Torah Gems - August 1, 2008 Parashat Ma'asei

Torah Gems - August 1, 2008

Parashat Ma'asei

Compiled by Rabbi William Hamilton

"On all other liturgical occasions, the Jew basks in the warmth of a creative partnership with God. Only on rare occasions of national calamity does he throw himself completely upon the divine mercies." Professor Yochanan Muffs, the great biblical scholar, hones in on the season we prepare to enter this Shabbat with Rosh Hodesh Menachem Av and the nine bleakest days of Judaism's calendar.

Customs vary during "the nine days." As has been the case for the prior 12 days (since the 17th of Tammuz), weddings and overly joyous celebrations are not arranged. Many refrain from eating meat products (except on Shabbat) during the first eight days of Av (with the 9th of Av, of course, being a fast day), because the rabbis associated eating meat with joy.

Returning to Muff's laser-sharp appraisal of the theological mood of this season, I want to consider a teaching from his book, The Personhood of God, which bares on the Haftorah this Shabbat, penned by the prophet who accompanies us on our theological descent to Tisha B'av. As gloomy and ominous as things sound, Jeremiah offers a silver lining thanks to the body of his work in the book that bares his name.

Muffs highlights three divine aspects: power, love, and justice. "When justice combines with love, the result is 'creative justice.' In His love for man and need for his sympathetic collaboration, God calls upon him to translate the divine norms into concrete reality, to assume the moral responsibility for partnership with Him." Jeremiah is the prophet most associated with this moral optimism, which is woven throughout our daily, Sabbath, and Festival liturgy.

"When justice combines with power," continues Muffs, "the result is judgment and condemnation. This notion is most typical of Isaiah, who stresses more than all the other prophets God's absolute transcendence, holiness, power, and otherness and man's ultimate fallibility and weakness." "When justice combined with power is about to destroy the world, a new configuration makes itself manifest: power with love. This is the basic idea of Second Isaiah (the latter portions of Isaiah which seem to come from a matured, more sympathetic voice)." Having failed to realize our potential, humanity experiences God's mercy (the highest form of God's power) as justice recedes into the background. It is no accident that the Haftorot for the seven weeks of comfort, which lift us from Tisha B'av up to the High Holidays, all come from Second Isaiah.

{Parenthetically, Muffs generalizes (his ideas on power, love, and justice) onto Judaism, Islam, and Christianity: "If Judaism was somehow able to balance these three elements (power, love, and justice) in a creative but often uneasy harmony, Christianity and Islam each sundered the original triad, extracting one element and making it normative, often to the complete exclusion of the other two. In Christianity, love became normative to the exclusion of justice and power. In Islam, power became normative to the exclusion of love and justice." The Personhood of God, P. 87}

What does this have to do with this week's Haftorah? Jeremiah's words: "Just look at the nations of the world; did they ever exchange their gods - who are, after all, nothings - while My people exchanged Me for that which is without use! "(Jer.2:11). The prophet persists: "Can you think of anything more stupid than rejecting a spring of freshwater, for the brackish, water of a cistern, a broken one!"(Jer.2:13) And finally exhorts, "Do yourselves a favor, save your feet and be kind to your voice; and the people retort, 'Get off my back! I like my lovers!"(Jer.2:25)

Its no wonder God has reached the point of no return in enabling the destruction of the Temple (by the Babylonians in Jeremiah's day, and much later the Second Temple by the Romans).

Jeremiah's eyewitness account of Jerusalem in flames - his book of Lamentations - will soon be the core text around which our observance of Tisha B'av will collect.

Yet, here is where I find a silver lining. Muffs points out that it is none other than Jeremiah who becomes the prophetic embodiment of "justice and love" which inspires sympathetic collaboration, grounded hope, which, again, is woven into the core of our daily, Sabbath, and Festival liturgy. The prophet of doom and gloom is also the prophet who inspires agency, partnership, and hope. At a season when "national calamity" looms largest, Jeremiah, the body of whose work enables us to "bask in the warmth of creative partnership with God" is the messenger.


Shabbat Shalom and Hodesh Tov

Rabbi William Hamilton

Torah Gems - July 25th Parashat Mattot

Torah Gems - July 25th

This week's Torah Gems were prepared by

Danny Margolis

Parashat Mattot

At first blush, Parashat Mattot has a "quaint" discussion about the importance of vows. To modern ears, this may seem out of date, for we live in a world where only written words have lasting meaning. If you want to make sure that promises are kept, get it in writing and keep a copy for your records.

Words, however, are very important in Judaism. Each day we begin the P'suke D'zimra, saying "Barukh She'amar v'Hayah HaOlam." (Blessed is the One who spoke and the world came into being.) The world was created through the power of words. They have power, creative power, and we must be very careful how we use them. Human words have the capacity to destroy the world as well.

Therefore, Parashat Mattot dedicates a whole chapter to the language of vows. Vows are more than promises; they are, as S. R. Hirsch noted, "Self imposed legislation." With our vows, we elevate our words to the realm of law; our speech becomes legally binding upon us. [More on this below.]

Rabbi Randall J. Konigsburg, Oz Ve

-Shalom

The Legal Sublimation of Anger and The Power of Words

Moshe Meir, Oz Ve-Shalom

"If the descendants of Gad and Reuven cross the Jordan with you before the Lord, and the Land is conquered before you, you shall give them the land of Gilead as a heritage.But if they do not cross over with you armed [for battle], they shall receive a possession among you in the land of Canaan."32:28

-30

The stipulation is clearly stated in a double format; it reflects all of the anger and distrust that Moshe felt towards the tribes who had betrayed his dream.The Sages used these conditional statements as a paradigm for the formulation of conditional statements in law:

From where do we learn about all conditional statements?From the stipulations of the Children of Gad and the Children of Reuven. (Gittin 75a)

For any stipulation to be halakhically valid, it must fulfill 3 criteria learned from the stipulations of the children of Gad and Reuven.First - it must be a double conditional ["If you do X, then X will happen; if you don't do X then Y will not happen"], and the principle that "the positive conditional implies the negative conditional" must not be applied.Second - the conditional term must precede the resulting act ["if" precedes "you shall give"]. Third - the positive conditional precedes the negative one ["If the descendants of Gad and Reuven cross" precedes, "But if they do not cross"].

