Madlik Podcast – Disruptive Torah Thoughts on Judaism: Recent Episodes
Geoffrey Stern
Madlik – Disruptive Torah thoughts from a post-orthodox Jew with a life-long love and appreciation of Jewish texts and a fresh and sometimes heterodox perspective on their meaning, intent and practical (halachic) implications.
What if Judaism has been misunderstood all along, and the real reward for doing good isn't what you get, but who you become?
Is Judaism really about reward and punishment—or is it about becoming?
Parshat Re'eh begins with a tiny grammatical anomaly. Instead of saying, "if you obey," the Torah says "that you obey." Could one unexpected Hebrew word change the way we understand blessing, virtue, and even human nature?
In this episode of Madlik, Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz follow that question from the Bible through the Rabbis, Maimonides, the Sefer HaChinuch, Aristotle, and contemporary philosophy. Along the way they uncover a radical Jewish insight: the reward of a mitzvah isn't a prize—it's the person we become.
Can a single act of kindness change your character? Is blessing something we receive, or something we cultivate? And what if the Torah's deepest teaching isn't about earning rewards, but about forming a life of virtue?
Join us as we explore why "the reward of a mitzvah is a mitzvah" may be one of Judaism's most profound—and surprisingly modern—ideas.
Key Takeaways 1. The Torah's smallest words often contain its biggest ideas.
Parshat Re'eh doesn't say, "if you obey" (אִם) but "that you obey" (אֲשֶׁר). That subtle shift invites us to read blessing not merely as a future reward but as something woven into the very act of living a good life. 2. Judaism is less about reward than about transformation.
From Ben Azzai's teaching that "the reward of a mitzvah is a mitzvah," to the Sefer HaChinuch's insight that "a person is shaped by his actions," Judaism teaches that our deeds don't just determine what happens to us—they determine who we become. 3. Character is created through practice.
Long before modern psychology and virtue ethics, the Torah and the rabbis understood that goodness is cultivated. Every good deed forms a disposition toward another good deed. We don't become good and then do good; we become good by repeatedly doing good.
Timestamps * 00:00 The Tiny Hebrew Word That Changes Everything * 02:17 Why "That You Obey" Isn't the Same as "If You Obey" * 07:53 The Reward of a Mitzvah Is Another Mitzvah * 10:01 Should We Do Good Without Expecting a Reward? * 13:15 Maimonides on Free Will and Becoming Virtuous * 18:52 Why Small Actions Can Change the World * 21:47 The Sefer HaChinukh's Radical Insight About Human Nature * 27:05 Modern Philosophy Meets Ancient Torah * 31:01 Is Love an Action or an Emotion? * 33:12 The Real Meaning of Becoming Good
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://voices.sefaria.org/sheets/741847
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
We've all heard the old cliché that "history repeats itself," but the Torah actually reveals a massive flaw in that idea.
The Greeks believed history repeats itself. Enlightenment thinkers believed history marches relentlessly forward. The Torah suggests they're both missing something. In this episode, Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz begin with a single Hebrew word—eikev—and uncover a uniquely Jewish philosophy of history. Through the insights of Ramban, Giambattista Vico, Johann Gottfried Herder, Isaiah Berlin, and Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, they discover a vision of history that is neither an endless cycle nor a straight line of inevitable progress, but a sometimes crooked, yet ultimately purposeful journey in which the past continually echoes into the present. Along the way, they explore Vico's revolutionary claim that history—and indeed all of the human sciences—is fundamentally different from the physical sciences. Nature may be governed by universal laws, mathematical formulas, and today's algorithms, but history is lived, remembered, recorded, and thereby created by human beings. It can therefore be understood only by entering the language, imagination, memory, and lived experience of a people. From Herder they learn that every nation and culture possesses its own authentic voice, and from the Torah that every generation must reinterpret its inherited story without abandoning it. Discover why Jewish history doesn't simply repeat itself—it rhymes.
Key Takeaways 1. History Doesn't Repeat. It Rhymes - The Torah rejects both the Greek idea that history endlessly repeats itself and the Enlightenment belief in inevitable progress. Jewish history moves toward redemption, but along the way the same moral challenges return, inviting each generation to respond anew. 2. Eikev Is More Than a Word - The opening word of the parsha—eikev—means "because," "heel," and "crooked path." Through Ramban, we discover that Jewish history is purposeful without always being direct. God's covenant unfolds through the winding paths of human choices rather than along a straight line. 3. History Is Made by People, Not Formulas - Vico, Herder, Isaiah Berlin, and Rabbi Jonathan Sacks help us appreciate what the Torah has always assumed: unlike the physical sciences, history cannot be reduced to universal laws or algorithms. It is created by people, cultures, language, and memory—and can only be understood by entering their lived experience.
Timestamps [00:00] Does History Rhyme [01:21] Eikev Opens the Parsha [02:05] Quid Pro Quo and Chalipin [04:49] Rashi and the Heel [08:07] Ramban on Endings [11:22] Crooked Paths Straightened [16:40] Jewish History Repeats [20:37] Sacks on Covenantal Time [23:28] Vico and Spiral History [24:55] Berlin Herder and Meaning [30:09] Closing Challenge to Viewers
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Safaria Source Sheet: https://voices.sefaria.org/sheets/740924
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
If you think your flaws and failures automatically make you a better, more "authentic" leader, you've completely misunderstood the lesson of Moses.
Most civilizations turned their founders into saints. The Hebrew Bible does the opposite. Abraham falters. Jacob deceives. David sins. Moses—the greatest prophet in Judaism—is denied entry into the Promised Land.
This isn't a bug in the Torah. It's one of its most revolutionary ideas.
In this episode of Madlik, Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz explore why Judaism insists that greatness and imperfection can coexist—but never confuses failure with virtue. Along the way they examine the Torah's portrait of Moses, the Beatitudes, Isaiah, Jonathan Sacks, Nahum Sarna, David Flusser, Martin Luther, Bret Stephens, and the surprising connection between biblical leadership and today's culture of authenticity, victimhood, and populism.
Can a society acknowledge human weakness without celebrating it?
That question may be as relevant today as it was in the wilderness.
Key Takeaways 1. The Torah Tells the Truth About Greatness - Unlike most ancient cultures, the Hebrew Bible doesn't turn its heroes into flawless saints. Moses, Abraham, Jacob, and David are remembered in all their greatness—and all their humanity. Their failures don't diminish them; they make their greatness credible. 2. Flaws Are Lessons, Not Credentials - Judaism teaches us to acknowledge weakness, learn from it, and overcome it. There is a profound difference between recognizing imperfection and celebrating it. The Torah preserves failure to cultivate humility—not to make failure itself a virtue. 3. Leadership Is Measured by Character, Not Victimhood
Moses never reaches the Promised Land, yet he remains Judaism's greatest leader because of his faithfulness, courage, and willingness to serve a mission larger than himself. In an age that often confuses authenticity with virtue and grievance with authority, the Torah reminds us that true leadership is earned by responsibility, not by imperfection alone.
Timestamps [00:00] Flawed Heroes Thesis
[01:14] Parsha Setup and Welcome
[02:07] Moses Pleads to Enter
[04:37] Rav Lachem Midrash
[06:49] Vetchanan and Human Limits
[07:43] Mythic Moses Rejected
[11:02] Sacks on Mortality and Mistakes
[18:31] Flaws Versus Virtue
[19:11] Beatitudes and Isaiah
[25:58] Essenes and Poverty Ideal
[31:09] Modern Populism and Privilege
[32:58] Closing Shabbat Shalom
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://voices.sefaria.org/sheets/739882
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
What if the greatest cure for our distracted, scroll-addicted minds was written over 3,000 years ago? Deuteronomy isn't just repeating the Torah. It's teaching us how to pay attention.
The fifth book of the Torah—Deuteronomy (Mishneh Torah)—is often dismissed as simply a review of what came before. But what if Moses' final retelling wasn't repetition at all, but one of the Torah's deepest lessons about how human beings learn, remember, and grow?
In this episode of Madlik, Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz explore how the Torah transforms review into a transforming discipline. From Ben Bag Bag's famous teaching, "Turn it over and turn it over, for everything is in it," to the Talmud's praise of the student who reviews a lesson 101 times, Judaism offers a timeless antidote to our modern epidemic of distraction.
Along the way, we compare Moses' retelling of the story of the spies with its original telling in Numbers, discovering how each retelling reveals new truths. We explore why detectives, trial lawyers, and cognitive scientists know that repetition uncovers what first impressions often miss. And we meet an unexpected companion on the journey—the Roman philosopher Seneca—whose warnings about information overload sound uncannily like a critique of today's endless scrolling.
Drawing on Moses, the Rabbis, the Stoic philosopher Seneca, and contemporary cognitive science, this conversation uncovers timeless practices for overcoming distraction, deepening attention, strengthening memory, enriching relationships, and living a more meaningful and connected life. If our greatest challenge today is not a lack of information but an inability to focus on what truly matters, perhaps the Bible's great book of reflection contains one of the newest and most necessary lessons.
Join us as we discover why the path to wisdom isn't always found by chasing something new, but by returning to timeless ideas with fresh eyes—and renewed attention.
Key Takeaways 1. Repetition Isn't Redundancy—It's Revelation -Deuteronomy doesn't simply repeat the Torah; it reinterprets it. Moses teaches that every return to a familiar story can reveal a deeper truth. As Ben Bag Bag taught, "Turn it over and turn it over, for everything is in it." 2. Attention Is a Transforming Discipline - From the rabbis' praise of reviewing a lesson 101 times to Seneca's warning against skimming too many scrolls, wisdom grows not from consuming more information but from dwelling deeply with what truly matters. The antidote to distraction is not novelty—it's sustained attention. 3. Growth Comes from Returning - Whether studying Torah, reflecting on our own lives, or listening to another person's story, every retelling changes us. The Torah reminds us that meaning isn't found by constantly moving on, but by returning with fresh eyes, a deeper perspective, and an open heart.
Timestamps [00:00] Why does Deuteronomy repeat the Torah?
[02:08] Chazarah: The forgotten Jewish art of repetition
[07:18] The spies story changes. Why does Moses retell it differently?
[11:06] Ben Bag Bag: "Turn it over and turn it over"
[13:36] Why reviewing something 101 times changes everything
[16:05] Deep learning vs information overload
[19:12] What police interrogations teach us about memory and truth
[23:10] Seneca's ancient warning about distraction
[26:33] The secret to remembering what you read
[29:18] Why repetition keeps Judaism and wisdom alive
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://voices.sefaria.org/sheets/738767?lang=bi
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
From the ancient words of the Torah to the modern frontlines, a hidden shift is taking place that will redefine what it means to be an Israeli.
Is the Haredi draft crisis really about military service—or about the future of the Jewish people?
As Israel struggles with one of its most divisive public debates, Geoffrey Stern sits down with Rabbi Yehoshua Pfeffer—founder of the Iyun Institute, editor of Tzarich Iyun, and one of the leading intellectual voices emerging from within the Haredi community—for a thoughtful and surprisingly hopeful conversation.
Key Takeaways 1. Brotherhood Before Politics
Moses doesn't ask, "Who should be drafted?" He asks, "Shall your brothers go to war while you remain here?" The Torah frames the issue not as one of politics or legal rights, but of achdut—brotherhood, shared destiny, and mutual responsibility.
- A Quiet Revolution Is Already Underway
Behind the headlines, profound changes are taking place within Haredi society. Rabbi Yehoshua Pfeffer argues that a new generation is rediscovering Tanach, engaging questions of citizenship and public responsibility, and seeking ways to integrate Torah values with participation in the life and defense of the Jewish State.
- Judaism Is Ultimately a Religion of Hope
Despite the tensions surrounding the draft, Rabbi Pfeffer remains remarkably optimistic. Like the tribes of Reuben and Gad, both Israeli society and the Haredi community are still evolving. The future will not be shaped by slogans or coercion, but by honest conversation, mutual respect, and a renewed commitment to seeing one another as brothers.
Timestamps [00:00] Meet Rabbi Pfeffer
[01:32] Parsha Sets the Stage
[02:40] Draft Law Update
[05:53] Achichem in War
[07:20] Meraglim and Courage
[09:38] Incubation and Tension
[15:44] Sponsor Break
[16:47] Israel and Haredim Evolve
[23:39] Back to Tanakh
[29:02] Brotherhood After Oct 7
[36:08] What Tzorich Iyun Does
[40:45] Hope and Closing
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://voices.sefaria.org/sheets/737810
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
Yehoshua Pfesser Website: https://iyun.org.il/en/
What if the Founding Fathers didn't invent American democracy, but actually lifted its most crucial laws directly from the Torah?
Did the Founding Fathers borrow from the Torah?
As America celebrates its 250th anniversary, Madlik explores one of the Bible's most remarkable constitutional moments. Before Israel enters the Promised Land, the Torah conducts a census—not simply to count people, but to constitute a nation of tribes, clans, families, and citizens.
Then, five extraordinary sisters—the daughters of Zelophehad—step forward and successfully challenge the law itself. Their case becomes the Torah's first great constitutional amendment.
In this episode:
🇺🇸 The Torah's original "constitutional convention"
The revolutionary daughters of Zelophehad
Daniel Elazar on covenant and federalism
The Hebrew Republic and America's Founding Fathers
Why unity doesn't require uniformity
What Independence Day can teach us about covenant, citizenship, and the enduring power of constitutional ideals
Key Takeaways 1. The Torah's first constitutional convention took place on the Plains of Moab.
Before a single acre of the Promised Land was distributed, the Torah painstakingly counted every tribe, clan, and family—not merely to conduct a census, but to constitute a nation. Numbers 26 is less about demographics than about creating a covenantal federation of distinct communities preparing to inherit a common future.
- The daughters of Zelophehad proved that covenant belongs to every citizen.
Five sisters—daughters of a man remembered as a public sinner—stood before Moses and challenged the law. Their successful petition didn't overthrow the constitutional order; it perfected it. By naming them repeatedly and preserving their case for generations, the Torah teaches that a covenantal society is strengthened when even its most vulnerable members can help shape its laws.
- America's founders weren't just inspired by Greece and Rome—they also looked to the Hebrew Republic.
Daniel Elazar argued that the ancient Israelite federation of tribes offered a model of covenantal federalism: independent communities united by a shared moral commitment. Revolutionary-era ministers and statesmen explicitly compared the thirteen American states to the tribes of Israel. As America marks its 250th anniversary, Parashat Pinchas reminds us that true unity isn't achieved by erasing differences, but by renewing a covenant that binds diverse people together in a common purpose.
Timestamps [00:00] 1776 Meets Moab
[02:24] Census After the Plague
[08:28] Fair Land Division by Lot
[11:48] Why Count the Levites
[13:21] Five Sisters Challenge the Law
[17:16] Names, Sins, and Identity
[19:19] Sponsor Break
[20:22] Tu B'Av and Evolving Tribal Lines
[21:50] Covenantal Federalism Explained
[24:38] Founders and the Hebrew Republic
[28:54] Pledge, Covenant, and Renewal
[31:45] Closing Question and Farewell
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://voices.sefaria.org/sheets
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
Why did ancient rabbis look at the longest, brightest day of the year and feel a sudden sense of impending doom?
As archaeologists uncover evidence of ancient solstice celebrations near Stonehenge, Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz explore a provocative question: Why does Judaism greet the longest days of the year not with celebration, but with mourning?
Key Takeaways
- Judaism Never Ignored the Sun—It Reinterpreted It
Although the Jewish calendar follows the moon, it is anchored to the solar year. Passover must occur in the spring, the rabbis linked the 365 negative commandments to the days of the solar year, and the Talmud records Adam's fear as the days shortened. Judaism paid close attention to the heavens—but refused to worship them.
- While Other Cultures Celebrated the Summer Solstice, Judaism Saw the Beginning of Decline
Stonehenge and other ancient cultures celebrated the triumph of light at midsummer. The Jewish calendar places the month of Tammuz, the breach of Jerusalem's walls, and the road to Tisha B'Av immediately after the longest day of the year. At the very moment nature reaches its peak, Judaism reminds us that every pinnacle contains the seeds of decline.
- Judaism Teaches That Every Light Casts a Shadow
Most cultures celebrate the summer solstice as the triumph of light. Judaism looks at the longest day of the year and notices something else: tomorrow the days begin to shorten. The brightest moment already contains the seeds of decline. But Judaism doesn't stop there. The rabbis taught that the Messiah is born on Tisha B'Av itself. Even the darkness hidden within the light contains the possibility of redemption.
Timestamps
[00:00] Solstice and Jewish Paradox [01:55] Midsummer Mourning Season [03:50] Stonehenge to Sacred Calendars [05:23] After the Longest Day [09:35] Lunar Solar Calendar Sync [12:57] Adam and Shortening Days [15:46] Sponsor Break [16:57] Tammuz Origins and Fast Days [21:20] Ezekiel and Pagan Tammuz [25:01] Messiah Born in Ruins [28:01] Closing Shabbat Shalom
Links & Learnings
Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://voices.sefaria.org/sheets/736189
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
What happens when an ancient religion that forbids any new rules gets caught secretly reinventing itself in plain sight?
Can God still create something new?
At the climax of Korach's rebellion, Moses declares:
"If God creates a new creation..." (Numbers 16:30)
But that single phrase opens a theological fault line running through all of Jewish thought. Did creation end after the six days of Genesis? Or does God continually recreate the world every day?
Key Takeaways
- Judaism Contains Two Opposite Visions of Creation
When Moses says, "If God creates a new creation" (Num. 16:30), the commentators divide sharply. Ibn Ezra, Pirkei Avot, and Maimonides insist that nothing genuinely new can be created after the six days of Genesis; even miracles were programmed into creation from the beginning. Yet our daily prayers proclaim that God "renews each day, continually, the work of creation." Judaism preserves a profound tension between a completed universe and a world that is constantly being recreated.
- The Rabbis Distrusted Miracles but Celebrated Renewal
The rabbis were uncomfortable with the idea of God repeatedly suspending the laws of nature. The Mishnah teaches that the earth's mouth that swallowed Korach was created before the first Sabbath, and Maimonides extends that principle to all miracles. Judaism's faith is not built on supernatural interventions but on discovering meaning within creation. At the same time, Jewish spirituality embraces continual renewal—every sunrise, every month, and every generation offers the possibility of a new beginning.
- Judaism Often Creates New Ideas While Claiming Nothing Is New
The Talmud transforms Korach's descent into Sheol into a descent into Gehenom, effectively introducing a richer doctrine of divine judgment into the biblical story. The irony is striking: while citing "There is nothing new under the sun" to reject new creations, the rabbis themselves were expanding and reimagining Judaism. From Gehenom to the synagogue, from the Passover Seder to fixed prayer, Judaism's history is one of creative renewal. Perhaps the greatest innovation in Jewish history is the insistence that Judaism does not innovate.
Timestamps
[00:00] Can God Create New
[01:50] Korach Verse Setup
[03:56] Ibn Ezra Avoids Miracle
[05:10] Twilight Creations Mishnah
[06:47] Rambam Nature Of Miracles
[09:55] Talmud Adds Gehenna
[13:02] Sponsor Break
[14:04] Nothing New Under Sun
[17:22] Daily Renewal In Liturgy
[21:24] Perpetual Creation Polarity
[25:10] Rabbis Create While Denying
[27:06] Chasam Sofer New Forbidden
[29:14] Wrap Up And Shabbat Shalom
Links & Learnings
Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://voices.sefaria.org/sheets/735044
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
There's a terrifying line between having unwavering faith in your homeland and blinding yourself to a reality that is tearing it apart.
Did the spies lie?
For generations, Jews have read Parshat Sh'lach as the story of a faithless generation that listened to ten pessimistic scouts instead of Joshua and Caleb. The rabbis saw their tears as a "bechi shel chinam"—a gratuitous cry whose consequences echoed through Jewish history.
But what happens when history forces us to reread the story?
Key Takeaways 1. The Spies Didn't Just Report the Facts—They Shaped the Narrative
The Torah's first Hasbara crisis was not about military intelligence but about interpretation. The spies and Joshua saw the same land, the same giants, and the same challenges. The debate was over what those facts meant. Every generation faces the challenge of distinguishing between reality and the stories we tell about reality.
- Sometimes Ancient Texts Force Us to Reconsider Our Assumptions
For centuries, Jews have read the spies as the villains of the story. Yet in a moment of war, division, and uncertainty, we asked whether there are times when their warnings deserve to be heard. The enduring power of Torah is that it does not merely answer questions—it challenges each generation to confront its own historical moment.
- Hasbara Begins at Home
The spies were not speaking to the Canaanites; they were speaking to their fellow Israelites. Before a nation can explain itself to the world, it must understand itself. The conversation explored whether Israel's greatest challenge today is not external public diplomacy, but maintaining a shared sense of purpose, responsibility, and destiny among its own people.
Timestamps [00:00] Meet Pamela Peled [03:07] Spies and Perception [07:29] Zionist Journey to Israel [11:11] When Fear Feels Real [18:10] Hasbara Begins at Home [21:34] Sponsor Break [22:32] Israel Not Apartheid [24:30] Needless vs Authentic Tears [28:52] Conflict and Corruption [32:05] Hope and Closing Blessing
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://voices.sefaria.org/sheets/733929
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
For thousands of years, who your father was determined your entire life—until the Torah decided to tear that system down to the ground.
For most of us, the defining moments of Jewish history are obvious: the Exodus from Egypt and the Revelation at Sinai.
But what if we've overlooked another revolution hiding in plain sight?
Key Takeaways 1. The Torah's hidden revolution was the attack on birthright.
We tend to think of the Exodus as a liberation from slavery and Sinai as the birth of law. But running beneath the surface is another revolution: the dismantling of inherited privilege.
- The Exodus story itself was reshaped to tell that story.
The Torah repeatedly links the sanctification of the firstborn to the death of Egypt's firstborn. The result is that the Exodus becomes more than a story about freedom from Pharaoh.
It becomes a polemic against the ideology that underpinned Egypt itself: hierarchy, inherited power, and entitlement.
The plague of the firstborn is not only a punishment of Egypt. It becomes a theological statement that holiness and authority are not guaranteed by birth.
- Judaism ultimately replaced pedigree with character and learning.
The transfer from firstborn to Levites was only one stage in a much longer process.
The Rabbis completed the revolution:
A Torah scholar can outrank a High Priest. The crown of a good name surpasses priesthood and kingship. Maimonides teaches that the holiness of Levi is available to anyone who dedicates themselves to God.
The trajectory of Judaism is clear:
Birth → Service → Learning
Or, put differently:
The Torah begins by challenging inherited privilege and ends by teaching that true authority comes not from who your father was, but from who you become.
Timestamps 00:00] Torah's Hidden Revolution [01:23] Madlik Intro and Setup [02:23] Menorah, Rashi, and Levite Tension [04:55] Levites Replace Firstborn [09:17] Golden Calf Theory Questioned [11:59] Sponsor Break [13:00] Exodus Firstborn Laws Reframed [19:36] Counting Swap and Five Shekels [23:28] Mashup Theory and Firstborn Focus [27:55] From Birthright to Merit [31:55] Closing Blessings
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://voices.sefaria.org/sheets/732770
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
If you've ever wondered why your observant grandmother didn't cover her hair, you're about to discover a hidden truth that changes everything about how Jewish law actually works.
What if the way your grandmother practiced Judaism no longer matches what contemporary Orthodoxy claims Judaism always required?
This week on Madlik, Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz sit down with Professor Michael Broyde to discuss his groundbreaking new book Splitting Hairs — a deep dive into women's hair covering that becomes a much larger conversation about how halakha actually works.
Key Takeaways 1. Jewish law has never evolved in isolation from lived Jewish experience, communal norms, and surrounding culture. 2. The debate over women's hair covering reveals a deeper tension between objective halakha (Dat Moshe) and socially conditioned practice (Dat Yehudit). 3. Great rabbinic authorities like the Ben Ish Chai, Rav Moshe Feinstein, and Rav Ovadia Yosef often defended inherited communal practice rather than simply imposing rigid uniformity.
Timestamps [00:00] Hair and Halakha [02:25] Meet Michael Broyde [04:14] Why Hair Covering [06:18] What Counts as Covering [08:16] Defending Communal Practice [14:49] Sponsor Break [15:57] Sotah Text and Rashi [21:15] Dat Moshe and Yehudit [24:57] Ben Ish Chai and Culture [30:11] Ovadia Yosef and Wigs [35:13] Israel America Modesty [36:25] Closing and Shabbat Shalom
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://voices.sefaria.org/sheets/731684
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
We usually think of the ancient world as being ruled by dangerous, power-hungry kings, but the Torah actually commanded a radical, unified democracy thousands of years before America.
What if the Book of Numbers is not really about numbers?
What if the census in the wilderness was actually the birth of the first constitutional government?
Key Takeaways 1. Bamidbar is not just a census — it is a constitutional moment. The Torah counts the Israelites not as isolated individuals but as tribes, clans, and representative units, revealing a revolutionary political vision: a nation built through covenant among distinct groups. 2. The Torah's model of unity preserves difference rather than erasing it. From tribal banners surrounding the Tabernacle to the Bible's vision of the end of days, Judaism imagines a shared moral order where tribes, nations, and differing opinions retain their unique identities. 3. Jewish political culture may explain Jewish intellectual culture. The same covenantal federalism that allowed tribes to remain distinct while united may also underlie Judaism's enduring embrace of argument, dissent, and multiple opinions within a shared tradition.
Timestamps [00:00] Numbers Reimagined [01:24] Bamidbar Setup [02:33] Census Text Walkthrough [05:46] Journey and Authority [07:40] Elazar Tribal Federation [10:48] Camp Flags Communication [12:33] Counting Methods Leaders [14:47] Twelve Tribes Problem [18:42] Sponsor Break [19:48] Elazar Biography [21:15] Numbers as Constitution [24:24] Federalism Covenant Model [30:39] Federal Mindset Today [31:40] Closing Shabbat Shalom
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://voices.sefaria.org/sheets/725075
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
What if the Jewish secret to creating your best work is actually learning how to do absolutely nothing?
Is Shabbat really about rest… or is it about creation? Is it about ceasing from activity—or a unique form of production?
The Torah says something strange: during the Sabbatical year, you don't eat crops—you eat "Shabbat." And when we are commanded to keep the Sabbath—we are told to make it.
Key Takeaways 1. Shabbat Isn't Passive — It's Creative.
The Torah doesn't just say observe Shabbat—it says "make" Shabbat. Rest isn't the absence of creation—it's a different kind of creation.
- Letting Go Produces More Than Holding On
In Shemitah, you don't eat what you grow—you eat what grows when you release ownership. Real abundance comes not from control, but from hefker, withdrawal, and trust.
- Shabbat Only Exists Because We Create It.
Unlike every other mitzvah, Shabbat has no physical form. It becomes real only when we live it— by stopping, we actually bring it into existence.
Timestamps [00:00] Creation Through Stopping [01:14] Lag BaOmer And Sevens [02:01] Shmita Text And Shabbat Haaretz [03:41] Rashi Ramban And The Oxymoron [08:23] Nullification And Ownerless Yield [11:20] Tzimtzum And Hidden Goodness [15:12] To Do The Sabbath [16:39] Making Shabbat Commentaries [19:29] Sponsor Break [23:10] Torah Temimah Makes Shabbat Real [26:00] Shabbat As Human Construct [28:42] Closing Lag BaOmer And Chazak
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://voices.sefaria.org/sheets/723691
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
What if the Torah's strictest, most uncomfortable laws about perfection weren't actually meant to keep us out, but to give us permission to be broken?
What does holiness look like… when life refuses to cooperate?
In this episode of Madlik, we dive into one of the Torah's most uncomfortable passages—Parshat Emor—where the priestly caste is commanded to live a life untouched by death, imperfect relationships, and even physical blemish.
No funerals. No complicated marriages. No broken bodies.
It's a vision of holiness that feels… impossible.
But what if we've been reading it wrong?
Key Takeaways 1. Holiness as Separation, Not Just Morality
The priestly laws aren't random restrictions—they form a unified system built on distance from life's messiness: death, complicated relationships, and physical imperfection.
Holiness here isn't about being good—it's about being set apart.
- A Vision of Perfection… or a Problematic Ideal
The Kohen represents an almost utopian human—untouched by loss, imperfection, or disruption.
But that raises a tension: is this an aspirational model meant to uplift, or the creation of a spiritual hierarchy that excludes real human experience?
- From "Disqualified" to "Permitted"
The word ḥalal, usually translated as profane or disqualified, may actually point in a different direction.
What if it means not rejected—but released?
Not unholy—but free to live fully human lives, where imperfection isn't a flaw… but the norm.
Timestamps [00:00] Holiness Without Cracks [01:40] Show Intro and Big Question [02:53] Priestly Mourning Limits [04:35] Marriage Rules and Separation [06:53] Rashi and Modern Practice [10:23] Talmud and Funeral Optics [13:52] Why These Marriage Bans [21:20] Physical Blemishes and Theater [27:00] Halal as Permission [29:57] Wrap Up and Shabbat Shalom
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://voices.sefaria.org/sheets/722306
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
For centuries, we've used the word "scapegoat" to mean blaming someone else—but what if the Torah meant the exact opposite?
What does the scapegoat really mean on Yom Kippur?
In Parashat Acharei Mot, two identical goats stand at the center of the ritual—one for God, one sent into the wilderness. Most read this as ancient ritual.
Isaac Abarbanel reads it as something far more radical.
Key Takeaways 1. The Scapegoat Isn't About "Them"—It's About Us
Abarbanel reframes the ritual: the two goats are not Israel vs. its enemies, but two possible versions of Israel itself—closeness or distance, covenant or exile.
- In the Face of Persecution, He Chooses Hope Over Revenge
Writing in the shadow of expulsion, Abarbanel could have turned the scapegoat into a symbol of blame. Instead, he offers introspection and resilience—a theology of survival, not vengeance.
- Exile Is Not the End—It's Part of Redemption
The goat sent away does not die. It survives. For Abarbanel, exile becomes a stage in a larger story—one that ultimately bends toward return and renewal.
Timestamps [00:00] Twin Goats Opening [01:01] Show Intro Lisbon Setup [01:45] Why Study Abarbanel [03:04] Don Isaac Biography [08:24] His Commentary Method [11:43] Two Goats Text [13:18] Abarbanel Long Preface [14:49] Sponsor Break [15:56] Twenty One Questions [19:58] Jacob Esau Reading [26:36] Israel In Exile Reading [30:26] Hopeful Takeaways [31:39] Closing Shabbat Shalom
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://voices.sefaria.org/sheets/720530
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
Look closely at the broken walls of Israel, and you might just see the hidden history, resilience, and ancient secrets waiting to be uncovered in the rubble.
The Bible contains an enigmatic set of laws about a house that becomes afflicted—and somehow needs to be cured.
But the Rabbis flip the script.
What if this "plague" isn't a punishment… but a gift? What if tearing down a wall reveals something hidden בתוך הקיר—inside the wall?
Key Takeaways 1. Our homes are not just structures—they are stories
The Torah teaches that a house can carry memory, history, and even moral weight. Whether through Midrash, archaeology, or modern Israel, we learn:
What's inside the walls is not empty—it's the past, waiting to be uncovered.
- Sometimes breaking is a form of revealing
What looks like destruction can also be exposure. The Rabbis reframed tzara'at not as punishment—but as a gift:
When the walls come down, hidden truths—about the past and about ourselves—come to light.
- The real "treasure" is resilience
Today, as we see homes in Israel torn open, it's hard to imagine anything positive.
And yet:
The treasure isn't gold in the walls— it's the strength, courage, and resilience of the people who built—and will rebuild—again.
Timestamps [00:00] Afflicted House Mystery [01:08] Meet The Hosts [01:29] Reading Metzora Laws [03:32] Rashi Hidden Treasures [08:00] Why Only In Israel [09:34] Mold Medicine And Ritual [15:37] Walls Have Ears [18:26] Sponsor Break [19:33] Archaeology And Spolia [25:50] Artist Finds In Concrete [29:15] War Ruins And Resilience [31:10] Closing Blessings
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://voices.sefaria.org/sheets/719351
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
There is one powerful verse the ancient rabbis purposefully cut from the Passover story—and for good reason.
Everybody asks why Moses is missing from the Haggadah.
But what if we're asking the wrong question?
In this final episode of the Madlik Haggadah, we explore a deeper and more urgent mystery:
Where is the stranger?
Key Takeaways 1. The Haggadah Stops Too Soon
The Mishnah tells us to read the Exodus story "until the end." But we don't.
