|
Traditional Congregation of Creve Coeur
Seth D. Gordon, Rabbi Ephraim I. Zimand, Rabbi Emeritus |
|
|
Traditional Congregation
Members' Reprinted from the
Shabbat Bulletin -Year 5766 |
|
|
Sept. 16, 2006/23 Elul, 5766 Nitzavim/Vayalech i find the combination of names for this week’s double Torah portion filled with fascinating possibilities: Nitzavim, “standing” and Vayelech, “going”. Though the terms are not in conflict, they certainly stand in contrast to one another, giving us pause to consider ways in which we might put them together. My suggestion would be to consider them as consecutive, i.e., in order for us to move forward (Vayelech) most effectively, it requires us to periodically pause (Nitzavim) and take stock of how we got to this point in our lives, where do we desire to go and how best to get there. It is an observable phenomenon of our lives despite (or perhaps, because of) all our time-serving and labor-reducing technology, e.g. microwave ovens, computers and e-mail, we seem to live faster paced lives. We seem to be perpetually on the move with no opportunity to stop and evaluate our existences. A story is told of a world-famous explorer on safari in Africa. His guides and carriers were all local tribesman. In his desire to reach his destination he drove his guides and carriers at a furious pace. After six days of this rushing, the guides and carriers sat down and refused to move. All the explorer’s urging and cajoling was in vain. They just refused to budge. When the explorer asked his chief guide what the problem was, he was told that the guides and carriers felt they had rushed up so fast that they left their souls behind and were waiting for their souls to catch up.
Thus it is with us. We flit about so fast from thing to thing that we frequently leave our souls behind. Judaism prescribes a weekly stoppage – shabbat – to give our souls a chance to catch up. Judaism also prescribes an annual stoppage – Rosh Hashanah and Yom Hakippurim. These days give us an opportunity to set aside time to look back at where we have been and determine where we want - or should - go an devise a plan on how to get there. Before we move on (Vayelech) we need to take time to stand still (Nitzavim). EZ Sept. 9, 2006/16 Elul, 5766 Ki Tavo This parasha begins with Moses delineating the specific prayers to be recited when the Israelites bring tithes into Jerusalem. Annually, the first tithe went to the Levites in lieu of having their own land. The second tithe was brought into the city to be enjoyed by the bearer in a festive manner. Every third and sixth year of the seven year cycle the second tithe was given to the needy. Here also is given the specific form of the prayer to be stated by the bearer. This is one of very few instances in which the Torah specifically spells out the form and content of a prayer. Having concluded this last specific instruction, Moses goes on to speak about the entrance to the Holy Land. Just as at Mt. Sinai there is a large community event. The people were gathered a safe distance from Mt. Sinai to hear the words of G-d directly and still collectively were awed and could not continue the direct experience of the words of the Decalogue. This time that entire generation who directly witnessed the miracles and heard the words of G-d was gone. The new generation about to enter the Holy Land needed a bit of reminding. Rather than Moses bringing down the two tablets, large stones were set up with the words of the Torah written for all to see. The Israelites are split and sent to the slopes of two mountains, Ebal and Gerizim. Moses and the Levites stand between the mountains and give instructions to the entire community fashioned after the manner of Sinai. This takes again the form of a contract between two parts, G-d and the Israelites, with emphasis on pointing out sins that could be committed in secret and thus could only be punished by G-d, who would know what one does even if hidden by the community. This last part of the parasha starts with the blessings which would be bestowed upon the entire nation if they followed all the commandments. Herein is found bounty of the land, money, fertility, and the vanquishing of enemies both physically and spiritually. This is followed by the Tochecha (rebuke or warning). This is a l o n g list of progressive disasters which would befall the community both on an individual and collective basis if the laws of the Torah are broken. There is a sense in all these punishments also of increasing despair and hopelessness – a communal depression from which there is no escape. Finally, Moses acknowledges that the slave-born Israelites were probably incapable of truly understanding and appreciating their relationship with G-d. It was not until they were shown forty years of beneficence and stand on the brink of the Promised Land that their eyes could be opened and true understanding take place. What I found most intriguing were the parallelisms between the revelation at Sinai and that just mentioned at the entrance to the Holy Land. Why would this be repeated? What are the differences between the Decalogue and the statements made here? What are the differences in the situations? I feel that many of these answers can be found in the beginning of the reading when the specific prayers are mentioned. Most of us would be familiar with these words since they are paraphrased in the beginning of our Pesach Haggadot and later discussed by the Talmudic sages quoted in Haggadah. It is important that each of them, as well as each of us, regards him/herself as if the slavery-redemption-Sinai-wilderness experience was personal which leads to a personal relationship with G-d and his commandments as well as a sense of being part of the larger Jewish community. Phil Brick Sept. 2, 2006/9 Elul, 5766 Ki Tetze In the parasha Ki Tetze, Moses, who will die soon, continues to deliver his ethical will, his review of 72 more of G-d’s commandments for the Israelites to follow so that it will go well with them and they may long remain in the land that God promised them. The context and overarching standard and persistent strategy of these commandments is the pursuit of justice. And often, in this listing, we learn that the behavior of a single individual in a single incident is important in maintaining the equilibrium of a healthy human society. Conflict, an inherent condition of human interaction, is discussed on the battlefield and in the home. In each case the commandment works to reduce the moral issue to its smallest essence so that the problem can be tackled and contained. The hubris of victory in war becomes the power of a soldier over his enemy and is expressed in the desire of a soldier for a woman captive. She is permitted to the soldier only once before she is given a period of mourning to adjust to her new circumstances. If the soldier changes his mind about her, he must give her her freedom. The Torah zooms in on two human beings and justice is defined as that which achieves a proper balance of conflicting interests. The commandment that keeps a groom at home with his bride, even as war prevails, understands that in life the good and the bad may travel in tandem. Justice insists on a future for humanity. The security of property is one of the reasons that governments are established. The exclusive right to possess, enjoy and dispose of a thing is challenged in this parasha by the definition of ownership. Lost property must be cared for and restored to the rightful owner, even as the Torah mandates that the owner of a field must not shake the olive tree twice and must leave sheaves for the poor. These corollaries to the commandment, “do not steal” teach responsibility and respect for one another. The owner of a building must build a railing on the roof to protect people walking on the roof. Life experiences continue to create a more nuanced understanding of justice. The parasha finishes with the warning to remember how the Amalekites attacked the weary Israelites in the desert. The commandments can serve to strengthen our society and suggest ways to deal with the humiliation of the defeated and the restoration of their properties. Shabbat ShalomNaomi Fishman August 26, 2006/2 Elul, 5766 Shoftim Parashat Shoftim commands us to actively pursue justice without compromise and only through honest means. Unjust or dishonest means cannot lead to justice. The leaders of Israel are to appoint judges and officers of the court to enforce decisions in every city of every tribe. No matter how great a sage or how perfect a tzaddik he is, a judge will still suffer mental confusion from the very act of accepting even the smallest bribe. A judge may never accept a bribe, not “even to acquit the innocent and convict the guilty (Sifrei) .