Transforming his anger into a principle of Jewish law helps Moshe to retain his leadership, just as he reminds God to suppress His anger to preserve His larger covenantal commitment to the people. Anger born of disappointment and feelings of betrayal can, unchecked by law, give rise to aggressive and violent deeds. A culture's power finds expression in the restraint of human inclinations, even when they are justified, in binding legal frameworks. An eternal institution of law allows Moshe to accept the children of Gad and Reuven despite his feelings of alienation from them.

The Present Shapes the Memory of the Past

Menachem Klein, Oz Ve

-Shalom

The content of our parashah contrasts with the season in which we read it. While parashat Mattot tells of the Israelites' great victories over the 5 kings of Midyan, the distribution of the territories captured from the 2 Kings, Sihon and Og, it is read bein ha'metzarim, the days that mark the destruction of both Temples, the loss of national autonomy, the conquest of the Land by alien empires, and our exile.The days bein ha'metzarim control our minds, hiding the victories from our eyes.The fasts and customs of mourning of this season help us remember catastrophes and forget parts of the parashah that are relevant in our day.

This contrast shows us that memory is not objective; rather, it is dependent upon our situation, and it is an act of selection. We choose what to remember and, simultaneously, what to forget.Remembering and forgetting are not only an individual act; it also shapes peoples and communities which create and rely on collective and national memories.The Jewish People is such a community of memory.Our calendar, great sections of the siddur, rituals personal and public, as well as many of the mitzvot are geared towards the construction of memory.The construction of Jewish memory continues throughout the course of everyday life even while factors wholly foreign to the object of memory actually control reality.For example: We remember divine providence and the presence of God in a world that proceeds by its own laws, and we remember the Exodus from Egypt thousands of years after it actually occurred.

The construction of memory is accomplished via formative and activating agents (tzitzit on our garments, tefilin on our heads, the Pesah Seder, dwelling in the sukkah, the prohibitions that shape Sabbath observance, reading the Shma and Megilat Esther) and by the construction of heroes and villains, e.g., Harvona vs. Haman.

The way we remember an event does not accurately reconstruct the past.Rather, it is an activity of selection, of reshaping an event that was.Since memory is recalled through and must contend with the present, the event, as it lives on in memory, bears a different character than it had in reality.The present shapes, challenges and influences the past.

In our parashah, Moshe lifts recollections out of the tangled past, bringing up memories of the national trauma of 40 years earlier.He reminds them that the spies had seen the Land of Israel and decided to convince the people not to enter it.Only Kalev ben Yefuneh and Yehoshua bin Nun remained outside of the conspiracy.According to this version, the people remained passive and the two great heroes of the story were the two spies who refused to join the conspiracy.Moshe says that the children of Gad and Reuven are repeating the sin of the spies.nature of the Land of Israel is not the central issue here, but rather the ability to disagree with the majority; individual courage and self-denial for the sake of the collective goal.

The end of parashat Devarim (in 2 weeks) also teaches us how powerfully the present shapes memory and constructs it.There, Moshe, ignoring the debate he had held with Gad and Reuven, now presents their settlement of the Jordan's East Bank as having been determined by God and himself.He leaves his bitter disagreement with them, as well as the spies' evil precedent, entirely out of the story.The argument with Gad and Reuven had been settled and accurate recollection of the past became pointless.

During the period of bein ha'metzarim in general and on the 9^th of Av in particular, we are enjoined to recall the past. These days invite simplistic historical analogies and the wholesale identification of present with past events.The Torah's various versions of the story of the spies teach us that even the remembrance of this essential element of Tisha B'Av involves a process informed by the present, and significance is lent to it by the present.To remember an event not only requires a contemplation of history. It also requires that we be aware of the changing present and allow it to shape our view of the past, lending it varied meanings.

Dr. Menachem Klein, a member of Oz Ve

-Shalom, teaches in the department of political science of Bar Ilan University.

SHABBAT SHALOM

Torah Gems - July 18th Parashat Pinchas

Torah Gems - July 18th

Sunday, July 20th, the 17 of Tammuz is a fast day. Mincha will take place at 6:30PM at KI, followed by Ma'ariv at 100 Centre Street.

This week's Torah Gems were prepared by

Adam Solomon

Parashat Pinchas

This week's parasha, Pinchas, is greatly concerned with the issue of leadership and the need to prepare for a transfer of power from one generation to another. This is in preparation for entering Eretz Israel. The tititular Pinchas and his descendants are awarded with the permanent status of kohen as a reward for his zealous actions in last week's parasha. According to the prolific French Medieval commentator Rashi, this was made explicit since Pinchas' birth preceded Aharon and his sons being anointed and as a result Pinchas and his offspring would not otherwise have been kohenim.

HaShem tells Moshe that he will not be entering Eretz Israel and that he needs to designate Joshua as a successor. In this instance, Moshe displays the humility for which he is so well known in our tradition and doesn't argue that he should be allowed to enter the land.

In preparation for a generational transfer and the subsequent conquest of Eretz Israel, another census is taken, inheritances among the tribes are designated. We also have the famous incident with Zelophehad's daughters in which the initial laws of inheritance are amended to allow daughters to inherit if they have no brothers. To a modern eye this patriarchal bias is troubling, though we can take some comfort in realizing that even as Jewish law was being formulated, it was open to amendment and interpretation.

The parasha finishes with a description of the some of sacrifices to be offered on the festivals, going into some detail for the Sukkot sacrifices. Rashi notes that through the whole holiday of Sukkot sacrifices are made for the benefit of all the nations of the world, but on the last day only one is made, being for Israel alone. This last day (Shemini Atzeret) is a day for Jews and HaShem only -- making Shemini Atzeret into Sukkot's "after party", if you will.