And the ending we skip is the most important part: "You, and the stranger in your midst."
- Being Oppressed Doesn't Automatically Make You Moral
The Torah doesn't assume we'll learn the right lesson.
It commands—again and again: Love the stranger.
Because history shows: those without power don't always become compassionate when they gain it."
- Redemption Isn't Leaving Egypt—It's What You Do After
For centuries in exile, this was theoretical.
Not anymore.
Now that we have power, the story changes: The real test of freedom is how we treat the stranger.
Timestamps [00:00] Welcome to Malik [00:26] Where Is the Stranger [02:21] Mishnah's Hidden Clue [03:52] The Verse We Skip [05:57] Why Rabbis Cut It [06:28] Power and Hagar [08:31] Sponsor Break [09:29] Back in the Land [11:24] Responsibility With Power [12:30] The Real Praise
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://voices.sefaria.org/sheets/229545
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
What if I told you that the most powerful way to read the Passover Haggadah... is to write your own?
In this episode of Madlik, we explore a radical idea born on Israel's early kibbutzim in the 1920s and 30s: that Judaism isn't just inherited—it's authored.
We're joined by Eran Yarkoni and Anton Marks of the Shittim Institute, who are traveling the U.S. with their exhibition Haggadah of Hope.
Key Takeaways
- The Haggadah Isn't a Book—It's a Framework
The kibbutzim didn't treat the Haggadah as sacred text to preserve, but as a structure to fill. They understood something we often forget: the power of the Seder comes not from repeating the words—but from making them speak to your moment.
- "Bechol Dor Vador" Is a Command to Create
We've been taught to relive the Exodus. The kibbutzim took it one step further: we are obligated to rewrite it.
Every generation doesn't just inherit the story—it adds a chapter.
- Ritual Isn't Escapism—It's How We Process Reality
From pioneers in the 1930s to displaced families after October 7, the Seder became a place to confront the present, not escape it.
By writing their pain, loss, and hope into the Haggadah, these communities show that ritual, at its best, is not about the past—it's about making meaning in real time.
Timestamps
[00:00] Kibbutz Haggadah Reimagined
[01:24] Meet the Shitim Institute
[04:07] Haggadah of Hope Tour
[07:09] Inside the Kibbutz Archive
[10:44] Haggadah as a Living Story
[13:23] After October 7 Texts
[15:01] Sponsor Break
[16:08] Return Home in the Fourth Cup
[23:26] Ma Nishtana Then and Now
[28:23] US Reactions and Roadshow
[30:16] Wrap Up and Passover Wishes
Links & Learnings
Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://voices.sefaria.org/sheets/715964
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
To donate to Shitim Institute: https://pefisrael.org/charity/machon-shittim/
Unlike almost every other major world religion, Judaism has absolutely no Pope—and the beautiful reason why is hidden deep in the Book of Leviticus.
Rabbis today are "ordained." But the original system of rabbinic ordination—semikhah, the laying on of hands—collapsed almost 1,600 years ago. So how did rabbinic authority survive?
In this episode of Madlik Disruptive Torah, Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz trace the surprising story of how a simple biblical gesture—placing hands on a sacrifice—became the foundation for Jewish leadership and authority.
Key Takeaways 1. Authority in Judaism started as a gesture, not an institution 2. Rabbinic authority survives not because the chain held—but because it broke 3. Judaism chose influence over control
Timestamps [00:00] Hands and Authority
[01:49] Leviticus Semikhah
[05:26] Blessing and Transference
[08:50] Two Hands Rule
[11:40] Women and Semikhah
[15:17] Sponsor Break
[16:23] Communal Offerings
[21:30] Joshua Commissioned
[23:22] Chain of Tradition
[25:13] Ordination Disrupted
[29:14] No Pope in Judaism
[30:53] Closing Reflections
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://voices.sefaria.org/sheets/714754
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
The Torah is incredibly strict about what goes into its holiest sanctuary, which is why one bizarre detail in Exodus chapter 38 makes absolutely no sense.
In the inventory of materials used to build the Mishkan, the Torah accounts for the weight and value of all the gold, silver, copper, wood, and linen material used. It's very clinical, with no reference to significance or context.
There is one striking exception.
Exodus 38:8 tells us that the priestly washing basin was made "from the mirrors of the women who gathered at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting." Why does the Torah suddenly reveal the provenance of this one object? Who were these women—and what were they doing there?
In this episode of Madlik Disruptive Torah, Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz explore how a single enigmatic verse sparked generations of interpretation.
Key Takeaways 1. The Holiest Objects May Come from the Least Holy Places 2. A Tiny Detail Can Create a Whole Tradition 3. A Mirror Is the Perfect Metaphor for Interpretation
Timestamps [00:00] Mirrors in the Mishkan
[00:56] Meet the Hosts
[01:36] Podcast Intro
[02:51] Reading Exodus 38
[04:48] Women at the Tent
[07:40] Rashi's Famous Midrash
[13:01] Word Study on Mirrors
[14:32] Sponsor Break
[15:45] Eli's Sons and Innuendo
[19:22] Scholars Offer Explanations
[22:43] Egyptian Mirrors and Fertility
[26:02] Repurposing Pagan Objects
[26:42] Cassuto and Poetic Memory
[29:39] Found Object Theology
[31:26] Modern Fertility Sculpture
[32:52] Wrap Up and Farewell
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://voices.sefaria.org/sheets/713285
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
What if I told you the Talmud's greatest secret for surviving a crisis isn't fighting harder—it's assuming the exact opposite of what you think is true?
In this special Purim episode of Madlik Disruptive Torah, Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz explore the Megillah's phrase וְנַהֲפוֹךְ הוּא (ve-nahafoch hu) — "everything was turned upside down" — and ask what it means after Purim, in a world facing crisis and uncertainty.
Key Takeaways 1. Reversal Is a Mindset, Not a Miracle. 2. Crisis Is an Invitation to Rethink the Paradigm. 3. Argue Hard. Stay Together.
Timestamps [00:00] Purim Eve Tension [00:43] V'nahafoch Hu Mindset [01:57] Meet the Hosts [03:20] Esther Texts Reversal [05:01] Greenberg on Paradox [07:15] Turn It Over, Pirkei Avot [09:18] Talmudic Opposite Logic [14:55] Cafe Hafuch and Disagreement [18:31] Purim Rule Breaking [21:44] Kuhn and Paradigm Shifts [25:26] Startup Nation Debate Culture [28:26] War Reality and Prayer
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://voices.sefaria.org/sheets/711758
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
If you want to understand the Jewish story, start with a color.
This week we're rebroadcasting one of my favorite episodes from 2022 — an episode about a single color that somehow contains an entire Jewish narrative: tekhelet, that rare, stubborn, unforgettable blue.
We're revisiting a conversation that feels more timely than ever.
As antisemitism re-emerges in public life, people are reaching again for symbols — simple, visible markers that say: I'm here. I'm not hiding. I'm not alone. One of those symbols is the Blue Square Campaign — a small square of blue worn or posted as a public expression of solidarity.
Key Takeaways 1. Blue teaches that holiness belongs to everyone. 2. Blue reminds us that identity is visible, resilient, and remembered. 3. Blue proves that a people can lose its Temple and still keep its thread.
Timestamps [00:00] Why Blue Now
[02:23] The Torah's Blue Thread
[04:19] Tekhelet in the Mishkan
[08:27] From Priest to People
[13:19] Sea, Sky, and the Throne of Glory
[17:04] The Desert Supply Mystery
[19:45] Royal Blue and Authority
[22:40] Lost and Found Tekhelet
[25:20] Fakes and Black Markets
[28:01] Tzitzit and P'til Tekhelet: Wordplay
[32:29] Blue and White, and Israel
[34:18] Shabbat Wrap Up
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://voices.sefaria.org/sheets/383005
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
We usually think a 'gift with strings attached' is a bad thing, but the Torah actually forbids giving without them.
No Free Gifts | Terumah, Purim & The Language of Reciprocity
There is no such thing as a free gift.
In this episode of Madlik Disruptive Torah, Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz explore Parshat Terumah through the provocative lens of French sociologist Marcel Mauss and his groundbreaking work The Gift.
Key Takeaways 1. Every gift binds. 2. Giving is a language. 3. Reciprocity builds society.
Timestamps [00:00] No Such Thing as a Free Gift: Torah Meets Anthropology [00:43] Terumah & Purim: Gifting as Covenant and Community Glue [01:57] Welcome to Madlik: What We're Really Exploring This Week [02:36] Hong Kong & Chinese New Year: Ritual Exchange in Real Life [04:33] Exodus 25 'Take for Me a Gift': The Strange Language of Terumah [06:21] Rashi's French 'Apaisement': Gifts, Favor, and Propitiation [12:24] Marcel Mauss' The Gift: Reciprocity vs. Utilitarianism [14:33] Potlatch, Honor, and Sacrifice: When Gifts Demand a Return [19:06] Sponsor Break: Voice Gift Tag (A Gift That Speaks) [20:00] Purim's Unique Mitzvah: Mishloach Manot as Required Reciprocity [21:38] Why No Blessing on Charity? Fixed Measures & Receiver Dependence [23:30] Megillat Esther's Two Gifts: Friends vs. the Poor [24:48] Halakhic Details: What Counts as Mishloach Manot (and Why) [28:18] Talmud Stories: Reading Meaning into the Gifts We Send [31:35] Meals, Kashrut, and Unity: Maimonides & Rabbi Riskin's Take [32:50] Closing Blessings: Shabbat Shalom and Heading Toward Purim
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://voices.sefaria.org/sheets/709029
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
The Torah doesn't celebrate freedom. It teaches dependence.
Parashat Mishpatim opens with a shock: the Torah's great civil code begins with laws of slavery—spoken to a nation freshly freed from slavery.
In this episode of Madlik Disruptive Torah, Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz ask why the Torah doesn't give an "Emancipation Proclamation," and what freedom even means in a world built on mutual dependence. From Thoreau's Walden myth to Bob Dylan's "You've got to serve somebody," and Yeshayahu Leibowitz's insistence that the Exodus is about serving God, we explore a radical reframing: freedom in the Torah isn't the absence of dependence—it's learning how to depend justly.
Key Takeaways 1. Freedom in the Torah is not independence. 2. Mishpatim isn't about preserving slavery — it's about dismantling it. 3. The Torah meets society where it is — and pushes it forward.
Timestamps [00:00] Introduction: The Illusion of Absolute Freedom [00:17] Thoreau's Shack and the Reality of Independence [00:40] The Torah's Perspective on Slavery and Freedom [01:35] Welcome to Malik: Exploring Jewish Texts [01:57] The Paradox of Emancipation and Slavery in the Torah [02:56] Analyzing the Laws of Slavery in Exodus [05:18] Rabbinic Interpretations and Commentaries [09:28] Modern Reflections on Slavery and Freedom [29:19] Conclusion: The Interdependence of Society
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://voices.sefaria.org/sheets/707773
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
In the darkest place imaginable, four men discovered that gratitude can keep you alive.
This episode of Madlik Disruptive Torah begins not in ancient text, but underground—inside the testimony of former hostage Eli Sharabi, who describes a ritual he and three others created in captivity: every night, they forced themselves to name one good thing that happened that day. Not because it felt true—but because without gratitude, hope would die.
Key Takeaways 1. Gratitude isn't a feeling—it's a practice 2. Jethro's greatest gift wasn't law—it was blessing 3. Saying it out loud is how we stay human
Timestamps [00:00] Introduction: The Power of Gratitude [02:04] Elie Sarabi's Story of Survival [03:05] The Ritual of Thanksgiving [06:24] Jethro's Blessing and Its Significance [09:45] The Concept of Blessings in Judaism [13:24] Voice Gift Play: A New Way to Share Stories [14:27] The Importance of Verbalizing Gratitude [27:31] Finding the 'Why' in Survival [30:52] Conclusion: The Secret to Survival
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://voices.sefaria.org/sheets/705869
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
How a Story of Liberation Was Used to Exclude
What if the Exodus wasn't just a story of freedom… but also a story of exclusion?
Key Takeaways 1. Redemption stories are rarely neutral—they are often weapons. 2. The charge of being "left behind" usually says more about the accuser than the accused. 3. A story about leaving becomes an excuse for not moving at all.
Timestamps [00:00] Moses' Uncompromising Message to Pharaoh
[00:24] The Irony of the 'Left Behind' Story
[01:48] Introduction to Madlik and This Week's Topic
[02:42] Exploring the Tradition of Those Left Behind
[04:00] The Ambiguous Word in Exodus 13:18
[05:24] Rashi's Interpretation and the Fifth Child
[11:08] Ezekiel's Rewriting of the Exodus Narrative
[13:25] The Polemic Against Those Who Stayed Behind
[25:05] The Tradition of Jewish Names, Language, and Dress
[29:56] Conclusion and Final Thoughts
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://voices.sefaria.org/sheets/704560
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
The Exodus isn't just a freedom story — it's the Torah's first argument about gatekeeping.
Pharaoh asks a simple question: "Who exactly is going?" — mi va-mi ha-holchim. Moses answers with a revolution: Everyone.
Key Takeaways 1. Who's going?" really means "Who counts? 2. Inclusion isn't modern — it's Torah. 3. Presence matters more than status.
Timestamps [00:00] Pharaoh's Question: Who's Going?
[01:26] Introduction to Madlik and This Week's Topic
[01:58] The Essence of Hasidism and Inclusion
[05:03] Exploring the Exodus Story
[07:14] Moses' Radical Answer to Pharaoh
[17:08] Modern Interpretations and Commentary
[20:45] The Inclusive Revolution in Judaism
[27:35] Concluding Thoughts and Reflections
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://voices.sefaria.org/sheets/702597
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
Rav Shlomo Wolbe, Mussar, and the Theology of Human Greatness
Moses delivers the greatest promise in Jewish history—freedom, redemption, a future—and the Torah says something heartbreaking: the Israelites don't listen. Not because they reject God or Moses, but because of "kotzer ruach" (Exodus 6:9)—shortness of spirit.
Key Takeaways 1. The Torah's Greatest Threat Isn't Sin — It's Smallness 2. True Greatness Is Internal, Not External 3. Mussar Teaches Us How to Grow, Not Just What to Do
Timestamps [00:00] The Devastating Reality of kotzer ruach [00:45] Introduction to Rabbi Shlomo Wolbe [03:11] The Teachings of Rabbi Shlomo Wolbe [08:08] The Greatness of the Human Being [10:25] The Inner Life and Human Potential [17:15] Modern Reflections and Critiques [27:40] Conclusion: Embracing Our Greatness
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/701299 Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
What Children Hear That Adults Miss
We begin the Book of Shemot (Exodus) with a New Year's-style resolution: read more Torah out loud—to our children, and to our grandchildren. Because the Exodus isn't just Judaism's greatest story; it's Judaism's most re-read story—told at the Seder, year after year, the longest-running book club in history.
We're joined by scholar and author Ilana Kurshan to discuss her new book Children of the Book, a beautiful exploration of how reading to kids shapes not only them, but us. Together we read Exodus through young eyes: the burning bush as a lesson in attention, "seeing" as a form of leadership, pictures as commentary, and Moses himself sounding like a nervous child—"slow of speech."
Whether you're a parent, grandparent, or just someone who loves texts, this episode is about the power of rereading—and the intimacy of reading aloud.
Key Takeaways 1. The Torah is meant to be reread 2. Reading out loud is how Jewish memory is formed 3. Reading with children changes how we read.
Timestamps * [00:00] Introduction to Malik Disruptive Torah * [00:35] Guest Introduction: Scholar Arthur Ilana Khan * [00:54] The Importance of Reading Aloud * [01:38] Meet Ilana Khan: Author and Scholar * [03:43] The Concept of Repetition in Jewish Reading * [08:54] The Burning Bush: A Story of Attention and Vision * [10:52] The Role of Close Reading in Jewish Tradition * [13:52] The Art of Reading in Modern Times * [24:05] Children's Unique Perspective on Stories * [31:41] The Power of Reading Aloud to Children * [34:53] Conclusion and Final Thoughts
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Link to Ilana's Book: https://ilanakurshan.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/699868
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
In this episode of Madlik Disruptive Torah, Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz explore one of the Torah's most enigmatic verses—Jacob's blessing of Judah and the phrase "until Shiloh comes." Claimed by Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, this single line opens a sweeping conversation about the power of religion to shape history—for good and for evil. Drawing on classical commentators, medieval Jewish-Christian encounters, and modern interfaith scholarship, we ask hard questions: What happens when sacred texts become battlegrounds? Can religion be part of the solution to religious conflict? And where are the moral red lines that faith must never cross? The episode concludes with a remarkable live contribution from Yochanan, known as the Rosh Kollel of Clubhouse—a former Hasidic Jew with encyclopedic Torah knowledge who left his community, is suing for lack of secular education, and brings both sharp critique and disarming wonder to his rediscovery of the wider world—including celebrating his first-ever birthday. This is a conversation about scripture, identity, responsibility, and hope—offered as a reflective closing to the year, and a thoughtful opening to what comes next.
As we close one year and step into another, we're revisiting a live Madlik Disruptive Torah conversation recorded in December 2022, back when the podcast was broadcast weekly on Clubhouse in front of a live audience. This episode explores the enduring power of numbers in Jewish thought—especially the number 70. From the seventy souls who descend to Egypt, to seventy nations, seventy languages, seventy judges on the Sanhedrin, and the rabbinic idea that Torah itself has shiv'im panim—seventy faces—this conversation asks what numbers can teach us without turning Torah into superstition. Along the way, we discuss: Why seven and its multiples signal cycles, completeness, and transition The difference between structural symbolism and later gematria Umberto Cassuto's insight into numerical patterns in the Creation story Why unanimity among seventy judges invalidates a verdict How translation, disagreement, and plurality are built into Torah itself
Was Hanukkah really a war of Jews vs. Greeks — or a Jewish civil war we chose to forget?
Was Hanukkah really Jews vs. Greeks — or a Jewish civil war we chose to bury under a story about oil?
In this episode of Madlik Disruptive Torah, Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz revisit the Hanukkah story through the sources. From Maccabees I and the politics of Ptolemy vs. Antiochus, to the lone Talmudic mention of the oil miracle (Shabbat 21b), they show how a messy internal power struggle became a clean miracle narrative.
Key Takeaways 1. Hanukah began as a Jewish civil war — not just Jews vs. Greeks. 2. Each generation rewrites the Maccabees to fit its own battles. 3. The shamash — the helper candle — may be Hanukkah's real hero today.
Timestamps [00:00] Hanukkah beyond oil and miracles
[03:12] Why the Talmud barely explains Hanukkah
[05:01] The forgotten Jewish civil war
[07:22] Hellenists vs. Maccabees reexamined
[09:48] Power, empires, and internal factions
[12:30] Modern culture wars through Hanukkah
[14:55] Why the rabbis hid the conflict
[17:05] Hillel vs. Shammai as metaphor
[19:10] The shamash in Israeli children's stories
[23:40] Hanukkah as a model for unity
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/695661
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
Imagine being told you belong to a faith that is fighting to keep you out—and refusing to leave.
In this week's Madlik, Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz welcome Rabbi Steve Greenberg, the first openly gay Orthodox-ordained rabbi, for a deeply personal and wide-ranging conversation.
Key Takeaways 1. Vulnerability transforms the meaning of Torah. 2. Bottom-up change is reshaping Orthodoxy. 3. The tradition has the capacity — and the precedent — to grow.
Timestamps [00:00:12]
Rabbi Steve Greenberg's coming-out context and the question of LGBTQ+ Jews as teachers of Torah.
[00:03:11]
Steve's Yom Kippur aliyah story and being vulnerable to the text.
[00:04:46]
Confronting the biblical verses; reframing what Leviticus might mean.
[00:06:22]
Tamar's courage and parallels to LGBTQ+ belonging.
[00:08:57]
"Bottom-up Judaism": queer Jews staying, not leaving — shifting the halachic landscape.
[00:11:39]
Google rabbis, post-COVID authority shifts, and personal autonomy in community life.
[00:15:08]
Israeli changes: rejecting the Rabbanut, forming new models of partnership.
[00:17:42]
A painful role-play with a rabbi exposes how harmful "lifelong celibacy" messaging is for gay teens.
[00:21:19]
New data on LGBTQ+ rabbinical students and why queer spiritual sensitivity strengthens Jewish leadership.
[00:24:56]
Parents as powerful advocates: Orthodox families pushing shuls and schools to stop rejecting their children.
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/691629
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
Eshel: https://www.eshelonline.org/
Beneath the surface, Israel is fighting for the soul of its religion — and most of us don't even see the battle lines.
In this episode of Madlik Disruptive Torah, Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz are joined by Professor Adam S. Ferziger to explore the quiet revolution reshaping Israeli Judaism. Drawing on his new book, Agents of Change, Ferziger reveals how American Modern Orthodoxy—its values, institutions, and worldview—has profoundly influenced Religious Zionism and the broader Israeli religious landscape. From the tension between nationalism and modernity to the emergence of a new Israel-born generation, we uncover the cultural, political, and spiritual crossroads Israel now faces. Beneath the surface, Israel is fighting for the soul of its religion—and American Jews are playing a bigger role than anyone expected.
Key Takeaways 1. American Modern Orthodoxy Has Become a Quiet Force in Israeli Judaism 2. Israeli Religious Zionism Is Splitting Into Two Distinct Paths 3. Israel's Next Generation of Leaders Will Be Religious — But Neither Haredi or National Religious
Timestamps * [00:00:00] Jacob returns from exile with wealth, family, and a new identity; exile reframed as productive, not just punishment. * [00:01:00] Intro to Professor Adam Ferziger and his book Agents of Change about American Jews reshaping Israeli Judaism. * [00:02:00] Host sets the frame: modern Orthodoxy's influence on Israeli religious life, education, feminism, and LGBTQ inclusion. * [00:03:00] Ferziger's personal story: gap year yeshiva, Aliyah in 1987, building family and rabbinic life in Kfar Saba. * [00:04:54] Early political snapshot: the failed "Meimad" experiment and how Anglo moderates felt marginal and deviant. * [00:06:36] Shift in the 2000s: religious-Zionist camp diversifies; modern Orthodox voices gain legitimacy and visibility. * [00:09:05] Explaining American Modern Orthodoxy: Torah plus general culture, YU, day schools, Rav Soloveitchik's synthetic model. * [00:14:10] Rise of "Hardal": nationalist-Haredi style religiosity, stricter halakha, and a more redemptive, messianic Zionism. * [00:21:45] The "agents of change": eight American rabbis/educators whose Israeli students indigenize and radicalize their ideas. * [00:34:15] Why this matters beyond religion: "Israeli Judaism" and how moderate Orthodox trends may shape Israel's future leadership.
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/692993
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
Adam Ferziger's Book https://nyupress.org/9781479817559/agents-of-change/
Ready to discover how reviving a lost language can reshape the whole Middle East? Ta Shma (come and hear)
Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz are joined by Shadi Khalloul—IDF paratrooper veteran, founder of the Israeli Christian Aramaic Association, and one of the world's most passionate advocates for reviving the Aramaic language. Together, they explore Parshat Vayetzei and the hidden "Rosetta Stone" moment in Genesis 31, where Jacob and Laban name the same monument in Hebrew and Aramaic.
Key Takeaways 1. Aramaic is the Hidden Backbone of Jewish Life 2. Aramaic Once United the Ancient World—And Can Still Bridge Communities Today 3. Israel's Aramean Christians Are a Forgotten but Loyal Minority whose story will surprise and inspire you
Timestamps [00:00:00] Opening: Jewish prayers written in Aramaic & introduction to Shadi Kaul
[00:01:03] Shadi's unique role: soldier, educator, reviver of Aramaic culture
[00:02:12] Shadi's background: identity, community history, and connection to Israel
[00:03:47] Serving in the IDF and discovering his Aramaic purpose in the U.S.
[00:05:32] Founding the Israeli Christian Aramaic Association & education initiatives
[00:07:14] Plans for Aramaic towns, schools, and coexistence programs
[00:09:22] Daily language reality: Arabic spoken, Aramaic preserved in prayer
[00:11:48] Parallels with Jewish language revival and historical connections
[00:14:27] Shadi's family displaced in 1948 and the ongoing struggle for recognition
[00:32:41] Aramaic as the ancient international language—the "first internet"
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/691050
Israeli Christian Aramaic Association - http://www.aramaic-center.com/?lang=en
A History of the First World Language - https://a.co/d/fjHe9C1
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
What if one of the Torah's greatest heroes was actually its most scandalous trickster?
In this episode of Madlik Disruptive Torah, Geoffrey Stern and Adam Mintz dive into one of the most provocative moments in the Torah: Jacob's audacious act of deception to secure his father Isaac's blessing in Parashat Toldot. Rather than smoothing over the ethical wrinkles, we sit with the discomfort, exploring why the Torah insists on portraying our third patriarch as a trickster—and what we're meant to learn from a hero whose virtues are tangled with flaws.
Key Takeaways 1. The Torah Embraces Imperfect Heroes prompting readers to grapple with imperfection as part of the human and spiritual journey. 2. Biblical stories were shaped by and for public reading; audiences came with expectations based on oral traditions and prior knowledge. 3. Spiritual growth often requires confrontations with failure and the "divine ruse"—a process of growth through challenge, not perfection.
Timestamps * [00:00:00] Geoffrey opens the episode and introduces the problem of Jacob stealing the blessing. * [00:00:25] He reframes the question: maybe the Torah wants us to sit with the discomfort. * [00:00:47] Overview of themes: ancient oil traditions, imperfect heroes, Maimonides on change. * [00:01:08] Show intro + housekeeping (YouTube, Substack, source sheet, reviews). * [00:01:27] Main question of the week: why portray Jacob this way, and are we projecting modern morality? * [00:02:18] Opening character analysis: Jacob's name, symbolism of "heel holder," zig-zag personality. * [00:04:01] Plot recap: Isaac asks Esau for hunted game, Rebecca overhears and initiates the plan. * [00:05:02] The key deception moment: Jacob tells Isaac, "I am Esau your firstborn." * [00:07:27] Esau's character through rabbinic commentary: glutton, outdoorsman vs. Jacob the tent-dweller. * [00:22:03] Jacob's consequences begin: exile, never seeing his mother again, being tricked by Laban.
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/689945
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
What happens when women finally enter the conversation that's been about them all along?
In this episode of Madlik: Disruptive Torah, Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz are joined by Prof. Rabbi Wendy Zierler — Sigmund Falk Professor of Modern Jewish Literature and Feminist Studies at HUC-JIR, ordained by Yeshivat Maharat, and author of Going Out with Knots: My Two Kaddish Years with Hebrew Poetry.
Key Takeaways 1. Expect to rethink assumptions about primary biblical characters—especially the matriarchs—and appreciate the living tradition of midrash as a vehicle for creativity and challenge. 2. Hear how feminist perspectives and modern poetry revitalize Jewish text study, offering new interpretations for "the life of Sarah"—and the legacies that women shape. 3. Explore the argument that literary and artistic creation in Hebrew is as much a part of Jewish commentary as classic text study.
Timestamps [00:00:00] Geoffrey introduces the episode and guest Rabbi Professor Wendy Zierler, setting up a feminist exploration of Sarah's story in Genesis.
[00:02:31] Discussion begins on Sarah's laughter and how women's scholarship reframes her response and role in Torah narratives.
[00:03:46] Wendy explains the irony of "Chayei Sarah" focusing on Sarah's death and how reading the gaps reveals her inner life.
[00:05:36] They examine Abraham and Sarah's separation after the Akedah and what it reveals about love, obedience, and divine testing.
[00:09:02] Wendy argues the Akedah causes a rupture—between Abraham and Sarah, Abraham and Isaac, and even Abraham and God.
[00:12:40] The hosts explore new feminist midrash: Sarah's imagined agency, waiting for angels, and representing love over fear.
[00:17:22] Conversation turns to Sarah's burial choice as an act of leadership that shaped the matriarchal roots of the Jewish story.
[00:19:53] Transition to Wendy's book Going Out with Knots and how Hebrew poetry became her lens for mourning and feminist study.
[00:21:41] Wendy teaches Leia Goldberg's reinterpretation of "the three pillars of the world," highlighting women's creative renewal of tradition.
[00:26:42] Discussion closes with Yehuda Amichai's outsider voice, women's return to Hebrew literature, and modern creativity as living midrash.
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet:https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/688219
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
Link to Wendy's Book: https://jps.org/books/going-out-with-knots/
Link to theTorah.com article: https://www.thetorah.com/article/sarah-finally-separates-herself-from-abraham
A Netflix rom-com jokes that Judaism "encourages me to argue." Turns out, that's not a joke—it's what set Abraham apart.
A Netflix rom-com gives us a throwaway line that might be the most Jewish thing ever said on screen. When a young rabbi admits that Judaism loves two opposing opinions, his girlfriend lights up: "A religion that encourages me to argue? Love that." It's meant as a joke, but this week's Torah portion proves her right. Sarah laughs at divine promises, Abraham bargains with God over justice, and on Mount Moriah, even silence feels like protest. Judaism doesn't shy from disagreement—it builds holiness out of it. In Nobody Wants This Argument With God, we explore how faith, laughter, and dissent became inseparable in the Jewish imagination.
Key Takeaways 1. From Sarah's laughter to Abraham's debate, the Torah's heroes don't obey blindly — they question boldly. 2. In Judaism, arguing with God isn't heresy — it's how prayer begins. 3. Laughter is not only a survival mechanism its an act of defiance.
Timestamps * [00:00:00] Opening story – bingeing "Nobody Wants That" and connecting its theme of argument to the Abraham story. * [00:01:22] Framing the Torah portions – arguing as Judaism's "love language." * [00:02:19] Introduction to the podcast and this week's Parsha topic. * [00:05:34] Beginning analysis of Genesis 18 – Sarah's laughter and disbelief. * [00:08:09] Discussion of women's Torah commentary and reinterpretation of Sarah's fear. * [00:12:30] Transition to the Sodom narrative – Abraham arguing with God. * [00:17:41] Exploration of rabbinic interpretations that amplify Abraham's argument. * [00:20:07] "Prayer as battle" – how the rabbis turned debate with God into daily practice. * [00:26:13] Transition to the Binding of Isaac – silent inner arguments and faith. * [00:30:44] Closing reflections – dialogue with God as Judaism's defining feature and farewell.
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet:https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/686496
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
3,000 years after Abraham heard the call to go forth, a group of 20 somethings booked a one-way ticket to Ben-Gurion.
What if the journey of Abraham in the Torah mirrors the modern-day aliyah experience? In this episode we dive into the modern-day "Lech Lecha" story with Noah Efron from The Promised Podcast. From his Young Judea roots to teaching at Bar Ilan University, Noah shares his journey of making aliyah (immigration to Israel) from America in the early 80s, offering a fascinating perspective on what it means to "go forth" in our generation.
Key Takeaways 1. The power of community in the aliyah experience 2. The unique perspective of being both an insider and outsider in Israel 3. The evolving nature of Israeli society towards greater inclusivity
Timestamps [00:00:00] – Opening narration: "Picture standing on the edge of an unfamiliar land…" — Sets up Abraham's journey and the metaphor for modern Aliyah.
[00:00:48] – Introduction of guest: Geoffrey introduces Noah Efron and outlines his background—academic, political, and as host of The Promised Podcast.
[00:02:00] – Podcast welcome + theme framing: Geoffrey and Rabbi Adam introduce the episode's focus—connecting Abraham's "Lech Lecha" journey to Noah's personal Aliyah story.
[00:05:46] – Noah begins his Aliyah story: Reflects on family, children, and how Young Judaea shaped his decision to move to Israel with his wife and friends.
[00:09:54] – Community and creation: Noah describes building new communities, egalitarian spaces, and shaping Israel through civic involvement and local politics.
[00:11:22] – Raising Israeli-born children: Noah reflects emotionally on seeing his kids grow up Hebrew-speaking, communal, and connected—contrasting American vs. Israeli culture.
[00:15:42] – Anglo influence in Israel: Discussion turns to American Jews' cultural and social contributions—environmentalism, NGOs, and pluralism—forming a distinct "ethnic group" within Israel.
[00:20:31] – Bridging identities: Noah explains how he respects Haredi (Ultra-Orthodox) culture and values, despite being secular-left politically—revealing his nuanced, integrative outlook.
[00:28:24] – Text study & reflection: Geoffrey brings in a Midrash about Abraham choosing industrious Canaanites; parallels to modern Israeli industriousness ("startup nation") and shared society.
