This sermon was delivered on Shabbat hol ha-moed Sukkot 5762, in October 2001.

During Sukkot, when the siddur speaks about the sacrifices made in the Temple in Jerusalem, there are a descending number of bulls offered on each day of the holiday. The number of bulls sacrificed begins with thirteen and is reduced by one each subsequent day, thus ending with seven on day seven, the last day of Sukkot. This is unlike Pesah, where identical sacrifices are offered on each day of the seven days of the holiday.

It is obvious that this would be noted by the sages. They note that the total number of bulls offered on Sukkot equaled 70, which is, by rabbinic count, the total number of nations in the world. What’s more, Sukkot is perceived to be the time when the world is judged regarding rainfall for the year. So, the rabbis said (Sukkot, 55b) that the 70 bulls represent the 70 nations of the world and their sacrifice atones for the nations, so that, according to Rashi, they, too, can be favorably judged for the required rainfall.

Sukkot has always had a universal flavor, and its message of the frailty and fragility of life is no less applicable to the rest of the world than it is to the Jews.

When we Jews pray for the welfare of non-Jews, or, in ancient times, sacrificed on their behalf, we have no hidden agenda of conversion. There is no mitzvah in Judaism to convert non-Jews to Judaism, and Jewish history has very few examples of forced conversions to Judaism. We do, I admit, perceive ourselves as having a mandate to serve as an or lagoyim (a light to the nations), such that, in the end of days, all will recognize God. But even that eschatological vision is projected upon non-Jews choosing to convert on their own, with no external pressure exerted by us. Indeed, Jewish law has serious reservations about conversions that are anything but purely self-motivated.

And even more, Judaism does not posit that the ultimate salvation is possible only within Judaism. Non-Jews have a place in the world to come, in Jewish theology, if they observe the sheva mitzvot b’nai Noah, the seven Noahide commandments. Their salvation is not contingent on becoming Jews. Quite the contrary, Jewish tradition affirms the right of non-Jews to be non-Jews. And while it is true that we were duty-bound to obliterate paganism from Israel, we have no mitzvah to obliterate either paganism or any other non-pagan religion in the rest of the world, and we do not say that adherents of these faiths can have no salvation.

In this regard, we are fundamentally different from the other two Western religions: Christianity and Islam. Both of these religions claim that the absolute truth, which they possess, is such that no salvation is possible without acceptance of it – that is, without becoming either Christian or Muslim. “There is no salvation outside the church.”

Why am I saying this to you? In order to make couple of a points:
All of Jewish history is virtually devoid examples of Jews “doing non-Jews the favor” of forcing them to convert to Judaism in order to save their souls, while Christian and Islamic history are the history of forced conversions precisely because both believe they possess absolute truth, which only the “ignorant” would be foolish enough not to wish to share.

Belief that one possesses absolute truth, which alone enables salvation, makes comprehensible (though from our perspective, not acceptable) recourse to the mass murder of those who persistently refuse to accept that truth. That is precisely why the Crusades were theologically justified, why the Inquisition and forced conversions were acceptable, and why some Muslims believe jihad will ultimately suffuse the earth with the one religious truth.

Why is it that Christianity and Islam have adopted such views, but Jews have not? I cannot be certain, but I suspect that the reason is that Judaism originated as the rejection of what was the normative religion of the time, paganism. Christianity and Islam perceive themselves as the fulfillment of Judaism, a fulfillment that replaces the original, not because the original has been rejected, but because it has been carried to the next logical step that devotees of the original ought to recognize. If they do not, they invalidate the legitimacy of the theological basis of Christianity and Islam.

On the universal holiday of Sukkot, I point out that each religion, ours included, believes itself to be correct. We, however, affirm as well that those who are wrong have the right to be wrong. However, our younger religious siblings, i.e., Christianity and Islam, affirm not only that they are right, but also that those who are wrong do not have the right to be wrong.

We continue to pray for the welfare of those who exercise their right to be wrong without attempting to compel them to choose the right; they pray for the welfare of those who are wrong because they have no right to be wrong. Both claim to be religiously tolerant, but, oh, what different meanings the wold “tolerant” has in each camp.