Yom Kippur theology

[cellio]

This year the contrast between two statements in the machzor (special prayer book for these holidays) struck me. We have both of the following statements:

1. For transgressions against God Yom Kippur attones, but for transgressions against other people, YK does not attone until you have made peace with that person. [1]

2. The "release": I forgive those who have wronged me and please don't punish them on my account, and I hope they say the same about me. (This is a paraphrase.)

If I am "off the hook" for something I did via #2 (the other person made this blanket statement) but I never actually made amends, how can I attone under #1 -- we didn't make peace? Or is the point to be strict on my own actions (I must make peace) but liberal on others'? I could think that #2 is for unknown offenses (I can't make amends if I don't know I wronged you), except that the text of the release says "intentional and unintentional".

(Am I correct in assuming that #2 is not a liberal innovation? I've never actually used or studied a traditional machzor, though I am motivated to find one now because a number of the translations [2] in ours struck me as wrong and I want to know what the Hebrew really says.)

[1] There's what amounts to a good-faith exclusion here, so you can't be hosed by someone who consistently refuses to forgive you.

[2] Reform prayer books before Mishkan T'filah feature a mix of loose translations and "alternative readings" (usually but not always marked as such). I am in the position of knowing enough Hebrew to see the issues but not enough to be able to just translate the text myself.

Comments

[baron-steffan.livejournal.com]

Those "alternative readings" really bother me. It's as though the book is telling me "say these words in Hebrew, (potentially) make this promise or oath or commitment, or accept this religious principle, but we're not gonna tell you what you're really saying". There's a good deal of that in "Gates of Repentance", which my new temple uses. But even in the old traditional texts we used in the Conservative schul back in Boston, this sort of thing went on. I don't know what the motivation is -- "modernization", I suppose, in the Reform text, and the Conservative text has something about "the Rabbinical interpretation" of Kedusha -- but to me it's simple dishonesty in a rather surprising venue.

[cellio]

Yeah, me too. I think if there's any English in the book at all, the very top priority is an accurate translation. Alternative readings have to get in line behind that. And, fortunately, Mishkan T'filah fixed a lot of this -- the ratio of alternative readings to the real stuff is still out of whack IMO, but at least there's almost always an accurate translation. (Not a pedantic one, but at least reasonable, in all but one or two places that I've seen so far. I haven't actually bought this siddur yet and don't know if I will, but I base that on the earlier draft I have and our use so far in the synagogue.)

As you might imagine, the non-translations in Gates of Prayer were a real hinderance to me when I was trying to learn the liturgy, theology, and Hebrew all in parallel. Gates of Repentance is in the same mold as Gates of Prayer.