In a discussion of Shoftim, Nehama Leibowitz writes that “Thus responsibility for wrongdoing does not only lie with the perpetrator himself and even with the accessory. Lack of proper care and attention are also criminal. Whoever keeps to his own quiet corner and refuses to have anything to do with the ‘evil world,’ who observes oppression and violence but does not stir a finger in protest cannot proclaim with a clear conscience that ‘our hands have not shed this blood.’” Shabbat Shalom, Susan Fleminger August 19, 2006/25 Av, 5766 Re'eh One of the themes in this week’s parasha, Re’eh, is the call to all Israel to be open and attentive to the needs of the less fortunate (Deut. 14:28 – 15:18). In his great compendium, Mishneh Torah summarizing and systematizing Talmudic information, Maimonides, in the section he titles “Grants to the Needy”, established his well-known, though sometimes erroneously cited, Eight Degrees of Giving (chapter 10: 7 – 14). In reverse order (for dramatic effect) they are:
To me, one of the amazing things about the highest level of giving is that it is very likely the benefactor will make a profit from the gift. In a sense, I give most when I profit most. What an incredible concept! The significance of that, i believe, lies in understanding what is at root of Maimonides’ eight levels. Please give it some thought. We will discuss your ideas this morning before maftir. EZ August 12, 2006/18 Av, 5766 Ekev This week's portion includes the verse upon which is based the obligation to recite the Grace After Meals. The text reads "and you shall eat and be satisfied and bless the Lord your God upon the land which is good." (Deuteronomy 8:10) The Talmud understands the first words "and you shall eat and be satisfied and bless the Lord your God" as the obligation to offer a prayer of thanksgiving to God after eating. The phrase "upon the land" instructs us to add a blessing of thanksgiving to God for giving us the land of Israel. And the words, "which is good" are taken to mean that an additional blessing thanking God for Jerusalem, the goodly spiritual center of the Land, is included as a third blessing. Here is the Biblical basis for the first three blessings of the Grace: Hazan - the blessing for food, Al Ha-Aretz - the blessing for the land, U'vnei Yerushalayim - the blessing for Jerusalem. (Berachot 48b) The question arises: Thanking God for food is completely understandable, but why include blessings for Israel and Jerusalem?
It can be suggested that not only are we thanking
God for the food that we've eaten, but we are also expressing confidence
that food will be provided in the future. The place where this confidence
is highest is in Israel where we are governed by Jews, not in the Diaspora
where we are not. In the Diaspora, we can never be sure of the way we
will be treated in the future, hence we can never be certain where the
next morsel will come from. Lest we think that the focus of Israel is
only land, the physical protection of Jews, we add the blessing of
Jerusalem, symbolic of the spirituality of Israel so necessary for its
survival. A land without a spiritual mission is the equivalent of a body
without a soul. Extraordinary: In expressing gratitude to God for food we recount the basic themes that have carved out Jewish destiny and our dreams for the future - Israel, Jerusalem, exile and the hopes of ultimate redemption. Shabbat Shalom - Rabbi Avi Weiss August 5, 2006/11 Av, 5766 V'Etchanan This week’s parasha includes a repeat of the Decalogue, which was previously read in parashat Yitro in the book of Exodus. However, if you compare the two versions, there are several differences that become apparent. The obvious explanation for these differences is the Exodus version is recording the actual event of Revelation when the Decalogue was given to the Israelites. In this week’s parasha, it is Moses retelling of the Revelation almost 40 years later. Even though Moses is 120 years old, we can probably assume that if it was his intention to repeat the Decalogue word for word, he would have been able to do so. Since it is not repeated word for word, what might we learn from these differences? The major difference between the two versions is regarding the commandment of Shabbat. In Exodus, the commandment of Shabbat opens with the word Zachor, which is usually translated as remember. In Deuteronomy, the commandment of Shabbat opens with the word Shamor, which is usually translated as guard or observe. Zachor seems to imply that we must acknowledge Shabbat, and remember not to treat it like the other days of the week. The command of Shamor would appear to be an instruction to be more proactive. It is not enough just to remember the Sabbath, but we must also be careful to safeguard its precepts. The more significant difference is the reason that is given for Shabbat. In Exodus, the story of creation is given as the reason for Shabbat. G-d created the world in six days, and on the seventh day, He rested. Therefore, G-d blessed and sanctified the Shabbat. This reason would seem to apply to every nation, not just the Israelites. Perhaps that is why the reason given for Shabbat in Deuteronomy is that we should remember we were slaves in Egypt, and G-d took us out of Egypt from slavery to Freedom. This explanation of Shabbat would apply only to the Israelites, therefore making Shabbat specifically for the Israelites. As the Israelites were about to enter the Promised Land, Moses wanted to ensure that the Israelites would continue to observe Shabbat. While the Exodus was the historical event that founded the Israelite nation, Shabbat would ensure that nation would survive. As Achad Ha’am, an early Zionist thinker stated “More than the Jewish People have kept Shabbat, it is Shabbat that has kept the Jewish People”. Shabbat Shalom Zumi Brody July 29, 2006/4 Av, 5766 Devarim Who wrote the Book of Deuteronomy (Sefer Devarim)?On the one hand it appears that God did not pen Devarim as the phrase “And the Lord spoke to Moshe (Moses) saying “ appears nowhere in the last book of the Torah. On the other hand, the very idea of Torah min ha-shamayim, Torah from heaven, means that all of the Torah comes from God. In his introduction to Devarim, Abrabanel, the fifteenth century Spanish commentator, distinguishes between the spoken word of God and that which God mandated to be written. Although God, of course, speaks in the Torah, not every word in the Torah was said by the Almighty. On countless occasions human beings speak (e.g. Avraham, Pharoah, etc) sometimes under Divine inspiration, sometimes not. Separate, however, from these spoken words is the axiom that every word of the Torah was written by God in that God testifies that these words were said and upon His dictation and approval, recorded by Moshe in the Torah. Our question is therefore answered. In the words of Abrabanel, “although Moshe delivered his address to Israel on his own, the words as recorded in the Torah were not written on his own...However, God concurred with the words of His loyal representative, and by dictating and arranging these words....He revealed them, and Moshe heard and recorded them, like every part of the whole Torah.” Hence, the Book of Devarim begins with God’s declaration,” These are the words that Moshe spoke to all Israel...in the fortieth year....Moshe began explaining this Torah saying.” (Deuteronomy 1:1-5) In other words, these were the words of Moshe as approved by God. Several ideas emerge from this analysis. First, Torah min ha-shamayim does not mean that God spoke every word of the Five Books of Moses at Sinai. After all, Moshe spoke Devarim at the end of the forty-year trek through the desert. Second, the position of the Bible critics, that bearing in mind the different styles of writing in the Torah, it must have had numerous authors, falls by the wayside. After all, in the written Torah God records the way different personalities spoke—their tone, their style, their language may have been different. Third, as God is eternal, so is the Torah eternal. After all, the Torah in its entirety is an expression of God’s revelation. No wonder our portion is read on the ninth of Av. Despite the calamity of the destruction of the Temples, we can take comfort in the recognition that God and His Torah are eternal. And so are the Jewish people to whom God gave the Torah. Am Yisrael Chai. Rabbi Avi Weiss July 22, 2006/26 Tammuz, 5766 Mattot/Masei The double portion Mattot-Masei contains a variety of topics including the Jewish people's forty-two-stage itinerary
through the wilderness, and the Almighty's commandment to settle in the land of Israel. During the Jews'
wandering through the wilderness, they received numerous statutes and codes of conduct. In Mattot, the Almighty
instructs concerning oaths and vows, especially about husband-wife relations upholding or annulling marriage vows,
and a daughter's ability to give oaths/vows while still living in her father's home. The latter usually involves someone
who is legally a minor. We usually give oaths or vows to the Almighty during times of emotional stress, and they
can be seen as an individual's pledge.