[00:29:55] – Closing vision: Noah's optimism—believing Israeli society continues to expand its "us," becoming more inclusive, compassionate, and interconnected. Ends with reflection on Ger v'Toshav (stranger and citizen) identity.
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/684491
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
Do They Really Speak with One Voice?" Yigal Carmon on the Arab Street
In a world where words can both unite and divide, understanding the true meaning behind them is more crucial than ever. This week's Madlik episode delves deep into the power of language, translation, and cultural understanding with special guest Yigal Carmon, founder of the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI).
Key Takeaways 1. The Deception of Unity: The illusion of a single voice in the Arab world often masks complex realities and diverse opinions. 2. Translation is Not Enough: Simply bridging the language gap doesn't guarantee understanding. Context and cultural nuances are crucial. 3. Hope in Unexpected Places: Amid challenges, there are voices of reform and progress in the Middle East that often go unnoticed.
Timestamps 00:00 Introduction to Yigal Carmon and MEMRI 01:50 Welcome to Madlik 02:13 Introducing Yigal Carmon 04:09 Yigal Carmon's Personal Journey 07:28 The Power of Language and Translation 11:42 Warnings and Ignored Signs 22:25 Current Geopolitical Landscape 35:03 Challenges and Hope for the Future 37:50 Conclusion and Final Thoughts
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/682911
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
Memri website: https://www.memri.org/
The Bible's most revolutionary concept wasn't monotheism - it was something far more profound.
What if the most revolutionary idea in human history wasn't freedom, democracy, or even monotheism — but a single verse from Genesis?
This week on Madlik Disruptive Torah, Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz are joined by Dr. Tomer Persico, author of In God's Image: How Western Civilization Was Shaped by a Revolutionary Idea. Together, they explore how the Torah's concept of tzelem Elohim — the image of God — was originally understood not as a metaphor, but as something startlingly literal: humanity as the actual analog of the divine.
The conversation also traces how Christianity, more than Judaism, adopted and amplified this idea — translating it into the language of conscience, equality, and individual dignity. Does that history diminish the Jewish claim to tzelem Elohim or, paradoxically, confirm its enduring power?
Finally, the discussion turns inward: once God's mind becomes internalized within the human mind, religion itself becomes a human sense — like music or beauty — embedded in the architecture of our consciousness. Studying religion, then, is not just the study of the divine, but the study of what makes us most profoundly human.
Key Takeaways 1. The concept of humans being created in God's image was revolutionary because it applied to everyone, not just rulers or heroes.
-
Taking the idea of God's image literally led to profound implications for human rights and dignity.
-
The "image of God" concept evolved through Christianity and ultimately influenced secularization and the emancipation of the Jews
Timestamps * [00:00:27] — Opening narration begins: "What if one of the most radical ideas in human intellectual history…" * [00:01:42] — Host commentary: Jeffrey connects the "image of God" to the modern idea of dignity and introduces the hope for the hostages. * [00:02:34] — Guest introduction: Dr. Tomer Persico is welcomed; he explains his research journey and the origins of his book. * [00:05:19] — Defining the radical idea: Persico explains how "in God's image" reframed power, privilege, and ethics in Western culture. * [00:07:45] — Literal God debate: Discussion turns to the ancient Israelite belief that God had a visible, bodily form. * [00:10:12] — Reframing idolatry: Persico redefines idolatry as failing to see the divine in people, not in statues. * [00:14:18] — Birth of human rights: Conversation about Genesis 9:6 and how individuality replaced collective punishment. * [00:18:47] — The Christian turn: How Christianity internalized the "image of God" into conscience and reason—laying foundations for science. * [00:25:26] — Secular autonomy and modernity: How reverence for human autonomy led to the rise of secularism and liberal rights. * [00:31:38] — Closing reflection: The innate "hunch" or instinct toward the sacred—"we do God" naturally—and the episode's farewell prayer for hostages.
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/681682
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
The Exodus isn't just a story—it's the operating system of Jewish practice.
Most of us were taught that the reason we sit in a sukkah for a full week is to commemorate the booths that the Children of Israel lived in during their forty years in the desert. We might even quote the verse in Leviticus that makes this claim — the only agricultural holiday that the Torah itself re-purposes.
The problem is… not only modern scholars, but all the classical rabbinic commentators either don’t take that explanation literally or find it riddled with problems. Over and over again, the Torah describes the Israelites living in tents, not harvest booths.
If Sukkot really commemorates the Exodus, why don’t we hold the Passover seder inside a sukkah? And while we’re at it — what crops did the Israelites grow in the desert that could justify a harvest festival at all?
Rashi turns the booths into clouds of glory. Rashbam turns them into a moral test of humility and gratitude. Ibn Ezra points to cold desert nights, while Rabbeinu Bahya imagines caravans bringing the necessary organic, plant-based roofing materials (Schach) from afar. Everyone, it seems, is trying to solve a puzzle.
And that puzzle leads to a deeper question:
Why does the Torah — and later Judaism — weave “Remembering the Exodus from Egypt” (zecher l’tziat Mitzrayim) into every corner of Jewish life? Into holidays that have nothing to do with Egypt, into Shabbat, even into the laws of interest and weights and measures.
As we finish the Five Books of Moses, we marvel at how the Exodus became Judaism’s Operating System.
Key Takeaways 1. The Torah itself repurposed Sukkot to commemorate the Exodus, sparking centuries of discussion. 2. Rabbinic commentators struggled to reconcile agricultural roots with historical significance. 3. Sukkot exemplifies how the Exodus narrative became the "operating system" of Jewish practice.
Timestamps * 00:00 Exploring the Connection Between Sukkot and the Exodus * 00:59 Transitioning from High Holidays to Sukkot * 02:04 The Agricultural and Historical Significance of Sukkot * 06:08 Rashi's Interpretation: Clouds of Glory vs. Literal Booths * 13:29 Modern Academic Perspectives on Sukkot * 24:12 The Broader Impact of the Exodus on Jewish Tradition * 30:06 Jonah's Booth and the Connection to Yom Kippur * 32:05 Conclusion and Reflections
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/680496 Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
From Moses to Leonard Cohen: The unexpected dilemma at the heart of Jewish prayer
Leonard Cohen called If It Be Your Will “a sort of a prayer.” In this episode of Madlik Disruptive Torah, Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz uncover just how deeply Jewish that prayer really is. Drawing on the words of Moses in Ha’azinu, the Psalms of David, the prayer of Hannah, and rabbinic debates in the Talmud and Maimonides’ Guide for the Perplexed, we explore how Cohen’s haunting lyrics echo one of the most radical ideas in Jewish liturgy: that prayer itself requires God’s permission.
From whispered lips to audacious praise, from silence as the highest form of worship to the chutzpah of demanding forgiveness, this episode connects the High Holidays’ most prayer-rich moments to Cohen’s timeless song. Was Cohen consciously channeling biblical and rabbinic texts he knew from childhood? We think the evidence is striking.
Join us as we show how If It Be Your Will isn’t just a song—it’s the continuation of a 3,000-year-old Jewish wrestling match with the meaning of prayer.
Key Takeaways 1. The Audacity of Prayer: We examine the chutzpah of addressing God and the need for "permission" to pray. 2. Silent Revolution: Hannah's innovation of praying silently and its impact on Jewish prayer traditions. 3. Words Matter: The power and peril of language in prayer, and why sometimes silence speaks loudest.
Timestamps * [00:00:00] Opening reflection on Yom Kippur and the nature of prayer. * [00:02:00] Deuteronomy 32—Moses asking permission to speak. * [00:04:00] Psalms as a source: prayer from both mouth and heart. * [00:06:00] Transition from singular to plural in liturgy. * [00:10:00] Hannah’s silent prayer as a model for Jewish prayer. * [00:13:00] Out loud vs. silent prayer; Shema as an exception. * [00:17:00] Can one pray all day? Talmudic debate. * [00:20:00] Concluding prayers about words and their power. * [00:23:00] The audacity of praising God—permission to pray. * [00:28:00] Leonard Cohen’s “If It Be Your Will” as modern midrash.
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Safaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/679254
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
Leonard Cohen - If It Be Your Will - https://youtu.be/SDemnguRYj4?si=7YGgCucKZ5-0fwFy
What if our High Holiday rituals are secretly about confronting aging?
Aging Gracefully: Rethinking Our Approach to the Elderly
As we approach Yom Kippur, a time of reflection and renewal, it's fitting to explore a topic that touches us all: aging. In this episode of Madlik, we delve into the often-overlooked issue of how our society treats and cares for the elderly. With insights from our special guest, Yossi Heymann, director of JDC Eshel and the visionary behind Muni100, we uncover surprising perspectives on aging in Jewish tradition and modern Israel.
Key Takeaways 1. Ancient Assumptions: Did Jewish society assume the elderly would be cared for in ways we've forgotten? 2. Hidden Strength: Moses at 120 - a paradox of frailty and vigor that challenges our perceptions of aging. 3. Modern Solutions: Discover how Israeli municipalities are redesigning cities to promote "optimal aging" for centenarians.
Timestamps * [00:00:00] Geoffrey opens: Bible’s silence on elderly as vulnerable; Moses at 120—weakness or hidden strength? * [00:01:00] High Holidays as communal ritual for aging; guest Yossi Hyman introduced. * [00:02:37] Yossi’s background: IDF career → JDC Eshel → Muni 100 mission on optimal aging. * [00:05:57] Geoffrey on Moses’ mobility, Rashi’s interpretations, bias against infirmity. * [00:08:27] Adam: Torah rarely shows sickness; pre-modern view of aging and illness. * [00:12:08] Yossi explains Muni 100’s 3 indicators: mobility, walking, participation. * [00:18:33] Social needs of elderly: synagogue, camaraderie, public spaces. * [00:23:15] Honoring elderly vs. sages; wisdom and age in Jewish tradition. * [00:26:27] Yossi: Israel’s family culture, aging in place, survey of 12,000 adults. * [00:33:27] Rosh Hashanah/Yom Kippur as communal confrontation with aging; closing reflections and blessings.
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Safaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/678049
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
From Woodchoppers to Kings: How the Torah's Radical Covenant Redefined Ancient Politics
In this episode we're diving into the radical inclusivity of the covenant in Parashat Nitzavim. From princes to woodchoppers, everyone is called to stand before God. But there's more to this than meets the eye.
We explore how the rabbis upped the ante, suggesting these "woodchoppers and water carriers" might have been outsiders or even forbidden Canaanites. This covenant wasn't just inclusive - it was pushing boundaries.
Key Takeaways * Radical Inclusion: The covenant encompasses everyone, from leaders to strangers, even those not yet born. It's a deliberate expansion of who "belongs." * Divine Democracy: By making God the sole sovereign, the covenant undermines human hierarchies. It's a blueprint for egalitarian society. * Movement Dynamics: The text reveals an evolving community, with various motivations for joining. It challenges our notions of purity and belonging.
Timestamps [00:00] The first “We the People” — long before Jefferson
[01:20] Who were the wood choppers and water carriers?
[03:10] Covenant as a new movement before entering the land
[05:30] Outsiders joining Israel — sincere converts or cunning opportunists?
[07:45] Commentaries on inclusion, agency, and social hierarchy
[10:00] The mixed multitude and converts of convenience
[12:45] Are menial roles punishment or sacred service?
[14:20] Radical responsibility — why every member matters
[20:10] Joshua and the Gibeonites: deception, covenant, and consequences
[28:15] Covenant as political revolution — God as king, no man as master
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Safaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/675947
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
Why Some Torah Laws were Meant to be Heard not followed
Live at the JCC’s new Shtiebel, Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz ask: what do we learn from laws that never happened? From the rebellious son to Bialik’s Halakha and Aggada, discover halakhah as a language of Jewish life.
In this week's episode of Madlik, we delve into a fascinating exploration of Jewish law that challenges our conventional understanding of mitzvot (commandments). As we navigate through the complexities of Halakhah, we uncover a profound truth: sometimes, the most impactful lessons come not from observance, but from observing and listening.
Key Takeaways 1. The Rebellious Son: A law that never was and never will be, yet teaches us volumes. 2. Halakha as Language: How Jewish law communicates deeper truths beyond mere observance. 3. Bialik's Perspective: The unexpected harmony between Halakha and Aggadah from a secular Jewish thinker.
Timestamps * [00:00:37] Intro — recording live at the JCC Manhattan * [00:01:42] Mitzvot as a cultural language, not just observance * [00:02:56] The rebellious son in Deuteronomy 21 and its harsh punishment * [00:04:13] Talmud: “There never was and never will be a rebellious son” * [00:06:18] Death penalty framed as pedagogy vs deterrence * [00:07:45] Fear as a teaching tool, like fairytales and folklore * [00:08:32] The “idolatrous city” — another law never fulfilled * [00:11:09] Reward in Torah study as outcome, not payment * [00:15:47] Maimonides reduces 248 commandments to only 60 definite ones * [00:20:36] Soloveitchik: Halakha as the language of Judaism
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Safaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/672006
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
Are there times were we should strive not to be present or in the moment?
As we enter the month of Elul and approach the High Holidays, many of us instinctively tighten our grip on spiritual practices. We double down on prayer, intensify our focus, and strive for flawless kavanah (intention). But what if true holiness sometimes emerges when we loosen our hold?
In this week's Torah portion, Ki Teitze, we encounter a surprising perspective on mitzvot (commandments) that challenges our assumptions about intentionality and control. Let's explore how embracing the unintentional might deepen our spiritual practice and transform our relationship with the Divine.
Key Takeaways 1. The nuanced approach to returning lost objects and when it's okay to "hide your eyes” 2. How the agricultural law of forgotten sheaves (shichecha) relates to selective memory during the High Holidays 3. The serendipitous nature of the bird's nest commandment and its character and environmental implications
Timestamps * [00:00:00] Holiness in forgetting and letting go * [00:02:07] Rabbi joins from Italy * [00:03:00] Announcements and upcoming live event * [00:04:00] Returning lost objects in Deuteronomy * [00:06:03] The subway lesson: looking away * [00:09:00] Exceptions to returning lost items * [00:12:00] The mitzvah of forgetting sheaves in the field * [00:17:00] Selective memory and Rosh Hashanah * [00:22:00] The bird’s nest commandment * [00:28:00] Wrapping up: intentional vs. unintentional holiness
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Safaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/672300
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
The Torah bans bribery — so why do our holiest rituals look like payoffs?
We're diving into a provocative topic as we enter the month of Elul - bribes, sacrifices, and cosmic payoffs in Judaism. We explore the tension between Deuteronomy's clear prohibition on bribery and the sacrificial rituals found elsewhere in the Torah that look suspiciously like attempts to curry favor with the divine.
Key Takeaways 1. The language of bribery and ransom intersects with concepts of atonement in Jewish texts 2. Deuteronomy emphasizes internal purification over ritualistic practices 3. Rituals like Kaparot and Tashlich can be viewed as attempts to influence divine judgment
Timestamps * [00:00:00] Bribery in Torah and the puzzle of Yom Kippur’s absence in Deuteronomy * [00:02:29] Surprising omission of the High Holidays in Deuteronomy * [00:03:00] Deuteronomy’s clear ban on bribery and its implications * [00:06:20] Ransom, redemption, and the link to atonement * [00:08:06] Rambam and the scapegoat: is it a bribe to Satan? * [00:12:00] Rambam’s sensitivity: accusations of idolatry and bribery in ritual * [00:15:05] Yom Kippur as atonement—bribe or genuine repentance? * [00:17:00] Deuteronomy’s alternate vision: inner repentance over ritual * [00:19:46] The Christian “Ransom Theory” of atonement and Jewish parallels * [00:23:50] Kapparot, petty bribery, and the danger of cheap rituals
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Safaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/671028
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
The Radical Contraction and expansion of Ancient Israelite Religion
The book of Deuteronomy presents a radical shift in religious practice that continues to shape modern Judaism and beyond. Far from expanding religious institutions as empires typically do, Deuteronomy takes the surprising approach of contracting and centralizing worship while simultaneously broadening its reach into everyday life.
This week's Torah portion, Re'eh, highlights this revolutionary approach. It restricts temple worship to a single location and forbids importing practices from other cultures. At first glance, this seems counterintuitive. Why limit religious expression when entering a new land?
Key Takeaways 1. Deuteronomy proposes a unique path that refuses both colonization and cultural blending 2. The centralization of worship and prohibition of foreign practices creates a religious vacuum 3. This approach leads to a transformation of holiness from specific locations to everyday life
Timestamps * [00:00:00] The radical shift in Deuteronomy – centralizing worship and banning outside practices * [00:02:52] Why centralized worship was so controversial * [00:04:28] Should destroyed cultures still influence us? * [00:07:22] Why Israelites were tempted by idols * [00:09:28] Borrowing rituals from other religions * [00:12:39] Contracting Judaism as expansion begins * [00:16:39] Religion beyond the land of Israel * [00:19:41] The diaspora’s role in the covenant * [00:22:42] Sacralization vs. secularization of daily life * [00:27:54] Final reflections and closing blessings
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Safaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/668904
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
The Dangers of a world seen on a screen: What Judaism Knew All Along
In our visually-dominated world, we're raising a generation that can see but not hear. This week's Madlik episode challenges us to reconsider the primacy of listening in Jewish tradition and its profound impact on our spiritual and emotional lives.
Key Takeaways 1. Deuteronomy emphasizes listening 92 times, highlighting Judaism's unique focus on auditory over visual experiences. 2. Memory and Music: We explore how sound and music are deeply connected to memory and emotion, even in cases of dementia. 3. High Fidelity Judaism: From the shofar to Torah chanting, we discuss how sound preserves traditions across millennia.
Timestamps * [00:00:00] Seeing vs. Hearing – The Deuteronomy Perspective * [00:01:33] Why “Just Listen” Matters in a Screen-Obsessed World * [00:03:01] The Word “Ger” – Stranger and Convert * [00:05:11] Rabbi Jonathan Sacks on the Radical Act of Listening * [00:08:42] “Nothing But a Voice” – The Mount Sinai Moment * [00:11:04] Video Killed the Radio Star – A Spiritual Parallel * [00:14:28] How Screens Impact Language and Social Development * [00:16:14] Music, Memory, and the Jewish Tradition * [00:20:37] Mnemonics, Oral Torah, and Memory Devices * [00:26:19] Maimonides and the Loss of Oral Tradition
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Safaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/668904
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/ https://sapirjournal.org/chosenness/2025/the-paradoxes-of-conversion/
https://open.spotify.com/episode/3fdQnTi6N3rG7MQfwFdy7H?si=bFHgMvQ3ShWc6-5J7x506A
The Torah's allure is so powerful, rabbis had to warn against misusing it.
Exploring the concept of "limud" (learning) unique to Deuteronomy, we uncover the rabbis' complex relationship with Torah study. From the joy of learning to the fear of misuse, the discussion spans intentionality, secular study, and the power of Torah to attract even non-believers. We delve into the debate between studying "lishma" (for its own sake) vs. applied learning, and examine how different Jewish movements approach Torah study.
The rabbis recognized the profound allure of Torah study, to the point where they had to warn against misusing it for personal gain or pride… or even to make a living. We explore the emergence of the academic and scientific study of our texts as well as contemporary women’s yeshivot and secular yeshivot and different rabbinic opinions on the matter, from those who believe any Torah study can lead to observance to those who fear misinterpretation. The segment provides insight into an ongoing debate within Judaism about the nature and purpose of sacred text study.
We conclude with the potential for new insights to arise from diverse groups studying Torah highlighted with the fascinating Talmudic story of Rabbi Meir learning from the heretic Elisha Ben Abuya, illustrating the idea that valuable wisdom can come from unexpected sources.
Key Takeaways 1. The word "limud" (learning) appears only in Deuteronomy, signaling a shift in Torah transmission. 2. Rabbis grappled with the allure of Torah study for non-religious purposes. 3. The debate continues: should Torah study be restricted to believers or open to all?
Timestamps * [00:00:00] – The episode opens with a provocative framing: Can the Torah survive being studied like secular literature? * [00:02:00] – Discussion on Tisha B’Av and the idea that Torah learning brings too much joy to be permitted on a day of mourning. * [00:03:00] – Story from Rabbi Riskin about the heretic who insists he’s not a goy, highlighting the irresistible pull of Torah study. * [00:04:42] – Deep dive into Deuteronomy and the word “limud,” and how teaching and learning emerge in the text. * [00:07:00] – Exploring Maimonides' take on the commandment to teach Torah not just to sons, but to students as children. * [00:10:00] – Pirkei Avot is introduced, differentiating learning to teach vs. learning to practice. * [00:13:00] – Cautionary wisdom from the sages: Don’t use Torah as a tool for ego or profit. * [00:17:00] – Talmudic view that learning Torah for the wrong reasons may still lead to righteous practice. * [00:23:00] – Norman Lamm and others weigh in on secular vs. sacred motivations for Torah study. * [00:30:00] – The closing story of Rabbi Meir and Elisha ben Abuya explores the value of learning Torah even from a heretic.
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Safaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/667572
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
Ancient Jewish texts offer surprising insights into contemporary debates on judicial activism, restraint and independence
Join us as we delve into a fascinating exploration of Moses' farewell address in Parashat Devarim. This episode uncovers striking parallels between ancient concerns about judicial integrity and modern debates over judicial reform in Israel.
Key Takeaways 1. Moses' emphasis on judicial reform highlights its critical importance to societal stability 2. The tradition of leadership farewell addresses often includes moral warnings for the future 3. Ancient Jewish texts offer surprising insights into contemporary debates on judicial activism and restraint
Timestamps * [00:00:00] – Opening: Moses’ Final Warning is About Justice * [00:02:27] – Farewell Speeches as a Genre * [00:05:12] – Eisenhower’s Farewell and Military-Industrial Complex * [00:09:00] – Urian’s Speech and Jewish Exceptionalism * [00:12:00] – Moses’ First and Final Acts: Appointing Judges * [00:14:45] – Deuteronomy 1:12–18 – The Core Torah Passage * [00:17:00] – Eicha (How?!) – Midrash and Lamentation Connection * [00:21:32] – Ramban: Justice Means More than Judges * [00:26:00] – Judicial Activism vs. Restraint in Rashi * [00:28:00] – Maimonides (Rambam) on Appointing Unfit Judges
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Safaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/665537
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
70,000 mothers are fighting for Israel's future - one draft notice at a time.
Mothers on the Front Line founder Agamit Gelb joins us to discuss the contentious issue of Haredi military service in Israel. We explore biblical parallels from Numbers, where Moses confronts tribes seeking exemption from conquest. The conversation delves into the social contract, national solidarity, and the unique perspective mothers bring to this debate. Agamit shares her organization's efforts to promote equality in service and challenge exemptions through legal and grassroots means. Agamit Gelb and her organization, Mothers on the Front Line, are at the forefront of this debate. Founded in April 2023, months before the October 7th attacks, this group of 70,000 mothers is fighting for equality in military service. But their mission goes beyond mere policy change—they're striving to redefine the very notion of national service and solidarity.
Key Takeaways 1. The issue of Haredi military service cuts to the core of Israeli society, affecting fairness and national unity 2. Biblical texts offer relevant insights on shared responsibility and leadership in times of national challenge 3. Mothers play a crucial role in shaping societal values and can be powerful agents for change
Timestamps * [00:00:00] – Introduction: The central issue of military service in Israel and its societal implications. * [00:01:45] – Guest Introduction: Agame Gelb and the founding of Mothers on the Front Line. * [00:04:55] – October 7th and the catalyst for mobilization of mothers across Israel. * [00:06:45] – The emotional and demographic power of Israeli mothers and national unity. * [00:10:40] – Inequality and the principle of service from the perspective of motherhood. * [00:12:30] – Legal petitions, community organizing, and educational programming. * [00:16:05] – Biblical context: Reuben and Gad's request and Moses’ moral leadership. * [00:21:15] – Rabbinic insights on morale, equality, and the impact of opt-outs. * [00:25:50] – The army’s evolving infrastructure for Haredi service and leadership resistance. * [00:30:15] – Final reflections: Love of country, courage, and the hope for democratic unity.
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Safaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/663980
Transcript here: https://madlik.substack.com/
Link to Donate to Israeli Mother on the Frontline: https://pefisrael.org/charity/mothers-on-the-frontline/
Link to Imahot Bahazit: https://www.imahot.org/en
Link to Podcast: A mother's Journey to a Beret: https://open.spotify.com/show/6cmqoZdNZnt6lF7LaDLngW?si=cf43c1b1d3504b62(Hooky First Line)
The only Israelite to go down to Egypt and enter the Promised Land was a woman.
In the years after the Civil War, heritage groups began honoring a rare category of Americans: Real Sons and Real Daughters — children born to aging veterans of that war. Not grandchildren. Not great-grandchildren. Their actual children. Living, breathing links to a fading past.
Today, the same honor is given to the children of Holocaust survivors. These are voices that don’t just remember history — they carry it.
In the Torah, there is one figure who embodies this idea more than any other.
Her name is Serach bat Asher.
According to legend, she enters Egypt with Jacob’s family — and, somehow, centuries later, she helps Moses find Joseph’s bones, enters the Promised Land and even consults with 3rd Century Rabbis of the Talmud. She provides us with a paradigm for a social institution that is undervalued... the Living Legacy. We explore this critical source of cultural history in the Bible, Rabbinic texts, other religions and cultures.
Key Takeaways 1. The power of intergenerational wisdom 2. The value of seeking out and listening to living witnesses 3. That authenticity comes from experience, not just bloodlines
Timestamps * [00:00:00] – Introduction to “real daughters” and the historical role of living links to the past * [00:02:48] – Rabbi Adam begins discussing the Parsha and the uniqueness of Serach bat Asher * [00:05:08] – Reflections on personal connections to historical generations and legacy * [00:08:06] – Discussion of adoption, inheritance, and authenticity in Jewish tradition * [00:10:03] – Serach reveals the location of Joseph’s bones, showing her enduring memory * [00:13:10] – Why Serach, as a woman, may have symbolized enduring legacy and transition * [00:16:00] – Midrash: Serach gently reveals to Jacob that Joseph is alive through song * [00:19:32] – Serach credited with prophetic knowledge of Joseph's survival * [00:23:00] – Serach offers eyewitness testimony at the splitting of the sea * [00:29:00] – Broader discussion on real sons/daughters, Holocaust survivors, and living legacy
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Safaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/662562
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2025/07/16/serach-the-keeper-of-israels-collective-memory/
What happens when the sacred victim becomes the sovereign nation?
We delve into a provocative exploration of Jewish identity and otherness in this week's episode. Drawing inspiration from the Torah portion Balak and a thought-provoking essay by Hussein Aboubakr Mansour, we challenge long-held beliefs about Judaism's role as the quintessential "other" in society.
Have we been misinterpreting our own history?
Key Takeaways 1. The concept of Jews as universal "others" may be more modern than we realize 2. Embracing particularism might be more authentic to Jewish tradition than universal symbolism 3. Zionism can be seen as a return to Jewish particularity rather than just a political movement
Timestamps * [00:00] Introduction to the episode and the theme of “The Jew as Other” * [01:45] How the term “other” appears in this week’s Parsha and Moab’s fear * [03:50] Biblical context: Egyptians and Haman’s perspective on Jews * [06:45] Jewish laws and their role in antisemitic narratives * [09:30] Rabbinic interpretations and perceived Jewish separateness * [12:15] Rabbinic blame of God for antisemitism through Jewish laws * [14:30] Evolution from oppression to loving the stranger in Torah * [17:00] Introduction of Hussein Aboubakr Mansour’s argument * [20:15] Breakdown of the Jew as metaphor and object of culture * [28:00] Zionism’s rejection of “otherness” and affirmation of sovereignty
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Safaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/661213
Hussein Aboubakr Mansour‘s Substack article
https://open.substack.com/pub/critiqueanddigest/p/the-jew-after-otherness
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2025/07/09/understanding-anti-semitism-through-history/
Death rituals reveal a civilization's deepest beliefs. But what if a religion rejects the cult of death entirely?
In this episode we explore Judaism's unique perspective on death and mortality. It is almost a cliché that Judaism is all about “Choosing Life”, but in our conversation we rely heavily of the academic research of Biblical scholar Baruch Levine who uncovers how the Torah's approach to death rituals stands in stark contrast to ancient Near Eastern practices. This normally under spoken scholar exclaims: “death rids the community of death!”
Key Takeaways In this episode we explore Judaism's unique perspective on death and mortality. It is almost a cliché that Judaism is all about “Choosing Life”, but in our conversation we rely heavily of the academic research of Biblical scholar Baruch Levine who uncovers how the Torah's approach to death rituals stands in stark contrast to ancient Near Eastern practices. This normally under spoken scholar exclaims: “death rids the community of death!”
Timestamps * [00:00:00] — Introduction: A cultural view of death across civilizations and contrast with Torah. * [00:02:00] — Show overview and episode topic: Judaism’s rejection of the cult of death. * [00:03:26] — Start of Torah discussion: Impurity and the Red Heifer ritual in Numbers 19. * [00:05:06] — Defining "Ger" and the universality of death rituals in Torah. * [00:07:00] — Scholarly insight from B. Levine on priestless death rites. * [00:09:55] — Application of purification rites in Numbers 31 and death in warfare. * [00:14:45] — Judaism’s rejection of temple burials and the Cult of the Dead. * [00:20:36] — The minimalist account of Miriam’s death and narrative transition. * [00:24:00] — Aaron’s death and the seamless transition of priestly leadership. * [00:28:00] — Philosophical and theological reflections on death, legacy, and the mission beyond death.
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Safaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/659883
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2025/07/02/death-cults-vs-israel-why-judaism-chooses-life/
How a failed biblical uprising reveals the power of productive disagreement.
Mark Friedman, author of "Come Now, Let Us Reason Together," joins Madlik to explore Judaism's embrace of disagreement. We dive into the Korach story, contrasting it with the debates of Hillel and Shammai to illustrate how Judaism values constructive conflict. Friedman connects ancient Jewish wisdom to modern philosophical concepts, drawing parallels between Talmudic discourse and Karl Popper's theories on truth-seeking. The episode challenges the notion of absolute truth in religious interpretation, advocating for pluralism within tradition.
Key Takeaways 1. Judaism celebrates constructive disagreement as a path to progress 2. The Korach story teaches the importance of sincere, well-intentioned debate 3. Modern philosophical concepts can illuminate traditional Jewish approaches to truth and interpretation=
Timestamps * [00:00] – Introduction of the theme: Judaism thrives on disagreement, not dogma. * [01:44] – Mark Friedman shares his background and journey from secular Judaism to deep Torah engagement. * [05:00] – Introduction to Pirkei Avot and the concept of a “dispute for the sake of Heaven.” * [07:36] – Why Korach’s argument failed: selfish motives vs. truth-seeking intent. * [09:34] – Korach’s logic vs. divine command: the flaw in rationalizing sacred law. * [12:23] – Misapplied questions and the importance of framing debate with sincerity. * [16:00] – Comparing the Tower of Babel to Korach: when unity becomes tyranny. * [20:00] – Applying Karl Popper’s philosophy of falsifiability to Talmudic pluralism. * [27:00] – Why Hillel’s flexibility makes his rulings endure more than Shammai’s rigidity. * [31:00] – Wrapping up with pluralism, tradition, and valuing minority opinions in Jewish thought.
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Come Now, Let Us Reason Together: Uncovering the Torah's Liberal Values Paperback – December 30, 2024 by Mark D. Friedman
Safaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/658585
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2025/06/26/pluralism-in-judaism/
The Surprising Link Between Biblical Spies and Modern Warfare
The Torah doesn't celebrate team players. It celebrates disruptors. This week on Madlik, we explore the story of Caleb, a biblical figure who defied groupthink with fierce truth.
In our latest episode, we dive into the fascinating tale of the biblical scouts and focus on Caleb Ben Yefuneh, who possessed a "ruach acheret" - a different spirit. We unpack what this spirit means and why being a holy troublemaker might be exactly what God wants. In light of Israel's recent surprise attack on Iran, we explore what it means to not just read reality, but to shape it. We unpack how Caleb found his unique spirit and why being a holy troublemaker might be exactly what God wants.
This episode offers profound insights into leadership, faith, and the courage to stand alone. It's a must-listen for anyone interested in biblical wisdom and possibly an insight into a culture of disruptive thinking.
Key Takeaways 1. The Power of Perspective: We explore how Caleb's unique viewpoint allowed him to see possibilities where others saw obstacles. 2. The Importance of Adaptability: We discuss how Caleb's ability to evolve his thinking set him apart from his peers. 3. The Value of Inner Strength: We examine how Caleb's name reflects his full heart and unwavering loyalty to his mission.
