Purim 5768/2007

Purim Message to Congregation Beth Sholom, Tri-Cities, Washington 5768

Rabbi Joseph Lukinsky

This year, 5768, is a leap year, which means that we have two months of Adar, Adar I and Adar II. Since the Jewish year is a lunar year, each month, starting with the appearance of the new moon [in ancient times reported by witnesses who came to the court in Jerusalem to report that they had seen it, a practice long made obsolete by rabbinical astronomical calculations] the lunar year falls short, by several days, of the solar year.

The rabbis figured out that adding an additional month seven times in 19 years would keep the two systems in synch. [Every 19 years the dates fall on the original civil date]. Islam follows a lunar calendar too, but in the Islamic tradition, there is no intercalation of an additional month, so Ramadan can fall any time during the year, difficult when the month-long daily fasting comes out during the long days of the summertime.

In the Jewish calendar intercalating the month, keeps Pesah as "Hag Ha-Aviv" [the spring festival] and Sukkot "Hag Ha-Asif" [the harvest festival]. Otherwise, we would find, for example, Pesah celebrated in December every few years, Shavuot in January, Rosh HaShanah in March!!

This year in Israel, i.e. in Jerusalem, we have what is called "Purim M'shulash" [Triple Purim] because Purim falls on Friday. Shushan Purim, celebrated only in Jerusalem, is on Shabbat when it can't be fully observed, and is therefore carried over to Sunday. A triple Purim!

Purim is celebrated in Adar II when we have a leap year. I think that I have written one or more times about how Marshall McLuhan's "the medium is the message," helps us to understand the meaning of Jewish practices and observances, which is another way of saying, in one context, that the "way" a holiday is observed is a clue to the underlying ideas and deeper meaning of the holiday.

I suggested earlier that the paradigm of "an upside down world" derived from the various "upside down" practices of Purim [Cf. Esther, 9:1] such as noise in the synagogue, a mitzvah to get drunk, wearing costumes as a disguise, and the like, as well as much material in the Megillat Esther itself, [see my earlier piece and watch for examples in the Megillah reading!] reflect the message that the world is "upside down," i.e. not the way it "ought" to be.

The Purim message expresses thus the hope that the ideal of the "world as it ought to be" should always be our hope, no matter how discouraged we may become sometimes. This Purim message kept hope alive throughout the dark centuries of Jewish life, and kept the Jewish people alive too.

Another practice that has a message is the practice of sending "shalah manot," portions of food, to family and friends in celebration of Purim. Yes, it's a generous and happy practice for a joyous holiday, but what is its meaning? [See the last chapter of Megillat Esther for the instruction that we are to send "Shalah manot" to one another]. It is, in light of McLuhan's principle, more than just a celebratory gesture, an expression of joy at Purim time.

I suggest that it relates to the idea of "community." You can easily buy baked goods at the bakery. They may be even better than the goodies we receive and send to our friends. But "shalah manot" reinforces the bonds of community. Each person cannot send shalah manot to everyone in a large community, but the very act of fulfilling the mitzvah, of sending to at least two friends and receiving in return, is an expression of the basic Jewish principle of "Kol Yisrael arevim zeh ba-zeh [Talmud Bavli Shavuot 39A] All Jews are responsible for one another."

Esther and Mordecai cared enough to risk their lives to save the Jewish people. They were responsible in a crisis. We may not be called to such a lofty endeavor, but there are things we can do, especially in these troubled times, to insure that we are doing what we can. In both Israel and the Diaspora, in communities large and small, there are many problems, many needs. We have to be ready to care and to act.

The symbol of shalah manot has broader implications it seems to me, and generates expanding our actions to include non-Jews too. Why not? In an election year, with so much divisiveness, the Jewish concept can be extended. All people are responsible for one another. We can't do it alone. We need each other. That's one of the deep level messages of Purim, that each of us can find a way to implement.