While in the wilderness, the Almighty engaged in kindness to the Jewish people, but also practiced retribution
when conduct was opposed to his precepts, e.g., parashat Korach (esp., Num 16); or requiring attack on
Midianites and Balaam for their role in the matter of Peor. For the Jewish people, Bnei Yisrael, what is the
meaning of the Torah commandment to settle in the Land of Israel? A paraphrase of these main ideas are: And the
Lord spoke unto Moses...Then you shall drive out all the inhabitants of the land from before you...and dwell therein;
for unto you I have given the land to possess it. (Num 33:50-53) The possession of the Land of Israel, Eretz Israel, is
an important dimension of the Jewish people's ability to be holy and maintain their obligations to the Almighty. The
Masei portion argues if those precepts and ideals are observed then the people will safely exist there. The dual portion
underscores that the Jewish people have moral and legal obligations to possess the land; and how they possess
the land should set an example for other nations. What do you envision as the state of Israel's and the Jewish
people's obligations in the current time period?
Steven Puro July 15, 2006/19 Tammuz, 5766 Pinchas In Kohelet (Ecclesiastes) chapter 3, it states that there is a time to kill, a time to hate, and time for war. It also states a time to heal, a time to love, and a time for peace. The trick is to know when it is the appropriate time to take action. In the end of Parshat Balak, Pinchas kills an Israelite man and the Midianite woman that was with him. In Parshat Pinchas, Pinchas’ actions are vindicated by G-d. Clearly it was a time to kill. According to Rashi, the Israelites accused Pinchas of murder, instead of applauding his actions. Had he lived today, I’m sure he would have been accused of using disproportionate force. The Israelites did not recognize that it was a time to kill, so G-d makes it clear that He approves of his actions by halting the plague that was among the Israelites, and granting Pinchas and his offspring eternal priesthood. G-d also gives Pinchas his covenant of peace. The Torah does not elaborate on what that covenant of peace is, but perhaps we can gain a greater understanding of this phrase by looking at Kohelet. There are many people in the world today, especially in Europe, who seem to think that there never is a time for war. Unfortunately, we live in a world where negotiation is not always possible, and hesitation to confront aggression can lead to even greater violence in the future. The world learned this the hard way in World War II. We stand at another juncture where we have to decide if we should keep negotiating, or take action. Pinchas recognized the appropriate time for action, and did not hesitate to do what had to be done. His actions spared the Israelites additional suffering and pain by halting G-d’s plague, and taking a stand against what he saw as a threat to his community. Perhaps this is the covenant of peace that G-d has granted Pinchas. By killing now, Pinchas prevented further deaths later and brought peace to the Israelites. Let’s hope our leaders recognize when it is a time for war, and when it is a time for peace.
Shabbat Shalom, July 8, 2006/12 Tammuz, 5766 Chukat/Balak Sometimes we pursue the wrong question. In parsha Balak, the Moabite king Balak orders the heathen prophet Balaam to curse the Israelite people so Moab can defeat them in battle. When Balaam tries to carry out this order, his donkey stops for the angel invisible to Balaam and then talks to Balaam. How can a dumb animal talk and reason we think?But maybe there are more important questions for us to ask. Is Balaam who gives us the blessing of "How goodly are thy tents, O Jacob, your dwelling places, O Israel" good or evil? Can he curse and bless us? Did God make this heathen a prophet? Why does it matter if he curses or blesses us? The commentators see Balaam as evil. While he blesses us, his intention is to harm us with his curses, but God will not allow it. He tries to change God’s decision not to allow him to go with the princes of Balak. His intention is to defy God. He tries to use magic and trickery to force God to curse the Israelites. And finally, he leads Israelite men to engage sexually with the Midianite women and to commit idolatry.Balaam can neither curse nor bless. His curses are ineffective and his "blessings" only describe what he knows the future will bring. Some say that God made Balaam a prophet so the nations cannot say if only we had had a prophet, we could have been like the Israelites. Others say that God made Balaam a prophet only so he could bless Israel. What Balaam appears to do matters because the nations and even we could have believed in the efficacy of his words. People could have said that good and bad things happened to the Jews because of the power of the heathen Balaam. This could have increased belief in magic and sorcery.In the blessing that we all know, the tents are yeshivas and synagogues and the dwelling places are the Temple. Balaam saw that the tent openings were not facing each other so people could not peer into each others’ private worlds. And the donkey? It could see the angel with the sword that Balaam the prophet could not see. Maybe it was a dream as Maimonides said. Maybe it uttered a donkey cry of pain that Balaam interpreted as, "Why did you hit me three times? Am I not your donkey? Do I usually treat you this way?" Or maybe God made the donkey between the end of creation and the first Shabbat. This parsha shows how God protected us from those who would harm us. That is what is most important. If a donkey spoke, who cares? Good Shabbos. Susan Fleminger (Shlomit) July 1, 2006/5 Tammuz, 5766 Korach Parshat Korach relates the story of Korach, Datan, Aviram and 250 members of the shevet (tribe) or Reuven challenging Moshe's choice for Kohen Gadol (high priest). The end result was that the 250 members were burned by a heavenly fire, and the other 3 were miraculously swallowed by the earth. From a motive perspective, Korach makes the most sense, because he felt slighted for not having been chosen himself. But why would 250 people follow him to their certain death, with apparently little to gain?
The answer
can be found in Rashi, the great medieval commentator, who writes that
just as Korach's family camped on the southern side of the Mishkan
(Tabernacle), so did the tribe of Reuven. Rashi quotes the words of
Chapters of the Fathers, "woe to an evil person, and woe to his neighbor."
The 250 people met their death, simply because they were influenced by
their neighbors! This points to the awesome influence that friends,
neighbors and associates have on us. So who do we surround ourselves with?
Do we have positive friends and neighbors? Are WE positive friends and
neighbors to others? June 24, 2006/28 Sivan, 5766 Shelach In this week's parasha, spies are sent into the land of Israel to check it out. The spies returned 40 days later and reported that the land ‘flows with milk and honey’. However the spies also reported that the people living in the land seemed too strong to defeat. Upon hearing this, the Children of Israel respond, “Is it not better for us to return to Egypt?” Because of this lack of faith in G-d the Children of Israel will now have to wander in the desert for 40 years and most of the adults will never see Israel. Why is it that the Children of Israel wish to return to slavery? Until recently I never understood this need. I only just made a connection with the need to return to slavery and my life. For me that connection is the path of least resistance. I have often found that it is easier for me to continue doing something that I know than to search for something new, even if it will be better in the long run. For example, my job often stresses me out and does not pay very well. I could go out and find a better job that pays more and might make me happier and less stressed. But why don’t I? I think to myself, it’s too much work to find a new job, interview, etc. I don’t want to start all over again. Plus my vacation benefits are great right now. So maybe I should just believe in myself and put my faith in G-d, and perhaps in the future I will realize that the path of least resistance is a kind of slavery and what I really want is to go out, work a little harder, face my fears and enter into the Land of Israel. Emily Perstadt June 17, 2006/21 Sivan, 5766 Beha'Alotecha As the Torah describes Moses’ career, he filled many roles.