"one bull, one ram". These correspond to Israel. [God said,] "Remain with Me a little longer." It expresses [His] affection [for Israel]. It is like children taking leave of their father, who says to them, "It is difficult for me to part with you; stay one more day." It is analogous to a king who made a banquet, etc. [and on the last day, his closest friend makes a small banquet for the king] as is stated in Tractate Sukkah [55b]. In the Midrash of R. Tanchuma (Pinchas 16) [it says]: The Torah teaches common courtesy. Someone who has a guest, [and wants him to feel at home,] on the first day, he should serve him fattened poultry, on the following day he should serve him fish, on the following day beef, on the following day pulses, and on the following day vegetables, progressively diminishing, as in the case of the festival bulls. - from Rashi's commentary on Pinchas

Former chancellor of the Jewish Theological Seminary, Rabbi Ismar Schorsch noted that Rashi departed from previous interpretations of Sukkot that were universalist in nature. It was traditionally thought that Sukkot was the time when HaShem decided how much rain the entire world would receive and the sacrifice of 70 bulls was on behalf of all the nations of the world. (see http://www.jtsa.edu/PreBuilt/ParashahArchives/5755/pinhas.shtml). I find the idea that we're in that select group that gets to hang out after the party for one more drink with the host captivating. I just hope that I remember this on Shemini Atzeret after a week of sukkah- hopping.

The Jewish values illustrated by this parasha are invaluable - humility in leadership, preparation for handing off responsibilities to the next generation, the importance of hospitality. These are values that I hope we can carry out of this Shabbat and into the rest of the week.

SHABBAT SHALOM

Torah Gems - July 11th Parshat Balak

Torah Gems - July 11th

This week's Torah Gems were prepared by

Dr. Bruce Weinstock

Parshat Balak

This week's parshat, Balak, contains two major story lines. The Bulk of the narrative tells of the non-Hebrew prophet Bilaam being called by the King Balak to curse the Children of Israel and how, after much hesitation, he is ultimately forced to beautifully bless them. The second is the concise story of Children of Israel straying to follow foreign practices culminating in a Hebrew man and non-Hebrew woman engaging in the public performance of a sexual pagan ritual and being speared in the midst of the act by the Kohane Pinchas.

Popular themes of study in many Divrei Torah include an examination of Bilaam's struggle in the first story and examination of the propriety of Pinchas's reaction in the second story. Rather than examine Bilaam or Pinchas, lets examine the Children of Israel in these two stories. In the first, what about Israel elicited the blessing rather than the curse? In the second, how could they ONCE AGAIN have strayed from fidelity to G-D?

Numbers 24:5 - "Ma Tovu Ohalecha ya'akov, Mishkinotecha Yisrael" - 'How beautiful are your tents, Jacob, your dwelling places, Israel.'
What was so beautiful about the tents and the dwelling places? Rashi comments that in his preparation to curse the Jewish people, Bilaam noted a very deliberate pattern to the social arrangements of the Israel dwelling tents. Despite being closed together, every tent doorway was oriented in such a way that one could not from inside his tent see through the open doorway of his neighbors. This wonderful mix of encouraging community while maintaining family privacy is what Bilaam is describing.

Numbers 25:1-3
'Israel settled in Shittim " Vahel Ha'am Liznot" - And the people began to commit Harlotry, with the daughters of Moab. They invited the people to the feasts of their gods. The people ate and prostrated themselves to their gods. Israel became attached to Baal-Peor, and the wrath of Hashem flared up against Israel.'

Sforno, the Italian philosopher, mathematician, and physician (Approximately 1470-1550 C.E.) stresses that the worship of other gods was a gradual unplanned event. It began with sexual indiscretion when approached by the Daughters of Moab. This led to more open socializing with idol worshippers at enticing meals. What followed was a meaningless mimicking of the social customs of their non-Hebrew friends. However, this led to Israel becoming spiritually attached to and worshipping Baal-Peor. Sforno goes on to explain, that the majority of the Children of Israel did not engage in these practices. However, they also failed to intervene or protest. As a result, the punishment decreed by G-d was to take the leaders of the practices and to hang them before G-d "neged hashamesh"- 'against the sun'. That is to punish them out in the open, in pure daylight, where the entire population will be forced to witness and recognize that these were sins affecting and permitted by the entire community and the punishment requires community participation.


It seems to me that the Rashi and Sforno commentaries have a common theme. The manner in which we arrange and orchestrate our physical lives and interact in our communities both have a profound impact on our spiritual development. Bilaam saw that the arrangement of the physical arrangement of the camp promoted community cohesion while maintaining personal privacy. Recognizing this, (and many commentators say advised by Bilaam) Moab attacked Israel by encouraging public physical pleasures that would gradually erode the inner spiritual strength. Israel's great sin was not only the actual participation in the rituals which were numerically the domain of only a few, Israel's true infidelity was in failing to act as a cohesive community, failing to protest or intervene among their fellow members of the community who were engaged in the practices. Public sins are not only sins that impact the public, but if there is no protest, they are sins that are owned by the public.

Summer is a time when we are all encouraged to be "neged hashemesh" - out in the sun. Weather provides opportunities to build physical changes in our structures and calendars encourage social get togethers that strengthen our community bonds. Whatever we do can be visible and inspiring. Whatever we see that is ugly, we should protest and strive to improve. May we all continue to build our physical and social lives in a way that will force others to say "How beautiful are your tents!"

SHABBAT SHALOM

Torah Gems - July 4th Parshat Chukat

Torah Gems - July 4th

This week's Torah Gems were prepared by Jennifer Rudin

Parshat Chukat

WE ARE ALL CONNECTED ONE TO ANOTHER...

MOSES, AARON & MIRIAM

The Israelites arrived in a body at the wilderness of Zin on the first new moon, and the people stayed at Kadesh. Miriam died there and was buried there. (Numbers 20:1)

The Gemara tells us that the Jewish people had three special caretakers

- Moses, Aaron, and Miriam. The Jewish people were the recipients of three special gifts - the wellspring, the Clouds of Glory, and the Mana. The wellspring was in the merit of Miriam. The Clouds of Glory were in the merit of Aaron and the Mana was in the merit of Moses. The Gemara quotes a verse in Zacharia which states," I removed the three shepherds in one month." This verse indicates that Moses, Aaron, and Miriam all passed away in the same month. Yet we know that this is not the case because Miriam passed away in the month of Nissan, Aaron in Av, and Moses in Adar. The fact is that each of them passed away in different months. How does the Gemara resolve the seeming contradiction between the verse and fact?

The Gemara answers

- that when Miriam passed away the wellspring ceased to flow and it was only in the merit of Moses that it was reinstated. After Aaron passed away the Clouds of Glory were dispersed and were also quickly reinstated in the merit of Moses. The Gemara explains that since these miracles were so quickly replaced in the merit of Moses, the Jewish people did not sense the loss of Miriam and Aaron, who had been their benefactors for close to forty years. It was not until Moses passed away and all of these gifts ceased that the Jewish people internalized the loss of the "three special shepherds of Israel." Although the Jewish people understood that each of the miracles from which they derived continuous benefit was in the merit of these special individuals, they had not internalized the reality of their loss until Moses passed away. Therefore, although Miriam passed away "on the first new moon" her absence was not felt until months later when Moses passed away and the wellspring permanently ceased to flow.