Purim Sameah!! from Betty and

Rabbi Joseph Lukinsky

Parashat Parashat P'kudei 5768/2007 Shabbat Shekelim

Said Rabbi Simha Bunam of Pzhysha: "When members of a community are

invited to contribute to a fund, each an allotted amount, some insist
upon giving more than their quota. This extra donation is of special
delight to the Lord. When the Tabernacle was completed, relates the
Midrash (Shemot Rabbah 51:1), a supply of gold was discovered. Moses
inquired of the Lord for what use should be made of it. The Lord
instructed him to use it for the making of the receptacle for the Two
Tablets of the Coventant -- the most sacred objects in the Tabernacle.
(Siach Sarfei Kodesh 6)

Said Avraham Yehoshua Heschel of Apt: "Holiness has the effect of
awakening holiness. It cultivates the better nature of those who
observe it. We learn that when the artists who wrought the holy
objects of the Tabernacle reported a surplus of materials, Moses did
not ordain that no more materials should be brought, but that no more
work should be done. This was because the people, aroused to a sense
of holiness and dedication, could not be restrained from bringing
gifts as long as a holy work was being performed. (Menorah Hatahorah
71)

Said the Sfas Emes, Yehuda Leib of Ger: "The Midrash quotes the
verse, 'A man of trust has many blessings, but he who runs after
wealth will not be cleansed' (Mishlei 28:20). The man of trust, says
the Midrash, is Moses. and 'whoever is trustworthy, God brings about
blessing by his hand.'
We have learned that 'Shalom is a vessel that contains blessing.'
This is the 'man of trust': all his deeds are attached to his root,
'planted firmly into a trustworthy place' (Isaiah 22:23). The he is
called shalom, for the lower portion is not whole (shalem) unless it
is joined to that portion [the root of the person] above. This was the
character of Moses our Teacher, of whom it says 'Moses Moses' (Shemot
3:4) without any indication of a break between them. And he is called
'a man of God' (Tehillim 90:1) meaning that he is 'half man and half
God.' Thus too the Tabernacle, for it says: 'These are the rules of
the tabernacle, tabernacle of witness' (Shemot 38:21).

This was the whole purpose of the Tabernacle: to be a vessel
containing shalom for the entire world. The same is true of Shabbat
with regard to time. That is why all its deeds are doubled: two loaves
of bread, 'A Psalm, a song for the Sabbath day' (Tehillim 92:1),
'Shamor' and 'Zakhor,' and it gives blessing to all of time...

Scripture speaks of 'tabernacle of witness,' for this is the
essence of Israel's witness: to bring divine blessing into the world.
'You are my witnesses, says the Lord, and I am God' (Isaiah 43:12).
Thus there is witness in space and in time. Israel deserved by their
deeds to build the tabernacle and to have the Shekhina dwell in their
midst. Shekhina comes forth also on Shabbat and at holy seasons
because of Israel's merit. And the same is true in the realm of souls,
when we bring forth holiness from above into our soul.
(Taken from Arthur Green's The Language of Truth)

Parashat Va-yakhel 5768/2007

"You shall kindle no fire throughout your settlements on the Sabbath day." (Ex. 35:3)

"The classic commentators ask why fire is singled out from all the things forbidden on the Sabbath. But, even more essentially, we may ask how Moses comes to be mentioning fire at all. He appears to be giving the people the commandment that God had instructed him to give regarding working six days and ceasing on the seventh (31:15) almost verbatim. But then he adds the part about fire, which was not in God's instruction. Fire has not been associated with the Sabbath until now. Why does Moses add it?

What happened between the instruction and Moses' fulfillment of it? Fire has been mentioned twice since then: Aaron has claimed that the golden calf came out of a fire, and Moses has destroyed the calf with fire (32:20, 24). The prohibition of fire on the Sabbath may thus be understood as a reminder of the golden calf rebellion. (An interesting comparison is the prohibition of playing musical instruments on the Sabbath, which was instituted as a memorial of the destruction of the Temple). Moreover, it is a reminder that the Sabbath is not just about work and rest. There are things that one does not do on the Sabbath even if one can do them without the effort associated with work, such as lighting a fire. And there are things that one does do on the Sabbath, not just because it is permitted but because it is a spiritual joy, such as singing Sabbath songs. The Sabbath is about separation and sanctification of time. It is about peace and respite, about family, and about community."