But of all Moses’ roles, he is best known to Israel simply as Moses, our Teaching Master. It is in his role as teacher that we relate to him most. And he shows himself no better as our teacher than in this week’s Torah portion Beha’alotecha. In response to Moses’ frustration with the complaining Israelites, God instructs him to invite 70 elders to join him in his personal tent of meeting to receive God’s spirit in order to assist him in leading the Israelites. Two of the invitees, Eldad and Medad, choose not to attend. However when God’s spirit descends on the elders in Moses’ tent of meeting and they begin to prophecy, so, too, Eldad and Medad begin to prophecy in the camp of the Israelites. One who overhears them prophesizing in the camp interprets this as an act of insurrection against Moses’ leadership. He immediately runs out to inform Moses of what is happening. Joshua, Moses’ attendant, fearful for his Master’s status as the Israelite’s leader, strongly urges him (Moses) to put an end to it. Moses responds as follows: Nu. 11:29 “… are you zealous on my behalf? Would that all of God’s people were prophets! That God place His spirit upon them.” The fondest wish of the truly dedicated teacher is to make him/herself obsolete; to so prepare learners that they become self-sufficient and have no more need of their teacher. It is in this that Moses indicates to us his understanding of his role – the role of Moses our Teaching Master, the role that is all-encompassing – with regard to the Israelite people. And it is in this role that he is ever recalled by us, their descendants. EZ June 10, 2006/14 Sivan, 5766 Naso
This
parshah--Naso--considers the importance and value of each Jew
to the people of Israel. The Talmud instructs us regarding the value of
each individual, so much so that each person is "worthy of the entire
world existing for his/her sake." Two distinctive features of Judaism are:
June 3, 2006/ 7 Sivan, 5766 Bamidbar Where Do We Belong? The bulk of parashat Bamidbar, as the English name suggests, is devoted to numbering the tribes according to their paternal lines and identifying the place of each tribe in the traveling formation. In fact, having a place to fit in was vitally important to our forebears – our Sages tell us that the reason the blasphemer of parashat Emor committed his transgression was that he was not allowed to register as a member of the tribe of Dan because his father was Egyptian, and his only connection to the Danites was through his mother. The question is, what is the significance that tribal identification is so vitally important? And if it is so important, where does that leave most of us, whose tribal identity is questionable at best (Levites and Kohanim excepted, of course)? I think we might be able to get a sense of the answer in our parashah. Not only are the tribes numbered, but the order of their encampments are specified, as is the order in which they traveled. At the center of the encampment was machaneh Shechinah, the “camp” of the Divine Presence, the Tent of Meeting where the Cloud rested. The entire rest of the encampment is described relative to the center – Judah’s camp on the east, Reuben’s on the south, etc. That is to say, our real, significant position in the world is where we are in relation to Gd. This means not only how close (that’s what we usually focus on!) but also in what direction. Each tribe had its distinctive modes of thinking and acting and used those modes, ideally, in Gd’s service. Similarly, each individual within a tribe has a distinctive mode of thinking, acting and serving. And just as each individual in a tribe contributes to the unity of expression of that tribe, so all the tribes taken together contribute to the unity of expression of Klal Yisrael. Each piece has to fit in to the whole. Each instrument in the orchestra has to play its individual part perfectly, no matter how exalted or how humble that part may be. The question naturally arises as to the blasphemer’s status. After all, where does he fit in? He’s certainly Jewish, for his mother was Jewish. But he certainly didn’t fit into any of the tribes, since his father was not Jewish. The same would hold for any convert whose father is not Jewish. And, since the destruction of the 10 “lost” tribes and the loss of knowledge of our own tribal antecedents, we are really all in pretty much the same boat. The Arizal teaches that there were 12 gates to Jerusalem, one for each tribe, and a 13th gate for those whose tribal identification is uncertain. Corresponding to each gate was a specific nusach, a specific way of relating to the Divine. The 13th gate too has its own nusach. (It’s the Nusach Ha’Ari!) This “generic” nusach is suitable for all Jews, even if it’s ideal for none. This may be one (of the many) disabilities we suffer in exile – that our path to the Divine is less well-tuned to our individual makeup than it might be, and consequently we have to work a little harder and overcome more obstacles before reaching our goal. Perhaps we’ll have to wait till the coming of Mashiach before all this gets sorted out, may it be speedily in our day. Rafi Rabinoff May 20, 2006/12 Iyar, 5766 Behar/Bechukotai This week we approach the end of vayikra (Leviticus). We read again about tithes—in this case tithes from one’s land and produce. The concept is simple - everything that you produce ISN’T yours to keep. This concept has enabled Jews throughout the ages to accept the responsibility of CHARITY as an organic part of being Jewish. Unfortunately, some Jews today forget the charitable aspect of Judaism and emphasize the minute stringencies (chumrot). The words of the Torah are here to remind all of what is substance, and what is fluff. On the other hand, the wonderful and meaningful concept of “everything I own isn’t mine” does present problems to some. Some capitalists may say “I worked for it. I earned it. It’s mine”. The socialist, disgusted by the inequalities that society produces says “let the government decide and redistribute the wealth.” In essence, big government (brother) will figure it out and take care of the poor and disadvantaged. Thus socialism leads to some sort of totalitarianism. But the Torah rejects both extremes. “Keep the fruit of your work, but understand your FUNDAMENTAL obligation to tithe - charity. Didn’t our sages say that charity is a form of kindness….and kindness that you can never give away. It ALWAYS will come back to you in one form or another. Gene Brody May 13, 2006/15 Iyar, 5766 Emor This week’s Torah portion opens with the statement that the kohanim, who were to function at the highest levels of sanctity are required to maintain themselves sacrally eligible and avoid defilement, which primarily comes from a human corpse. Lev 21:1 – “…say to the kohanim…he should not defile himself for any within his nation.” This is then followed by a series of exceptions, specifically immediate relatives. Singled out for special mention is the sister of the kohen Lev 21:3 “And for his unmarried sister, for her he becomes defiled.” The talmud (Zevachim 100a), taking note of the emphasis of the repeated “for her”, comments: “It is a mitzvah (requirement) – if he refuses to, we force him to defile himself.” This statement addresses the potentially fastidious kohen whose commitment to his sacred role is so strong that he would forgo personal mourning for his sister in order to continue to serve in God’s Sanctuary. Says the Talmud, the Torah’s emphatic “for her he becomes defiled” indicates he (the kohen) must become defiled in order to properly mourn the death of his sister. This statement from the Talmud makes the point that in some situations “too frum,” being overly scrupulous in perceived obligations to God may turn out to be not observant of God’s will at all. Frumkeit which causes another hurt, when alternatives within the wide parameters of legitimate halachic interpretation could prevent it, would, it seems to me, be “too frum” and no piety at all. When the late Rabbi Joseph B. Soleveichik’s grandfather, Reb Chayim Brisker was confronted as being maykil (lenient) when it came to allowing a hungry congregant to eat on Yom Hakippurim, he responded “I am not maykil (lenient) regarding Yom Hakippurim. I am machmir (stringent) with regard to pikuach nefesh (saving a life).” Leniency concerning questions of kashrut may in reality be stringency with regard to concern for another’s money and concern for the widest possible inclusiveness for kashrut observance. Making use of halachic possibilities that serve to include other Jews may turn out to be not being maykil (lenient) in defining “Who is a Jew?” but rather machmir (stringent) when it comes to ahavat yisrael (love of Jews) and achdut yisrael (unity of Jews). In our service of God we need to be sure we are really serving God and not an inflated sense of religiosity.EZ May 6, 2006/8 Iyar, 5766 Acharai Mot/Kedoshim Jews are famous for guilt feelings. We excel both in giving and receiving them. For example, this is the second year in a row that I’ve had to write the commentary for this week’s parasha. I think the