MOSES & ABRAHAM

The Torah tells us that after Miriam passed away the water ceased to flow and Moses was told by God to speak to the rock so that it would give forth its water. However, rather than speaking to it Moses struck the rock. The Sforno explains that if Moses had spoken to the rock, he would have brought about a revealed miracle. However since Moses struck the rock he did not bring about the Kiddush Hashem (Sanctification of God's Name) that would have resulted from his speaking to it. As a result of this failing, Moses and Aaron had to pass away before the Jews entered the Land of Israel. As much as Moses pleaded with God for forgiveness, God did not listen to his pleas because when he had the opportunity to Sanctify God's Name he did not do so. Why would Moses, a man of such "great merit" do such a thing? The Gemara in Tractate Bava Metzia states that the manner in which Abraham hosted the visiting angels determined the manner in which God accommodated the needs of the Jewish people in the desert. The Talmud states that any act of hospitality which Abraham performed himself resulted in a miracle coming directly from God without any human intervention. However any act of hospitality that was brought about through an intermediary, God allowed the corresponding miracle to come only through an intermediary. The Gemara explains that since Abraham offered the bread himself, the Jewish people received the Mana in the desert. Because of the shade of the tree that was offered by Abraham to protect his guests, we merited the Clouds of Glory, which protected the Jews in the desert for forty years. However since Abraham offered the water (to wash their feet) to the angels through an intermediary the Jews received the water through Moses who had to extract it from the rock.

SHABBAT SHALOM

Torah Gems - June 27th Parshat Korach

Torah Gems - June 27th

This week's Torah Gems were prepared by Larry Sochrin

Parshat Korach

"You want too much, sons of Levi."

As a Levi, especially one who expresses his views about KI religious policies as a KI officer, I'm naturally concerned about this parasha. Korach, also a Levi, argues against a system that categorizes levels of holiness within the community, a view that would fit in well in this age of egalitarianism. Korach is swallowed by the earth for expressing his views.

What exactly did Korach do to be so strongly punished?

Most commentary on this topic focuses on Pirkei Avot (a volume of the Mishnah), chapter 5: Every argument that is in the name of heaven will be established at the end. And those that are not in the name of heaven will not. What is an argument in the name of heaven? The arguments of Hillel and Shammai. And one that is NOT in the name of heaven? The argument of Korach and his followers. Why was Korach's argument not in the name of heaven? Because he was advancing a selfish cause:

"Is it not enough for you that the G-d of Israel has distinguished you from the community of Israel... that you also desire the priesthood?"

From Moses' response, we see that Korach actually desired the office of the Kohen Gadol for himself! He wasn't protesting because of the injustice to others. He was protesting because he wanted to inflate his own position. He was jealous. (Rabbi Michael Gold.)

The Talmud proclaims: "Anyone who engages in divisiveness transgresses a divine prohibition, as it is written: 'and he shall not be as Korach and his company.'"

Korach's vision seems the paradigm of harmony: diverse elements unified by a common goal. But while his "separate but equal" world may unite its various components in that they all serve the same common goal, it fails to provide for any true connection between them. The paths may converge at the destination, but they are separated by walls which isolate and divide them. Without a reciprocal relationship between them, without any sense of where they stand vis-à-vis each other, their separateness inevitably disintegrates into factionalism and conflict. By pointing to Korach as the father and prototype of divisiveness (machloket), the Talmud is saying: This pseudo-peace, this "Parallelism" that says, "I do my thing, you do yours, but it's all equally good, there's no objective 'higher' and 'lower' so there's neither need nor responsibility of one towards the other" - that is the source of all conflict in our world. (Lubavicher Rebbe.)

There is a second question that needs answering. G-d told Moses to physically move away from Korach. Why did G-d do that? Was it a fear that bad ideas were physically contagious?

"Separate Yourselves from among this congregation, that I may consume them in a moment."

The typical interpretation of this is that Moses and Aaron would be vulnerable to destruction were they to remain in the vicinity of Korach. Fifteenth century Italian commentator Rabbi Ovadiah Sforno states: "for we have a principle 'woe to the wicked and woe to his neighbor.' Hence, they are told to distance themselves, 'lest they be swept away.'"

But after pointing this out, Sforno comes up with a very different interpretation, saying that it actually could be read as "Separate yourselves from among this congregation, so that your merit should not shield them." He based this on Job 22:30, which says, "He delivers the one who is not innocent." Sforno believes that "the guilty can be saved by the righteous, for as the Metzudos David interprets the verse, the meaning is G-d delivers those who are not innocent in the merit of those 'whose hands are pure.' Therefore, Moses and Aaron are told to separate themselves from these sinners for otherwise, their presence will protect Korach and the others from punishment."

A more modern interpretation would be that sometimes, good people change bad people's minds. In the Torah, G-d occasionally works against people changing their minds to teach a lesson, such as when G-d kept hardening Pharaoh's heart, or here, where G-d did not wish Moses' presence to positively influence Korach.

So what can we learn from these interpretations of the elements of Parshat Korach?

1. We should be careful that our motives are not selfish ones before arguing with others.

2. We each need to view our roles in terms of their positive impact on the rest of the community.

3. When others are arguing on behalf of a bad situation, we may have the power to change their minds simply by setting good examples.

SHABBAT SHALOM

Torah Gems - June 20th Parashat Shelach

Torah Gems - June 20th

This week's TORAH GEMS were prepared by Stephanie Berkowitz

Parashat Shelach contains the story of the 12 spies: one leader from each of the 12 tribes who are sent to check out the land of Canaan. After forty days they return with a very large cluster of grapes (a symbol now used by the Israeli bureau of tourism) and report that the land is indeed flowing with milk and honey, but inhabited by powerful peoples, too strong to overcome. The consensus is that they should not try to enter the land. Only two of the spies, Joshua and Caleb, dissent from this opinion. Angry with their rejection of the holy land, G-d punishes the spies and all those who listened to them.