Richard Elliot Friedman

By bracketing Shabbat with fire (candles Friday night, Havdallah Saturday night), we are reminded of what cannot be done in between these experiences.

But, why would refraining from kindling fire serve as a reminder of the golden calf?

"May God double the reward of Saadia Gaon, who (in a charming book) completely refuted the position of the Karaites, who prohibit having even an existing fire on the Sabbath. 'A Karaite got friendly with me once, and I said to him, "Let's forget about rabbinic tradition, and follow nothing but the written Torah." Naturally, he was happy to hear me say this. So I asked him, "Who prohibited us from lighting the lamp on Sabbath eve after sunset?" He replied, "You shall kindle no fire" (our verse above). I responded, "That verse says only 'on the Sabbath day.' You certainly agree that circumcision 'on the eighth day (Lev. 12:3) means that a child cannot be circumcised during the night!" He replied, "And there was evening and there was morning, one day (Gen. 1:5). Both evening and morning together are called 'day', and the evening that goes with the morning is the one preceding it."

"That cannot be," I said. "For the same verse says, "God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night." How can you say that He called the darkness Day?" At this point the Karaite was quite befuddled. He came back to me a few days later, citing "whoever eats leavened bread from the first day to the seventh day, that person shall be cut off from Israel" (12:15).

But I replied to this also. He went off disgusted with himself. A month later he came back in an extremely cheerful mood, having found the verse, "This is a day of good news" (2 Kings 7:9), which continues, "If we wait until the light of morning, we shall incur guilt." I replied, "Is that the only place in the Torah you could find nighttime referred to as 'day'? What about 'on the day that I smote all the first-born in the land of Egypt' (Num. 3:13)? The smiting of the first-born took place at midnight!" In fact, the Hebrew word yom has two meanings: first, the 24 hour "day," and second, a period of time. Thus "in that day" (Isa. 17:4) means "at that time, on that occasion." I have mentioned all these things because people of understanding can explain biblical verses in many different ways. That is why, when it comes to the commandments, we require tradition and the Oral Law, as I explained at the beginning of my Torah commentary.

~Ibn Ezra

A fascinating lesson for what I call 'scriptural opportunism' - deploying a 'verse of choice' to reinforce a self-made conviction. A frequent phenomenon today. Yet this passage itself does reinforce something as well - the abiding value to Judaism of rabbinic tradition (the oral Torah). May we deploy scripture as reverently and helpfully as did the rabbis.

A final thought about the use of fire. Josh Greenfield with whom I regularly study, pointed out yesterday that fire in daytime is hardly noticeable, while at night it artificially extends (day)light. Perhaps this is the meaning of why it is prohibited on Shabbat. Nature rests, God rests, and so do we. By not lighting fire on Shabbat, we respect the individuality of day and night - refraining from artificially extending or altering their given state. May the fires that bracket Shabbat this week offer you much warmth and light in a natural world at rest.

Parashat Ki Tissa 5768/2007

Ki Tissa: It's all in how you read it

Prepared by Jennifer Rudin

Summary of Parasha Ki Tissa

God instructs Moses to take a census of adult men by asking each to donate a half shekel. The instructions for making the bronze basin, the anointing oil, and the incense are given. Bezalel is named to head the construction of the mishkan and its furnishings, with Oholiav as his assistant. God tells Moses to remind the people of the importance of keeping Shabbat and then gives him the tablets inscribed with the Ten Statements.