source of Jewish guilt comes from parashat Acharei Mot. In this week’s parasha, we are given the everlasting commandment of the Day of Atonement for all of our sins. Since we are commanded to atone for our sins only once a year, that means the other 353 days (12 lunar months minus one day) we have to live with the guilt that our sins have caused us to feel. In a leap year, we have even more days of feeling guilty. This also may be where the expression “it’s better to give than to receive” originated. Seriously though, the progression of Yom Kippur throughout Jewish history is fascinating. From the beginning, Yom Kippur has always been a day where we are forbidden to do any work. In that respect, it has not changed since the commandment was first given. However, the method by which we atone for our sins on Yom Kippur has changed dramatically. The Torah provides detailed instructions on the rituals Aaron, the High Priest is supposed to perform on Yom Kippur. By performing these rituals, Aaron is atoning for all the sins that have been committed by the Israelite nation over the past year. Over the next, approximately, 1400 years, with a few small interruptions, the pattern of atonement remained similar. As part of our prayers on Yom Kippur, we read about the service that occurred during the Second Temple period. There does seem to be more involvement by the people in the service than what is mentioned in this week’s parasha, but the rituals of the High Priest are still the centerpieces of the Yom Kippur service. Following the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE, the Yom Kippur Service changed by necessity, and over the next 1936 years, evolved into the service we have today. I say that in all seriousness, as our congregation is a great example of how the service continues to evolve with our supplemental readings. Today, the Yom Kippur service is designed to allow individuals to atone for their own sins. The closest thing we have to a High Priest would be the Rabbi of our congregation. Just like the ancient People of Israel hoped to be forgiven for their sins based on the merits of the High Priest, many Jews today hope that through their spiritual leader they may seek atonement from G-d for their sins. If they are lucky, they will have as good a spiritual leader as we have been blessed to have over the past 25 years.
Shabbat Shalom
April 29, 2006/1 Iyar, 5766 Tazria/Metzora Last week’s parasha concluded with the section of the Torah which outlined for us the regulations regarding which species of animals, fish and fowl we may choose for our consumption; in short, which animals may be considered kosher and which may not. This week’s double portion Tazria-Metzora spends a great deal of time with the issue of tzaraat – usually translated as “leprosy”. On the surface (no pun intended) we seem to be instructed regarding a health issue. However, for our Sages, it represented a physical manifestation of a moral malady, viz. slander. Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish in the Talmudic tractate Archin interprets the opening words of Chapter 14 of Leviticus (14:2). “This should be the instructions regarding the metzora (leper)…”as “This should be the instructions regarding the motzi shem ra (slanderer) …” Rabbi Shamon ben Lakish makes his point with a Hebrew play on words, breaking down the word grumn-metzora into component parts, gr oa thmun-MOTZi Shem RA. The question i would ask you to think about before reading further is what significance could you attribute to the Torah’s choice to juxtapose the regulations regarding kashrut and those regarding tzaraat, understood as a consequence of slander? Rabbi Yisrael Salanter, the founder of the Mussar school within Judaism, suggests the significance can be found in the fact that both are connected to our mouth, the food we put in it and the words that come out of it. By putting them close together, Rabbi Salanter suggests the Torah is striving to have us understand that the same care we exercise in determining that the foods we put into our mouth shall meet the highest standards of kashrut so should we make sure that the words that emanate from our mouth meet, not only the highest standards of truth, but also the highest standards of kindness and gentleness. EZ April 22, 2006/24 Nissan, 5766 Shemini How individuals or representatives of a people might attain holiness during a lifetime is a central thought in the portion of Shemini. This portion considers the time of the consecration of the members of the priesthood for Israelites. Rashi suggests close relationships between the holiness of the Almighty and the holiness of the Israelites. Lev 11:45 reinforces this classic thought, and an idea oft-stated during recent Passover seders: For I am the Lord that brought you out of the land of Egypt, to be your G-d; ye shall therefore be holy, for I am holy. Foremost, the priests and their lineal descendants had to show holiness in observing laws and commandments which contain both positive and negative precepts. In the Tent of Meeting Aaron follows Moses’ specific commands from the Lord to atone for himself and then to atone for the Israelites. This atonement occurs through bringing the sacrificial offering of the people. An absence of holiness can be a key to unraveling reasons for the death of Nadab and Abihu, sons of Aaron, before the Almighty in the Sanctuary. Commentators have asked what behavior or what abandonment of commandments were involved? One suggestion often giving is that they were intoxicated. Another approach may provide a closer and direct link. The portion informs us that priests and Israelites were beginning to establish elements of holiness. Nadab and Abihu entered the inner sanctuary without proper respect for the holiness and sanctity of that environment where individuals come closest to the Almighty. They contravened laws concerning the Priesthood, and replaced human authority for the Lord's authority. The latter occurs when they choose to use a fire other than that which would descend from the Lord, and then when they offer a strange fire before the Lord (Lev 10:1). These specific behaviors stained the holiness of the inner sanctuary and diminished the ideal that priests would represent the highest standards of holiness. Nadib and Abihu received rapid punishment. Can their deaths be seen as a burnt-offering to sanctify the name of the Lord and maintain parameters of holiness for the society? Steve Puro April 8, 2006/10 Nissan, 5766 Tzav The great bulk of Parashat Tzav is dedicated to the laws of the various offerings brought by the Kohanim. The offerings, which we generally call “sacrifices,” are called in Hebrew korbanot, from the root meaning “closeness.” Ultimately the aim of all the korbanot are to come closer to Gd. Now that the Holy Temple no longer exists, “our lips (prayers) are in the place of our korbanot” – the medium of prayer is what we use to try to approach and cleave to the Divine. The form of our liturgy provides numerous opportunities to pray for our needs, some structured, others less so. Whenever we are praying for something specific we may face the situation that our prayers don’t seem to be answered. This lack of an answer can often feel like a cruel rejection and abandonment. Yet if we think for a minute about who we are, and Who Gd is, we can see that this is not so. A major problem in theology is the problem of theurgy – can a person’s actions “force” Gd, so to speak, to do something. The Midrash Aggadah gives us an example of this – when Hannah was praying for a child (the future prophet Samuel) the Midrash has her saying to Gd “If you don’t give me this child I’ll seclude myself with a man other than my husband, he’ll bring me to drink the bitter waters (the ordeal of the sotah/suspected adulteress), I’ll be innocent and, per Your promise in the Torah, I’ll conceive a child.” Checkmate! Did Hannah “force Gd’s hand”? Perhaps it was just time for her to have this child. Perhaps Gd was waiting for her to dig really deep inside herself, and she had finally actualized all of the potential for closeness that was built into her. Someone else will have to answer this question. But even if it were possible to “force Gd’s hand,” I would argue that this is not the course any sane person would take. Here we have ourselves, in trouble, with limited intellect and limited vision, desperately thrashing about looking for a solution. Would we not want to take the easy way out? And the result of taking the easy way out is the same bad result as when we “help” a butterfly emerge from its cocoon – the butterfly is crippled for life, its wings stunted and useless, because it hasn’t had the opportunity to grow that its struggle to emerge afforded it. On the other side we have Gd, infinite intelligence, pure awareness, concerned with every detail of the functioning of the universe that He created, and concerned with our good. Everything that comes our way is to guide us to the greatest happiness there is – union with the Divine. Do we really want to force Gd to do what we think is best! The answer is obvious.