Timestamps * [00:00] - Introduction to the episode and framing Caleb as a disruptor with a "different spirit." * [01:55] - Reference to current events in Israel and the strategic parallels with biblical stories. * [03:50] - Introduction to the Parsha and the story of the spies in the Book of Numbers. * [05:30] - Analysis of the name change from Hoshea to Joshua and the significance of names. * [07:45] - The scouts return and report, beginning the debate over the land and its inhabitants. * [10:20] - Caleb’s bold statement and contrast with the fearful report from the other spies. * [13:10] - Discussion on how facts were interpreted and the deeper implications of “Efs.” * [17:45] - Breakdown of Caleb’s unique spirit and how it’s represented in the text. * [24:00] - Commentary on how Caleb might have changed over time and internal conflict. * [30:25] - Final reflections on interpreting facts, attitudes in leadership, and modern military parallels.
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Safaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/657424
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2025/06/18/a-different-spirit/
The magic of twilight isn't just for vampires—it's a cornerstone of Jewish ritual and philosophy.
Twilight in Judaism is more than just a daily transition—it's a liminal space rich with spiritual significance and halachic implications. We explore the concept of "bein hashmashot" (between the suns) in Jewish law and philosophy, examining its role in Shabbat observance, Passover rituals, and prayer timing. The episode delves into rabbinic debates on defining twilight and its duration, revealing how this ambiguous period embodies uncertainty and celebrates mystery in Jewish thought.
Key Takeaways 1. Uncertainty can breed creativity and innovation. 2. Liminal spaces often precede major life transitions. 3. Embracing ambiguity can lead to deeper spiritual experiences.
Timestamps * [00:00] – The personal story behind the episode: a rabbinic rejection using twilight metaphor * [01:30] – Introduction to twilight in Jewish ritual and halakhic significance * [03:00] – Exploring the Mishna’s mention of twilight miracles and coded miracles * [04:45] – Twilight and uncertainty: How it shaped Jewish philosophical thought * [06:00] – Biblical references to twilight and its Hebrew/Aramaic translations * [10:30] – Halakhic debates over defining twilight: Rashi vs. Ibn Ezra * [12:00] – Talmudic insights into twilight as a period of halakhic uncertainty * [15:00] – Mystical and cultural perspectives on twilight in Judaism * [20:45] – Personal customs, twilight babies, and matzah-making rituals * [29:00] – Final reflections and the full story of the rabbinic rejection using twilight metaphor
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Safaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/656116
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2025/06/11/embracing-the-ambiguity-of-transition/
October 7th shattered more than Israel's security - it's challenging core Haredi beliefs.
In the wake of October 7th, a seismic shift is occurring within Israel's ultra-Orthodox community. The long-standing exemption from military service for Haredi yeshiva students is facing unprecedented scrutiny – not just from secular Israelis, but from within the Haredi world itself. This week's Torah portion, Bamidbar (Numbers), offers a timely lens through which to examine this complex issue. As we explore the biblical census and military draft, we uncover surprising parallels to today's debate over Haredi enlistment.
Key Takeaways 1. The Torah provides precedent for both military service and exemptions 2. Current Haredi exemptions stem from out-dated post-Holocaust efforts to rebuild yeshivas 3. Internal voices are now challenging the status quo of Haredi non-service
Timestamps * [00:00] – Opening statement: The Torah doesn't protect Israel? A challenge to traditional exemptions. * [01:00] – Introduction to the episode and its biblical context in Parshat Bamidbar. * [02:57] – Discussion begins on modern military service issues in Israel and relevance of the parsha. * [04:00] – Examination of Torah's census and the military obligation for Israelites over 20. * [06:00] – Introduction of the Levite exemption and its relevance to today’s arguments. * [10:59] – Broader discussion on deferments and biblical precedents for military exemptions. * [12:34] – The pivotal 1998 Supreme Court case on yeshiva deferments and its historical context. * [17:59] – Debate on exposure and risks in army life for Haredim and their integration challenges. * [21:20] – Spotlight on Rabbi David Leibel and his reformative stance within the Haredi community. * [30:59] – Reflection on societal impact, army service as potential transformation for struggling youth.
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Safaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/651245
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2025/05/28/haredim-a-path-forward/
What if everything you knew about Shavuot was rooted in exile, not the land?
Join us as we explore how the early Zionist pioneers revolutionized Shavuot, transforming it from a purely spiritual celebration into a powerful expression of connection to the land of Israel.
Key Takeaways 1. Balancing tradition and innovation: The pioneers show us how to breathe new life into ancient traditions while respecting their core essence 2. Building community: The Bikurim ceremony brought people together from across the country, emphasizing unity and shared purpose. 3. Embracing action: Rather than simply studying about the land, the pioneers actively worked it and celebrated its fruits.
Timestamps * [00:00] – Opening statement about the “first fruits of Zionism” and intro to the episode * [01:04] – Introduction of guest Iran, CEO of the Shitim Institute * [02:12] – Background on the Shitim Institute and Arieh Ben-Gurion’s founding vision * [05:10] – Shavuot in the Torah: its purely agricultural origins * [07:20] – Verses from Deuteronomy emphasizing the land and first fruits * [10:08] – Mishnaic procedure for selecting and presenting Bikurim * [13:03] – Iran explains a 1920s kibbutz debate about reinventing holiday rituals * [17:54] – Description of the 1928 kibbutz tractor parade replacing the ox from Mishna * [24:10] – Rabbi Yehuda Leib Maimon’s scathing critique of the reinvented Shavuot * [26:50] – Rabbi Kook’s nuanced response: praise for the pioneers with theological caution
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Safaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/649082.39
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2025/05/21/the-first-fruits-of-israeli-judaism/
Societal Stigma and Technological Advances in Disabilities
Empowering the Blind and Deaf: Lessons from Israeli Innovators When was the last time you truly appreciated your ability to see and hear? For many of us, these senses are so fundamental that we rarely pause to consider their significance. But what if I told you that understanding disability could bring us closer to revelation? In this eye-opening episode of Madlik, we dive deep into the world of visual and hearing impairments, guided by two remarkable Israeli experts who have dedicated their lives to empowering the blind and deaf. Their insights not only challenge our perceptions but also reveal the extraordinary potential within every human being. Background and Context The Torah's perspective on those with disabilities has long been a subject of debate and interpretation. In this week's parsha, Emor, we encounter references to the blind and deaf for the second consecutive week. But rather than viewing these mentions as limitations, our guests offer a fresh, empowering perspective that aligns with modern understanding and technological advancements. Meet our esteemed guests:
- Professor Kenneth Koslowe, Director of Professional Services at Eliyah Association for Blind and Visually Impaired Children
- Elias Kabakov, Director of Ma'ase Oz, the Center for Deaf-Blind Persons Both have made aliyah to Israel and have found a powerful convergence of their professional passions, Zionism, and Judaism in their work.
Key Takeaways
- Empowering individuals with disabilities involves treating families, not just individuals
- Modern technologies are revolutionizing accessibility for the blind and deaf
- Biblical references to disabilities can provide practical guidance as well as carry deeper metaphorical meanings
Links & Learnings
Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Safaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/647020
Transcript: https://madlik.com/2025/05/14/disabilities-in-jewish-texts-and-israel/
The biblical command to love others might be more about social contracts than warm fuzzy feelings. What if "love your neighbor" wasn't just a moral cliché, but a radical political theory? In this week's Madlik episode, we explore how the biblical concept of love in Judaism goes far beyond sentiment, representing a powerful social contract that shapes how we build just societies. Challenging Conventional Wisdom Many associate "love your neighbor as yourself" with Christian teachings, unaware of its origins in Leviticus. This episode aims to reclaim this foundational concept, examining it through the original texts and a Jewish lens and uncovering its profound implications for social and political philosophy.
Key Insights: • Context is crucial: The commandment appears alongside practical economic and ethical guidelines, suggesting a broader application beyond personal relationships. • Love as action: The Hebrew phrasing implies loving what's good for your neighbor, focusing on welfare and justice rather than emotion alone. • A tool for ethical decision-making: The Bible creates a thought experiment that by considering what we'd want for ourselves, we gain a framework for fair treatment of others. • The gift of giving: Some interpretations link "love" (ahava) to the concept of giving (hav), emphasizing generosity as a core expression of love. Rethinking Love as a Social Contract Geoffrey Stern challenges us to view "love your neighbor" not just as an individual ethical guideline, but as a foundational principle for structuring society. This perspective aligns fascinatingly with the work of political philosopher John Rawls. Rawls' "Veil of Ignorance": • Imagine creating a society without knowing your place in it (rich/poor, talented/average, religious, secular etc.) • This thought experiment forces us to consider fairness for all, not just the majority • It echoes the biblical command to love your neighbor "as yourself" – putting yourself in another's position "What if 'love your neighbor' is the measuring stick we need to use when creating a just society?" - Geoffrey Stern Practical Implications: • Rethinking social safety nets: If you didn't know whether you'd be born advantaged or disadvantaged, what protections would you want in place? • Balancing opportunity and security: How do we create a system that rewards initiative while ensuring basic dignity for all?
-
What if “neighbor” refers less to someone of the same religion, tribe or ethnicity and more for someone who one wishes to form a social contract with? • Defining community: Who counts as our "neighbor" in an increasingly interconnected world? Challenges to Consider
-
Emotional agency: Can love truly be commanded? While we can't control feelings, we can cultivate loving actions and mindsets.
- Balancing self and other: How do we interpret "as yourself" without neglecting self-care or enabling codependency?
- Applying ancient wisdom: How do we translate these principles into modern policy and social structures? What We Learned About Love and Justice This exploration of "love your neighbor" reveals it's far more than a simple ethical maxim. It's a powerful tool for ethical reasoning, a guide for building just societies, and a challenge to constantly expand our circle of moral consideration. The next time you encounter this familiar phrase, consider: • How would your decisions change if you couldn’t determine where you stood in your social system? • What would our communities look like if we used this principle as a foundation for policy-making? • How can you actively practice this form of love in your daily interactions and civic engagement? By reframing "love your neighbor" as a radical social contract, we unlock its potential to transform not just individual hearts, but entire societies. This episode of Madlik invites us to see love not as mere sentiment, but as a powerful force for justice and human flourishing.
Timestamps * [00:00] — The Radical Reframe: Is “Love Your Neighbor” Really About Politics? * [01:45] — How Leviticus 19 Contextualizes Love With Justice and Economics * [04:02] — Ethical Laws in Detail: Gleaning, Wages, and Honesty * [06:25] — Love vs. Hate: The Torah’s Practical Definitions * [10:13] — Rabbi Akiva's Declaration: Why This Verse is a “Great Principle” * [12:01] — How Medieval Commentaries Interpret “Love” Through Justice * [17:15] — Emotional Agency and the Commandment to Love * [20:17] — Christianity’s Take: How the New Testament Riffs on Leviticus * [24:55] — Giving as an Act of Love: Rabbi Riskin on the Root of Aha’vah * [28:02] — John Rawls and Torah: Justice, Fairness, and the Veil of Ignorance
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Safaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/645145
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/?p=5948
This episode explores the biblical and rabbinic perspectives on gender, sex, and reproduction through the lens of Leviticus 12. We examine how the Torah's language of "seed" and agricultural metaphors connect childbirth to creation and redemption. We explore the biblical imagination where women's reproductive power links her to primal creative forces. What does it mean that a woman's body mirrors the act of creation? The Torah's description of childbirth in Leviticus 12 might seem straightforward at first glance. However, the use of the word "tazria" (to seed) opens up a world of interpretation that spans millennia. "The verb refers to a woman producing an offspring," notes The Torah: A Women's Commentary. This active language challenges traditional notions of women as passive vessels in reproduction. It's a subtle yet powerful shift that sets the stage for deeper discussions on gender roles and biology. The discussion delves into ancient and modern interpretations of conception, from rabbinic debates on determining a child's sex to Simone de Beauvoir's critique of biological determinism. This week on Madlik, we're diving into the fascinating world of gender, sex, and creation in the Torah. Starting with the opening verses of Parshat Tazria, we unpack the rich agricultural metaphors used to describe conception and birth. We share some intriguing rabbinic interpretations about how the embryo is formed and what determines a child's sex. We also look at how these ancient texts have been reinterpreted over time - from medieval commentators to modern thinkers like Rabbi Shlomo Riskin and Simone de Beauvoir. There are some surprising insights about sexual ethics and gender roles that feel remarkably progressive for their time.
Key Takeaways 1. The Torah links women's reproductive power to primal creative forces 2. Rabbinic tradition shows early sensitivity to mutual sexual needs in marriage 3. Ancient beliefs about conception shaped gender roles, but are open to reinterpretation
Timestamps * [00:00] The Second Sex: Introducing Simone de Beauvoir and biblical connections * [01:45] Exploring Torah laws of childbirth and personal purity * [04:05] The metaphor of seed, soil, and creation in Genesis and Leviticus * [08:55] Agriculture, menstruation, and exile: a deeper metaphor * [11:00] The rabbinic obsession with embryology and “who contributes what” * [13:50] Color-coded anatomy and Greek philosophy in Jewish texts * [17:30] Could Adam have been male and female? What creation myths suggest * [19:00] Can prayer change the sex of a child? The rabbis weigh in * [22:30] Kosher Sex and rabbinic views on orgasm and mutual satisfaction * [26:30] Simone de Beauvoir, Aristotle, and feminist deconstruction of biology
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Safaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/643110
Transcript on episode web page:
Passover, which we recently celebrated, bans bread. Leviticus bans pigs. Ashkenazim banned rice, but Mizrachim and the rabbis of the Talmud did not. What do these bans and dietary practices actually say about us?
For 2,000 years the Jewish people have been doing something that nowadays is indispensable... reading food labels. It's required nowadays to list whether a food contains lactose or gluten. Was this made in a factory where they also process peanuts? Is it organic and sustainable? But the ancient Israelites and modern-day Jews have been understanding the importance of diet for a long, long time. This week on Madlik we delve into the fascinating world of Jewish dietary laws and their profound impact on Jewish identity. In this episode, we explore how ancient legal discussions about food continue to shape modern Jewish society, challenging our assumptions about the purpose and relevance of these laws today. The Torah introduces dietary restrictions in Leviticus, using language that goes beyond simple dietary prohibitions: • The text uses terms like "tameh" (impure) and "sheketz" (detestable), not unkosher, to describe forbidden foods. • These laws are presented as a means of separating the Israelites from other nations and elevating their lifestyle. The recent Passover holiday brought to light a common question among Ashkenazi Jews: Why can't we eat rice, corn, or hummus during this time? This seemingly simple inquiry opens up a complex discussion about the nature of Jewish dietary laws, their origins, and their role in shaping Jewish identity throughout history.
The exploration of kosher laws and the kitniyot debate reveals that Jewish dietary practices are about much more than just food. They serve as a powerful tool for shaping identity, fostering community, and navigating the complexities of tradition in a modern world. These discussions challenge us to reconsider our assumptions about the purpose and relevance of dietary laws in Jewish life. They invite us to reflect on how our food choices can connect us to our heritage, distinguish us from others, and potentially unite us as a people. As we continue to grapple with these ancient laws in our modern context, we're reminded that the way we eat is intimately connected to who we are and who we aspire to be as a community.
Key Takeaways 1. Dietary restrictions in Leviticus use language that goes beyond simple dietary prohibitions 2. Passover illustrates how dietary practices can evolve and differ among Jewish communities 3. It is a continuing challenge to maintain distinct customs while fostering unity
Timestamps * [00:00] Why Rice Is Forbidden: A Modern Question with Ancient Roots * [02:19] Snack Shaming in Israel: Identity in a Bag of Chips * [04:21] Impure or Just Unkosher? Leviticus' Language Decoded * [09:06] Detestable vs. Impure: What Fish Teach About Bias * [13:33] Dietary Laws as a Reflection of Egypt and Elevation * [17:45] The Kitniyot Debate: What Really Happened * [20:58] Slippery Slopes: From Rice to Mustard Seeds * [24:55] The Legal and Cultural Pull of Tradition * [27:48] The Economic Pain Behind Prohibitions * [29:39] Uniting the People Through What’s on the Plate
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Safaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/641409
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2025/04/23/kosher-laws-and-identity/
Whether you’re a radical Progressive or Traditionalist, are you ready to be Free?
Join Jews and Gentiles, blacks and whites, progressives and traditionalists and return to April 4th 1969 (MLK's first Yartzeit) at Arthur Waskow's radical and controversial Freedom Seder. I recently picked up a first edition of this Mao-sized red booklet, and it's far more nuanced than I expected. Radical progressives will be surprised by its Jewish particularism and its defense of taking up arms to defend one’s people. Traditionalists will be struck by how rooted it is in Rabbinic tradition and delighted by the meaningful rituals it re-introduces. We explore how Waskow, a typical 60’s social activist who only later became a rabbi, created an "activist Midrash" that balances Jewish particularity with universal themes.
Key Takeaways 1. Universality meets particularity: Waskow's Haggadah balances universal themes with deeply Jewish elements, challenging both progressives and traditionalists 2. Ritual innovations: The Freedom Seder introduces thought-provoking additions to the traditional Seder, including a moment of silent meditation before candle lighting. 3. Nuanced perspectives: Waskow doesn't shy away from addressing difficult topics, including Jewish shortcomings and the complexities of liberation.
Timestamps * [00:00:05] — Introduction: Passover a year after MLK’s assassination and the origin of the Freedom Seder. * [00:04:07] — Arthur Waskow’s background and path to becoming a rabbi through the Freedom Seder. * [00:09:14] — Distinction between universal and Jewish themes in the Haggadah. * [00:10:42] — Observations on the symbolism of unlit candles and the unique kiddush for Saturday night. * [00:14:29] — Discussion on Waskow’s reimagined translation of “Melech Haolam” and blessing reinterpretations. * [00:19:08] — Story of Rabbi Mendel and the power of silence and speech in the Seder. * [00:20:09] — Ritual of darkness and silence before candle lighting, using silence and speech as symbolic themes. * [00:21:41] — Opening the door for Elijah and referencing Ha Lachma Anya with new interpretations. * [00:24:25] — Reflecting on “Next year in Jerusalem” as both literal and metaphorical. * [00:26:39] — Revolutionary themes in Moses’ story and the broader message of activism and discomfort in liberation.
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Safaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/638787
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2025/04/09/freedom-haggadah-tradition-meets-social-justice/
Forget Exodus - the key to understanding matzah lies in Leviticus.
As we approach Passover, it's time to challenge our assumptions about one of the holiday's most iconic symbols: matzah. What if I told you that the true significance of this unleavened bread goes far beyond the rushed exodus from Egypt? In this episode of Madlik, we explore a revolutionary interpretation of matzah that will transform your Seder experience.
Key Takeaways 1. Matzah as a Poor Man's Offering - the purity of intent from those with little to give. 2. The act of breaking matzah is a universal gesture of creating reciprocal relationships. 3. Reinterpreting the Seder as a call to action
Timestamps * [00:00] - Introduction and setting the stage for the discussion * [02:15] - The traditional understanding of Matzah in Jewish history * [05:08] - A new perspective: What Matzah symbolizes beyond its basic meaning * [07:42] - Comparing interpretations from different Jewish texts * [10:55] - How historical context shapes the evolving meaning of Matzah * [14:21] - The contrast between Matzah as affliction vs. Matzah as redemption * [18:03] - Personal reflections: What Matzah means today * [21:17] - The significance of Matzah in Jewish rituals and practice * [25:12] - Modern applications of the Matzah symbolism * [28:30] - Final thoughts and closing remarks
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Safaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/637051
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2025/04/02/matzahs-hidden-meaning/
Skincare isn’t just self-care—it’s a divine commandment.
Join us as we uncover the surprising connections between everyday skincare routines and sacred rituals, and how this ancient practice can transform and inspire us. In this week's episode of Madlik, we explore a fascinating aspect of ancient Israelite culture that's often overlooked: the significance of anointing oil. Far from being a mere cosmetic practice, anointing held deep spiritual and social importance in biblical times.
Key Takeaways 1. Anointing with oil wasn’t just a ritual—it was a powerful status symbol that transformed ordinary people into priests, kings, and even the Messiah. 2. The Bible’s skincare secrets weren’t just about beauty; they carried deep spiritual and cultural significance, influencing rituals that lasted centuries. 3. The special anointing oil was so sacred that making or using it improperly came with severe consequences—including exile.
Timestamps [00:00] The Surprising Role of Oil in the Bible
[02:45] Why Anointing Was a Daily Practice in Ancient Times
[06:30] Biblical Verses That Reveal Oil’s Importance
[10:15] The Ritual of Anointing Priests, Kings, and Sacred Objects
[15:40] The Shocking Connection Between Messiah and Moisturizer
[20:05] Was Anointing Oil a Lost Power or Just a Daily Habit?
[24:50] The Secret Ingredients of the Bible’s Forbidden Oil
[28:30] Why the Anointing Oil Was Kept Hidden for Generations
[32:10] The Ritual That Only Certain Kings Needed—And Why
[36:45] Final Thoughts: What We Can Learn from Biblical Skincare
Links & Learnings Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/635232
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2025/03/26/how-the-israelites-gave-us-self-care-daily-rituals/
Think Shabbat is all about turning things off? Think again.
This week's Torah portion, Vayakhel, offers a unique perspective on Shabbat observance. While the prohibition of lighting fires is explicitly mentioned, it's just one piece of a much larger puzzle. Let's explore how Shabbat has evolved over time and continues to change in our modern world of LED lights and electric vehicles.
Key Takeaways
- We're empowered to ask questions and engage deeply with how we observe Shabbat.
- There's no single "correct" way to observe – different communities and individuals may have valid approaches.
- The spirit of Shabbat – rest, rejuvenation, and connection – is just as important as the technical details.
- We can look for ways to enhance our Shabbat experience that align with both tradition and our modern lives.
Timestamps
(0:00) Intro: Shabbat is more than just unplugging
(5:53) Dancing and swimming on Shabbat in ancient times
(11:49) Fluidity of Sabbath observance throughout history
(18:11) Book of Jubilees and temple-focused Shabbat
(23:35) Modern debates on electricity use on Shabbat
(28:38) Rethinking Shabbat observance for today's world
Links & Learnings
- Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
- Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/633571
- Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2025/03/19/electric-sabbath/
Dressing up as the opposite gender on Purim: a tradition or a taboo?
As we approach the joyous holiday of Purim, it's time to look beyond the costumes and revelry to uncover the profound lessons this ancient celebration holds for our modern world. In this eye-opening episode of Madlik, we explore the surprising connections between Purim and other global festivals of excess, revealing how these celebrations can transform our perspective on joy, tragedy, and the human experience.
Key Takeaways
-
Purim is not just a Jewish holiday; it shares themes of excess and celebration with global festivals like Mardi Gras and Holi, highlighting a universal human desire to break free from winter's constraints.
-
The tradition of cross-dressing and excessive celebration on Purim challenges societal norms, offering a unique perspective on joy and irreverence in religious practice.
-
Harvey Cox's insights in "Feast of Fools" suggest that embracing festivity and fantasy can provide a necessary balance to the seriousness of life, reminding us of the importance of play and imagination.
Timestamps
- [0:00] Intro: Purim and Feast of Fools
- [5:23] Purim's unique place in Jewish canon
- [11:03] Cross-dressing and rule-breaking on Purim
- [16:07] Harvey Cox's insights on festivity
- [21:15] Three essential ingredients of festivals
- [26:47] Celebration as balance to tragedy
- [30:49] Restoring balance through joyful celebration
Links & Learnings
- Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
- Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/631323
- Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2025/03/12/feast-of-fools/
What if the biblical tribes of Israel were more radical than we ever imagined?
At the heart of our discussion is the high priest's breastplate, described in Exodus 28. This ornate piece of priestly attire wasn't just a decorative element—it was a powerful symbol of the entire Israelite nation.
The breastplate featured 12 precious stones, each engraved with the name of one of the tribes of Israel. This was a profound representation of a radical social structure God was establishing for His people.
"The stone shall correspond in number to the names of the sons of Israel, 12 corresponding to their names. They shall be engraved like seals, each with its name for the 12 tribes."
This description emphasizes a crucial point: every tribe had equal representation on the breastplate. There was no hierarchy, no favored position. Each tribe, regardless of size or perceived importance, had its place. Even one missing letter would render it unusable - every tribe mattered.
Key Takeaways
-
The high priest's breastplate represented all 12 tribes of Israel, symbolizing a unique social structure that united diverse groups under one ideology and legal system.
-
The tribal confederacy of ancient Israel was a radical departure from typical city-state models, creating a flexible yet cohesive society bound by shared beliefs rather than physical structures.
-
The concept of equal tribes working together remains relevant today, offering insights into how modern societies can function without clear majorities or hierarchies.
Timestamps
- [0:00] Intro to Madlik Disruptive Torah
- [3:05] Exploring the radical tribal confederacy
- [6:30] The high priest's breastplate and tribes
- [11:01] Functionality and symbolism of the Urim Vitumim
- [15:33] Importance of representing all tribes perfectly
- [19:16] God, Torah and people coming together
- [25:22] Norman Gottwald's analysis of Israelite society
- [29:59] Radical nature of tribal structure then and now
Links & Learnings
- Sign up for free and get more from our weekly newsletter https://madlik.com/
- Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/629914
- Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2025/03/05/tribal-revolution/
Ever wondered why we stand when the Torah is taken out? Our latest Madlik episode uncovers the surprising history behind this universal Jewish tradition.
Join Rabbi Adam Mintz and Geoffrey Stern as they explore the concept of "Torah on the Move" in this week's parsha, Terumah.
We unpack the symbolism behind the Ark of the Covenant and its enduring impact on Jewish tradition.
Some highlights:
• The origins of Jews being called "People of the Book"
• Surprising details about the Mishkan's construction and materials
• How the Ark's design emphasized mobility and permanence
• What was actually kept inside the Ark (you might be surprised!)
• Parallels between ancient practices and modern synagogue rituals
We also touch on some unexpected traditions, including an Orthodox community that doesn't always stand when the ark is open. And a personal story about an embarrassing synagogue faux pas that taught an important lesson about honoring the Torah.
This episode really opened our eyes to how central the idea of a "moving Torah" is to Jewish identity. I think you'll find it both enlightening and thought-provoking.
Here are 3 key insights from our discussion:
• The Ark's Mobility: The Torah emphasizes the permanent nature of the Tabernacle's portability, hinting at its enduring significance.
• A mobile Icon: Ancient Israelites, like their neighbors, carried sacred texts into war as divine protection and inspiration.
• Unifying Ritual: The Torah procession remains a powerful, shared tradition across all Jewish denominations.
Discover how this ancient practice connects us to our ancestors and why it's more relevant than ever in today's world.
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/628017
In this week’s episode of Madlik Disruptive Torah, we explore how the Torah's legal sections, particularly in Parashat Mishpatim, interact with and transform the legal traditions of the ancient Near East rather than create an original Code of Law. We take this fascinating journey through the lens of Umberto Cassuto, a brilliant biblical scholar whose work has been largely overlooked in modern biblical scholarship. Background and Context
The Torah is often viewed as an all-encompassing legal code, dictating every aspect of Jewish life. However, Umberto Cassuto, writing in the newly formed state of Israel, presents a revolutionary perspective. He argues that the Torah's laws should be understood in the context of existing legal traditions in the ancient Near East.
Cassuto's approach is groundbreaking. He suggests that to truly understand the Torah's legal sections, we must examine them alongside other ancient legal codes, such as the Code of Hammurabi. This comparison reveals the Torah's unique contributions and its transformative impact on existing legal norms.
Key Insights and Takeaways
- The Torah as a Responsive Document
Contrary to the idea that the Torah created a legal system from scratch, Cassuto argues that it responds to and builds upon existing legal traditions. This perspective challenges our understanding of the Torah's role in ancient Israelite society.
- The Religious Nature of Torah Law
While other ancient Near Eastern legal codes were primarily secular, the Torah introduces a religious dimension to law. As Rabbi Adam Mintz points out:
"What's surprising in Judaism is the laws come from God. And the reason for that is because they practice monotheism... Monotheism allows for religious law. Idolatry doesn't allow for religious law."
- Three Ways the Torah Interacts with Existing Laws
Cassuto identifies three primary ways the Torah engages with existing legal traditions:
-
Introducing amendments
-
Opposing or invalidating certain aspects
-
Confirming and elevating worthy aspects
This nuanced approach shows how the Torah acts as a catalyst for change while acknowledging existing societal norms.
- The Sanctity of Human Life
One of the most significant innovations of Torah law is its emphasis on the sanctity of human life. Geoffrey, quoting Cassuto highlights this point:
"The Torah wishes to affirm and establish the principle in the name of divine law that human life is sacred, and whoever assails this sanctity forfeits his own life, measure for measure."
This principle leads to more compassionate laws, even for those who have committed crimes.
Challenges and Practical Advice
- Rethinking Biblical Interpretation
Cassuto's approach challenges us to reconsider how we interpret biblical texts. By understanding the historical and legal context, we gain new insights into the Torah's teachings.
- Balancing Tradition and Innovation
The Torah's interaction with existing legal codes provides a model for how we can approach societal change today. It shows us how to respect tradition while pushing for ethical improvements.
- Applying Ancient Wisdom to Modern Challenges
Umberto Cassuto's work offers a fresh perspective on the Torah's legal sections. By viewing them in the context of ancient Near Eastern legal traditions, we gain a deeper appreciation for the Torah's innovative and transformative nature as well as it’s limitations. The Torah laws were not meant to replace or undermine all existing norms, customs and social behavior.
This approach provides a model for how religious traditions can respect, engage with and elevate societal norms. It challenges us to think critically about the interplay between religious teachings and secular laws in our own time and in general and in the State of Israel, in particular.
As we continue to grapple with complex ethical and legal issues in the modern world, the Torah's example of building upon existing foundations while introducing higher ethical standards remains profoundly relevant.
To dive deeper into this fascinating topic and hear the full discussion, be sure to listen to the entire episode of Madlik and check out the Sefaria Source Notes https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/626312
The Art of Stealing: Unraveling the Complexities of the Eighth Commandment
"Thou shalt not steal" seems straightforward, but is it? This week's episode of Madlik delves into the intricate world of Jewish law and ethics surrounding theft, revealing surprising insights that challenge our assumptions about this fundamental commandment.
Background and Context
The Ten Commandments are a cornerstone of Judeo-Christian ethics, but their interpretation is far from simple. In this episode, we explore the eighth commandment, "Thou shalt not steal," uncovering layers of meaning that go far beyond the obvious prohibition of theft.
Rabbi Adam Mintz and Geoffrey Stern guide us through a fascinating journey, examining rabbinic interpretations that span millennia. From the Talmud to Maimonides, we discover how Jewish scholars have grappled with the concept of stealing, expanding it to encompass a wide range of ethical considerations.
Key Insights and Takeaways
- Kidnapping vs. Theft
Contrary to popular belief, the rabbis interpreted "Thou shalt not steal" in the Ten Commandments as referring specifically to kidnapping, not theft of property. This interpretation stems from the context of the other commandments, which deal with capital offenses.
"Scripture here is speaking about a case of one who steals human beings, whilst the command in Leviticus, 'you shall not steal,' speaks about a case of one who steals money from another person's property." - Rashi
This distinction highlights the gravity with which Jewish law views the theft of a person's freedom, placing it on par with murder and adultery.
- The Spectrum of Stealing
While the Ten Commandments may focus on kidnapping, Jewish law expands the concept of stealing to cover a wide range of actions:
-
Theft of property
-
Deception (geneivat da'at)
-
Stealing sleep (gezel sheina)
-
Unfair business practices
-
Plagiarism
This broad interpretation encourages us to consider how our actions might "steal" from others in less obvious ways.
- The Psychology of Stealing
Maimonides warns against stealing even in jest or with the intention to return the item:
"It is forbidden to steal as a jest, to steal with the intent to return, or to steal with the intent to pay, lest one habituate oneself to such conduct."
This perspective emphasizes the importance of cultivating ethical habits and avoiding even the appearance of impropriety.
- The Social Impact of Theft
Nachmanides (Ramban) connects the prohibition against stealing to the broader social fabric:
"If you do any one of the Thou Shalt nots in the second tablet, you are breaking the social network that is formed by saying God created everyone in His image, and your parents are partners in that."
This interpretation encourages us to view ethical behavior not just as individual actions, but as part of maintaining a harmonious society.