According to the Ramban, none of the facts that the spies reported were untrue. However, they phrased their report with their own negative bias-in a way that caused the Israelites to panic and lose faith. According to the Talmud, this is the way of all who seek to slander someone. They start off by saying something nice and conclude with something evil. Moreover, the spies' report suggests that even G-d cannot overcome the Canaanites. The sin of the spies is allowing their fear, triggered by what they see in Canaan, to taint their belief in the word of G-d, who has already promised the Israelites that they will inhabit this land.

The parasha also contains the mitzvah of "taking challah." Every time we mix a significant amount of flour (opinions vary but usually at least 3 pounds) and water to make bread, we are required to "set some aside as a gift to the Lord." This portion is called challah. Originally the loaf was given to the Cohanim, but in absence of the Temple, we observe the mitzvah today by burning this portion and rendering it inedible. By consecrating a piece of the bread dough before it is baked/finished, we are reminded that all of our possessions originate with G-d and all of our creations are made possible by the original Creation. However, Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik says, the mitzvah also reminds us thatnot everything is handed to us on a silver platter. We must contribute some effort in order to reap the benefits of Creation. This could also be interpreted as the sin of the spies-an unwillingness to put in the effort necessary to actualize G-d's word and to work to claim the land promised them.

Shelach starts out with the commandment "Send men to scout (v'yaturu) the land of Canaan, which I am giving to the Israelite people," and ends with what is now used as the third paragraph of the Sh'ma, the commandment to wear tzitzit. We are told, "look at it (the tzitzit) and remember all the commandments of the Lord and observe them so that you do not follow (v'lo taturu) after your heart and eyes in your lustful urge. The same word, tur: to scout or tour or follow, is used in both places. The Torah is telling us that the tzitzit are a physical reminder not to succumb to the sins of spies. Rashi says, "The heart and eyes are the spies for the body. They are its agents for sinning: the eye sees, the heart covets and the body commits the transgression." In the Talmud (Bavli Menachot 43b), Rabbi Meir interprets the phrase "look at it (u'reitem oto) to mean "look at Him." Thus, when one fulfills the mitzvah of tzitzit, it is as if one is in the Divine Presence.

The mitzvot of challah and tzitzit are not incumbent on the Israelites until they enter the land of Israel. These mitzvot can be viewed as a promise to the Jewish people that despite the transgressions of the spies and the subsequent punishment (continued wandering for 40 years), ultimately they will enter the land. G-d's forgiveness is explicit, saying "I pardon as you have asked (slachti kidvarecha-a phrase quoted in the liturgy on Kol Nidre)." May it continue to be so.

SHABBAT SHALOM

Torah Gems - June 13th Parashat Beha'alotka

Torah Gems - June 13th

This week's TORAH GEMS were prepared by Sam Tarlin

Beha'alotka

This parsha ends with the famous critique of Moses by Miriam and Aaron: "Has the Lord spoken only through Moses? Has He not spoken through us as well?" Miriam is punished by God with tza'arat. Moses says nothing.

In an earlier passage Joshua hurls a related critique at Moses. The people complain about a lack of meat. Moses calls to God for assistance. God replies that Moses should gather 70 elders at the Tent of Meeting and that God will "draw upon the spirit that is on you and put it upon them; they shall share the burden of the people with you, and you shall not bear it alone." The elders gather and the spirit is somehow distributed amongst them. Two elders, Eldad and Medad (two additional or two of the seventy-it's unclear) remain in camp and begin to prophesize. Moses, with Joshua at his side, is summoned and Joshua interjects, "My Lord Moses, restrain them!" Moses scolds Joshua: "Would that all the Lord's people were prophets, that the Lord put His spirit upon them!"

Moses quickly defends Eldad and Medad, but he is entirely silent when Miriam criticizes him! God punishes Miriam, but does nothing following Joshua's similar criticism. Isn't Joshua's critique as worthy of punishment as Miriam's?

What is different about the critiques of Joshua and Miriam/Aaron? Joshua defends Moses' status; Miriam and Aaron challenge Moses' status, and they challenge the manner in which God chooses to make God's will known.

In Richard Friedman's commentary on the Torah he points out that when Aaron pleads with Moses to intercede with God on behalf of Miriam, Aaron defers to Moses calling him "my lord." Friedman notes that only other occasion in which Aaron refers to Moses this way is during the episode of the Golden Calf. In both instances Aaron is humbled and his language indicates it. We see when Joshua addresses Moses in the Eldad and Medad episode, he too addresses Moses as "my lord". Joshua's critique is couched in humility, in full deference to Moses and by extension in full deference to God.

It is no accident that the two critiques by Joshua and Miriam/Aaron are separated by the culmination of the story of the people's complaint about meat. God causes a month's worth of quail to fall. The people eat so much that they are poisoned by the meat and die. "That place was named Kibroth-hattaavah [lit. 'graves of craving], because the people who had the craving were buried there."

There are physical cravings and spiritual cravings. Both have the capacity to injure and to kill. What's the medicine that protects Moses from craving? What protects Joshua? What spiritual strength does Aaron embrace to save his sister? The answer is humility. To be humble is not always easy - for even our great prophets Miriam and Aaron lacked it at times. Humility is the trait most associated with Moses and is perhaps the most valuable for us to try and emulate.

SHABBAT SHALOM

Torah Gems - June 6th Parashat Naso

Torah Gems - June 6th

This week's TORAH GEMS were prepared by Charles Radin

This week's parasha, Naso, is closely associated with Shavuot, and is always read on the Shabbat adjacent to the holiday.

But why? What is the connection between the exalted experience of receiving the Torah and detailed listings of the duties and the censuses of the Levites, and the details of ritual purity and sacrifice of which Naso is largely composed?

Perhaps it is that Judaism encourages us toward two types of person transformation - /khidushim/, transformative insights, and tzedek, transformative action.

Shavuot is mainly about the former: We come to Sinai, we see, we hear, we experience - in the modern day we study and meditate -- and through the insight thus gained we are transformed. Partially.

Parasha Naso is about doing. The distinctions of Kohathites, Gershonites and Merarites have passed from relevance, but the ideal of communal groups that bear responsibility for preserving the apparatus of the faith and that help their fellow Jews, in /functional/ ways, toward the highest standards of ritual and personal uprightness is a cornerstone of who we are and how we organize ourselves as a community.