While Moses is on the mountain, the people despair of his return and demand that Aaron "make us a god who shall go before us." Aaron fashions the Golden Calf and the next day the people offer sacrifices and rise to dance before it. God tells Moses what is happening in the camp. Moses pleads with God to restrain God's anger and then descends the mountain. When Moses sees what the people are doing, he angrily shatters the tablets. He destroys the calf and 3000 of its worshipers are put to death. Moses returns to Mount Sinai and intercedes with God to save the people.

God tells Moses to lead the people to the land God has promised, but that God will no longer go in their midst. Moses once again steps forward on behalf of the people and God relents. Moses asks to see God, but God refuses, saying, "man may not see Me and live." Moses ascends Mount Sinai a third time and receives the revelation of God's Thirteen Attributes.

וַיְדַבֵּר ה' אֶל־מֹשֶׁה לֵּאמֹֽר: כִּי תִשָּׂא אֶת־רֹאשׁ בְּנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵל

לִפְקֻֽדֵיהֶם וְנָתְנוּ אִישׁ כֹּפֶר נַפְשׁוֹ לַֽה' בִּפְקֹד אֹתָם וְלֹא־יִֽהְיֶה בָהֶם נֶגֶף בִּפְקֹד אֹתָֽם:

After forty days, Moses descends the mountain with the second set of tablets. ( Rabbi Joyce Newmark, Teaneck, New Jersey)

One Sound: Two Opinions

When Joshua heard the sound of the people in its boisterousness, he said to Moses, "There is cry of war in the camp." But he [Moses] answered, "It is not the sound of the tune of triumph, Or the sound of the tune of defeat; It is the sound of song I hear!" (Etz Hayim, Exod. 32:17-18)

Ibn Ezra, a medieval commentator, shows that kol anot refers to neginot, or songs. He bases his explanation on Isaiah 27:2, where the root for anah means "sing." According to Ibn Ezra, Moses stands outside the camp and hears music, the songs of the people that accompanied their carousing around the Golden Calf. Rashi disagrees and argues that anot is tied to the Hebrew word eenu'ee, meaning "affliction." According to Rashi, this verse would now read as: "The sounds that I hear afflict me."

One Set of Words: Two Meanings

In the same way that Joshua and Moses were present in the same moment and listened to the same sound yet heard two different things, the two sets of "tablets" which contain the very same words can be understood in two very different ways.

"The tablets were the work of G-d; the writing was the writing of G-d, engraved on the tablets." (JPS, Exod. 32:15)

Carve out two stone tablets like the first ones, and I will write on them the words that were on the first tablets, which you broke. (JPS, Exod. 34:1)

According to tradition, when Moses was given the first tablets, he was given only Torah shebikhtav, the "written Torah". At the time of the second tablets, he was given Torah she-be'al peh, the Oral Torah as well: "R. Jochanan said: G-d made a covenant with Israel only for the sake of the Oral Law, as it says [in the context of the second tablets]: "For by the mouth [al pi] of these words I have made a covenant with you and with Israel"" (Ex. 34:27). The difference between the Written and Oral Torah is profound. The first is the word of G-d, with no human contribution. The second is a partnership - the word of G-d as interpreted by the mind of man.

One Word: Forward and Backward

When you take a census of the Israelites to determine their numbers, each one shall be counted by giving an atonement offering for his life.

Notice that the word "v'natnu" (vav-nun-tav-nun-vav) is a palindrom. The word is spelled the same backwards and forwards. In the context of this census where each person is not counted himself but rather is counted by the shehckel he gave, the word can be interpreted as a reminder to us all that there is equal value in giving and in receiving and that as easily as we are givers today we could well be receivers tomorrow.