Challenges and Practical Advice
- Redefining Theft in the Modern World
As our world becomes increasingly digital and interconnected, we face new challenges in defining and preventing theft. Consider:
-
Intellectual property rights
-
Data privacy
-
Time theft in the workplace
Action Step: Reflect on your digital interactions. Are there ways you might be "stealing" that you haven't considered before?
- Cultivating Ethical Habits
Maimonides' warning about habituating oneself to stealing applies to many areas of life. How can we build positive ethical habits?
-
Practice mindfulness in your interactions with others
-
Regularly reflect on your actions and their potential impact
-
Seek feedback from trusted friends or mentors on your ethical conduct
-
Balancing Intent and Impact
The rabbinic discussions highlight the complexity of ethical decision-making. Sometimes, good intentions can lead to harmful outcomes.
Challenge: Think of a situation where you tried to help someone but may have inadvertently caused harm or discomfort. How could you approach similar situations differently in the future?
What We Learned About Stealing
Our exploration of "Thou shalt not steal" reveals that this commandment is far more nuanced and far-reaching than we might have assumed. It challenges us to:
-
Consider the broader implications of our actions
-
Cultivate ethical habits in all areas of life
-
Recognize the interconnectedness of individual ethics and social harmony
By delving into these ancient texts and interpretations, we gain valuable insights that can guide our ethical decision-making in the modern world. The Jewish tradition's expansive view of stealing encourages us to be more mindful of how our actions impact others and to strive for a higher standard of ethical behavior.
As we navigate the complexities of modern life, let's carry these insights with us, always striving to uphold the spirit of "Thou shalt not steal" in its fullest sense.
Ready to dive deeper into this fascinating topic? Listen to the full episode of Madlik for more insights and join the conversation about ethics, law, and the timeless wisdom of the Jewish tradition. Please also find Sefaria Source Sheet link here: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/623551
The Maidservant's Vision: Redefining Jewish Experience and Philosophy
Our latest Madlik Disruptive Torah episode challenges conventional wisdom about Jewish history and philosophy. Exploring the concept of "root experiences," we delve into how a simple maidservant's vision at the Red Sea can reshape our understanding of Jewish thought and practice.
Background and Context
The episode centers on Parashat B'shalach, specifically the Song of the Sea in Exodus 15:1. This iconic moment in Jewish history is recited daily in morning prayers, underscoring its significance. Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz examine various interpretations of this passage, focusing on a particular Midrash that claims a maidservant at the Red Sea saw more than even the greatest prophets.
This seemingly innocuous Midrash becomes the springboard for a profound discussion on post-Holocaust Jewish philosophy, drawing on the works of Emil Fackenheim, Martin Buber, Elie Wiesel, and Yitz Greenberg.
Key Insights and Takeaways
- The Power of Collective Experience
The episode emphasizes the unique aspect of Jewish tradition that values collective experience over individual revelation. Unlike other religions founded on the visions of a single prophet, Judaism's foundational moments involve the entire community.
This perspective challenges us to reconsider the importance of communal participation in religious and cultural experiences.
- Redefining historical perspective and theology
The Midrash's assertion that a maidservant saw more than the prophets Isaiah and Ezekiel challenges traditional hierarchies of religious knowledge. It suggests that direct experience can trump even the most sublime visions.
Geoffrey explains Fackenheim's interpretation: "After the Holocaust, we can no longer run away from those... inconvenient truths of good and evil, those inconvenient truths of what happened to God's chosen people. We cannot escape into the world of philosophy and Kabbalah."
This idea invites us to question our assumptions about wisdom and authority, especially in the face of profound historical events.
- The Concept of "Root Experiences"
Fackenheim introduces the idea of "root experiences" - pivotal moments in Jewish history that shape the collective consciousness. These experiences are characterized by:
-
Involvement of the multitude
-
Transformation of earthly reality, not just heavenly visions
-
Ongoing impact on future generations
-
Inspiring action and change
This framework offers a new lens through which to view Jewish history and tradition, emphasizing the ongoing relevance of past events.
Challenges and Practical Advice
- Embracing Contradiction
Fackenheim argues that Jewish thought, particularly Midrashic thinking, thrives on contradiction. Rather than seeking to resolve these tensions, we should embrace them as reflective of the complex nature of human experience.
Fackenheim writes: "Midrashic thinking cannot resolve the contradictions in the root experience of Judaism, but actually expresses them. Midrashic thought, therefore, is both fragmentary and whole."
This perspective challenges us to move beyond black-and-white thinking and embrace the nuances of our traditions and experiences.
- Balancing Tradition and Contemporary Challenges
The episode grapples with the challenge of honoring Jewish tradition while remaining responsive to modern realities. Fackenheim warns against making Judaism "absolutely immune to all future events except Messianic ones," arguing that this approach dismisses the challenges of contemporary events.
Instead, we're encouraged to engage with our traditions in a way that allows for growth and adaptation in response to new circumstances.
- Redefining the Importance of Historical Events
The discussion suggests that the literal historical accuracy of events like the splitting of the Red Sea may be less important than how these stories have shaped Jewish consciousness over time.
Geoffrey explains: "What makes the Jewish people, what guarantees its future, what gives us hope and faith, is that we can still look at the Red Sea event and look at it from the perspective of 2000 years of Jews who have reacted to it, 2000 years of Jews who can talk about it without even talking about the historical event."
This perspective invites us to engage with our traditions not as fixed historical facts, but as living, evolving narratives that continue to shape our identities and values.
What We Learned About Jewish Philosophy and Experience
This episode of Madlik Disruptive Torah offers a profound reimagining of Jewish thought and experience. By exploring the concept of "root experiences" and the power of collective memory, it challenges us to reconsider our approach to tradition, wisdom, and contemporary challenges.
The discussion invites us to:
-
Value collective experiences over individual revelations
-
Recognize wisdom in unexpected places
-
Embrace contradiction as a source of depth and meaning
-
Engage with tradition in ways that remain responsive to modern realities
-
See our sacred texts and stories as living, evolving narratives
As we grapple with the complexities of modern Jewish identity and the ongoing impact of historical traumas like the Holocaust, and ongoing conflicts, these insights offer a framework for engaging with our traditions in meaningful, transformative ways.
Whether you're a scholar of Jewish philosophy or simply curious about new perspectives on tradition and experience, whether you're secular or religious, this episode provides valuable food for thought. We encourage you to listen to the full discussion and continue exploring these ideas in your own study and practice.
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/622215 Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2025/02/06/root-experiences-beyond-philosophy/
This week on Madlik, we're diving into a fascinating exploration of the Jewish calendar - a topic that's not just about marking time, but about renewal, liberation, and the very essence of what it means to be Jewish. In our discussion of Parashat Bo, Rabbi Mintz and I unpack the significance of the first commandment given to the Israelites as a nation: establishing their own calendar. We examine how this seemingly simple act was actually a radical departure from other ancient calendars, and how it embodied core Jewish values of human agency and imperfection. Some highlights from our conversation: - Why the lunar-solar Jewish calendar was seen as revolutionary by other cultures - The deeper meaning behind witnessing the new moon - How the Essenes and early Muslims viewed the Jewish calendar - The beautiful tension between divine perfection and human imperfection in our timekeeping This episode really drove home for me how our calendar reflects so much about our worldview as Jews. I hope it sparks some thoughtful reflection for you too. Tune in for a mind-expanding journey through time, Torah, and Jewish thought! Please also be sure and give the Sefaria Source Sheet Link in the notes: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/620499
Have you ever wondered why we don't raise our hands during prayer in Judaism? It's a question that might seem trivial at first, but as we explored in our latest Madlik episode, it opens up a fascinating world of gesture, ritual, and cultural evolution.
As I sat watching the presidential inauguration, I couldn't help but notice the raised hand during the oath of office. This simple gesture, so commonplace in our civic life, is surprisingly absent from our religious practice. Why is that? And what can we learn from the rich tradition of hand gestures in our biblical texts?
In our conversation with Rabbi Adam Mintz, we delved into the surprising prevalence of hand gestures in the Torah. Did you know that the Hebrew Bible has the richest source of gesture phrases of any ancient Near Eastern religion or literature? It's true! From Aaron lifting his rod to God's promise of redemption with an outstretched arm, our sacred texts are filled with powerful non-verbal communication.
But here's the kicker: despite this rich heritage, hand gestures are virtually non-existent in modern Jewish ritual and prayer. It's a stark contrast that begs the question: what happened?
Sefaria Source Sheet: http://www.sefaria.org/sheets/617755 Link to Transcript on episode site: https://madlik.com/2025/01/16/the-nativity-of-moses/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz as we explore the nativity of Moses in Parashat Shemot. Delving into the dramatic birth story of the Jewish people’s greatest leader, we uncover parallels with other ancient “savior” narratives, includoing a home bathed in light, three wise men, astologers reading the stars, danger, murder, flight and return of the hero. The birth story of Moses clearly mirrors other “savior” narratives, including those of Abraham and Jesus, highlighting its broader cultural significance. Why does this pivotal tale seem isolated within the larger Exodus narrative? We discuss the tension between hero worship and the emphasis on collective redemption… all while pondering the significance of what’s left unsaid in the Torah’s account. Discover how this foundational story sets the stage for the epic journey of the Israelites from slavery to freedom.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/617755
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2025/01/16/the-nativity-of-moses/
Watch on YouTube: https://youtu.be/iJQldtucNxU
This week on Madlik, we're diving into a fascinating topic that's close to my heart - grandparenting in Jewish tradition. Our discussion centers around the iconic blessing Jacob gives to his grandsons Ephraim and Manasseh in Parashat Vayechi.
I'm excited to share some insights I've never noticed before about this pivotal moment. We'll explore how Jacob essentially adopts his grandsons, saying "they shall be mine," and what this reveals about intergenerational relationships in our tradition.
We'll also look at how this blessing became so central in Jewish practice, being recited every Friday night to bless our children. I was struck by how much depth there is to unpack here about the unique role grandparents can play.
As always, Rabbi Adam Mintz joins me for this illuminating conversation. And in a bit of perfect timing, he had some exciting personal news to share related to our topic!
I hope you'll tune in for this meaningful discussion on the power of grandparenting to shape Jewish identity and values across generations. The insights we uncovered really made me see this familiar blessing in a new light.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/615769
Transcript on episode webpage: https://wordpress.com/post/madlik.com/5667
Watch on YouTube: https://youtu.be/NDz8du4I_GM
This week on Madlik, we’re exploring how Joseph’s reconciliation with his brothers offers profound insights for our own lives. At a time when many of us make resolutions and fresh starts, this episode couldn’t be more timely.
We’ll examine how Joseph and his brothers navigate the complex dynamics of forgiveness, rehabilitation, and moving from a paradigm of grievance and victimhood to challenge and opportunity… Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz discuss the psychological aspects of sin and redemption, drawing parallels to our own experiences with failure and the challenge of moving forward.
We’ll also touch on the fascinating concept of “making lemonade from lemons” and its American/Jewish roots and the contribution of Julius Rosenwald and the Tuskegee Institute.
Whether you’re grappling with personal setbacks or seeking inspiration for the year ahead, this episode offers valuable insights on turning adversity into opportunity and embracing a narrative of ambition and success.
Join us for another thought-provoking discussion that bridges ancient wisdom with modern life. Remember, whatever your resolutions may be, stumbling once or twice doesn’t define you – it’s how you harness those moments that truly matters.
Shabbat Shalom and Happy New Year
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/614569
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2025/01/03/making-lemonade-from-lemons/
View episode on Youtube: https://youtu.be/WE3Jd7otrCk
This Shabbat Hanukah Madlik episode explores the intriguing parallels between John Lennon's iconic song "Imagine" and traditional Jewish concepts. Delving into the Shabbat zemirot "Ma Yedidut," Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz uncover surprising connections between Lennon's utopian vision and Judaism's aspirational views of Shabbat and the World to Come. The discussion challenges the notion that Judaism is solely particularistic, revealing its universal and redemptive aspects while also recognizing the conecpt of preferential love. How does the Jewish tradition balance particularism with universalism? Discover the unexpected interplay between modern secular ideals and ancient Jewish wisdom.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/613636
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/12/27/imagine-and-the-jews/
Watch on YouTube: https://youtu.be/u6xn990AcCw
This week on Madlik, we’re diving into Parashat Vayeshev and exploring the Joseph story through a unique lens. Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz as we unpack this pivotal narrative that bridges Genesis and Exodus.
We’ll be taking a hard look at the uncomfortable truth at the heart of this parasha: human trafficking. It’s not just about Joseph in Egypt – we’re talking about the profound implications of ethnic groups selling their own people into slavery.
We’ll also examine how this story fits into the broader context of biblical literature. Is it a court legend? Wisdom literature? Or something entirely different?
Plus, we’ll discuss how the sale of Joseph has echoed through Jewish tradition, from Yom Kippur liturgy to modern-day rituals. It’s an approach that might break the oppressor/oppressed lense used by so many today.
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/612024
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/12/19/joseph-slave-trade/
Watch it on YouTube: https://youtu.be/QkhOPS54nfc
From the first chapters of Genesis, when Adam named the animals, naming in the Biblical narrative is a powerful tool which defines destiny. This process reaches a climax with the re-naming of Jacob and the birth of Israel. Although "Israel" is normally translated as "struggling with God" we explore other meanings that align more powerfully with the metamorphosis that Yaakov experiences. Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz as we explore the nuances of this name Israel, that until today defines and inspires the Jewish People and their land.
Sefaria source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/610333
Transcript: https://madlik.com/2024/12/13/what-israel-means/
Watch on YouTube: https://youtu.be/xQt2m7poFCE
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz for another week of Madlik Disruptive Torah. We explore the biblical narratives surrounding Jacob and Abraham, the sanctity of places in the Ancient Near East and Jewish tradition, and the ongoing relevance of these themes in contemporary discussions about Jerusalem. The conversation highlights the deep connections between history, identity, and spirituality, emphasizing the importance of understanding the layers of meaning associated with sacred sites.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/608262
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/12/05/scaling-the-temple-mount/
Watch on Youtube: https://youtu.be/RHv0rHLtqXs
Are we defined by our names or by the stories we tell? We explore Parashat Toldot, diving into the intricate relationships between the Philistines and ancient Israelites "up until today." Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz in a conversation that highlights the melting pot of cultures in ancient Israel. We reveal that the Philistines, like the Hittites and Hebrews, were newcomers to the land and for the most part contributed culturally and integrated well. When friction arose, they willingly separated and made agreements that showcased mutual recognition and trust. In a week that the 2024 cease fire between Israel and Lebanon is consummated and we in the US celebrate Thanksgiving we wonder what lessens from the past we can take to guide us in these challenging times.
Check out the Sefaria Source sheet here: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/606744
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/11/28/the-philistinians-and-the-israelites/
Watch on YouTube: https://youtu.be/cbPen_DRgmo
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz discussing the weekly Torah portion. What happens when ancient narratives of trauma echo through generations? This episode of "Madlik Disruptive Torah" delves into the parsha Chayei Sara, exploring the post-traumatic impact of the attempted sacrifice of Isaac. Through the lens of Jewish, Islamic and contemporary literature, we examine the emotional and familial fallout experienced by Abraham, Sarah, Hagar, Isaac, and Ishmael. They pose intriguing questions: Did Abraham and Sarah live apart after the Akedah? Where did Isaac go after the attempted sacrifice by his father and how did he relate to his half-brother Ishmael and step-mother Hagar? How did Isaac's near-sacrifice shape his life? The discussion weaves historical context with contemporary reflections, drawing parallels to modern-day conflicts and shared traumas.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/605334
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/11/21/the-day-after/
View on YouTube: https://youtu.be/jf-oCqMqbco
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz as we explore the intriguing theological debate where Abraham challenges God over the fate of Sodom and Gomorrah. Unlike typical moral or ethical arguments, Abraham's stance is deeply rooted in his understanding of God's nature. He questions whether it would be Godlike to act in a manner that contradicts his perception of the divine. Profaning God's name is a major them in the Torah but in this first instance, it is God Himself who is accused of the crime. Come and learn!
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/603675
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/11/14/god-forbid/
Youtube video: https://youtu.be/RMPRRuil5lY
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded in [location] on [date]. What does it mean to leave everything behind and embark on a journey of faith? This episode of "Madlik" delves into the Torah portion Lech Lecha, exploring Abraham's radical departure from his homeland and the birth of monotheism.
-
Discover how Abraham's journey is not just a physical one but a profound internal quest for meaning and connection.
-
Examine the midrashic interpretations that paint Abraham as a rebel, challenging the status quo and seeking a universal God.
-
Consider the contemporary relevance of Abraham's story in a world where chaos and division often prevail.
Explore the philosophical and spiritual dimensions of Abraham's journey... and ponder what it means for us today.
For more insights, see the Sefaria Source Sheet (link below) and access the episode transcript. Recorded live on Clubhouse, this discussion invites you to reflect on the enduring question: What do we find when we truly leave everything behind?
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/602012
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/11/07/radical-disruption-and-the-birth-of-faith/
Video on YouTube: https://youtu.be/Ud7D7ZWMnMI
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz in conversation regarding the weekly Torah portion. What happens when language becomes both a bridge and a barrier? In this episode of the "Madlik Disruptive Torah Podcast," the duo delves into Parashat Noah, exploring the Tower of Babel's tale and its implications on linguistic diversity. They unravel how the division of languages shaped rabbinic texts and Jewish tradition, posing questions about unity and communication. Discover how ancient narratives explain modern phenomena, and consider the power of translation in preserving and transforming sacred texts. Is the multiplicity of languages a divine gift or a source of chaos?
Explore the Sefaria source sheet www.sefaria.org/sheets/599916
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/10/31/words-without-borders/
Episode on YouTube: https://youtu.be/KtJ-aPx1Kfc?si=zNV9Fdfj6lT_UCSA
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz as they explore the creation myth. There are those who would have us believe that in Creation, God made unity from chaos and that the Torah’s end game is to find that unity, tikkun and nirvana once again. We explore an alternative, counterfactual approach, where God created through division and with a goal of creating a world where divisions are emphasized, managed but definitely not erased.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/598674
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/10/24/splitting-the-adam/
At sunset the holiday of Sukkot begins and we leave the security of our homes and dwell in the temporary booths of farmers. In previous episodes we have focused on what makes this falling dwelling so permanent and eternal, but this year, in the shadow of Oct 7th we focus on the darker side of these exposed dwellings. We also explore the potential of the sukkah and the Jewish People to rise from the ashes like the Phoenix.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/597045
Transcripton episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/10/16/the-sukkah-will-rise-again/
While I considered writing a sermon for this Yom Kippur I listened to the Madlik Sermon given a week before October 7th 2023. So much of what concerned me, even terrified me, came to fruition that I decided to re-broadcast. Maybe next week as we approach the anniversay of last year's dreadful Simchat Torah we can discuss further the concept of סֻכַּת הַנּוֹפֶלֶת; "the falling Sukkah" but for now, let's try to learn the lesson of Yom Kippur 1973 and 2023. Hatima Tova for all of us.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/513577
Episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/09/26/the-yom-kippur-sermon-i-wanted-to-hear/
Join Geoffrey Stern recorded live at the Conservative Synagogue of Westport, Connecticut with guest appearences of Madlik Faithful Henry Feuerstein, Martin Rosenfeld z'l, Martha Rosenfeld, Judy Shapiro and others.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/594972
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2016/10/01/whats-new-with-the-jewish-new-year/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded in front of a live audience. God, so to speak, “joining the Jewish People in Exile”, is a radical Rabbinic concept that in the words of Rabbi Akiva would have been blasphemous had it not been supported by Scripture. We explore the source of “God in Exile” (Shechinta B’Galuta - שְׁכִינְתָּא בְּגָלוּתָא) in Rabbinic texts and ponder its ramifications for modern-day Jewish Thought.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/592663
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/09/25/god-in-exile/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded in front of a live audience on Clubhouse. Moses warns the Israelites that if they do not live up to God’s expectations, they will be vilified as a caricature of evil. The world will use the Jew to personify failure and depravity. We discuss the use of the Jew as metaphor in our texts and literature.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/591169
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/09/18/jew-as-metaphor/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse in front of a live audience. The Torah teaches that one must return a lost object to its rightful owner. The great sages Abaye and Rava use this as an opportunity to argue over the dynamics of loss and despair! We swim into this iconic Talmudic text to find what we have lost…
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/589057
Link to The Eli Fishman Podcast: Rabbi Adam Mintz: On the topic of Conversion (gerus).
Transcript on Episode Web Page: https://madlik.com/2024/09/11/lost-found/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. הי״ד the Hebrew acronym הַשֵּׁם יִקּוֹם דָּמוֹ “May Hashem avenge his blood” has been carved after the names of too many victims of bloodshed in the past few months, and especially in the last few days. This week's parsha addresses tribalism, revenge killings and blood feuds which in the Ancient Near East, especially in the Sinai Peninsula, have a too rich history. Today we review the Biblical texts in light of pre-Islamic customs preserved by the Bedouin and we wonder …. when will it ever end.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/587623
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/09/04/may-god-avenge-his-blood/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on August 25th 2022. The Torah prohibits us from adding or detracting to its directives and also against rewriting history. It even predicts that there might be a time where our leaders will try to reinvent our past. We discuss.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/426413
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/08/24/a-time-that-never-was/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded in front of a live audience on Clubhouse. The Book of Deuteronomy presents the Torah’s various rules and regulations as a corpus. It uses a unique expression; כׇּל־הַמִּצְוָ֗ה variously translated as “All the commandment” or “instruction”, the “entire mitzvah”. It is mitzvah in the singular … not in the plural as we would expect. So, we explore how the concept of a corpus of 613 commandments as well as the value of a single mitzvah developed in Rabbinic thought and Jewish practice.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/584896
Trancript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/08/21/the-whole-mitzvah/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded in front of a live audience on Clubhouse. The Torah proclaims that its laws are our wisdom and understanding in the sight of the nations. The nations of the world will say of the Israelites that this is a wise and understanding people. We explore the traditional commentaries and then we discover Rabbi Moshe Shmuel Glasner; born at the end of the 19th century and a radical thinker and early religious Zionist. Based on this verse, he taught that if our Torah does not match the most enlightened moral, ethical, cultural and aesthetic standards of the day…. It…. And we... need to evolve. So, join us for “What they say about us actually matters...”
Sefaria source sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/583652
Transcript on episode webpage: https://madlik.com/2024/08/14/what-they-say-about-us-actually-matters/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded in front of a live audience on Clubhouse. The book of Deuteronomy known as the Second Torah, is not only spoken in the first-person voice of Moses but is also a reworking and reinterpretation of earlier events. This is nowhere more apparent then in the retelling of the story of the spies where, in our disruptive reading, the spies and their generation are not blamed for being too meek, but rather…. for being too militaristic.
Sefaria source sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/582307
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/08/07/just-war/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz reorded in front of a live audience om clubhose. Moses accuses the tribes of Reuben and Gad of perpetuating the defeatist attitude of the generation of the Exodus. The word Moses uses; Tarbut, has come to mean culture and we explore how culture, in contradistinction to Torah, has evolved and continues to impact Jewish thought until today.
Seafaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/581130
Transcript on episode: website: https://madlik.com/2024/07/31/culture-wars/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded in front of a live audience on Clubhouse. The three week mourning period commemorating the fall of the first and second Jewish commonwealth reminds us of the divisive nature of zealotry. And it is zealotry that lies behind the story of Pinchas taking the law into his own impulsive hands. The Pinchas model was problematic to the Rabbis and has been used by zealots until today to justify vigilantism and extrajudicial activities. We discuss.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/580008
Transcript on episode web page.
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded live on Clubhouse. This week’s parsha includes a blessing about goodness, delivered by a prophet of the nations that is so inspiring it is used to initiate the morning prayers in Jewish houses of worship of every denomination and until today. This week another 20-something kid took a gun and killed and tried to kill. A NY Times editorialist wrote that: “Though details remain sparse, this appears to be a story less about fanatical partisanship than about the crisis of lonely and disconnected young men being radicalized into pure nihilism.” So we celebrate the simple good of pitching a tent and sitting with one’s fellow.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/578771
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/07/17/how-good-was-that/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded live on Clubhouse. This week’s parsha iis as much about water as it is about Chukim or challenging rules. It starts with the death of Miriam and her well, segues into Moses fatal sin in striking the water rock and concludes with the Red Heifer and its purifying water. Today we focus on the ability of sprinkled water or emersion into water to purify in Judaism and later Christianity and up onto today.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/577579
Transcript on episode website: https://madlik.com/2024/07/10/holy-water/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz, recorded on Clubhouse. Moses uses a title for God he uses in only one other place and which is not used again in all of Tanach: "God of the spirits of all flesh". This name for God strikes us as very universalist, even humanistic and we explore.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/576389
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/07/03/the-spirit-of-all-flesh/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. The so-called Biblical Spies are actually not characterized as undercover agents but rather as tourists or in Hebrew; Turim. Broadcasting live from Venice, Italy, we take this opportunity to explore the significant impact that journey has played in defining the Jew.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/575122
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/06/26/wanderlust/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. We’ve encountered age limits in the Torah with regard to reaching the age of majority, military age and the age required to serve as a priest, but there is a singular verse which provides a mandatory retirement age and this is the subject of our discussion.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/574152
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/06/19/retirement-ageism-and-age-limits/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. This week we start the fourth Book of the Torah and it is also my grandson Ari’s Bar Mitzvah. As the Torah quantifies and qualifies its members, there is nothing new with the emphasis on the genetic lineage of the tribes. What is surprising, is a strategically placed Rabbinic comment that whoever teaches Torah to another, Scripture regards it as though he had given birth to him. So, what is Ari celebrating… his membership in the tribe or his choice to be reborn as a student of Moshe Rabenu and his teachings. In short, is it Nature or Nurture?
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/569859
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/06/05/jewish-identity-nature-or-nurture/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded live on Clubhouse. God threatens to scatter the Israelites among the nations. The Septuagint, in its Greek translation, coins a new word, maybe a new concept. A Greek word used, not for migrants but to reference a people who identify with a specific geographic location, but currently reside elsewhere. The word is Diaspora, a seminal concept in Judaism and a word that has spawned such concepts as alienation, ethnicity, repatriation and redemption. Modern day Diaspora Studies may ignore the Jews but Disapora may lie at the heart of what is the enigma of the Jews…
Sefaria source sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/567783
Transcript on episdode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/05/29/diaspora/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. This week’s parsha is Behar, which means “at the Mountain”. While Rabbi Mintz is not at the Mountain, he is in Israel and will share impressions of his recent visit to the only Haredi Hesder Yeshiva. The Talmud suggests that we set aside specific times for Torah study and we will use the Sabbatical year referenced in the parsha to focus on different ways that our tradition has offered for integrating study into civil society and military service.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/566480
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/05/22/times-for-torah/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse.
We usually think of Tishrei and the Fall as a marathon of Jewish holidays, but if you count Rabbinic and Israeli holidays, the seven weeks of Spring win the holiday race with ease. Pesach, Yom Hazikaron, Yom Ha’atzmut, Pesach Sheni, Lag ba’Omer, Yom Yerushalyim and Shavuot. We use Leviticus 23 which has the most complete summary of Biblical holidays to explore the dynamic of adding new holidays and adding meaning to existing holidays.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/564540
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/05/14/ki-ba-moed-the-time-has-come/
Join Geoffrey Stern, Rabbi Adam Mintz and special guest Rabbi Menachem Bombach recorded on Clubhouse. This year Yom Hazikaron; Israeli Memorial Day, will be different for many reasons and from many perspectives. We invite Rabbi Menachem Bombach, a maverick visionary in the Haredi community to join us for a conversation about the meaning, history and halachic significance of this day for Israelis in general and for the ultra-Orthodox in particular.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/563501
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/05/08/yom-hazikaron/
This week’s parsha is Acharei Mot.. literally; After Death. From Rabbinic Judaism up until the present, we Jews “Choose Life”. Was it always so? Was it so obvious? Is it the secret sauce of Jewish survival? And…. Is it at the core of the current conflict? So many questions and only half an hour. Join us for Life Comes First recorded live on Clubhouse.
Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/561608
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/05/01/life-comes-first/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. This year our Seder will be different from other seders. For the first time in many of our lives it will be a Leil Shemorim, a night of concern; a night of uncertainty, fatigue and confusion. So, let’s follow the advice of the Rabbis to see ourselves as though we too are leaving our Egypt. Join us as we recast the ancient texts of the Haggadah for our generation and our challenging times.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/559081
Transcript: https://madlik.com/2024/04/16/madlik-model-seder-2024/
On the last day of a wartime visit to Israel, I visit the Shittim Institute; The Kibbutz Institute for Holidays and Jewish Culture, situated on kibbutz Beit Hashita in Northern Israel. I recently discovered this amazing institute when I purchased a first edition Kibbutz Be'eri Haggadah from 1950. I was researching the provenance of this new edition to my collection when I learned that Machon Shittim has the most extensive and unique archive of what I now recognize as Yahadut Yisraeli, organic Israeli Judaism. So join me as we learn about the archive, it's history and it's potential to build resiliency and unity in Israel and the diaspora.
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/04/11/from-farm-to-table-organic-israeli-judaism/
A conversation in Jerusalem with Professor Daniel Polisar, co-founder of Shalem College and his assistant, Hannah Liberman. We talk about the miraculous and sui generis emergence of the Hamal Yerushalyim; The Jerusalem Civilian Command Center at the beginning of the October 7th War. We also try to quantify and comprehend the IDF’s cataclysmic failure to provide basic protective gear for Israeli troops.
Transcript here: https://madlik.com/2024/04/05/where-have-all-the-helmets-gone/
Join Geoffrey Stern in the Negev to meet with soldiers in the 97th Netzah Yehuda Battalion, previously known as Nahal Haredi, a battalion in the Kfir Brigade of the Israel Defense Forces. The soldiers are all Haredi and you will be hearing first from the commander and then from one of the new recruits, both of which spoke English and approached me to tell their story. While the government of Israel is on the brink of collapsing over the issue of haredi draft, these young soldiers provide a little light and a lot of inspiration. These soldiers were all supported by a great not-for-profit called Nahal Haredi. Feel free to lend your support and enjoy. Be sure to click on the link below to see the original videos of these two pioneers!
YouTube Video Link: https://youtu.be/2ftxUBwJ9rM
Join us for a conversation with Elimelech Crystal; one of the leaders of Beyahad Em Lochamey Kippur 1973, an organization dedicated to supporting Israel's combat soldiers while at the same time protesting the current government.
Transcipt on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/03/30/veterans-of-the-yom-kippur-war-are-heard/
Join Geoffrey Stern in conversation with Ruth Calderon. In Israel while the war in Gaza rages on and with over 100 hostages still in captivity, we sit down with Talmud scholar and founder of Amla; Ruth Calderon to discuss the need to reclaim Jewish texts and create a shared cultural language in Israel..... now more than ever.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/554640
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/03/27/the-next-day-with-ruth-calderon/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. The Book of Vayikra (Leviticus) is also called Torat Cohanim (The Priestly Torah) and has traditionally been the first book to be studied by children in the Cheder. Today there is a growing and no longer fringe group of Mikdashnikim who want to rebuild the Temple. So today, from the mouth of babes up until the present we will trace and try to understand the unique place these laws play in Jewish theology and modern Israeli politics.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/553283
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/03/20/torat-cohanim-then-and-now/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. Moses feels obliged to acknowledge the individuals who designed and built the Tabernacle and to provide an exact accounting of all the funds used. We explore the profound place that transparency, accountability and most of all; honoring one’s sources, play in Jewish tradition, culture and in light of the reckoning that lies ahead for the State of Israel and the Jewish People… will play in the future of our people.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/550971
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/03/13/transparency-accountability-and-citation/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. By tradition, the holiday of Passover is preceded by five specially named Shabbatot. The first is called Shekalim and we discuss the meaning of this shabbat in light of both Rabbinic and New Testament texts and in the process join our forebears in preparing for the Spring awakening.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/549744
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/03/06/shekels-count/
Join Geoffrey Stern and rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. We invite Berel Dov Lerner the author of recently published: Human-Divine Interactions in the Hebrew Scriptures to discuss his book and his premise of Covenants and Cross-Purposes. We’ll use a simple basin made of pedestrian copper found in the Tabernacle as our point of departure.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/547714
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/02/29/human-divine-interactions/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. We explore the enigma of the Urim and Thummim; the priestly breastplate, especially within the context of the Torah’s explicit rejection of sorcery and divination. And we wonder …. We wonder about contemporary incarnations of divination and prophesy in the form of opinion-polling and social media engagement.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/546029
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/02/21/the-sorcerers-apprentice/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbiu Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. According to Rabbinic tradition Moses was shown a paradigm of the Menorah but was uncertain how to translate the vision into reality of the moment. Bezalel had no such reservations and succeeded where Moses failed. We use this tradition to explore the modern concept of Paradigm Shift and wonder whether we are at such an inflection point today.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/544480
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/02/15/paradigm-shift/
Join Geoffrey Stern, Rabbi Adam Mintz and special guest, the Reverand Dumisani Washington recorded on Clubhouse. As the rubber meets the road and the Torah begins to translate its vision of liberation into practical rules and regulations, we sense a pattern. The Torah starts by addressing a legal institution close to home; slavery, and provides laws of emancipation. Next the Torah begins to create social solidarity amongst this previously persecuted multitude. Finally the Torah addresses a natural inclination towards a victim mentality and a lens that sees only privilege and victims. We use this opportunity to invite our friend Rev Dumisani Washington to discuss the current state of the Black Church and its relationship with Israel.