I’ll close with a
beautiful example of this faith. After the murder of Nachshon Waxman, a
secular Israeli asked his father: “You prayed, we all prayed, and nothing
happened. Gd did not listen. Does that not bother you? Are you not
angry?” Mr. Waxman answered “Yes, we prayed, we begged, we asked H” to
listen, to save Nachshon. He listened. He listened very intently and He
weighed the request. He could have said Yes, He could have said No. He
said No. H” listened. His answer was No.” (Quoted in Peninim on the
Torah by R. A. Leib Scheinbaum, 11th series, page 147,
Parashat Tetzaveh). We may not know why the answer was No, but we
have faith that it was the best answer possible. April 1, 2006/3 Nissan, 5766 Vayikra Parshat VaYikra gives us the detailed instructions for the sacrifices, voluntary and mandatory, expensive and modest, to be offered in the Tabernacle and in the Temple. Offerings can be of cattle, sheep, goats, small birds, or grain and oil. As long as there is no Temple in Jerusalem, we can study these mitzvot and pray daily for the restoration of the Temple and the sacrifices, but we cannot make sacrifices. For this limitation most of us are actually grateful. Think about how difficult it is to draw near to God, to feel in His presence, to express to Him gratitude and sometimes regret and dismay for our actions. We do not always know how to act or what to say even with each other. Is it not still more difficult with God? How would most people 3,000 years ago have approached their gods? The common pagan ritual was animal and sometimes even human sacrifice which Judaism has never allowed. Performing ritual acts and voicing ritual expressions can make us feel more comfortable when we do not know what to do or say. Perhaps when we were still in the wilderness, God lovingly gave us the commandments of sacrifice, ritual acts, so we could relate to God with familiar religious practices. Does God need our sacrifices? No, we were not feeding or trying to bribe God when we brought offerings to the Temple. We were trying to approach, to come closer, to connect. Giving can help us to feel closer. Do you ever give a present, possibly extravagant, to someone who already has everything and so does not need your gift? Why? Does the special someone need to receive, or do you need to give? The words are in our siddur, but do we really want to return to making animal sacrifices? In the new USCJ Chumash, Etz Hayim, it says that Rav "Kook, a chief rabbi of Palestine (This was before 1948) and a vegetarian, envisioned a time when the Temple would be rebuilt and only the grain offering would be brought..." No blood would be dashed or sprinkled. No animal fat would smoke on the altar. Cain and Abel, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob made animal sacrifices on altars. Our ancestors made public sacrifices in the Temple in Jerusalem. Would a vegetarian sacrifice be acceptable for modern Jews and would God accept it? Susan Fleminger Mar. 25, 2006/25 Adar, 5766 Vayakhel Parashat Vayakhel opens with the commandment of Shabbat. This is not the first time that G-d has commanded the Children of Israel to observe Shabbat. On five previous occasions in the book of Exodus alone, we read about the commandment of observing Shabbat. Each time we read about the commandment to observe Shabbat, we learn more about the purpose of Shabbat, as well as additional details of what we are expected to do, or not do, on Shabbat. A common motif regarding the commandment of Shabbat is the concept of rest. Six days we are told to labor, but the seventh day, we are told to rest. We are also provided with several explanations for the observance of Shabbat, with the most well known being that G-d created the world in six days, but on the seventh He rested. In Parashat Vayakhel, we are told that the punishment for whoever violates Shabbat is death. Why are we told about the punishment for violating Shabbat in this Parasha, and not the previous five times when G-d commanded us to observe Shabbat? According to Rashi, the commandment to observe Shabbat is placed here to inform the Israelites not to violate the Shabbat with the building of the Tabernacle. Perhaps G-d felt it was necessary to make it clear to the People not to violate the Shabbat, even for the sake of another commandment, so He explicitly says what will happen if one engages in prohibited activities on Shabbat. If we look at the relationship between G-d and the Children of Israel as a parent-child relationship, we may get another insight as to why we are told what the punishment will be if we violate the Shabbat. Like any parent, G-d lays down the law for His children, and hopes His children will follow His instructions, without having to issue threats. Perhaps it is only after the sin of the golden calf that G-d feels His children need to know what their punishment will be if they do not follow His commandments. Children do not always understand why their parents place restrictions on them. They do not realize that their parents have their best interest at heart. G-d knows we need a day of rest, even when we think we are too busy to take a day off and stop what we are doing. So the next time someone wishes you Shabbat Shalom (peaceful Shabbat), remember they are not just speaking for themselves, but for G-d as well.
Shabbat Shalom Mar. 18, 2006/18 Adar, 5766 Ki Tisa Ah yes. The famous golden calf episode. But there are many other significant events in this week’s Torah portion. Moshe is on Mount Sinai to receive instructions for building the Tabernacle. In addition to the golden calf, important instructions are given concerning the Sabbath. Moses received the two stone tablets written by the finger of GOD. The people worship the idol and they are threatened with destruction. The first set of tablets is broken. Moshe successfully pleads with GOD to avert catastrophe and requests to understand GOD’s nature. A number of attributes of GOD are revealed. GOD speaks with Moshe “face to face.” Moses is put into the cleft of a rock for protection and sees the aftermath of GOD’s glory. The three pilgrimage Holy days are discussed. Speaking of the golden calf, what is the significance of a calf? Why not a lamb, a lion, the sun or a sphinx emerging from the molten pool of golden jewelry Aaron melted? The entire world knows about Israel’s great sin; dumping GOD and turning to idol worship fearing the loss of their human leader who had seemingly perished on Mt. Sinai. The making of an idol seems an incredulous act by a people who “know” GOD was real, having experienced the spectacular events in Egypt and at the Red Sea and their escape from slavery from the hands of the greatest power in the world. How quickly faith is lost when uncertainty, fear and insecurity arise. What have you done for me lately? We have all experienced feelings of insecurity and it is a great fear, indeed. One possible explanation is the Israelites were herdsman. Let me suggest that their most valuable earthly possession was their cattle. This is the way they knew how to rely upon themselves to make a living and survive. Israel’s turn towards the calf symbolizes their loss of spirituality and faith in GOD and return to human self-reliance. “We will do the best we can ourselves” is a common human response in times of trouble. “Who else is there to help us?” “Moses is gone therefore GOD is gone, we are on our own.” How often we have all thought this when problems beset us? Self-reliance is good up to a point and that is when the sin of the golden calf comes in. Forgetting about GOD and turning away from GOD results in a significant human turning toward evil actions. It doesn’t have to be that way, but human nature over the millennia shows that is the case. As GOD continuously directed our ancestors on how to live a worthy life, so does GOD direct us today with the instructions documented in the Torah. So remember GOD today, and every day, even when you cannot see GOD or understand GOD. When we follow the ways of GOD and so achieve holiness, we always do better, feel better, and increase our chances to avoid the evils of the world. Shelby Kopp (Alias “Sar”) Mar. 11, 2006/11 Adar, 5766 Tetzaveh The Torah portion opens with God’s charge to the Israelites to provide olive oil for use in the Tabernacle menorah. (Ex. 27:20-21) It also briefly describes its manufacture and procedure. In establishing the purpose for the olive oil, the Torah says, “I’ha’a lot nayr tamid.” Though the intended meaning of the word is “to kindle lights regularly” they literally mean “to raise or elevate lights regularly”. Rashi, troubled by the use