Ibn Ezra: The Golden Age of Spain produced some magnificent Jewish scholars. One of these was Abraham Ibn Ezra. Born in 1089, Ibn Ezra was a friend of Judah HaLevi. Tradition maintains that Ibn Ezra married Judah HaLevi's daughter. After three of his children died and one son converted to Islam, Ibn Ezra became a wanderer. It was during his self-chosen exile that he wrote his brilliant works. Ibn Ezra was a poet, astrologist, scientist, and Hebrew grammarian. Ibn Ezra also introduced the decimal system to Jews living in the Christian world. He used the Hebrew alef to tet for 1-9, but added a special sign to indicate zero. He then placed the tens to the left of the digits in the usual way. In his travels, ibn Ezra met Rabbenu Tam (the grandson of Rashi) in France, and they apparently discussed Halachah and Torah. Ibn Ezra's most famous work was his commentary on the Bible. Unlike Rashi, Ibn Ezra didn't want to use midrash in his explanations. He concentrated on the grammar and literal meaning of the text. His most controversial beliefs were all couched in very careful language; scholars suspect that Ibn Ezra did not

believe that the

Torah was written by Moses on Mount Sinai. He found seams and grammatical problems which indicated that the Torah was written over a period of time. He didn't dare proclaim this opinion openly; it would have meant his death. However, there are hints of his suspicions within his commentary. He carefully used the phrase, "And the intelligent will understand" whenever he discussed a controversial insight.

Rashi: Foremost French commentator, called Rashi after the initial letters of his name, Rabbi Shlomo Yitzhak (1040-1105). Rashi was born in Troyes in northern France and spent most of his life in this city. In his youth Rashi studied for a number of years at the great center of Jewish learning, Mayyence in Germany. Returning to his native city, Rashi taught without a fee a number of chosen disciples, earning his living by means of the vineyards he owned. Rashi's daughters married scholars, members of whose family established the school of the Tosafot glosses to the Talmud. [Tosafot, lit. "additions," were glosses added to Rashi's commentary by Talmudic scholars in France (the tosafists) in the 12-14th centuries.] Rashi's two most famous grandsons were Rashbam and his younger brother, Rabbenu Tam.

Rashi's undying fame rests on his commentaries to the Bible and the Babylonian Talmud, printed together with the text in practically all editions. Rashi's commentary to the Humash (Pentateuch) was first printed in Reggio, Italy, in 1475 and seems to have been the first Hebrew book ever printed. Rashi's method is to state what he considers to be the plain meaning (peshat) of the text and also homiletical comments (derash) culled from the Midrash.

Parashat Tetzaveh 5768/2008

Torah Gems - February 15

Parshat Tetzaveh

Prepared by Rabbi Hamilton

The Baal Shem Tov offered a simile: A musician was playing on a very beautiful instrument, and the music so enraptured the people that they were driven to dance ecstatically. Then a deaf man who knew nothing of the music passed by, and seeing the enthusiastic dancing of the people, he decided they must be insane. Had he been wise he would have sensed their joy and rapture and joined their dancing. Heschel writes, "We do not hear the voice. We only see the words in the Bible. Even when we are deaf, we can see the rapture of the words."

Amidst the details of the Tabernacle and the vestments of the priests in this week's Parasha, God's grand purpose is revealed. "I will abide among the Israelites, and I will be their God. And they shall know that I the Lord am their God, who brought them out from the land of Egypt that I might abide among them, I the Lord their God (Ch. 29:45-46). This is one of the most crucial passages in the Torah. Yet, how shall we know this to be so?

Often I am asked a question about the difference in linguistic style between the Torah and the Haftorah. The Torah, for all of its mystery and 'invitations to midrashic imagination', is relatively clear and straight forward. This is certainly the case in this week's nuts and bolts, point by point, description of priestly vestments and tabernacle dimensions. Contrast this clarity, with the verbiage that is often featured in the Haftorah. Ezekial the prophetic author of this week's Haftorah (even though this Haftorah in particular is relatively concrete) so often employs allegory, metaphor, and esoteric imagery to convey a message. Why isn't the Haftorah written as clearly as is the Torah?

Heschel's insight in God in Search of Man offers an answer which I find compelling.