The proposition that this - not the minutia of an ancient division of labor - is what the text is about is supported by the section of the parasha that lays out the relationship of the clergy to the congregation and its offerings, and also by the section that deals with the administration of the three-fold priestly blessing.

The former passage (Ch. 5, v. 9-10) establishes the right of Jews bringing an offering in Torah times to give it to the priest of their choice, who in turn has the right to keep the offering - as opposed to sharing it with the priesthood generally, or with the priestly hierarchy. It seems analogous the freedom of Jews ever since to discuss, debate and choose for themselves their path and their leader. [What we would do with this tradition if the temple were restored is a subject for another day.]

Similarly, while it is a principal duty of the priests to bless Israel, the text makes clear that this blessing is from G-d, not from the priests -- even though many of us now commonly refer to these verses as ``the priestly blessing.'' The blessing may be delivered by the priests, but G-d in His own voice makes clear (Ch. 6, v. 27) that ``they [the priests] shall link My name with the people of Israel and */I/* will bless them.'' For Jews, the clergy in their official roles, then and now, are technicians. Transformative insights and transformative deeds are the work of G-d and of people.

The blessing itself is both simple and fascinating. The three blessings are in a poetic form, a rising progression of three, five and seven words. The beginning and end -- ``The L-rd bless you and grant you peace'' - are of an equal number of syllables and summarize the essence of the poem.

The Jewish Publication Society Torah Commentary notes that the first part of each blessing invokes the movement of G-d toward the people and the second projects His activity on their behalf: bless and protect, shine and be gracious, bestow favor and grant peace.

An interesting question raised by this structure is whether these are six actions initiated by G-d, or whether there is a cause-and-effect meaning intended - that G-d's blessing brings protection, that His radiance brings grace and His bestowal of favor brings peace.

Whatever the case, it is our good fortune now as individuals to be able to extend this blessing to our children every Shabbat. In so doing, we can experience a potentially transformative insight - that we can be the technicians of a link between our G-d and our offspring - and we also be transformed by the act pronouncing this beautiful and poetic formula.

SHABBAT SHALOM

Torah Gems - May 30th BaMidbar

Torah Gems - May 30th

This week's TORAH GEMS were prepared by Francine Aron

The first parsha of the book of Numbers, Bamidbar, discusses the census of the men of military age; the arrangement and order in which the people were to proceed on their journey; and the work of the Levites.

There is an interesting connection between the census and the work of the Levites. The census of the men of military age was to be done personally - by a head count. They were to pass before Moses and Aaron and give their names. This is an extremely respectful way of counting. It is God's way of showing the importance of each individual, and showing that each individual should be looked at carefully and seen clearly. This is appropriate looking.

Concerning the work of the Levites which was to take care of the Tabernacle and its furniture and guard it and carry it, Moses and Aaron are told several times to take great care that only those whose job it is may look at the Tabernacle and its contents. Chapter 4 goes into very great detail about how the parts of the Tabernacle were to be wrapped when in transit, so that no danger would befall the Kohatites, whose job it was to carry the Tabernacle. If they were to see the actual items uncovered it would be considered inappropriate looking and the punishment was severe. Why? One commentator (Hirsch) says the danger is that the object might come to be considered more important than the spirit which it represents - thus losing sight of what really matters. We are shown how extremely important it is to see to the heart of the matter.

In between the census and the work of the Levites, is the arrangement of the group and the order in which they were to journey. They are to proceed in a formation which surrounds the Tabernacle - each tribe having its specific place in the outer square, and the Levites in the inner square, with the Tabernacle, which is the heart of the people, in the center. God, like a good parent, shows the people how to maintain order, so that they will be seen as a group which knows what it is doing, and a group to be respected and taken seriously, and therefore a group which will succeed.

SHABBAT SHALOM

Torah Gems - May 23rd

Torah Gems - May 23rd

This week's TORAH GEMS were prepared by Dr. Rob Lindeman

"All tithes of the herd (bakar) or flock - of all that passes under the shepherd's staff, every tenth one - shall be holy to the Lord. He must not look out (lo yi-vaker) for good as against bad, or make substitution for it" (Vayikra 27:32-33)

In adjacent verses the root bet-kuf-resh produces two words with disparate meanings: bakar (herd), and yi-vaker (look out for). In fact, these words rest on a single conceptual foundation. Bet-kuf-resh means "to cleave" or "to open" (Genesius, 1906). This notion applies to plowing, as in bakar (cattle, animals that perform plowing). It also applies to inspecting or looking into, as in li-vaker (to inquire). The third sense is breaking forth and arising of light, as in the familiar boker (morning).

All three senses of bet-kuf-resh suggest more than merely cleaving or opening; they suggest opening for the purpose of caring for or tending to something. A bakar opens ground for the planting of seeds. Li-vaker always implies opening inquiry with intent to aid or comfort, as we will see. Boker opens the day, making human activity possible.

In our verses, lo yi-vaker implies that the shepherd should not look into or investigate the kashrut of the bakar. Such an investigation requires close inspection with careful, intimate contact. Similarly in Vayikra 13:36, the priest examining a patient for presence of tsaraat needn't "look for (yi-vaker) yellow hair". In other words, the priest does not need to get up close and look carefully at the skin. Yi-vaker implies a deep inspection that requires looking into the essence of a thing and making a careful judgment (or, as in these cases, refraining from looking into the essence of a thing!)

Bet-kuf-resh also appears in a verse from the Psalm of David that we sing during the penitential season (Tehillim 27:4).

One thing have I asked of the Lord, this do I desire:

That I may dwell in the house of the Lord

All the days of my life,

To behold the graciousness of the Lord,

And to enter into (li-vaker) His sanctuary

(translation from the Silverman siddur)

It appears the Silverman misses the full meaning of li-vaker. David has already asked to dwell in God's house and to look upon God's graciousness forever: why would he ask now to enter or visit? Furthermore, if David had been asking merely to enter God's sanctuary, he might have said la'voh b'haichalo (from the shoresh bet-vav-hay). Instead, by saying li-vaker, David is asking God's permission to care for His sanctuary. This is more in keeping with David the poet king who danced before the Holy Ark!