of the verb – “to raise or elevate” – unusual in connection with lighting flames, quotes the Talmud (Shabbat 21), “He (the kohen) ignites the flame until it rises on its own.” The use of the unusual – in this context – verb, “to raise or elevate” teaches us says the Talmud, that the procedure of lighting the menorah in the Tabernacle was for the kohen to ascertain that the flame, once ignited, was self-sustaining. The imagery works well as a metaphor for education, as well, particularly for Jewish Education. If the kohen represents the teacher and the flame symbolizes the learner’s education, then it is the function of the teacher not to just fill the learner with information, but to make the learner self-sustaining educationally. In the Jewish education of children, the role of the teacher is filled not only – maybe not even mainly – by rabbi and Jewish educators, but by parents. Each of us – rabbi, teacher and parents, working together – has the task of nurturing and educating the child to become Jewishly self-sustaining. The flame in the Menorah once ignited must be capable of rising on it’s own. EZ Mar. 4, 2006/4 Adar, 5766 Terumah This week's Torah portion, Terumah, is a continuation of the departure from the "story line" of the Exodus from Egypt. It instead concentrates on the laws concerning the building of the Ark, the Tabernacle, and the Tent of Meeting. It goes into great depths explaining exactly how to build each item. These parshiot have always been difficult for me. I keep wondering why it is necessary to be so detailed in describing how these items were to be constructed. It might also be confusing to me because of my own ineptitude in building anything. (Those who have heard the story of the building of my sukkah can attest to this). Because of my own puzzlement, I felt compelled to try to come to an understanding of these difficult passages. Of course, there is always the simple answer. We build these items this way because it is a commandment. However, I feel it is important to look deeper and see if there is something more. The biggest problem I have are the cherubim on the Ark. Are they not statues of angels? Are they not graven images? I found an article by a Dr. Avignor Bonvhek which speaks directly to this matter. In it, he says that Hashem teaches us through the cherubim that even a graven image can be holy if he wills it so. It seemed that I was back to the original simple answer until I continued reading. The cherubim are facing each other. The Rambam in his code (Vessels of the Sanctuary Ch 2, 11-12) says that when transported, the Ark is carried with the men facing each other, similar to the cherubim. So then, there is the explanation. The Jewish people carry out their mitzvot in a fashion which imitates the cherubim in heaven. We do in the physical world what is done in heaven. That is an answer I find inspiring. I hope you find something in it as well. Shabbat shalom Michael Timmerman Feb. 25, 2006/27 Shevat, 5766 Mishpatim The parasha Mishpatim follows on the heels of the Revelation at Sinai and the recitation of the Decalogue. Although the Decalogue seems to cover the full range of responsibilities that people have to God and to each other, the Decalogue in of itself could not have been intended as being a comprehensive guide for human obligations. This is evidenced by the legislation that is greatly elaborated upon in Mishpatim. Indeed, the remainder of the Torah is primarily legislative in character. Yet something paradoxical immediately presents itself. The people of Israel had just emerged after centuries of slavery in Egypt. One might expect, if not in the Decalogue itself, then perhaps in the subsequent expanded civil legislation, that there be a total prohibition of involuntary servitude. In fact, what we see is that Mishpatim begins with regulations concerning bondsmen clearly indicating that the Torah permitted bondage. How can this be reconciled? Slavery, as an institution, had been part of virtually every past culture, and regrettably remains in force in many present day societies. Moreover, we know that slavery was part of the way of life of our patriarchs even before they journeyed to Egypt. When the Jewish people were liberated and transformed into an independent nation, it would have been difficult to suddenly and completely eliminate certain practices that were deeply rooted parts of their prevailing culture. What had become different, however, is that the Torah, while acknowledging bondage, emphasized the rights of the individual even in the case of a bondsman or slave. Moreover, the Torah legislates that there be a time limit to the length of servitude. It is also noteworthy that the rights of Jewish bondsmen are the first individual rights that are expanded upon in Mishpatim. Contrast this with the institution of slavery as it existed in the United States at the time of its founding. The original constitution of the United States, including the Bill of Rights, made virtually no reference at all to slavery let alone granting any rights to slaves or provisions for their freedom. In fact, the constitution specifically prohibited addressing any issues of slavery for a period of twenty years after its ratification. Ultimately, it took much longer and, of course, a civil war was necessary with the subsequent amending of the constitution to resolve this issue. While it is true that the Torah is immutable, human behavior is not. It is a tremendous testament to the humanity of the Jewish people that by using the Torah as a moral compass, practices that are objectionable by modern standards, yet were common place in our history, were voluntarily abandoned even though they were permitted by the Torah. We can only hope that other peoples will follow these examples. Paul Tesser Feb. 18, 2006/20 Shevat, 5766 Yitro The parasha Yitro describes preparation of the nation of Israel (B'nai Yisrael) for the Giving of the
Torah, and carefully specifies the Giving of the Torah, which occurred on Shavout. How would
you envision your individual or collective reaction as part of B'nai Yisrael, if you found yourself
preparing for G-d's Revelation at Sinai? In this context there is importance in suggesting G-d's
relation to the people of Israel. The people lived as slaves all their lives under Pharaoh; and by
what actions could G-d change that mentality. This mentality could be most easily altered through
real events, especially taking them out of Egypt and the house of bondage, and creating a
personal relationship by speaking directly to them. G-d offers a major promise to the people with
the following words: "And now, if you hear my voice and observe My covenant, you shall be to
Me the most beloved treasure of all peoples, for Mine is the entire world." (Ex 19:5)
B'nai Yisrael's knowledge and experience of real events deepens acceptance of Torah and its commandments, and also leads to future communal and national projects. How we recognize these events and their importance is significant for our individual development and for the direction of B'nai Yisrael. Steven Puro Feb. 11, 2006/13 Shevat, 5766 B'Shallach This parasha in this year has special meaning for me. It was my Bat Mitzvah parasha when I was 13, and I have just now turned 31. To be honest I don’t remember what I wrote about for my Bat Mitzvah speech. But as I read it again, it brings up so many questions. Why does God tell Moses he is going to harden Pharaoh’s heart? Why does God harden Pharaoh’s heart? Why do the Israelites complain at every turn, of the wilderness, of the Egyptian’s, of thirst, of hunger? Why doesn’t God foresee their complaints and provide for them without their needing to ask? Why do the Israelites disobey God so often? Why does God need Moses to hold up his arms in order for Joshua and his men to defeat Amalek? And so on. I openly invite answers to any of these questions, and I with the wisdom I have gained since my Bat Mitzvah will posit my own. When I add all the questions together I feel this answers them all: God need’s our belief in God as much we need to believe in God. We cannot all be Moses or Aaron, and have steadfast faith. I know it seems hubris to say that God needs our belief, but in the same way that I believe the world needs all different kinds of people to do different jobs, we need bakers, and accountants, and garbage collectors, and store clerks, God needs different people to believe in God in different ways, some with the steadfastness of Moses, some with the questioning of Elie Wiesel, some with quietness of a child’s prayers, and some with tears of loved ones. We make choices everyday that reflect how we chose to be Jewish. We keep kosher, we light Shabbat Candles, we recite ancient prayers. But what about the moments when another bill comes and there is no money left to pay it? What about when we or someone we love is sick and there is no cure? What about all of the violence in the world? These are the moments that I have found that while the rhythm of ritual and tradition keep me moving, it doesn’t cure the heartbreak in my soul, and then I remember this parasha when I say the Mi Chamocha, and I remember that God needs me and my questioning belief as much as I need God and there will be days of Manna ahead somewhere. Hadas Metzger