Sefaria source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/543156
Transcript on podcast web page: https://madlik.com/2024/02/07/the-black-church-and-israel/
Join Geoffrey Stern, Rabbi Adam Mintz and special guest Shikh Muhan Fares for a discussion recorded on Clubhouse.. We celebrate Yitro and our Druze brothers and sisters. We marvel at the superlatives that the Torah uses to describe Jethro and how the same characteristics of loyalty, leadership and integrity are showcased by Israeli Druze today…. and maybe in the process, we learn a little bit more about the Druze and about ourselves.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/541621
Transcript on episode webpage: https://madlik.com/2024/01/31/jethro-and-the-druze/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. Nachshon is the posterchild of what Heschel called “Praying with your feet”. He personifies Judaism’s clear bias for action over the status quo, action over prayer and even action over reflection. Today we explore the darker side of Nachshon and the potential deficiencies of Action Bias in decision theory.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/539799
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/01/24/nachshon-and-action-bias/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. Of all the plagues, only the plague of the firstborn carries a timeless message. It represents the culmination of the Torah’s critique of primogeniture and takes on a life of its own in the Israelite law of the firstborn and first fruits. So join us as we explore how the death of the firstborn impacts the message of the Exodus.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/538044
Transcript onm episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/01/17/entitlement-reform/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. We explore Martin Luthur King Jr.’s iconic “I have a Dream” speech along with an interview he gave at the Convention of the Rabbinical Assembly for Conservative Judaism, a year after the 6 Day War and 10 days before he was assassinated. We will showcase King’s identification with a prophetic tradition which saw the universality of the Exodus story without diminishing its unique message for the Children of Israel.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/536664
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2024/01/11/mlk-and-exodus/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam MIntz recorded on Clubhouse. Following Classical Rabbinic sources that show a link between the Family Story of Genesis and the Birth of a Nation Story of Exodus we review a recently published book: Why the Bible Began: An Alternative History of Scripture and its Origins by Jacob Wright and reflect on what made the Hebrew Bible so unique and its message so eternally timely.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/534972
Transcript on episode website: https://madlik.com/2024/01/04/exodus-and-the-birth-of-a-nation/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. As we complete the book of Genesis, we look at a few verses that have been interpreted by both Jewish and Christian exegetes and explore how these commentaries may have been a conversation rather than a polemic. In the process, and without ignoring the divisive nature of religion, we wonder at the power of scripture and the potential for religion to bring us together.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/533990
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/12/27/until-shiloh-comes/
Join Geoffey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. Joseph is confronted with his long-lost family who thought he had died. It is the so called: “holiday season” which can be a difficult time. While many of us celebrate, some of us wonder, with the passing of another season, of another year, what difference has our life made. In wartime, with our finest youth being cut down before the prime of their life we anguish, what difference could they have made. So join us as we ponder: A Wonderful Life
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/532981
Transcript on episode website: https://madlik.com/2023/12/20/a-wonderful-life/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. Jacob, now called Israel, approaches is estranged brother with trepidation. He splits his clan in half in order to minimize any losses and he sends gifts and otherwise tries to appease Esau. We explore appeasement and compromise in the Torah and Rabbinic Literature.
Sefaria Source sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/528058
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/11/29/appeasement-in-its-time/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. In a week where indirect negotiations between Israel and Hamas, mediated by Qatar and with pressure from the public and the US have appeared to have reached a tentative and partial hostage deal, we explore, what according to Rabbinic tradition was the first instance of an anti-Israel campaign and its resolution. Is this a model of how we deal with our neighbors with whom we disagree? What are the lessons to be learnt?
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/526979
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/11/22/conflict-resolution/
Rav Stav is the co-founder of the Tzohar, a rabbinical organization which aims to provide religious services to and create dialogue with the broader Israeli population. He also serves as the rabbi of the city of Shoham. Previously he served as the rabbi of the religious film school, Maale, and was one of the founding heads of Yeshivat Hesder Petach Tikva. He is the author of Bein Ha-Zemanim, a book about culture and recreation in Jewish thought and law. One of Israel’s most visible rabbinic figures, he regularly appears on Israeli television and radio, and lectures to a wide range of audiences. We discuss his organization and the challenges and opportunities presented by the war and its aftermath.
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. In the only parsha named after a woman we continue our exploration of issues raised by Israel at war. In the Jewish State, Jewish law (Halacha) has exclusive jurisdiction over marriage and divorce for Jews. One area where Orthodox women have radically broken with Rabbinic authority is with regard to divorce. Traditionally women have been at the mercy of the patriarchy, whether their husbands or the rabbinic courts. These women, the NGOs and Rabbis who support them have used Biblical and Rabbinic texts to claim rights long denied. The primary source relates to King David and a single verse in the Book of Samuel protecting military wives. Join us as we explore these initiatives and texts.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/523840
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/11/08/women-wage-war/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. Over 250,000 innocent civilians have been displaced since the advent of the Oct 7th war from both the South and the North of Israel. Volunteers, non-government organizations and tech workers who were organizing protests a month ago have taken the lead in welcoming these fugitives and providing all sorts of support, both physical, spiritual, social and psychological. Join us as we study a parsha that celebrates the hosting of guests.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/522063
Transript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/11/01/making-place-for-the-displaced/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. What about Abraham was so radical? What about Abraham has created such extremes of love and hate… such rivalry, such animosity, such promise and such despair?
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/520323
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/10/25/abraham-and-the-birth-of-anit-semitism/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. Noah has been denigrated for saving only himself and his family and not for saving all of humanity. In a world where victims and survivors of terrorism are vilified and protecting ones life and the security of ones family a sin, we look at Noah differently and learn something about ourselves and our enemies.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/518474
Transcript on Episode Web page: https://madlik.com/2023/10/18/a-tzaddik-in-peltz/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. As Hamas finally achieves its goal of massacring thousands of Israelis, we reconsider the Talmudic saying that man was created single to teach that for anybody who destroys a single life it is counted as if he destroyed an entire world. So join us as we mourn and Study Torah....
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/516652
Transcript: https://madlik.com/2023/10/11/a-single-life/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. As we finish the annual Torah cycle we use the legendary partnership between Zebulun and Issachar to explore Rabbinic Judaism’s various and many times conflicting position on financial support for Torah Study.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/515056
Transcript on Episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/10/04/learning-torah-for-a-living/
Join Geoffrey Stern recorded on Clubhouse as he preaches the Yom Kippur Sermon on the 50th Anniversary of the Yom Kippur War and while 100s of thousand Iisraeli citizens are protesting on a weekly basis for the soul of Israel and the future of the Jewish People.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/513577
Transcripton on episode website: https://madlik.com/2023/09/26/the-yom-kippur-sermon-i-wanted-to-hear/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. We have previously remarked that the ultra-orthodox are re-creating a world and traditions that never existed. Moses admonishes the Children of Israel to “Ask your parent, who will inform you” and we explore the function and exploitation of custom in the Rabbinic Tradition up unto today.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/512114
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/09/20/inventing-tradition/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. One of the arguments that you hear for not supporting the current demonstrations in Israel is that they are supported or funded by foreign players or …. that criticizing the Government of Israel will provide fodder to our enemies. And so …. we examine a deep-seeded reflex of the Ancient Israelites and their heirs to focus on foreign opinion and blame foreign intervention to vindicate their shortcomings.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/509231
Transcript on episode website: https://madlik.com/2023/09/06/what-will-the-goyim-say/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. We re-visit Bikkurim; the offering of the First Fruits to the priest. We explore the development of this parsha from its ancient beginnings where it excluded everyone besides a male landowner through Rabbinic literature up until the present where it is used to accommodate converts and gender differences.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/507524
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/08/30/read-it-till-the-end/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. The Biblical prohibition against leaving a human being unburied overnight; no matter how unworthy the deceased may be, has both practical and profound lessons …. which we shall explore.
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/506265
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/08/23/god-hanging-here-from-these-gallows/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. As the State of Israel is polarized by the role and authority of the Supreme Court we read the Biblical injunction to provide Judges and pursue Justice. We will study the primary sources and we wonder ….. why both sides are claiming the mantle of Democracy but no one in the Jewish State is discussing Judaism! So join us for Courting Justice.
Sefaria source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/505087
Transcipt: https://madlik.com/2023/08/16/courting-justice/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. Deuteronomy, and only Deuteronomy stipulates … over 20 times, centralized worship in what ultimately became Jerusalem. The Samaritans accepted this centralized approach but substitute Mt. Gerizim for Jerusalem. The Essenes rejected Jerusalem and its corrupt priests and power-brokers and moved to the desert to achieve spiritual purity. Finally the Rabbis ….. chose Yavneh and it’s scholars… and we discuss....
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/503844
Transcript on episode webpage: https://madlik.com/2023/08/09/next-year-in-yavneh/
Join Geoffrey Stern and rabbi Adam Mintz, recorded on Clubhouse. Moses links the rights the Israelites have to occupy their homeland with the radically contingent nature of those rights. We marvel at how when asked what is the most important concept in the Torah, Israelis almost always answer ‘am segulah’ … a Chosen People, or the like and the Americans almost always answer ‘tikkun olam’ or the like. So, join us as we attempt to unravel this riddle.
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/502940
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/08/02/jewish-homeland-or-homeland-for-the-jews/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Tisha B'av 2023 / 5783. In this past week, Israel has been subjected to nationwide protests, potentially catastrophic strikes, deep division and a total lack of political leadership culminating in a rash move by the Knesset. We’ve seen this movie before… so we mourn, we learn and maybe we discover a glimmer of hope.
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/501664
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/07/26/tisha-bav-came-early-this-year/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. Moses tries to (re)formulate the message of the Torah for a new generation which did not know the Exodus. The founders of the State of Israel chose not to write a constitution and we wonder if and how the ideals of those who established the State of Israel can guide a new generation.
Sefaria Source Sheeet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/500692
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/07/19/eleven-days-from-horeb/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. In all honesty, we really can’t promise to light a spark or shed some light on this week’s parsha but we will, bli neder, review the laws of making and annulling vows and in so doing explore the ambiguous relationship that Judaism has with keeping one’s word.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.Sefaria.org/sheets/499543
Transcript on episode website: https://madlik.com/2023/07/12/no-promises/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse as we review the literature on the obscure word "Atzeret" which can variously mean an assembly, a captive audience, a day-off from work or an after-party. With particular focus on "after-party" we use Atzeret as an opportunity to explore the concept of The Feast in the Ancient Near East and in the Torah.
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/497992
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/07/05/party-on/
Join Rabbi Adam Mintz and Rabbi Avraham Bronstein recorded on Clubhouse. This week while Geoffrey is Island hopping in Greece Madlik hosts a lively discussion between his two favorite co-hosts as they discuss the dramatic episode of Moses seeming disregard for God's command to talk to the rock and his fatal decision to strike it.
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/497433
Transcript on episode page: https://wordpress.com/post/madlik.com/4231
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse. We sense that Korach’s rebellion has something to do with correct governance and even democracy, it’s just not clear what the message is and whose side we’re on. Join us as we survey Classical Jewish and philisophic literature on Korach and the enigma of Democracy.
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/496058
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/06/21/the-people-v-korach/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on June 15th 202 on Clubhouse. The Biblical Spies looked like grasshoppers to themselves and so they imagined in the eyes of others. We review Rabbinic and later Zionist texts as we explore the pitfalls of a Slave and Ghetto mentality up until today.
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/494982
Transcript of episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/06/14/the-grasshopper-mentality-and-the-new-jew/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on June 8th 2023 on Clubhouse. Pesah Sheni, the makeover Passover has been adopted by the Orthodox LGBTQ community as a Biblical holiday to accept different pathways, identities and evolutions amongst the Jewish People. We review the sources and celebrate!
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/493778
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/06/07/kosher-queer/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on June 1st 2023. We compare and contrast the Biblical Sotah (Suspected Woman) and the ritual of the bitter waters to the trial by ordeal found in ancient societies up until the Salem Witch Trials. We ask, what we can learn from this primitive form of justice.
Sefaria Source sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/492460
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/06/01/truth-or-dare/
Join Geoffrey Stern for live Shavuot night learning on Clubhouse. We’ll prove, with the help of Yehudah Halevi, and beyond the shadow of a doubt, that the Torah was given at Sinai. In the process, we hope to share an insight into the meaning and challenge of Sinai.
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/489667
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/05/24/the-echo-of-sinai/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on May 18th 2023 on Clubhouse. The Torah counts every able-bodied male to serve in the army and to pay their share of taxes and we look at the Haredi demand that they be exempt from military service and subsidized by the State and wonder…. why?
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/487982
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/05/18/god-wants-you-to-serve/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on May 11th 2023 on Clubhouse. We marvel at how Rabbinic Judaism modified if not totally abrogated explicite Biblical injunctions against selling land in perpetuioty and taking interest on loans. Using the Pruzbol and Heter Iska as case studies we explore the audacity of Rabbinic Judaism.
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/486023
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/05/10/prozbul-and-iska-llc/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on May 4th 2023 on Clubhouse. This week’s Torah portion is Emor. In it we come across the source for the tradition for Jewish men to grow beards and Peyot (side curls) and the prohibition to cut the corners of the beard. We are struck by a recurring theme of the holiness of the corner whether in beard grooming, agricultural laws or in the four-cornered garment and we wonder whether there is something more at play.
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/484211
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/05/04/rounding-the-corner-2/
Join Geoffrey Stern ansd Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on April 27th 2023. This week’s Torah portion is Achrei Mot-Kedoshim. It contains what is known as the Holiness code which describes and prescribes pretty much every sexual deviation. It is the perfect opportunity to celebrate and review a radical responsa that was published earlier this year. It was written by Rabbi Jeffrey Fox, and called Gay Women (Nashim Mesolelot) A Teshuva and published by Maharat Yeshiva. So join us for Women who love women who love Torah.
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/482838
Direct Link to the Responsa: https://www.yeshivatmaharat.org/gay-women-teshuva
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/04/26/women-who-love-women-and-the-torah-a-responsa/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on Thursday April 20th. – We peel away the stigma of leprosy from the biblical Tzorat and instead look at it through the lens of the death-averse Tumah/Taharah paradigm …. with some insights into life.
Sefaria Source sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/480513
Transcript: https://madlik.com/2023/04/19/cosmetic-theology/
Passover has finally come to an end and we are putting away our Passover plates and unboxing our Hametz. What a great opportunity to revisit one of our favorite episodes recorded in 2021 where we challenge our Rabbis and ourselves to re-imagine our Synagogue Services after Covid. Join us for a replay of Prayer and Services and the Sickness unto Death.
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/313001
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on March 29th 2023. We continue our exploration of Haggadot that break with the past. Today we will focus on Kibbutz Haggadot which were written, for the most part, by secular Jews who had a deep understanding of Jewish texts and traditions. In these Haggadot these self-proclaimed "New Jews" reimagine the message of the Seder and inspire us to do the same.
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/477153
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/03/28/protest-haggadah-cont/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Avraham Bornstein recorded on Clubhouse on March 24th 2023. This week’s Torah portion is Vayikra. Vayikra is a call to action. In every generation we are admonished to imagine ourselves overthrowing the Pharaoh of our day and liberating the People of Israel. Today we’ll survey haggadot that take this challenge to heart and re-imagine the Haggadah in their time and for their time. As Israelis take to the streets, we challenge ourselves to join this tradition and write a new Hagaddah.
Sefira Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/475511
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/03/23/protest-haggadah/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recordeed on March 16th 2023 on Clubhouse. The craftsmen and craftswomen building the Tabernacle are commanded to weave curtains showcasing images of two Cherubs and fashion golden statues to match. We wonder how these winged-creatures differ from the Golden Calf and the forbidden images that the Bible ridicules with such scorn?
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/474160
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/03/15/man-made/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on March 9th 2023. The Torah commands the Priests to wash their hands and feet before conducting the Temple service. The Rabbis command hand washing upon waking, before prayer, before eating and on multiple other opportunities. When I studied in the Yeshiva, I had a bowl and cup of water under my bed so that I could wash my hands before my feet touched the floor. If you’ve been to an Orthodox wedding or a rest room in Israel you’ve likely seen a washing cup with two handles. What’s with all the washing you say. I say, watch your mouth and….. Wash your hands!
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/472460
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/03/08/wash-your-hands/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on clubhouse on March 2nd 2023. We survey the prophetic and Rabbinic re-imagining of a Temple culture without a Temple but we also continue our discussion from last week where we noted how Jewish Messianism includes an often violent break with accepted practice, intentionally breaking moral and Rabbinic norms to hasten the end. We explore how after the Six Day War, but specifically after the Oslo Accords previous Rabbinic guidance relating to the sanctity of the Temple Mount has been cast aside.
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/470857
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/03/02/temple-politics/
Join Goeffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on February 24th. Last year when we discussed the creation of the tabernacle, we explored a powerful theological concept called Tzimzum where God creates the world by contracting his presence. This year we continue the discussion from a historical, ideological and political perspective. We explore how after the expulsion from Spain this concept profoundly impacted every aspect of the Jewish Journey into modernity and up until the current political crisis in Israel.
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/469103
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/02/23/when-god-gets-small-cont/
Last year's Podcast: WHEN GOD gets small: https://traffic.libsyn.com/secure/madlik/WHEN_GOD_gets_small.mp3
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on February 16th 2023. We continue our discussion of Sinai with a focus on the negative aspects foreshadowed even at the climactic moment of revelation. We survey the Rabbinic tradition as preserved in our texts and surprisingly in the Koran. Finally we wonder whether Israel and God have entered into a relationship at Sinai that neither one can resist?
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/467460
Transcript on episode website: https://madlik.com/2023/02/15/shadows-of-sinai-cont/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on clubhouse on February 9th 2023. The Torah uses two words that describe the orientation of the Israelites towards Mt. Sinai: נֶ֥גֶד and תַחְתִּ֥ית. We survey the interpretation of these words in the Rabbinic tradition to shed some light on revelation and even to critique synagogue architecture.
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/465646
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/02/08/shadows-of-sinai/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on clubhouse on February 2, 2023. The Torah declares that the Israelites went up out of the land of Egypt “Hamushim” חֲמֻשִׁ֛ים , a word related to Hamesh, the number five. According to many commentaries this word implies that only some of the Israelites left Egypt … armed and ready to fight. This is the first time that distinctions are made between one set of Jews and another. So, as divisions begin to surface within the ranks of the Israelites, we raise our hand to identify and call out the birth of Jewish sectarianism.... A sepcial extended episode with live interaction with clubhouse friends of Madlik.
Sefaria source sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/463446
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/02/01/high-five/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded live on Clubhouse on January 26, 2023. God hardens the heart of Pharaoh. We ignore the question of free will and God’s omnipotence and instead we ask: “What makes a man’s heart so hard that it can’t be softened?
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/462193
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/01/25/hard-hearts/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on January 19th 2023. The Rabbis learn from Moses the importance of Hakarta HaTov; recognizing good and showing gratitude even to inanimate objects. We explore this character trait as it relates to personal conduct and current Israeli politics.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/460393
Transcript on episode web page:
https://madlik.com/2023/01/18/thank-the-donkey-of-the-messiah/
Join Geoffrey Stern recorded on clubhouse on January 12th 2023. The Exodus from Egypt is not simply an episode in the script of the Jewish People; it is The refrain. The fact that it represents the essence of the Jewish people is captured in every commandment that is זֵכֶר לִיצִיאַת מִצְרָיִם to commemorate the Exodus from Egypt. Modern liberation movements have taken their inspiration from the exodus as a paradigm so what does the Exodus Liberation paradigm look like for Jews and for Israel?
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/458913
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2023/01/11/liberation-theology-for-jews/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on January 5th 2023. Jacob, upon his reunion with Joseph exclaims: לֹ֣א פִלָּ֑לְתִּי “I had never imagined” that I would see my son again. The word he uses for imagining is the same word we use for praying, so we imagine prayer as a form of imagining.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/456805
Transcript on Podcast webpage: https://madlik.com/2023/01/04/imaginary-prayer/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse December 29th 2022. Even if you are not a proponent of numerology you cannot ignore the repeated claim of the Torah that seventy souls went down to Egypt. The implied significance of the number 7 and its variants 70 and 49 provide a unique lens to view the Biblical narrative. Join us as we explore Gematria, rules of Biblical interpretation and the number Seventy in the Bible.
Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/455577
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/12/28/seventy-faces/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on December 22nd 2022 on Clubhouse. The human act of bowing plays a major role in the dreams of the young Joseph. The people of Egypt actually call Joseph: “Abrek” a name shared by Hosni Mubarak and Barak Obama which means both blessed and bow-worthy. Join us as we explore the relationship between blessing and bowing; prayer, praise and body movement in the Bible and latter Rabbinic texts…. and on this festival of rededication, wonder how we can bring more physical movement back into our prayers.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/454638
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/12/21/body-language/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on December 15th 2022 on Clubhouse. Joseph is the first and only biblical personality characterized as a success. With a nod to Max Weber who wrote the iconic socioreligious study; The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, we take this opportunity to explore the Biblical and latter Rabbinic definition of financial and other success.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/453456
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/12/15/joseph-and-the-spirit-of-capitalism/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on clubhouse on December 8th 2022. An innocuous reference to a Princess named Timna teaches us a profound lesson regarding accepting potential converts and how critical such a choice can be to the future of Judaism. We are oh so fortunate to be able to explore the lenient opinion of conversion in Rabbinic texts with one of its leading practitioners…. our very own Rabbi Adam Mintz. So join us for The Conversion Factor.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/451745
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/12/07/the-conversion-factor/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on December 1st 2022. In a parsha that starts with Jacob having an iconic dream of a ladder joining heaven to the holiest place on earth, we find foreshadowing of the origins and significance of the third holiest site in Judaism; Rachel’s Tomb
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/449816
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/11/30/mother-rachel-comes-to-me/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on Thanksgiving 2022. Isaac and Jacob choose brides from Aram. Aramaic is the chosen legal and liturgical language of the Rabbis and the lingua franca of the Ancient world. Why is Laban vilified and should we slander or offer our gratitude to the Arameans?
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/448278
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/11/23/lost-found-in-translation/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi recorded on Clubhouse on November 17th 2022. With Akedat Yitzchak (the Sacrifice of Isaac) still on our minds we look at Brit Milah from a fresh perspective and review the meaning, function and maybe even contemporary sensibilities regarding circumcision.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/446688
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/11/16/circumspect-about-circumcision/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded November 10th 2022 on Clubhouse. We look at the Binding of Isaac and wonder whether Abraham passed or failed this test. What possible lessons are to be learnt from this narrative other than blind faith and obedience. Finally, we are puzzled why Abraham confronts God over Sodom and confronts Sarah over sending away Ishmael but remains silent when it comes to sacrificing his son.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/444778
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/11/09/unbinding-isaac/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on November 3rd 2022. We discover that when the younger son Isaac is chosen, the older son Ishmael’s banishment in some way endears him to his father and latter Rabbinic and Muslim commentators. By being rejected Ishmael may actually provide an alter ego of the Jewish people. We will discuss…
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/442342
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/11/02/call-me-ishmael/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on October 27th 2022. According to the popular Bible translations, “in the generation of Noah, God regretted having made humankind”. As if to say that regret is the first Divine emotion represented in the Torah… not mercy, not anger, not joy, not love and not jealousy. We discuss…
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/440854
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/10/26/with-regret-god/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Dr. Richard J. Meddleton recorded on Clubhouse on October 20th 2022. As we begin reading the Torah all over again we are joined by a leading Christian Hebrew Bible scholar for a fresh insight into the message of Bereshit. Richard is revolutionizing the way Christians read our Torah and he does the same for us. So crack open your Humash and join us for Shared Beginnings.
Sefariah Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/438848
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/10/19/shared-beginnings/
Join Geoffrey Stern recorded on clubhouse on October 12th 2022 for Madlik Disruptive Torah. In a previous podcast called Architecture in Time we’ve discussed Judaism’s unique concept of the holiness of time. This coming Shabbat is Shabbat Sukkot so find yourself a temporary booth and join us as we explore Judaism's unique concept of holiness of place.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/437526
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/10/12/fallingsukkah/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on October 6th 2022. In Moses’ parting song to the Jewish people he mentions Faith (emuna) in two different ways, both of which don’t refer to man’s faith in God. We take the opportunity to explore the meaning of Faith in the Torah and latter Rabbinic thought.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/436267
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/10/05/god-believes/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on September 29th 2022. The weekly parsha becomes particularly topical this year as we end the year of the Shmitah (Sabbatical Year). As the life of Moses comes to an end, he provides his last instructions which relate to the blowing of the Shofar on Yom Kippur and the public reading by the King of the Book or Deuteronomy on Sukkot.... Join us as we draw lessons for the new year ahead.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/434397
Transcript on podcast web page: https://madlik.com/2022/09/28/free-at-last/
Parshat Nitzavim - Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on September 22nd 2022. The Book of Deuteronomy, also known as Mishna Torah, or the second; Reviewed Torah is drawing to an end and provides us with an opportunity to review some of the Rabbinic Principles that have guided us in the reading of the Five Books of Moses. Starting with the iconic statement that "The Torah is not in Heaven" we realize how the Rabbis began a process of humanizing, maybe even secularizing the Torah in a very radical way…. Almost as though they took the Torah from Heaven. With no apologies to Abbie Hoffman, join us for - Steal this Book.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/433106
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/09/21/steal-this-book/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on clubhouse on September 15th 2022. As we approach the high prayer season we trace the evolution of the oldest prayer preserved in the Torah. The First Fruits Declaration, a once iconic prayer made by a farmer on Shavuot; the Harvest Festival. We see how this prayer was censored, repurposed and reinterpreted up until today and wonder what license it provides to us.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/431313
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/09/15/first-fruits-first-prayers/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on clubhouse on September 8th 2022. As we approach the Jewish New Year with its emphasis on Zichronot, we ask: what role does memory play in the Torah? Is it for historical accuracy or moral edification? In this week’s parsha we are told to despise some of our foes and others to offer our gratitude. For our arch enemy, Amalek we are told to remember to forget!
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/429450
Trtanscript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/09/07/remember-to-forget/
Parshat Shoftim - Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on clubhouse on September 1st 2022. In the same parsha that the Torah concedes to the people’s desire to have a king “like the other nations” it also suggests another leadership model. The Shofet, normally translated as the Judge. We discuss the meaning of Shofet and explore a past and promised age of Shoftim.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/427752
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/08/31/restore-our-judges/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on August 25th 2022. The Torah prohibits us from adding or detracting to its directives and also against rewriting history. It even predicts that there might be a time where our leaders will try to reinvent our past. We discuss.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/426413
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/08/24/a-time-that-never-was/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on August 25th 2022. The Torah prohibits us from adding or detracting to its directives and also against rewriting history. It even predicts that there might be a time where our leaders will try to reinvent our past. We discuss.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/426413
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/08/24/a-time-that-never-was/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on clubhouse on August 18th 2022. Much in this parsha relates to the correct and incorrect attitude. The Israelites are described as “stiff necked” and “rebels” (mamrim). They are warned not to attribute their success to their own power and commanded to bless God even when satiated. Finally, they are told that all God wants from them is their fear. We explore the power of disposition and attitude in Jewish thought.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/425215
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/08/17/attitude-is-everything/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on August 11th 2022. Moses pleads with God to cross the Jordan into the Promised Land. God is cross with Moses. When should we ask for more? When do we ask for too much? That is the question.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/424108
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/08/10/enough/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on August 4th 2022. The fifth book of the Five Books of Moses is called Mishneh Torah which means the Second Torah or the Repetition of the Torah. We use this as an opportunity to explore how the Torah has been renewed and rediscovered over time.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/422607
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/08/04/a-second-torah/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz reorded on Clubhouse on July 28th 2022 as we look at the configuration of the Israelite tribes through new eyes… the eyes of modern scholarship that suggests that the conquest of the Land of Israel by the freed slaves from Egypt also included the uprising of local tribes. Together they formed a confederation of tribes, united in their rejection of the existing class structure and the sovereign-vassal subjugation of Egypt and later empires.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/421369
Transcript on episode website: https://madlik.com/2022/07/27/the-united-states-of-israel/
Join Geoffey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz on Clubhouse recorded on Thursday July 21st 2022 for another episode of Madlik disruptive Torah. The Torah uses a term associated with harassment, pain, siege, and tsuris and we are intrigued, because it is also associated with being bound up in the bundle of life. In a week when we mourn our losses we explore the connections.
Sefaria Source Sheet:
Transcript: https://madlik.com/2022/07/20/the-circle-of-life/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on clubhouse on July 14th 2022. We read the story of Balaam and note the selective use of the generic “God-Elohim” and the particular name of the God of Israel – “YHVH”. We wonder if it is simply stylic variation or does it have significance. In the process we compare traditional Rabbinic solutions to the so-called Documentary Hypothesis and consider whether the Torah is comprised of different literary voices edited together.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/418965
Transcript on episode web site: https://madlik.com/2022/07/13/god-whats-in-a-name/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded July 7th 2022 on Clubhouse. In a parsha dedicated to death and with much attention on the enigmatic law of the Red Heifer we also witness the death of Moses and his siblings; the primary protagonists of the Exodus. Miriam dies in two verses and Moses and Aaron are sentenced to death with Aaron quickly dispatched. Which leads to the age-old question: Who Done it and why?
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/417920
Transcript on Episode Website: https://madlik.com/2022/07/07/murder-in-the-desert/
Join Geoffey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on June 30th 2022 on Clubhouse as we take a fresh look at Korach’s rebellion. Dathan and Abiram refer to Egypt as a Land Flowing with Milk and Honey and defy Moses even were he to offer fields and vineyards in a land flowing with milk & honey. What does the Biblical “Flowing with Milk & Honey” mean?
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/416706
Transcript: https://madlik.com/2022/06/30/milk-and-money/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse June 23rd, 2022 as we discuss parshat Shelach. We ignore the headline story of the spies who lacked vision. We overcome the urge to defend the מְקֹשֵׁ֣שׁ עֵצִ֑ים the gatherer of sticks on Shabbat. We even pass up a chance to enjoy the blue indigo of the tzitzit. Instead, we focus on the lowly loaf of challah and explore how it saved the Jews. So join us as we Make Challah!
Sefariah Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/415522
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/06/22/making-challah/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on June 16th 2022. The Torah breaches the subject of a Ger (Convert alt. resident alien) celebrating the Exodus from Egypt. Jews-by-birth praise God who took “us” out of Egypt and we wonder along with Nachmanides and Maimonides whether a convert can or should consdier him/herself a part of past Jewish historical experience as well as part of the Jewish People. In the process, we discover an ambivalence Judaism has to converts and we explore this ambivalence through history and up to the present.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/414358
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/06/15/joining-the-tribe/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on June 9th 2022 as we read the text of the weekly portion through the eyes of the iconic Torah Commentator; Rashi. Keep in mind that Rashi was the proud father of four daughters (no sons) and had a day job as a vintner. Did this affect his treatment of the Sotah (Unfaithful Wife) and the sober Nazirite? Grab a glass of wine and let’s discuss. L’chaim!