In empathizing with the plight of the prophet (who is always the author of the Haftorah), Heschel tries to capture what it must have been like for the prophet to try and capture in words a first-hand encounter with God. If such an encounter is ineffable (beyond verbal expression), the prophet's task was mighty indeed.

"The human mind is a repository of a variety of ideas, some of which are definite and expressive while others resist definition and remain ineffable. Correspondingly, there are two kinds of words: descriptive words which stand in fixed relation to conventional and definite meanings, such as concrete nouns, chair, table, or the terms of science; and indicative words which stand in fluid relation to ineffable meanings and, instead of describing, merely intimate something which we intuit but cannot fully comprehend. The content of words such as God, time, beauty, eternity, cannot be faithfully imagined or reproduced in our minds. Still they convey a wealth of meaning. Their function is not to call up a definition in our minds but to introduce us to a reality which they signify. They are not portraits, but clues. They are not to be taken literally nor figuratively but responsively."

"This indeed is our situation in regard to a statement such as "God spoke." It refers to an idea that is not at home in the mind, and the only way to understand its meaning is by responding to it. We must adapt our minds to a meaning unheard before. The word is but a clue; the real burden of understanding is upon the mind and soul of the reader."

According to tradition, God lovingly revealed the Torah 'in the language of human beings' (using words that, even if indicative, were meant to be accessible to us). In the Torah, God speaks to people. In the Prophets, God speaks through people. In the Writings, people speak to God (Rabbi Jonathan Sacks' overview of the three sections of the Bible). The prophet is not as gifted in capturing 'ineffable content' as is God. When God speaks to us in Torah, God distills ineffable truths in discernable, concrete words and statements. When God speaks through a prophet (Ezekial or any other Haftorah passage), it is up to the mortal prophet to try and distill the 'ineffable content' of such an experience - typically necessitating allegory, metaphor, and imagery that represents the best effort of the prophet to convey his encounter with God. This is why, typically, Torah is clearer and more concrete than Haftorah.

But before parting from this subject, I want to dwell a bit longer on the prior assumption (conviction) that Torah is God's word.

"True it seems incredible that we should hold in our gaze words containing the breath of God" Heschel writes. "What we forget is that at this moment, we breathe what God is creating, that right in front of us we behold works that reflect His infinite wisdom, His infinite goodness."

"A hasid, it is told, after listening to the discourse of the one who lectured him about the lofty concept of God according to the philosophers, said "If God were the way you imagine Him, I would not believe in Him." However subtle and noble our concepts may be, as soon as they become descriptive, namely, definite, they confine Him and force Him into the triteness of our minds. Never is our mind so inadequate as in trying to describe God."

Yet, God gifted us His will and word. Why should we assume that the power that can make possible the world's coming into being has never been able to make itself known?

"If the stream of energy that is stored up in the sun and the soil can be channeled into a blade of grass, why should it be a priori excluded that the spirit of God reached into the minds of men?"

"More than two thousand years of reading and research have not succeeded in exploring the Bible's full meaning. In fact it is still at the very beginning of its career."

"There are no words in the world more knowing, more disclosing, and more indispensable, words both stern and graceful, heart-rending, and healing. A truth so universal: God is One. A thought so consoling: He is with us in distress. A responsibility so overwhelming: His name can be desecrated. A map of time: from creation to redemption. Guideposts along the way: the Seventh Day. An offering: contrition of the heart. A utopia: would that all people were prophets. The insight: man lives by faithfulness; his home is in time and his substance in deeds. A standard so bold: ye shall be holy. A commandment so daring: love thy neighbor as thyself. A fact so sublime: human and divine pathos can be in accord. And a gift so undeserved: the ability to repent."

As we strive to see the rapture in words heard by those who came before us (as the Baal Shem Tov's simile suggests), may we cling with fidelity (especially in today's world) to Heschel's prophetic reminder: "There is a passion and drive for cruel deeds which only the awe and fear of God can soothe; there is a suffocating selfishness in man which only holiness can ventilate."