Feb. 4, 2006/6 Shevat, 5766 Bo God’s promise to Abraham is the gift of freedom for his descendants. This freedom begins for the Israelites on the eve before their Exodus. We learn that freedom comes with specific expectations. For the first time, God addresses the Israelites as a new nation. God's first expectation is that the Israelites are to keep a lunar calendar instead of the Egyptian solar calendar. The second is the creation of a series of community rituals. Why are these obligations imposed on the eve of their great freedom? God knows that freedom means being able to choose. The simple and controlled life of the slaves was about to end. Now they would be faced with a life full of possibilities. With such a staggering number of options what should the people choose? How can they avoid the fear and confusion that can come with such choices? God gives the Israelites the lunar calendar to renew themselves in this transitioning. The contrasts between the solar and the lunar calendar can give us insight into the significance of this commandment. We can look at different shapes of the moon and the sun . While the sun keeps its round appearance, the moon is forever changing its shape during its 28 day cycle. The moon gets smaller and smaller and then, just when it looks like it might disappear, a new moon begins to show itself. This rebirth of a new moon offers a sliver of hope to show the Israelites that they now have a chance to be reborn as a free people. The Hebrew word for month is Chodesh, which actually means renewal. It is God’s gift to the Israelites and all future generations to be able to constantly evaluate and have the possibility to renew themselves every month just like the moon. The lunar calendar shapes the freedom the Israelite community will experience. Today in our own generation, let us help each other continue the journey towards freedom and the freedom of choice initiated by our ancestors. With every new moon, may we encourage the asking of questions and allowing for changes so that the world will be open to multiple possibilities for all of us. To all of you, family and friends, and especially to my son, Benjamin, take this Torah portion from Bo and hold it in your hearts and minds as a reminder of our freedom to choose. This gift to the Jewish people, to choose, and choose wisely, was granted us from God at the time of the Exodus. Let us all commit to making wise choices in our own lives because choices we make as individuals affect us all. Amen. Barbara Gaponoff Berson Jan. 28, 2006/28 Tevet, 5766 V'aera This week’s Parasha, V’aera opens with God encouraging Moses after the initial failure of his mission to Pharoah. God instructs Moses to return and demand the release of the Israelites slaves. God assures Moses that he will eventually succeed because God intends to fulfill the covenant He made with the ancestors to grant their descendants the Land of Canaan in which the ancestors sojourned. Furthermore, God says: “In addition I have heard the moans of the Israelites whom Egypt is enslaving and I have recalled My covenant” (Exodus 6:5)." That is to say that God, in addition to planning to fulfill the covenant made with the ancestors because He promised He would, is further motivated to do so at this time because He has heard the cries of the oppressed Israelites. However, it is also possible to legitimately translate the above verse somewhat differently as follows: “I also have heard the moans of the Israelites whom Egypt is enslaving and I have recalled my covenant.” The above translation would imply that someone, beside God, heard the groans of the oppressed Israelites. This raises the question of who is the other being, or beings, who were affected by the lamenting Israelites? i hope you will take time to consider your response to this question before reading on. As found in Rabbi Menachem Hacohen’s, The Passover Haggadab: Legends and Customs, Rabbi Moses Schrieber of Pressburg, known from his magnum opus as the Chasam Sofer suggests the following answer: “It states in the Torah (Ex.6:5), I also have heard the moans of the Israelites whom Egypt in enslaving … We know the word “also” is meant to be inclusive. Who does it include here? What it teaches us is that even though all the Jews were enslaved, and that each one sighed for his own sorrows, nevertheless all heard the sighs of their fellows and felt their distress. It was because of this that God, also, heard their sighs.” i believe this insight imparts an important lesson to all of us. Regardless of the straits we may be in and the efforts and energies required to achieve relief, we must nevertheless be concerned with the difficulties and troubles others may be in. We may then pray and hope that God will see our concern and decide it is time to send redemption to us all. Rabbi Zimand Jan. 21, 2006/21 Tevet, 5766 Shemot “Because the midwives feared G-d, He built houses for them.”
Here we have a very
clear-cut example of a choice between two fears. The leader of the
world’s superpower gives you an immoral order. Do you fear him, or do you
fear the One by Whose Word morality is determined? On an intellectual
level it is easy to say that of course we fear G-d. But in actual
practice, I think we all know that our behavior demonstrates that we fear
the danger that is right in front of us, and physical (financial,
emotional…) far more than we fear an invisible, abstract Our ultimate purpose in life is of course to come into an intimate relationship with G-d, to return as it were to the situation prior to Adam’s sin. Our tradition very forthrightly proclaims that to do so it is not necessary to renounce the material world and its sensory pleasures. Rather we are to sanctify the material world and raise it to the level of, as it were, expressed Divinity. This sanctification takes place through our action in accordance with G-d’s commandments to us. In the case of the midwives, it was refraining from murder, even though they knew their own lives might be forfeit (how could they have known that Pharaoh would fall for their story about the Hebrew women giving birth before they got there?). What I find interesting about the verse quoted above is what Torah doesn’t say. It doesn’t say that the midwives reached a great level of prophecy, or that G-d spoke with them, or that their relationship with G-d got stronger. Instead it focused on the material reward – home and family – which G-d bestowed upon them. I believe Torah is telling us that in fact G-d wants to shower blessings upon us. G-d wants us to have material abundance, comfort and ease, so that we can apply ourselves to cleaving to Him and expressing the Divinity inherent in all of material creation. What stops the process? It is our own fears of lack in the material world. If we are fearful of Pharaoh we will act in a way that is the opposite of expressing Divinity and therefore G-d’s flow of blessings has to be constricted. If we cheat on our income taxes because we fear not having enough, how can G-d give us what we want – we will suppress the Divinity in what we have rather than bring it out. What can we do to overcome our fears? A brief personal story. In 1988 my marriage was splitting up and we were all living, in two households, in San Jose. I was offered a job that wasn’t really what I wanted, but I was down to my last few thousand dollars and had California-level monthly expenses. I realized at that moment that I could either settle for second best or decide to put aside my fear, trust in G-d and go for a better job. Within an hour of making that decision I had the better job. Does this always work? It hasn’t always for me; my level of faith is not as high as the midwives (nor have I been faced with truly life-or-death choices as they were). But that experience made it very clear to me that if I want G-d to build a house for me I have to decide Who I’m going to fear the most, and let the rest of the fears go. Rafi Rabinoff | |