teacher’s words at Harvard University, Dr. Ali Asani- Professor of Islamic Civilization at the time and quite frankly I had no issue with Islam, just the behavior- bullying. Well when you complain against a religious minority in a place like Davis, even if you are telling the truth, watch out. From the California Dept. of Fair Housing lecturing me quite spitefully on how I should “be a good Christian and turn the other cheek” (no point in trying to explain my true non-committal to any religion to her) to the attorneys who said “you will be fighting this for years if you choose that route, it is a question of civil rights” our family could not get any official in Davis (Mayor, City Attorney, Yolo DA, Enterprise and Vanguard) to publish our story. So it was published by Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch. Some said that was a “racist right wing publication” and justified not publishing our story. Robert Spencer was for me what MEMRI is for this instance, someone who brings some clarity to a situation. Above all odds we fought the eviction of our family from Davis, where the kids were born, where my wife and I had volunteered nearly every day to some capacity in the elementary schools, and I was an Office Manager and Intake person for a large psychotherapy office in Davis for 6 years, to be abandoned by the “city” and embraced by our friends and many teachers who wrote letters in support for us that we were not racist bastards, but very community minded people who were caught in the crossfire of an issue we shouldn’t have been. When at the end I threatened to take the parties to trial court Yolo County, the eviction process stopped within 2 hours and the “honorable” lawyers of the other side agreed to a settlement. We would have to leave Davis though and we did.
My overall point is twofold: When people abuse other people there comes a response that in itself can become irrational and somewhat unforgivable, and when you are surrounded by people who refuse to stand up and say “THIS IS WRONG WHAT IS HAPPENING HERE” you feel the deepest sense of betrayal.
I for one am glad to see Davis responding this way in this instance. It’s not a question of forgiveness only (though forgiveness is probably the healthiest thing in life after drinking lots of water) but being able to SUSTAIN a conversation about things that can be very uncomfortable to talk about but you do it to prevent people from being hurt by inaction. You see how it feels when it is you who is touched, this I learned from our experience.
Thank you for the opportunity to say this.
Matt Hamilton