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/412925
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/06/08/rashi-women-wine/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on as we meet a man named Nachshon ben Aminadav. A man with only a insignificant walk-on role in the text of the Torah but an iconic presence in Jewish religious and secular thought, culture and mythology.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/410450
Transcript on episode web site: https://madlik.com/2022/06/01/nachshon/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on May 26th 2022. This week we see the flip side of not owning our land. We are exposed to exile and alienation, both physical and emotional. But mostly, we are struck by the almost too rich vocabulary and overly haunting imagery the Torah exhibits for a people without a land.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/408510
Transcript on episode website: https://madlik.com/2022/05/25/as-a-driven-leaf/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on clubhouse on May 19th 2022. The earth is the Lord’s resonates throughout the Torah nowhere stronger than in the laws of the Sabbatical and Jubilee years. We explore what a Promised Land means when land ownership is only temporary.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/406956
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/05/18/this-land-is-my-land/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on May 12th 2022 for a discussion of the Biblical taboo against contact with death. We explore Biblical and Rabbinic texts and wonder what the Torah’s aversion to death teaches us about life.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/404890
Transcript on episode website: https://madlik.com/2022/05/11/life-after-death/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on May 5th 2022 as we ask: what does it mean to be holy? Does holiness divide or unite us? Join us as we ask whether the revolutionary perception of holiness contained in the biblical text is eclipsed by puritanism and sectarianism.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/403778
Transcript: https://madlik.com/2022/05/04/divide-and-sanctify/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on April 28th for Madlik Disruptive Torah. A goat is thrown off a cliff to atone for our sins. A troubling rite with a rich history for the Jewish people and for Christianity that believes in a Savior who died to expiate the sins of mankind.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/401839
Transript on Podcast web page: https://madlik.com/2022/04/27/scapegoating/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on clubhouse on Thursday April 7th 2022 as we explore how the affliction of Leprosy became identified with slander in Rabbinic texts. We’ll watch our tongue as we revisit the theme of Mitzvot as symbol, language and metaphor. We'll see that the Rabbinic concept of slander covered a lot more than idle gossip and included character assasination, questioning the idealistic intentions of others, bigotry and even anti-Israel bias.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/398050
Transcript on episode webe site: https://madlik.com/2022/04/06/loose-lips-and-leprosy/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on March 31st 2022 as we use the Torah's treatment of postpartum impurity to explore postpartum depression, gender definition and female sexual needs and rights, to name a few stimulating topics...
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/396094
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/03/31/of-woman-born/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Michael Posnik recorded on March 24th 2022 on Clubhouse as we ask: Was the death of the two sons of Aaron a tragedy or the ultimate sanctification of God’s Name…. or both? We explore the concept of martyrdom in the Bible and Rabbinic texts and into modern times with the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising and the creation of the State of Israel.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/394321
Transcript: https://madlik.com/2022/03/23/no-martyrs-no-more/
Parshat Tzav - Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz and grab a drink as we explore this week’s Torah reading and how it relates to Spring Folly and Spring Cleaning. Exposed to the ingredients that are used in the sacrifices we realize that Hametz, Matzah and Bread (not to mention hard liquor) have significance unrelated to the Exodus story and more related to the trials, violence as well as joys of life.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/392354
Transcript on episode website: https://madlik.com/2022/03/16/purim-st-patricks-day-mardi-gras-more/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on March 10th 2022 as they encounter the first mention of the Hebrew word for a mistake (Shegaga). They explore the Biblical and Rabbinic idea of the stain, intention and the etiology of sin either as a deficiency in character or treatable condition.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/390805
Transcript on episode website: https://madlik.com/2022/03/09/oops-i-did-it-again/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on clubhouse on March 3rd at 1:00pm Eastern as we complete the Book of Exodus and its lengthy treatment of the construction of the Tabernacle. In so doing, we recognize the twofold message that the cloud covered the Tent of Meeting, and the Presence of God filled the Tabernacle but also that when the cloud lifted from the Tabernacle, the Israelites would set out, on their various journeys. We use this observation to address the challenge of temples which lose their spiritual cloud-cover and ruminate on the necessity for movement in Judaism.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/388585
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/03/02/temples-with-no-cloud-cover/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on February 24th as we continue our discussion of melacha – work. Last week we discovered that creative work, even the construction of the holy tabernacle is subservient to the sanctification of time. This week we celebrate creative work as a reflection of the divine. We explore the eclipse of manual labor and the arts in Jewish culture during the exile and marvel at the rebirth of physical work and Jewish artifice in the writings of early Zionist thinkers and in the State of Israel.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/386520
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/02/23/jews-with-tools/
Parshat Ki Tisa - The Torah references the observance of the Sabbath in the context of building the Tabernacle (Mishkan). The Rabbis learn from this simple juxtapostion that there are 39 forms of labor prohibited on the Sabbath. If you observe the Sabbath you appreciate the deep significance and practical ramifications of this interpretation. We explore the connection between the Tabernacle and the seventh day.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/384711
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/02/17/architecture-in-time/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz for a new episode of Madlik Disruptive Torah. We’ll explore the Torah’s preeminent use of a hue of blue called Tekhelet in the construction of the Tabernacle and in the Priestly garb. This rare and dear dye; extracted from a non-kosher mollusk, was also used on the four-cornered tallit of every simple Jew.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/383005
Transcript: Episode web site: https://madlik.com/2022/02/09/why-blue-and-white/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on February 3rd 2022 as we explore a single verse: “Make Me a temple and I will dwell within them” This iconic verse, pregnant with meaning, enables us to visit classical Jewish commentaries and discover some surprising views of God’s relationship with His/Her creation, not just with a tabernacle or temple.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/380865
Transcript on Podcast episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/02/02/when-god-get-small/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded live on Clubhouse on January 27th 2020 discuss Parshat Mishpatim. Moses places twelve stone slabs (stelas) engraved with a code of law before his people. We take a look at the similarities and differences with other ancient Near Eastern Codes such as Eshnunna and Hammurabi and ask: What’s new with Moses’ Code of the Covenant?
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/379013
Transcript on Episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/01/26/moses-code-of-law-whats-new/
parshat yitro - Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on January 20th 2022 as we discuss the Torah portion that includes the Ten Commandments but is named after a non-Jewish priest. A priest who blesses God, successfully offers sacrifices, shares a sacred meal and, with God’s sanction, establishes institutions of jurisprudence for the Jewish People. For a religion that is known for exclusivism, we use this realization to explore inclusive and exclusive tendencies in Jewish tradition.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/377219
Transcript in episode web site here: https://madlik.com/2022/01/19/is-judaism-exclusive-or-inclusive/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on January 13th 2022. God leads the Jews on the scenic (long) route to the Promised Land and the classical commentators wonder why. All of them find a pedagogic approach but their conclusions are diverse and in some cases, perplexing! We join the Israelites as they embark on this fateful trip into the desert and we learn a little something about long roads that are short and God’s Gracious Ruse.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/375388
Transcript on Episode web page: https://madlik.com/2022/01/12/gods-gracious-ruse/
Parshat Bo - A live recording of Madlik Disruptive Torah recorded on Clubhouse with Geoffrey Stern, Rabbi Adam Mintz, Rabbi Abraham Bronstein and “The Haftorahman”, Reuben Ebrahimoff on January 6th 2022.
Can Biblical commandments evolve and have alternative meanings at different times and to different people? Mitzvot; for some an obligation, for others a political, cultural or fashion statement and for still others a magical charm. In Exodus 13 we are introduced to the first formal commandments given in the Torah; a book of Law. These laws relate exclusively to the celebration of the first and subsequent Passovers. Out of nowhere we also find the first reference to what was to become the commandment of Tefillin. We explore the classical commentators and modern scholarship to discover the multiple layers and nuances behind tefillin and possibly all mitzvot.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/373717
Transcript on episode web page here.
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on December 30th 2021as we use an innocuous reference in Rabbinic Literature to Pharaoh’s personal hygiene to explore the unique disposition of Judaism to the physical body and bodily functions and contrast it to other religions and cultures.
With special guest appearances by Josephus Flavius, Karl Marx, Ernst Becker and the Rabbis of the Talmud
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/372485
Transcript on episode web page: https://madlik.com/2021/12/30/holy-crap-2/
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse as we discuss Judeo-Christian Magical Thinking….. Moses encounters a miraculous burning bush, receives a magical rod and learns an incantation of the name of God. But the Rabbis of the Talmud call Jesus a magician…. We explore the Hebrew Bible and Rabbinic Judaism’s uniquely ambivalent attitude to the miraculous.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/371145
Transcript on Episode web site: https://madlik.com/2021/12/22/moses-reluctant-magician/
Parshat Vayechi - Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse December 16th 2021 as we recognize that Jacob introduced the handle #TwelveTribes. The book of Genesis ends, as does Deuteronomy with blessings over these iconic Twelve Tribes of Israel but the count is unclear. Joseph is at times counted as one tribe and at times subdivided. Shimon and Levi are likewise alternately diminished or removed. What are we to make of these inconsistencies and of Jacob’s desire to share the future? Join us as we discuss who’s in and who’s out and what it all means for us.
Special guest story - the rape of Dina or the tragic romance if Dinah and Shechem...
Sefaria Source Sheet: https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/369304
Transcript on episode web site: https://madlik.com/2021/12/15/members-of-the-tribe/
Parshat Vayigash - A live recording of Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on December 9th 2021 as they ask: What if our Prince of Egypt, was not an ancient-day Paul Samuelson using science and economic theory to serve society? What if Joseph and his Pharaoh were the villains and the new Pharaoh “who knew not Joseph” was an Egyptian patriot and liberator who saved the Egyptians from foreign exploitation? How would that change the message of the Exodus?
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/367055
Transcript on episode web page here.
Parshat Miketz- Shabbat Hanukkah - Food Fights-Gastro Diplomacy. Ancient Egyptians wouldn’t break bread with Hebrews and were known to have rigorous dietary restrictions..... How does this play out in the Exodus narrative and what does it mean for us? Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz for a live recording on Clubhouse December 2nd, 2021 for the first Madlik lunch & learn as we discuss the social power of food.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/365771
Transcript on Episode website: https://madlik.com/2021/11/30/food-fights-and-gastro-diplomacy/
Parshat Vayeshev - Join Geoffrey Stern, Rabbi Adam Mintz and friends. Recorded on Clubhouse on November 25th as they explore how the story of Joseph and the patriarchal origins of the Exile to Egypt is interrupted by the story of Tamar and the matriarchal origins of redemption through the Davidic bloodline. They wonder whether we might re-read Genesis as Her Story?
With special “guest” appearances from Jonathan Kirsch (author of The Harlot by The Side of the Road) and Harold Bloom (the author of The Book of J).
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/365002
Transcript on podcast website here: https://madlik.com/2021/11/24/genesis-as-her-story/
parshat Vayishlach (genesis 32) Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded live on Clubhouse on November 18th 2021 as they discuss arguing with God in the Bible and later Rabbinic texts and Jewish Literature. Jacob’s name is changed to Israel which we are told means to struggle with Man and God. How do we live up to this name?
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/363352
Transcript on episode web page here
Parshat Vayetzei - The Rabbis learn from the multiple use of the word MAKOM - Place in the story of Jacob's Ladder, that God is the Place of the World, but the World is not His Place. What can we learn from the Rabbis?
Special "Guests" Baruch (Benedict) Spinoza and the Kotzker Rebbe
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/360797
Transcript on Podcast Website: https://madlik.com/2021/11/10/hamakom-place-no-place/
Recorded live on Clubhouse on November 4th from Tzofar in the Arava of the Negev Desert in Israel with Rabbi Adam Mintz in New York, we explore Yaakov's name and career path and struggle with his twice stolen blessing. We ask how parents could give a child a name such as "heel-sneak" or "heal grabber' and how Israel could emerge from such crooked timber?
Special "guests" include Shmuel Yoseph Agnon and Isaiah Berlin
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/358410
Transcript on Episode Website here.
Parshat Chayei Sarah - Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse on October 28th 2021 as they explore the Bible’s euphemism for death: “and he was gathered unto his people” as an opportunity to question our assumptions regarding the biblical view of the afterlife … with much appreciation to Jon D. Levenson. Resurrection and the Restoration of Israel: The Ultimate Victory of the God of Life.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/357282
For a full transcript of the podcast go to the podcast web site here: https://madlik.com/2021/10/27/life-is-with-people-and-so-is-death/
A live recording of Madlik Disruptive Torah on clubhouse with Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz as we ask: Was it the Binding of Isaac or the Sacrifice of Isaac and what difference does it make?
We use the seminal story of the miraculous birth of Isaac and the hints at the Sacrifice and Resurrection of Isaac in the biblical and later Rabbinic texts to explore the meaning of these themes in Judaism and Christianity.
Other "guests" include, Søren Kierkegaard, Jon D Levenson, Daniel Boyarin, Shalom Spiegel, Seth Daniel Kunin and some surprising Rabbinic Midrashic texts.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/356011
Transcript of the episode webpage here: https://madlik.com/2021/10/21/the-miraculous-birth-and-resurrection-of-isaac/
Recorded live on Clubhouse on Friday October 15th 2021 Parshat Lech Lecha - Geoffrey Stern, Rabbi Adam Mintz and Rabbi Abraham Bronstein explore various ways of viewing Abraham's epic journey and how it reflects our own.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/354270
Transcript (excerpt):
You know, I could make the argument that Abraham was the first atheist. And what I mean to say is, if you look at Abraham from the perspective of Terach, or if you follow the story of Nimrod, who puts him into a fiery furnace? Here is a guy who's saying that everything the world believe was a God does not exist. He says, No, the sun has no power, the stars have no power, this Totem, this animal, it has no power. And and what he was claiming, was, in fact, of a power and of course, this is all a projection of the Midrash, or of Maimonides or of the Zohar was this hidden this unseen, untouchable thing from the perspective of the landed powers that be he was denying God, he was denying all that they believed in and from that perspective it leads all the way to Spinoza, who was excommunicated by saying God is no way but God is everywhere. Maybe he was the first secularist.
Avraham Bronstein 20:13
You remind me of Peter Brown. So Peter Brown, the great historian of the Roman Empire, and one of his books about religion in the ancient Roman Empire, or the classical world, talks about how the Judeans, the original Jews were seen as atheists by the more polytheist, pre Christian Roman Empire at the time, because they couldn't comprehend how Jews maintain the belief not in their God, but in a god. It didn't make any sense to them.
Geoffrey Stern 20:44
Fantastic. Yochanan welcome to the bima
Yochanan 20:48
Thanks, thanks. Thanks so much for having me. By the way, Rabbi Maza, the Chief Rabbi of Moscow, 400 years ago, he says what you just said. So he says that Abraham was a kultur b'kalim . He was like, like you said, he was the first secularist or atheists to to deny all the deities, all the old the religions of the environment.
For full Transcript: https://madlik.com/2021/10/14/abrahams-epic-journey-and-our-own/
Parshat Noach - Join Geoffrey Stern, Rabbi Adam Mintz and Pastor Dumisani Washington of IBSI - Institute for Black Solidarity with Israel and Christians United For Israel for a live recording of a discussion on Clubhouse Friday October 8th with the Pastor regarding his book Zionism and the Black Church: Why Standing with Israel Will Be a Defining Issue for Christians of Color in the 21st Century. We follow a less traveled path down Noah’s family tree. We discover the Biblical Mission of Africa and the bond between the Children of Shem and the Children of Ham.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/352058
Transcript:
Geoffrey Stern 00:00
[To Reverend Dumisani Washington] Thank you so much for being with us. On on our clubhouse when you come up to the platform, we say first of all that you're coming up to the bimah [the podium or platform in a synagogue from which the Torah and Prophets are read from]. And then second of all, when we make you a presenter, we give you smicha... So that means that you are ordinated. So instead of Reverend, we'll call you Reb. Is that okay?
Dumisani Washington 00:20
That sounds good to me. Sounds good, no problem.
Geoffrey Stern 00:23
So anyway, welcome to Madlik. Madlik is every week at four o'clock, and we do record it and post it as a podcast on Sunday. And if you listen to it, and you'd like what you hear, feel free to share it and give us a few stars. And what we do is disruptive Torah. And what we mean by disruptive Torah is we look at the ancient text of the Torah, with maybe a new lens, or to see a new angle. And today, I'm delighted to say that we're not only looking at it through a new lens, but we're looking at it through another lens, a lens of a pastor, of a man of God, who we will learn about his mission. I heard about it on clubhouse one evening, I was scrolling, and I stumbled upon you Reverend, and you're on a mission and you see Judaism and you see Zionism from a whole new perspective. So I want to thank you for coming on. And I want to say that, as I told you, in my email that I sent you that you know, every week about Saturday on Shabbat, on Sunday, I start thinking about what I'm going to pick as a subject matter for the coming Madlik session. And I purchased your book maybe two months ago, and it was sitting by the side of my bed, and for some reason, and of course, I'm sure there are no coincidences in this world. I picked it up this Shabbat. And it starts with our portion of Noah, it starts by talking about the line less traveled by us Jews of Shem's son Ham. And I should say that nothing is written for no reason in the Bible. And when it gives you a genealogy, it's because of what comes in the future. And many of us Jews will look at the genealogy in Genesis 10. And focus on Shem... with Semites. And that's where the name comes from. And we go down that path, and your book starts. And of course, I should say that your book is called "Zionism and the Black Church, Why Standing with Israel will be a Defining issue for Christians of color in the 21st Century". And it begins by traveling down this path less taken, of Ham. Welcome to Madlik. But if you could begin by touching upon our portion of the week, no off and and and discussing what you see in it, and maybe your mission.
Dumisani Washington 03:06
Absolutely. And thank you, again, Rabbi for having me on. Yes, there are six chapters in "Zionism in the Black Church". And the first chapter is entitled The African Biblical Tie to Israel. And so we as I say, in the book started the beginning, right, we start at the beginning of the Scriptures, and so as you know, between the two portions of "Bereshi" I believe whether the towards the end is when Noah was first introduced, but of course in "Noach" there's the explanation of the nations where all the nations of the earth come from, from Noah's three sons Shem, Ham, and Jafet. And so we recognize that in the Scriptures, it is said that Ham has four sons. And there's a couple of unique things as you know, you read the book, that the scriptures that in the law of Moses deals, Psalms and some of the prophets, there's a term that's given several times in the scripture about Ham's descendants harms the sentence differently, then either Jafet or Shem. The land of Ham is actually something that's in the scriptures. And I don't know what that Hebrew word is ... "Aretz Ham" ... I never looked at that part of it, Rabbi but it talks about that, which is really interesting because there's not, to my knowledge, and I've kind of looked at for a little while, a similar rendering like the Land of Japhet or Land of Shem. Right? We're obviously the genealogy is there, right? But there's not the same thing that deals with the land and the peoples .... interesting and we've come to know that of the four sides of Hem, which are in order Kush, which you know, is where obviously the Hebrew for later on Ethiopia I believe is a Greek word, but from that region Mitzrayim, which is Egypt. Fut or Put which is Libya, and then Canaan, which is Canaan, right? So those four sons who come from him. But interestingly in the scriptures when it says land of Ham, it almost exclusively refers to Egypt and Ethiopia, what we would call today, Africa, right? This region. And again, you're talking about an antiquity these regions were much broader in size. And they are today if you look at the map today, you see Egypt as a small state and go down to the south, west, south east, and you'll see Ethiopia then you see Yemen, you see Kenya, well, obviously all those states weren't there that happened much later in modernity is particularly after the colonial period where those nations were carved up by a few states in Europe, and they were given certain names everything right, but these were regions in the Bible. And so Kush, the land of Kush, and the land of Mitzrayim, they're actually dealt with many, many times. Right? After the words obviously "Israel" and "Jerusalem". You have the word Ethiopia, I believe one of the Ethiopian scholar says some 54 times or something like that the word Ethiopia actually comes up in the Bible, obviously not as many times as Israel or Jerusalem but more than virtually any other nation other than Egypt. Right? So Egypt obviously that we know too. Africa plays a huge role in Israel's story right? The 430 years in slavery is in Africa, right? The Torah was received at Sinai: Africa. All these things happen in Africa. At some point God tells Jeremiah during the time of the impending doom, the exile that will happen at the hand of of Nebuchadnezzar and God says to to the Israelites to the Judeans, and "don't run down into Egypt, Egypt won't be able to save you." Why does he say that? Well, because historically the Israelites would go to Egypt when it until it got safer, right? For those Christians who may be on the call, you'll know that in the New Testament, Jesus, his parents take him down into Egypt because Herod's gonna kill him. Right? So there's this ongoing relationship between Ham and Shem, that's very intertwined. Moses, his wife, or his second wife, depending on how you interpret it.... Some of the sages. She's Ethiopian, right? She's kushite. So you have this interchangeable thing all the time, throughout the scriptures, but actually starts with the genealogy. And I'll say just one last thing, rabbis ..... we're opening up. This is also unfortunately, as I mentioned, the book as you know, the misnomer of the quote unquote, "Curse of Ham", as we know in the text, Ham is never cursed for what happens with Noah it is Canaan that is cursed. And he actually says, a curse that Canaan become a servant of servants shall he be, even though it was Ham who however you interpreted.... I've heard many different interpretations of "uncovered the nakedness he saw his father, naked," but somehow, for whatever reason, Noah cursed Canaan, not Ham. Who is Canaan... is one of him so's, his fourth son, as we know those who are listening, you may know that it is The Curse of Ham, quote, unquote, that has been used sadly, unfortunately, among many other things as a justification of the slavery of Africans. Right? That somehow, Africans are quote, unquote, "Cursed of Ham", therefore, the transatlantic slave trade, the trans Saharan slave trade, those things are somehow... God prescribed these things in the Bible, the curse was making him black. That's why he's like all those things that are nowhere in the text whatsoever, right? skin color is not in the text. slavery as a descendant of Ham. None of those things are in the text. What's in the text? Is that Canaan is cursed for that? And so we start there, Rabbi, and from there trying to walk out this whole Israel Africa thing.
Adam Mintz 08:47
First of all WOW... thank you so much. I just want to clarify in terms of color, I think that's a very interesting thing. It's very possible that in the biblical period, everybody was dark.
Dumisani Washington 09:00
Yes, sir. I mentioned that in the book as well. But yes, sir. Yes, yeah. All right. Sorry,
Adam Mintz 09:04
I didn't see that in your book. But that's important, you know, because a lot of people are caught up in this color thing. Did you know that there's a distinction, we don't know it for sure but it makes sense that everybody was dark in those periods. So that the difference in color was not significant. So when, when Moses marries goes to Ethiopia, maybe is king of Ethiopia, and marries an Ethiopian. And the idea is that he marries a foreigner. The fact that she's darker may or may not have been true.
Dumisani Washington 09:39
Yes, absolutely. No, thank you Rabbi. And I do touch on that, as well. We say in the terms in this modern term, even in my book, I use the term Christians of color and I don't usually use those terms just in when I'm speaking. I did it that way in the title so that it would be presented in a way that is going to deal with some provocative things but hopefully the people that they read it they'll see what I mean by that and if you're talking about the Israelite people, the Hebrew people they are what I call an afro Asiatic people. Israel is still at that at the point of where those two continents meet right Southwest Asia northeast Africa is landlocked with Egypt I tell people God opened up the Red Sea because he wanted to right ... He's big and bad and he can do what he wants to do but you can literally; I wouldn't recommend it obviously, but you could literally walk from Egypt to Israel and you always have been able to for 1000s of years that has always been the case and so you have a people that in terms of skin tone or whatever... Yes, absolutely, they would be what we would call today quote unquote people of color right and so unfortunately particularly in our country we all know race and colorism is such a huge topic and it's often so divisive and it's used in so many different ways and we know much of that goes back to whether slavery, Jim Crow, people being assigned work obviously based on how dark or light they are all of those things but the problem as you all know is that those things aren't in the Bible right? There's no God likes this person doesn't like this person, this person's dark this person's like, that type of thing. But again, that's what men do, we are fallen creatures, we read what we want to read into the text, and then we use it unfortunately, in a way that's not helpful. Let me just say and pause here, I can tell you that as a Christian pastor, over the years of my just delving into what we often call the Jewish roots of our faith, by studying Torah with rabbis and with other Jewish scholars, my faith has been more important to me than ever in that it helps me understand even more so right, what is the Hebrew in this word here? What do the sages say about that, that's been a fascinating journey for me, over the last 30 some odd years since I've been doing this particular work.
Geoffrey Stern 11:58
So I just want to jump in, you said so many things. But there is in this verse that we are reading today, the word "ashkenaz", he was one of the children of of Shem, and you quote, an Ethiopian Rabbi named Ephraim Isaac, and this is a sample of some of the humor in your book or the sense of discovery. And somebody said to him, You don't look Jewish. And he said:, "Ethiopia is mentioned the Bible over 50 times, but Poland not once." And I feel like that was, that was a great line. And what it really talks to is our preconceptions, and your book, and your vision, and your mission breaks preconceptions of what it is to be a Jew, what the mission of a Jew is, but most importantly, what the relationship is between the Jewish people and the African people. And one of the things that you touched upon was the sense of Mitzraim and Kush , and in your book, you really talk about how many times they're interchangeable, because really, it is the same area and those of us who think about Mitzrayim, or Egypt, we focus on the Exodus story, we focus on the pharaoh story. But as you mentioned, the prophets later on, we're having to talk to the Jews about not going back, because ultimately, the experience in Egypt was always favorable, it was our neighbor, and it was our place of refuge. Abraham goes down there with Sarah twice, Jacob sends his kids down there during a time of famine. The relationship and the reference to a Ham and to Mitzrayim and to Kush is a very positive one. And yes, it does say in our week's parsha of all of the children, it says, "b'artzetam v'goyehem" , that they have a special language, and they have a family and they have a land. So the fact that we are neighbors is so important in the biblical context. So I said if we were going to walk down this wonderful path, and I would love for a second to talk about your mission about reuniting our two peoples and some of the challenges that you have. Clearly you don't speak to groups like us very much, although I think that I'm going to have an opportunity later to say that I think you should, because there's so much that we can learn. But what is your mission? How did you discover it? And what are your challenges?
Dumisani Washington 14:40
Well, I'll do it concise, just because I don't want to take up too much time to firstly touch as much as we can. I am the founder and CEO of an organization called The Institute for Black Solidarity with Israel. I started it in 2013 but for about nearly seven years, I was not as active I started it. I did a lot of touring and a lot of speaking throughout the United States, churches, sometimes synagogues as well. And with this mission, it was a mission that was really placed in my heart. Actually in 2012, my first trip to Israel, I went as a guest of Christians United for Israel, I would come later on to join the staff with CUFA. But I was a guest pastor, I knew some friends who were part of the organization. And the short version of that story was my first tip ever, I'm in Israel, I'm at the Western Wall of the kotel. And I have a very intense experience in which I feel although Africa and Israel were passions of mine already, but the fusing of those two things together and a real work in which we continue to strengthen the alliance between Israel and Africa. And then obviously, in the States in the black and Jewish community. And there and finished the first edition of the book now, what you have there Rabbi is the second edition. And we started this organization for that very purpose to do both of those things continue to strengthen the black Jewish relationship, and also the Israel Africa Alliance. And so the challenges have been probably more than any other thing disinformation, right? There's a lot of false information that's there, when it comes to those things that would seek to divide and separate when you're talking about whether Africa Israel, now we're talking about the modern state of Israel, obviously, the rebirth of Israel in 1948. Israel's close ties with African nations throughout the continent, starting especially with Golda Meir, the foreign minister, all the way up into the 70s, where you have, as I mentioned in the book, Israel has more embassies throughout Africa than any other nation other than the United States, African economy, some of them are thriving, a great deal. You have a lot of synergy between the African nations and Israel. And after the Yom Kippur War in 1973, like never before Israel's enemies target that relationship between Israel and its African neighbors for different reasons. One of those is voting in the United Nations, right? And that became very much of a challenge. So one of the greatest challenges is, is information. What we share in the book and when we do our organization, we teach what we call an organization "Authentic History” is really simply telling what happened, how did something [happen]. Whether we're talking about biblically, whether we're discussing the parsha or we're talking about historically, right? We're talking about what the relationship was, and is. Why those connections there? And I'll just give one quick example if you're talking about black Jewish synergy in the United States, not just Dr. King's relationship with Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel in the civil rights community, not that it happened, right? But why, what was that synergy about? Right? So we've delve into that. We share from the documents from the Rabbinical Assembly; Dr. King's most famous words regarding Israel that were recorded 10 days before he was killed, right, why? And as a pastor, what we call a prophetic moment. Why 10 days before he's taken from us, is he telling the black community in the world to stand with Israel with all of our mind and protect its right to exist? Why is he saying these things? What's so important about it. And even the generation before? Why was it a black and Jewish man who changed the trajectory of this nation, Booker T. Washington, and Julius Rosenwald; millions of now first and second generation, slave; free slaves, right? but who had no access to education, not in a broader sense, and why that synergy saw some 5400 Rosenwald schools built throughout the segregated south. We touch on those historical points, and we delve into why that black Jewish synergy has been so powerful for so many people for so long. So that is our mission to strengthen those ties, because we believe that there's a great future ahead.
Geoffrey Stern 19:05
You did such amazing research. I mean, I can tell you I never knew that Herzl said about Africa, "that once I have witnessed the redemption of Israel, my people, I wish to assist in the redemption of the Africans." And that is taking a small quote out of a full paragraph where the histories of the two people are so similar. I mean, it comes to us as a pleasant surprise, these synergies but it shouldn't because both our peoples have really traversed and continue to reverse the same pathway. And you quote Marcus Garvey and even Malcolm X and William Dubois. Malcolm X says "Pan Africanism will do for the people of African descent all over the world, the same that Zionism has done for Jews. All over the world." there was a sincere admiration for this miracle of a people returning to its land, we were talking before you came on about this whole kind of image of an ark. And it reminds you of Odesyuss... and it reminds you of all of these stories of man going on this heroic journey to find their their roots to come back, gain, experience and come back to their homeland, to their Aretz.. On the one hand, your job should be very simple. I guess, like any other fights, the closer you are, the bigger the friction can be. And there's nothing bigger than the friction between brothers. But it's such a challenge to address, as you say the misinformation.
Dumisani Washington 20:51
Absolutely. And this is, again, why that's our primary goal. And then as part of what our mission is, we have launched here just recently, an initiative called The PEACE initiative. And PEACE is an acronym for Plan for Education, Advocacy, and Community Engagement, and the short version of that, again: We recruit young, black American and African young people from certain cities throughout the United States, a group of them, they go to a 16 week study course having some of the same conversations we're having now, including the modern state of Israel, ancient Israel, the United Nations, all these things that intersect when it comes to the black Jewish relations, then they will travel to Israel for about 10 days, and returned to the cities from where they've been recruited, and be the hub of black Jewish synergy in their communities. We believe with our organization that one of the reasons for the synergy that we've seen in the past, whether it was at the turn of the century with Booker T Washington, and Julius Rosenwald, or the mid part of the century with Dr. King and Rabbi Heschel, right now we are in different challenges, there are challenges that face particularly the more vulnerable black communities. And we see that that synergy could really address so many issues, whether it's education, whether it's jobs, those types of things, they can be really be addressed in a very holistic way. And really harnessing that synergy between the black and the Jewish community. And this is what we are doing. An Israel advocacy that is also rooted in these communities. And it's amazing. We see already rabbis and black pastors are working together all over the country. So that continues to happen. But we want to highlight those things even more and go even further in meeting some of the challenges what we call MC ambassadors will be leading that in different cities across the country.
Geoffrey Stern 22:02
That's amazing. I want to come back to this sense of self-discovery and pride. And we always talk about it from our own perspective. So if you're African American, you want to make sure that your children believe that black is beautiful, that they come from an amazing heritage to be proud of who they are. And if you're Jewish, you want the same thing. But it seems to me, and you kind of cage the question in this way, "Why standing with Israel will be a defining issue for Christians of color", when we as Jews can see ourselves in the black community as we did during the civil rights movement that redeems us. And that empowers us. And I think what you're saying, and I don't want to put words into your mouth, but the same thing works in reverse. That in a sense, when the African community can recognize in Israel, its own story. It also can find a part of itself. Is there any truth there?