The mitzvah of Bikur Cholim is usually translated "visiting the sick", but the mitzvah requires more than mere visitation: The foundation of the mitzvah of Bikur Cholim is to visit a sick person and to inquire after his or her needs. If one merely visits, but does not inquire, he does not fulfill the mitzvah (Y.D. 335)

An additional law of Bikur Cholim shines light on all three senses of bet-kuf-resh (cattle, inquiring, and morning). We must avoid visiting a sick person during the first three hours of daylight. The reason given is that the sick person feels relatively well at this time and might not be inclined to ask for your help. But I might suggest another reason:

There isn't much light during the first three hours of the day. A shepherd tends to his cattle when the light is good enough for him to inspect them closely and to see which animals need his help. Similarly, we visit the sick person in the light of day, when we can see the patient and we can see to his or her needs. Clearly it is no accident that it is our custom to perform Bikur Cholim in the morning.

SHABBAT SHALOM

Torah Gems - May 9th Parashat Emor

Torah Gems - May 9th

This week's TORAH GEMS were prepared by Adam Solomon

This week's parasha is Emor. It covers a great deal of ground. When I started studying it this week I was struck by the idea of how much of Judaism is encapsulated in this one parasha. In this one parasha we learn some of the rules regarding the kohanim needing to maintain ritual purity and we're given commandments surrounding Passover, the counting of the omer, Shavuot, Sukkot, and Yom Kippur. Keeping Shabbat is also mentioned. It seemed that if there was only one parasha you could have from the Torah, you could do a lot worse than to pick Emor.

One detail that I'd like to pull out, though, is one that might seem less relevant to today's world. Kohanim are commanded to avoid exposure to the ritual impurity which emanates from the deceased. Exceptions are made for first degree relatives. The kohen gadol however does not even get these exceptions, he was not allowed to even attend the funeral of a parent.

Rashi, the prolific medieval French commentator, notes that there is a case where even kohen gadol is obligated personally to attend to the burial of an individual. This is the case of the "met-mitzvah", an abandoned dead body (see B.T. Nazir 48a). Every Jew, including the kohen gadol, who encounters a met-mitzvah is obligated to ensure that the met-mitzvah has a proper burial.

Rabbi Eli Mansour of the Syrian Jewish community in Brooklyn expands on this by noting that even on Yom Kippur when the kohen gadol is going to atone for the communal sins of the Jewish people, if he encountered a met-mitzvah he would have been obligated to personally perform a proper and dignified burial. This would necessarily disqualify him from performing the Yom Kippur rites which would then be carried out by another kohen who had been prepared for such a contingency.

Tractate Nazir also notes that in the case of a nazir and a kohen encountering a met-mitzvah, the kohen would be obligated to bury the met-mitzvah and not the nazir. If a nazir becomes ritually impure he has to restart his period of nazirute from the beginning and bring an appropriate sacrifice. The kohen merely needs to wait a week and then immerse in mikvah to return to a state of ritual purity (see B.T Nazir 47).

So how is this relevant to us?

I think that it demonstrates the critical nature of acts of lovingkindness (gimilut chesed) in Judaism. Here we have a scenario of the kohen gadol on the holiest day of the year - the Sabbath of Sabbaths as it is called in this week's parasha - and he is obligated to attend to an anonymous person who clearly cannot repay his kindness.

I would hope that for all of us our Torah would be a Torah of lovingkindness in this spirit.

SHABBAT SHALOM

Torah Gems - May 16th Parashat Behar

Torah Gems - May 16th

This week's TORAH GEMS were prepared by Emma Starr (with Rabbi David Starr)

Parashat Behar

This week's parasha discusses agricultural laws and also commands us to behave responsibly for one's neighbors. One particular verse teaches "Do not deceive one another, but fear your God; for I am the Lord your God." (Lev 25:17)

What does it mean to fear God? We may fear God's power in the world, believing that He sees what we do when we interact with other people. That's the easy part, to correct what others can see, including God. But what about what others cannot see, what we think and feel inside? We wonder if God knows all of our secrets, our deepest darkest thoughts and feelings that we're afraid to share with others. Sometimes it's easier to be honest with other people than it is to be honest with ourselves.

Rabbi Bunum of Pryzscha, a famous Hasidic master, understood this. That is why he explained that this verse from Behar refers to a truly pious person, a hasid. That person does more than the law requires, does more than be honest with others, does more than fears God for seeing what we do out in the world. Rabbi Bunum would say: "Now, this is the law: 'Do not deceive one another, but fear your God; for I am the Lord your God.' A hasid goes beyond the letter of the law; he will not even deceive his own self!"

We must be honest and fair with others. Sometimes it's even harder, and more important, to be honest with ourselves.

SHABBAT SHALOM

Torah Gems - May 2nd

Torah Gems - May 2nd

This week's TORAH GEMS were prepared by KI Rabbinic Resident Chaim Koritzinsky

BE HOLY, LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR-BUT HOW???

This week's parasha contains one of the most famous passages in all of Torah: "Love your neighbor as yourself- I am the Lord." "V'ahavta Le'Reicha Kamocha, Ani Adonai" (Leviticus 19:18). In fact, this passage is so well known that it has become known as the Golden Rule and a variation of this passage can be found in almost all faiths.

This passage is quoted so often that it's easy to forget that it is actually a mitzvah, a commandment. After all, how can a person be commanded to love another person? What does it mean to love someone kamocha, like yourself? Isn't the commandment then dependant on how much one loves oneself? And what does God have to do with this commandment? Why does God need to remind us that Ani Adonai (I am God) in the same breath as commanding us to love our neighbor?

Contextually, we read this passage as part of a larger parasha that begins Kedoshim Tehiyu (Be Holy). The parasha goes on to describe all the mitzvot that one must follow in order to live up to this standard of holiness. Loving one's neighbor is one piece of this larger Holiness Code.

This week, we also read this parasha and this passage v'ahavta le'reicha kamocha, Ani Adonai (Love your neighbor as yourself, I am the Lord) with the backdrop of Yom Ha'shoah (Holocaust Remembrance Day). As my classmate Shayna Rhodes pointed out, the combination of last week's parasha "Achrei Mot" (After Death) with this week's parasha "Kedoshim Tehiyu" (You shall be holy), spells out a way that we can honor the memory of those who perished as well as inspire each of us today in fulfilling this commandment anew.

In this spirit, I offer various interpretations of this passage followed by a beautiful essay by one of my teachers and the founder of the Hebrew College Rabbinical School, Rabbi Arthur Green:

Hillel on One Foot
Once there was a gentile who came before Shammai, and said to him: Convert me on the condition that you teach me the whole Torah while I stand on one foot. Shammai pushed him aside with the measuring stick he was holding. The same fellow came before Hillel, and Hillel converted him, saying: That which is despicable to you, do not do to your fellow, this is the whole Torah, and the rest is commentary, go and learn it."

Babylonian Talmud, Shabbat 31a

Maimonides
It is a mitzvah for every human to love each and everyone from Israel as he loves his own body. As it is written, "Love your neighbor as yourself", therefore one must sing his praises, and show concern for his financial well-being, as he would for his own well-being and as he would for his own honor. Anyone who aggrandizes himself at the expense of another person has no portion in the world to come.

From Hilchot Deot: Laws of Counsel

Nachmanides
The reason behind, "be loving to your neighbor like yourself" is in fact an overstatement for no human heart can accept loving a command to love one's neighbor as oneself. And furthermore Rabbi Akiva already taught that "your own life comes before the life of your friend." Why is the passage written LE'reicha , meaning "to" or "towards" your neighbor (as opposed to the use of et, indicating a simple direct object)? For sometimes a person will love his neighbor in certain matters, such as doing good to him in material wealth but not with wisdom and similar matters. But if he loves him completely, he will want his beloved friend to gain riches, properties, honor, knowledge and wisdom. However [because of human nature] he will still not want him to be his equal, for there will always be a desire in his heart that he should have more of these good things than his neighbor. Therefore, the Torah commanded that this degrading jealousy should not exist in his heart, but instead a person should love to do abundance of good for his fellow-being as he does for himself, and he should place no limitations upon his love for him. It is for this reason that it is said of Jonathan's [love for David}, for he loved him as he loved his own soul (Samuel I 20:17)

Debate between Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Azzai

"Love your neighbor as yourself." Rabbi Akiva said: this is the most important principle in the Torah. Ben Azzai said: More important is the principle: "this is the book of the generations of Adam; on the day when God made humans they were fashioned in the image of God" (Genesis 5:1).

From Midrash- Sifra Kedoshim 45

Rabbi Tanchuma brings in the Divine

Rabbi Akiva said: "Love your neighbor as yourself" is the most important principle in the Torah. Lest you say: because I was cursed so let my fellow be cursed, because I was despised, so let my fellow be despised, Rabbi Tanhuma said: If you behave in this manner, know whom you are despising for you were created in God's image.

From Midrash Genesis Rabba 24:7

A Christian Take

"He (one of the scribes) asked him (Jesus), which commandment is the most important of all? The most important is 'Hear O Israel the Lord our god, the Lord is one, you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind, and with all your strength. The second is this: 'you shall love your neighbor as yourself.' There are no commandments greater than these."

From Mark 12:28

A Contemporary View

A short essay from Rabbi Arthur Green who picks up on the debate quoted above between Rabbi Akiva and Ben Azzai as to what is the most central precept in the Torah.

IN GOD'S IMAGE

The second mitzvah of Creation is that of treating every human being as the image of God. The very core of our self-understanding as Jews and as persons calls upon us to see each man and woman as a lens through which the Divine is reflected. This simple statement is the basis for all Jewish interpersonal ethics.

When Rabbi Akiva claimed that "Love your neighbor as yourself; I am the Lord" (Lev. 19:18) was the basis of the entire Torah, his colleague Ben Azai replied that "This is the book of the generations of Adam; on the day when God made humans they were fashioned in the image of God" (Genesis 5:1) was a more basic principle than that.

The discussion is a crucial one for understanding the place of ethical conduct within Judaism. Akiva is the great believer in love, both human and divine. Akiva sees the Song of Songs as the central metaphor for the relationship between God and Israel; he is willing to allow human ethics to base themselves on the commandment to love. Ben Azai is more realistic. Even where there is no love, he tells us, there is still the divine image. Every person is the bearer of that image and is entitled to the esteem and reverence in which we hold the face of God.

All the decisions we make in the interpersonal realm need to bear this principle in mind. The decision to open ourselves to another in love is one of sharing that divine spark within us, that of seeking out the face of God within the other. The realization that every human being is God's image makes an unambiguous demand upon us. Each person has the right to be known and loved for that divine image that is his or her most profound and often hidden self.

Each image of God in the world also has the right to exist in dignity, to engage in meaningful labor, and to live at peace. The role of governments and political parties is to see that this happens; it is to this standard of our religious respect for human dignity that they are to be held up.

In our individual lives as well, we constantly face the question, "Am I treating human beings- myself as well as others- as the image of God?" This demand will shape and restrict our actions rather clearly in attempts at the "use" of other human beings- whether as sexual objects, as tools to help us gain money on political power, or as fulfillment of some other need we have. We even ignore the divine image when we place people in depersonalized categories, relating to them only professionally, as "clients" of our therapeutic practice, or as "congregants" of our synagogue.

When applied to the way we treat ourselves, it will restrict both those activities that harm the human body, and those that lead us into situations of personal degradation. It is the basis of that hard-to-define term menschlichkeyt, or decent humanity, that sets the agenda for the instinctive ethics of many Jews, even those cut off from the theological moorings of their own values. The value of tselem Elohim, seeing humans as God's image, is also key to some of the most wrenching and difficult decisions we face in our lives. Some of these decisions, such as those involving abortion and euthanasia, are still difficult and morally ambiguous, even where we do seek full regard for God's image. Consideration of the human as divine image does not necessarily tell us which way to turn in such situations. Even there, however, it is a principle that guides us away from steps that might otherwise be undertaken too lightly.

But the matter of treating each person as the image of God extends beyond all these examples of moral demand. If we really live as though each person were God's image, we necessarily find every human being to be of interest to us. "There is no person who does not have his hour"- every human life has something unique and valuable about it, a contribution to be offered that can be fulfilled by no other. Each messenger brings back a unique portrait of the king, one that only he or she could paint. To take seriously our faith that each person is God's image is to treat every person with a spiritual dignity and caring that would transform all of our lives. Surely none of us lives this mitzvah to the fullest, but there can be no Judaism that does not constantly attempt to make it a reality.

From Seek My Face, Speak My Name: A Contemporary Jewish Theology (Jason Aaronson, 1992)

Shabbat Shalom