Dumisani Washington 23:50
I believe so Rabbi. I believe that that's exactly as a matter of fact, what we saw was the synergy. So let me use the example and go back to the early 1900s with Booker T. Washington, Julius Rosenwald. The way that story happens, as you may know is that Booker T Washington writes his seminal book "Up From Slavery". Julius Rosenwald, who lives in Chicago at the time, is very active in his community. As a matter of fact, he was active, using his wealth; of those of you who don't know of Sears Roebuck fame, he is the one who took his company to this whole different level, economically and everything. And so with his wealth as a businessman, he's helping the Jews who are being persecuted in Russia. And one of his own testimony, I don't say this part of the book, but I kind of alluded to it, that here he is driving to work from the suburbs to where his factory is where his store is, and he's passing by throngs of black people who've left the South, right? looking for a better life, but they're living in very, very bad conditions, a lot of poverty and everything. And he says to himself, basically, if I'm going to do all of this to help Russian Jews right, way over the other side of the world, and I have this human crisis right here, where I live, I want to be able to do that and his, his Rabbi was Emile Hirsch, one of the founding members of the NAACP. Right? So his Rabbi encourages him. And we see this with our Jewish brothers and sisters all the time, see yourself, do help, do use your wealth, use your ability, right? To help. And so he reads Booker T. Washington's book he's taken with him, they begin to correspond. And Booker T. Washington says, Here's how you can help me I'm trying to build schools for my people who don't have access. And Rabbi to your point. Here is this man, this Jewish man who is very well aware of his history, he knows his People's History of persecution and struggle and triumph, right? Very much sees himself in that black story, and then he uses his ability. It's amazing even what he does; there's a Rosenwald film about Rosenwald schools, I believe his children were the ones who produced it. And they were saying that what he actually did was pretty ingenious, he put up a third of the money, the black community raised a third of the money, and then he challenged the broader white community to partner with them and bring the last third and that is how those Rosenwald Schools began. Because what he wanted to do, he wanted to see people come together, he wanted to see them all work together. Even though Booker T. Washington passes away only three years into that, right, that venture continues on Julius Rosenwald goes and sits on the board of the Tuskegee college, Tuskegee University, right? There's this long connection that's there. So in that struggle, the black American community, and he connected with this black American leader, the one of the most prominent of the time, Booker T, Washington, and they, like I tell people, changed the world. Like, can we imagine what the United States would have been if you had those millions of now freed slaves, right? with no access, and particularly those who are living in the Jim Crow South, no access whatsoever to education, Would the Harlem Renaissance have become what it become, with the black Wall Street, whether it was in Tulsa, whether in Philadelphia, these things that explode because of the access to education to now these first and second generations of people coming out of slavery, right? So I believe that that's the case and which is why I'll say again, here today, some of those challenges are there, some of the challenges are different than they were, obviously 50, 60, 70, 80 years ago, but we believe in organization that those challenges can be met with that same amazing synergy between the black and the Jewish community.
Geoffrey Stern 27:26
A lot of people would argue that the rift or the change of the relationship between the African American community and the Jewish community was when the Jews or Israel stopped being looked at as the David in the Goliath story and we won the Six Day War. And how do you ensure that the facts are told, but also as you climb out of the pit, and as you achieve your goals, you shouldn't be necessarily punished for being successful. Success is not a sin. It's an inspiration. But it seems to me that's one of the challenges that we have, especially in the Jewish community for our next generation of children, who really do see ourselves not as the minority and don't see ourselves anymore mirrored in the African American community.
Dumisani Washington 28:25
But one of my favorite things about the Jewish tradition of the Seder, is that you all lean and recline in the Seder today, and you tell your children, when we had the first one, we sat with our sandals on, our staff, in our hand, our belts ....because we were slaves leaving slavery, but now we are no longer. And that whole ethos of telling children, right? There's a strong parallel in the black American community, right? The whole point of going from struggle to a place where you can live in peace or at the very least, you recognize and realize the sacrifice of the people who came before you right? And I won't step into the controversial for lots of different reasons, we'll be able to unpack it, but let me just say this, for the black American experience when you're talking I often teach this in our sermons and other things that arc .... and let me say again, no, people are monolith. Obviously we just kind of put that on the table, all the Jews arent' alike all black Americans aren't alike..... Having said that, there is an overarching story when you talk about black Americans, who, from slavery to Jim Crow, segregation, black codes, all of those types of things to the modern era. And that story cannot accurately be told without talking about God and His people. In other words, when you're talking about the spirituals "Go Down Moses". "Joshua Fit the Battle of Jericho" and I talked about that in the book, these songs that are rooted in the scriptures, most of the time in, in the Tanakh, our Jewish brothers and sisters’ side of the Bible. I mean, sometimes in the New Testament, most of the time, these songs are being sung in hope. And that hope was realized, right? It's not an Negro spiritual song technically, but I put it in that category, part of the greatest one ever. I mean, how it culminates would be "Lift Every Voice and Sing" us a song that today has all these political things connected to it for lots of different unfortunate reasons. But when James Weldon Johnson wrote that song, wrote it as a poem? Those stanzas and anybody listening to this, I want to tell Google that Google Lift Every Voice and Sing"; just read the words. And this was a very powerful, very, very much God and God's love, and our hope and our faith and our trust, and our honoring the people who came before us; all of those things. And he talked about being free. Now, it's written in 1899. Right? You still have questions. I mean, there are no laws against lynching there going on, it's still crushing racism. However, he as a father in the black community is not only acknowledging what God has done, there's amazing things that are happening. One of the economist's that I quote, in my book, Thomas Sol said that the black community after slavery, and less than 50 years after slavery went from 0% literacy to almost 50% literacy, in that half a century, something economic historians say has never happened before. And now you're later on, you're talking about the black Wall Street, you're talking about black oil barons and landowners and factory owners, right? You're talking about this black middle class emerging. There's been no civil rights bill, right? There's been no Pell grants for school. These things don't even exist yet. We're talking about the 19 teens and the 1920s. You're talking about black people who had previously been slaves for hundreds of years. Why am I saying all that we as a people know full well; if we know our history, know full well what it is to come from all of those dire situations into a place of blessing, even though there may be struggles just like our Jewish brothers and sisters. We are convinced an organization that as we know, as a black community, particularly younger people that we are talking with, and teaching, as we know and appreciate our history, not the history that's regurgitated in terms of media and, and for political purposes. But truly our history, there is a great deal to be proud of about that. And to see, as I said in the sermon a couple of months ago, not only does it not a victim narrative, I descended from superheroes, my people went through slavery, Jim Crow, and still build on Wall Street still built the Tuskegee Institute. Still, we're soldiers who fighting for their own freedom in the Civil War. I mean, you're talking on and on and on things that they should have never been able to accomplish. When I consider what they accomplished with not very much help often. I recognize the greatness of the heritage that I come from, then that allows me to see an Israel rise like a phoenix from the ashes and not spurn that but recognize that our Jewish brothers and sisters have gone through millennia of this and Israel then to be celebrated, not denigrated.
Adam Mintz 33:12
Thank you. We want to thank you. Your passion, and your insight is really brought a kind of a new insight to our discussion here. We really want to thank you, you know, we at Madlik we start on time and we end on time, Shabbat is about to begin in just a little while. Hopefully we'll be able to invite you back in the future as we continue this conversation. But I know I join Geoffrey and everybody on the call and everybody who's gonna listen to the podcast. Thank you for joining us and for really your insight and your passion. You really leave us with so much to think about as we begin the Shabbat.
Dumisani Washington 33:51
Thank you. Thank you for having me.
Adam Mintz 33:53
Thank you Geoffrey, Shabbat Shalom, everybody,
Geoffrey Stern 33:55
Shabbat Shalom. And Reb Dumisani, you mentioned the songs. There's a whole chapter in your book about Negro spirituals. And as the rabbi said, w are approaching the Shabbat. And as you observe the Sunday we observed Saturday, but you know that the secret of living without a land or being on a difficult mission is that Sabbath, the strength of the Sabbath, and the connection between Noah and the word Menucha which is "rest" is obvious. And there was a great poet named Yehuda halevi. And he wrote a poem about the Yona; the dove that Noah sent out of the ark to see if there was dry land. And he he said that on Shabbat. Yom Shabbaton Eyn L'shkoach, "the day of Shabbat you cannot forget" Zechru l'reach Hanichoach" He also uses Reach Nichoach which is a pleasing scent,Yonah Matzah Bominoach, the yonah, the dove found on it rest v'shom ynuchu yegiah koach and there in the Shabbat , in that ark of rest on that ark of Sunday or Saturday is where we all gain strength. So I wish you continued success in all that you do. And that this Shabbat and this Sunday we all gather the strength to continue our mission. But I really do hope that we get another chance to study Torah together. And I really hope that all of the listeners go out and buy your book, Zionism in the Black Church because it is an absolute thrill. And I understand you're coming out with a new book that's going to talk more about the Jewish people and the various colors and flavors that we come in.
Dumisani Washington 35:55
Hopefully to put that out next year sometime. Absolutely.
Geoffrey Stern 35:59
Fantastic. Well thank you so much so Shabbat Shalom and we are we are in your debt.
Dumisani Washington 36:05
Thank you. Shabbat Shalom and looking forward to bye bye
Music: Lift Every Voice and Sing - Melinda Dulittle https://youtu.be/6Dtk9h1gZOI
Parshat Bereshit - Exile and Return is a seminal Jewish theme we normally associate with Exodus and the narrative of the Jewish People. We discover this theme in the first chapters of Genesis and in so doing discover the Hebrew Bible's universal message regarding the trauma of birth, the anxiety of life and the rewards of creativity and expansion.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/349788
Transcript:
Geoffrey Stern 00:00
Welcome to Madlik disruptive Torah. And every week, we record half an hour of what I call disruptive Torah, where we kind of look at the Torah with a new lens and maybe from a new angle and try to share that sense of discovery with our participants. So thank you all for joining. And we are going to start with Bereshit. And for those of you who have been listening and participating in clubhouse, I think you already know that one of my favorite commentators is Rashi. He wrote a commentary on all of the books of the Torah, including the Talmud, the Mishanh, I just an unbelievable encyclopedic review of the Holy Writ of the Jewish people. But it's not the expanse, it's the detail and he always brings a midrash or a quotation that is absolutely insightful and actually kind of positions the whole discussion. So the first verse of the Torah we all know "In the beginning God created the heaven in the earth." And the first Rashi starts as follows: "Rabbi Isaac said, the Torah, which is the law book of Israel, should have started with Exodus 12: 2 the first commandment "This month shall be unto you the first of the months", which is the first commandment given to Israel. "What is the reason" asks this Rabbi Isaac "then that it commences with the account of creation?" Pretty good question. We'll discuss the question in a second and its premise. And he answers "because of the thought expressed in Psalms, "God declared to his people the strength of his works, in order that he might give them the heritage of the nations.". Rashi continues, "for should the people of the world say to Israel, 'are robbers because you took by force the lands of the seven nations of Canaan', Israel may reply to them and say, from Psalms, all the earth belongs to the Holy One, bless be he. He created it, and gave it to whom he pleased, when he willed, he gave it to them. And when he willed he took it away from them and gave it to us." So Wow, what a way to begin studying the the narratives of the cosmology, the creation of the world, and our foreparents with a question of, well, what are we even reading this for? The Torah is a book of laws. It's a book that gives us the "hora'aot" the direction, the path that we should walk down. Why are we wasting our time with this mythology? And then he gives an answer, but let's stop for a second Rabbi and discuss the premise of his very question.
Adam Mintz 03:09
The premise is very problematic. The premise is that the only purpose of the book is to teach us laws. Ramban, Nachmanidies, the great Spanish scholar who lived in the 1200s. he disagrees with Rashi, here at the beginning of the Torah immediately. He says that the purpose of the book of Bereshit, of Genesis is not to teach us laws, but it's to teach us moral cause. He has a great phrase, the phrase is "Ma'aseh avot, siman l'banim" "the actions of our forefathers our models to the children", and therefore that's the reason we have all the stories in Bereshit. Rashi seems to argue with that. Rashi seems to say that, no, it's not about morality, it's about law. And if you think it's about law, there's no reason for the book of Bereshit. So Rashi needs to explain that it's to teach us about our connection to the land of Israel. So in that very first Rashi, there actually is a fundamental question about the purpose of Torah.
Geoffrey Stern 04:22
So I love the fact that you quoted "Ma'aseh avot, siman l'banim" which literally as you say means "the are stories of oure foreparents. "siman" is a sign for the children. And of course, you could expand and say "avot" could also mean as in "avot melacha" or "Pikei Avot", it could mean the most basic primary principles. So the stories of our roots, of our beginnings are is a siman is a sign for its children. But in a sense, "sign" is very similar to myth. Meaning to say that even Ramban quoting this Talmudic phrase, there's almost the recognition that we're not just telling stories here that either the stories actually occurred but they have deeper symbolic meaning. Or it's not that important that every one of them occurred because the symbolic meaning is what drives us. And if you think about that for a second, I'm not sure that is that different from what Rashi ends up answering, which is okay, the reason we need this is because these stories justify the Jewish people's coming from another place and coming into the land that was at the time that they came in occupied by another people. And the ethical, moral, or you could even say political message, the "siman" that we are getting from these stories is that you know what, no one owns anything. The earth belongs to the Lord. And he can give and he can take and that's a big message, I think for life. But but really they're all kind of on the same page from the fact that none of them, correct me if I'm wrong, is interested or believes that these stories by themselves as a historical record, belong in our holy book, they have to symbolize something, they have to inspire us in some way. Would you agree to that?
Adam Mintz 06:51
I would agree. Now, the idea of myths is a fascinating idea. I actually spoke about this right before Yizkor. There's the new book by Dara Horn. the book by Dara Horn is some title like people, "Why do people love dead Jews?" It's a provocative title. But she has a collection of essays. She raises the following idea, which is a great idea. You know, we're all brought up Geoffrey with the idea that the way that we all got our American names is our forefathers, our grandparents came to Ellis Island, and they only knew Yiddish. So they were asked by the by the representative at Ellis Island: "What's your name?" And they answered, "shoyn Forgesin", which means in Yiddish "I forgot". And the representative said, okay, your name is "Shawn Fergeson"And that's how everybody got their American names. They didn't know any English so they made up something and that became their American names. Dara Horn, the author points out that that is not true. We know that that's not true. What's true is that in the 1930s, we have multiple court records about Jews who actually went to courts in America, especially in New York, to change their names, because there was so much anti semitism in America, and they couldn't get jobs and they couldn't get into schools, and they couldn't get into colleges. And therefore they they asked to change their names. She said, Where does the myth come from? The myth comes from the fact that we as American Jews want to protect America, we want to protect the Jewish relationship with America. So therefore, that myth of Ellis Island is a much better myth than the truth. And I think Geoffrey, that's a very interesting idea here. When you talk about the myth of the stories in the book of Genesis. Did they happen? Did they not happen? The point is, it doesn't make any difference whether they happened or they didn't happen. But each one of them grapples with a moral issue. And not all of them are easily resolvable. Let's take Geoffrey the most difficult one of all, God says to Abraham, I want you to sacrifice your son. Now, the question is not whether that actually happens, or not, the question is why Abraham said, Okay, I'll sacrifice my son. What right did he have to sacrifice his son even at God's Word? So the entire book of Genesis is made up of these "Ma'aseh avot, siman l'banim" these stories, these myths that come to teach us a moral lesson. So I think Dara Horn is really on to something, that sometimes the myth is more important. Then the fact because it comes to teach us something important.
Geoffrey Stern 10:05
I think that's great. And clearly, these are myths that resonated, certainly when the Torah was edited, put together, and then re-read over and over again, these are myths that work picked for a reason. And then by simply being repeated so many times they take on a life of their own. And you get to see how different generations and different people react and interact with them. I have to say, as an aside here, that Elie Wiesel wrote a book on Rashi. And it struck Elie Wiesel that the first Rabbi that Rashi quotes is named Rabbi Yitzchok. And of course Rahi's name is Shlomo ben Yitzchak. So the truth is, this is a rabbi that comes from the Yalkut Shimoni it was not his father. But again, it does give another rendering to "Ma'aseh avot, siman l'banim" that we are looking almost like a Rorschach inkblot at the same stories that were looked at, by our forefathers, our forbearers in the case of Judaism, by Christians, by Muslims, by scholars. And that's kind of fascinating, too, I just find that the term that the stories of our past are a sign to us is so so pregnant with meaning, and makes it all so exciting. And getting back to your point about the sacrifice of Isaac, you know, another way to look at myths, and we're gonna start talking about how the psychoanalysts looked at it is like a dream as well. And, you know, the thing about a dream, especially a nightmare, is it's made to resolve certain things, talking about it, hearing it, repeating it over and over again. And then we can manufacture the ending sometimes. So the ending does become important. So I've always thought that the punch line of the sacrifice, or the binding of Isaac was that he wasn't sacrificed. But that is a story that we are going to discuss in the future. What I want to spend the rest of today's discussion talking about is something that I thought about for the first time this year. And that is that when Rashi brings up this point, that why do we need the stories? And he answers with a seemingly very provincial, national answer saying, well, it's in order that we should not be called colonizers, because we're going to come and we're going to, at a certain point in time, take this land that we admit, we are not originally from. And we need these stories to justify that land grab, so to speak. But what it really comes down to, and this is the insight that I want to spend the rest of the day talking about, is that the earth belongs to the Lord. And I would say, it's arbitrary that we own this, or we sit here or we live there. And then there's this other issue, which I really want to focus on, which is that none of us belong to a particular place in the sense we're all alienated from it. From the beginning of the Torah, we're going to see more than I think any of us ever expected. The theme of exile, over and over again in the first, just four chapters of Genesis. And Rashi is even here talking about this concept of exile and return that comes up much later in the narrative. But he brings it to the beginning of the Torah and that I think is not provincial is not partisan, but actually is one of the primary themes of the Bible. So in terms of the Bible itself, we all know that Adam in the second chapter, it has the story of man being created by himself. Maybe he was androgynous we don't know. But after looking for a helpmeet throughout the animal kingdom, God fashioned his rib in 2: 22 And it says, "and he had taken from the man into the woman, and he brought her to the man, then the man said, this one at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh, this one shall be called woman." So here you have this beautiful image of the unity of mankind of a man cleaving to his wife. And then it goes on to say, "for from men, she was taken. Hence, a man leaves his father and mother, and clings to his wife, so that they shall become one." So we have already in the second chapter, the first instance of this tension between being unitary, whole, complete, and being separated. And there's almost this sense of the separation is a necessary part of our identity. Ever think, and I'm not even talking about the amount of times in the process of creation itself. We had God is doing "havdalah" where he's creating by separating Earth from land, sky from the abode. Have you ever thought about it this way Rabbi Adam?
Adam Mintz 16:21
Yeah, well, the idea of separating.... you brought up a whole bunch of different things here. Let's talk about the last thing, the idea of separating the entire story of the six days of creation, is the story about separating, separating night from day, light from darkness, animals from people, the sun and the moon, everything has its opposite. What do you make of that? Why do you think that's so important, that in the story of creation, everything has its opposite?
Geoffrey Stern 17:03
Well, I think again, it gives us an insight into the biblical mind, the mind of the Bible's sense of God. And so many things about Genesis is about either dividing or choosing and when you choose, you also are selecting one thing and rejecting something else. It just seems so written in to the fabric. You can almost make the case that creation itself was not so much out of nothing, which is a Greek term, a modern term, but was this act of separating and repositioning. And it does become something that if you use it as a lens, enables you to understand much about the different narratives. In this particular case. I focused first upon man and wife, which is kind of, you know, the beginnings of society, separate from their father and mother, who is the father and mother of Adam and Eve. It's God in a sense, and of course, that story gets picked up a few verses later, in chapter three, when the famous Original Sin occurs. And at this point, God says to the woman, I will give you birth pangs, "b'etzev tilady", you shall give birth in pain, when you bear children, and your husband will rule over you, but also will struggle to pull crops from the ground, "by the sweat of your brow, shall you have bred to eat". Some of the modern day psychologists look at this whole story as the beginning of the "trauma of birth", that here, man was first created without those birth pangs. And he was first created without needing to separate the crop from the earth and to create creation, so to speak. And the first story of creation is this major separation where we are thrown out of the Garden of Eden. So again, everything that we've been talking about till now has focused on this separation. You can even call it alienation That we are torn apart. And that's how on the one hand, you could make an argument creation happens. But certainly it's the source of a lot of anxiety.
Adam Mintz 20:12
I mean, there's no question that that's right. A couple of things you brought up, number one, the idea of Adam and Eve not having parents. But then you have the story in chapter three of the sin. And God really takes the position of Adam and Eve's parents in the sense that he's the one who reprimands them, and he's the one who punishes them. I was always wondering, Geoffrey, the rabbis say an amazing thing. The rabbis say that Adam and Eve were created, they were put in the Garden of Eden, but they never actually slept a night in the Garden of Eden. They couldn't even make it one night, before nightfall they had already sinned. Why do you think it is that there was somehow a need for the Torah to tell us that they sinned so quickly, that part of the nature of human beings is to sin? What do you make of that?
Geoffrey Stern 21:16
Well, it's certainly the source or the intention of that type of explanation of the myth would come from the fact that it was it was just a taste, it was just so fleeting. And it happened in an instant. And I think that what I kind of come up with is, first of all, how final the divorce, how final the expulsion from the Garden of Eden was, you have these Cherubim, you have these angels with a sword, standing guard over it. It almost sounds as if it was part of the birth pang. It was a rupture, it had to occur, that everything that lies ahead, is after this fact. And that this story was there less to tell you about the bliss of the Garden of Eden, but more to focus you on the project that begins after the expulsion. That's my read. But it's true. We don't spend a whole lot of time on the pearly gates, the beauty of the Garden of Eden, it's almost as though On the flip side, the Torah doesn't spend much time, or any time at all, I would argue on describing a heaven. on describing a pearly end it's all about what lies ahead of us..
Adam Mintz 23:08
That point is such a good point. Because the Garden of Eden is much more important symbolically as the place where they will go back to, right? When we say when somebody dies, "b'gan eden t'he menuchatam" that their resting place will be in the garden of Eden. So the Garden of Eden becomes a place we're going back to not a place that we spend very much time in. That's a fascinating idea.
Geoffrey Stern 23:42
So that's a great segue for me to talk a little bit about the psychoanalytic analysts and Otto Rank, wrote two two books 10 years apart. One was called "The myth of the birth of the hero", and the other was called "The trauma of birth". And in the myth of the birth of the hero, he gives much credit to Freud and Freud actually, I wrote on this subject in a book he wrote called "Moses and Monotheism" and that is, and we'll discuss this when we get to Moses, is how almost to a "T" in every one of the ancient mythologies whether it's Romulus and Remus, or whoever. There's this story about the Royal heir, the prince who is expelled from the home, maybe it's because the father is afraid that he's going to come and usurp the throne, has to go out .... many times he's put into a raft through a boat, is raised by animals or simple people. And then you have like Odysseus, a whole way of coming back. Ultimately, if you get to the Oedipus story, he then comes back and he kills his father. He gets his mother and all is resolved. And that's what Rank writes about in this "myth of the birth of the hero". But he makes a major change when he talks about "the trauma of birth". And what he says there is that there's something even more primal, then this, Oedipus and this hero, and what that is, we are all born of women, so to speak, we all are ruptured and thrown into the world. And we are separated from that warm place of our origins. And unlike the Oedipus myth, he claims and I think he's right, and that's why I'm bringing it up now is that it doesn't necessarily or it does necessarily not get resolved. In other words, none of us can go back into the womb. And he brings the Cherubim outside of Eden, because he does see the creation of Eve from Adam, as a way to, to kind of detour around the birth of of humans as it actually occurs. And he does talk about taking the apple off the tree as giving birth to it and separating it. And what he talks about is the whole sin, the whole original sin that all of us human beings have to try to address and not necessarily resolve is this original disruption in our lives. And what argues is that you do not go back to Eden. And I do think you're absolutely right, that we talk about "Gan Eden Mi'Kedem". And we talk about in our prayers going back to Eden, but Eden does not feature as much in Judaism as in Christianity, the Fall does not feature as much. But certainly, there's this sense that the trauma of birth is something that we can't put back, you can't put the genie back inside of the bottle. And that's what kind of is intriguing to me. And again, when we look at myths, some myths, you can wrap with a bow, and they resolve themselves, and others are ones that are just the human condition that we have to deal with.
Adam Mintz 27:29
Yes, that is right. And you say that here in the in the very beginning of the Torah, we're really introduced to different kinds of myths. Now we talk about myths. Then you talk about the story of fratricide where Cain kills Abel. That's very much not a myth. That feels very real, doesn't it?
Geoffrey Stern 27:56
Well, it absolutely does. But thank you for bringing it up. Because that, I would say is the fourth instance, in our parsha this week, where we have this sense of being a wanderer on the earth, the punishment that Cain gets goes back to the same thing that happened with Adam. It says, If in Genesis 412, it says, "If you till the soil, it shall no longer yield its strength to you." So this birth process will no longer be natural. And then it says you shall become a ceaseless wanderer on the earth. "Na v'nad ti'hiye b'aretz" Then he goes on to say that I "geyrashta" I will divorce you from the face of the earth. And it uses the phrase that we discovered in Deuteronomy at the end of the story, and it goes "umipanecha Ester" and I will hide my face from you. So again, these themes that we thought developed all the way at the end, were there all the way at the beginning as kernels. And then finally, where does Cain go to live and This to me is discovering humor in the Bible as well. "veYashav b'eretz Nod", and he settled he dwelt in the land of Nod. Nod is the same word for Na v'nad", that is he settled in the land of wandering.
Adam Mintz 28:05
Which means he never settled.
Geoffrey Stern 29:34
He absolutely never settled. He felt responsible for death, he had that guilt. And again, you can say yes, it's a real story. It's not a myth. But if you look at it in terms of all of the narratives that we've seen in Genesis, so far, through this lens, in the first four chapters, it's all about being sent into exile, alienated from one's source ripped away from whether it's the tree, whether it's the father, be it God or one's parents.... cleaving on to each other, to me, it just is so amazing that even though we're not talking about the story of the Jewish people that Rashi focused us on to, the idea is in humanity is this same trope of, of literally from the beginning, we are separated. And if you ask the same question that Rashi asks, from that perspective, then the answer is it needs to start here, because the journey is all about somehow regaining that unity that wholeness, that, that completion. So what what I also discovered is this amazing essay by Bialik, and it's called "Jewish Dualism". And he looks at all of Jewish history, he picks up on where Rashi left off. And he says that, you know, we've been out of the land more than we've been in it. Every time we've left, we've expanded, we've grown. He talks about "a group which adapts itself to the ways of life of the whole world, but nonetheless remains a people dwelling apart." And that's part of the other narrative. And he talks about this strength that it gives us. And I think he wrote it in the same year, as Otto Rank, wrote his book, and they both come to an interesting conclusion. And that is that it's not all a negative thing, that from each expansion and contraction from each exile and return. We enrich ourselves and we enrich others. And Bialik, who is considered the poet Laureate of Zionism, even ends his essay with the following statement, which is mind blowing, he says "And who knows, perhaps after hundreds of years, [of living in the State of Israel], we will be emboldened to make another Exodus, which will lead to the spreading of our spirit over the world, and assiduously striving towards glory." So he really sees it as a pathway going forward of enrichment that is intrinsic to the biblical project. And Rank talks about artists and philosophers and religionists who are able to take this trauma of being born against one's will being passed out and separated from one's natural mother parents from God from this sense of unity and he sees it also as a potential for amazing creation. And He therefore doesn't call the hero the hero anymore he calls it the artist which is kind of fascinating to me so I really do think that the the question is a good one Why do we read these stories? It's a question we all have to ask ourselves and how we answer it really says a lot about ourselves and the direction we want to go in but certainly having multi generations talk about the same texts like Rashi and his father Yitzchok and like you and I and like our listeners is part of the creative project which I think brings us together so anyway, I just love discovering these themes of exile and return so early in the mythological narrative, and I hope you do as well.
Adam Mintz 34:11
What a good star Geoffrey. We thank everybody enjoy the parsha Bereshit, and we look forward to continuing Noach next week. And we look forward to a great year of studying parshiyot together with you on Madlik. So thank you, everybody. Shabbat Shalom and enjoy the parsha.
Join a live recording of Madlik disruptive Torah on Clubhouse with Geoffrey Stern, Rabbi Adam Mintz and Rabbi Avraham Bronstein as we use the book of Kohelet to explore the fundamental difference between the Torah given at Sinai and the Wisdom literature we share with our ancient Near Eastern neighbors. We explore the difference between linear and cyclical time and we wonder why we need a healthy dose of common sense, living in the moment and even cynicism after the Jewish New Year.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/348859
Transcript:
Geoffrey Stern 00:00
So welcome to Madlik disruptive Torah every week at four o'clock on clubhouse eastern time, we have a half an hour discussion of the Parsha. And by disruptive we mean we look at things maybe from a slightly different angle and hopefully help our participants look at it slightly differently as well. And this week is no exception. So Rabbi Adam challenged me last week to talk about Kohelet Ecclesiastes and that is what we're going to do. And we're going to start with the first verse because in that first verse is so much of what is to follow, and it raises so many questions about authorship and about the sense of the message. So this is how it begins The words of Kohelet, Son of David king in Jerusalem. utter futility, said Kohelet, utter futility, all is futile." And of course, the Hebrew is "haval havalim" And that translation of utter futility, or "vanity all is vanity" is from the King James Bible, and probably we've all absorbed it. So the question that really comes up is Who was this guy? Kohelet? Was it a real person? Or is it a nom de plume for the writer? And then of course, the other question is, what does it mean that all of life is vanity? So why don't I start right there and open up to the discussion of what are you guys thoughts on who is Kohelet what is Kohelet? Avraham? Why don't you store
Avraham Bronstein 01:45
The words after Kohelt are "Ben David Melech Yerushalyim". So whoever Kohelet is, he's the son of David king in Jerusalem. That kind of narrows it down. That's why the tradition is that the author King Solomon.
Geoffrey Stern 02:00
So I think you're absolutely right. Of course, we're all called B'nai Yisrael And Yisrael is not my actual father. So that's not totally true, in terms of necessarily making it Shlomo. And then I mentioned a second ago that we all read "Vanity of Vanities", and that comes from the King James Bible. And I hardly doubt that King James translated the Bible. But what he did was he financed a group of people to translate the Bible. So all of a sudden, we have a lot of complication, when it says, somebody wrote a book, did he actually write it? Or did he support it? And when it says, We are a child, does it mean a follower? Does it mean an actual child? Rabbi, Adam, where do you come in on this?
Adam Mintz 02:50
So there are a couple things. First of all, I want to bring everyone's attention, there's an amazing English translation of the Bible, written by a professor from Berkeley by the name of Robert Alter, and generally he's good, and his introductions to Kohelet is especially good. The first thing he says is what Geoffrey says. And that is Kohelet Ben David doesn't mean that he's the son of David doesn't have to be Solomon. And it means that he came from the Davidic family. Now, that's one thing. So we could be many generations later. And the scholars all think it was later. The other thing is, and I think this is interesting to consider when you write a book, and there's some kind of competition, whether or not your book is going to be included in the Bible. You very often want to give yourself some credibility. It might be to give yourself some credibility. You say, I'm William Shakespeare, I wrote this play. Like it was 500 years ago. I don't know if William Shakespeare wrote it, or William Shakespeare didn't write. But if I say that I'm William Shakespeare, then I give myself credibility. So it is possible that the author of go hell it is not indeed the son of David or a descendant of David. But he knew that if he wanted to get his book into the Bible, he needed to call himself a son of David. That's a little cynical, but I think it's something to consider.
Geoffrey Stern 04:31
Well, it gets but it does get even better because it's not as though he said my name is Shlomo. Like he did for the Song of Songs that he said Shir HaShirim asher l'Shlomo" he took on a Nom de plume, and he engendered this whole conversation that we're talking about him so it is kind of fun that way.
Adam Mintz 04:55
Not only a name that we've never heard before, but the structure Kohelet is a very funny structure. That's not the way you say it. If the word Kohelet means the one who gathers people, there's a way to say that in Hebrew "make'el" "he gathers people" Kohelet is a very strange form of the term to gather people. So Geoffrey, it's almost as if he chose a name for himself, a Nom de plume and it's not even real, meaning that he just chose a name for himself. So I think that's interesting. "vanities of vanities" of course, the King James made that famous. Alter points out and this has been pointed out by many, many people, the word has really means breath. And "hevel havalim hakol hevel" really means that everything is no more than breath. The same way when you breathe in the cold, and you can see your breath, but it's really nothing. That's what life is have, "hevel havalim amar Kohelet" All life is like that. It's like the breath that looks like it's something but it's really nothing.
Geoffrey Stern 06:19
So we don't have a dearth of material today, that's for sure. So the word that he took forgetting about who he was, as you point out, Kohelet means to gather. It's one who assembles and even in the translation into Latin Ecclesiastes, which literally means someone who gathers an ecclesiastical court is a gathering. It's an assembling an audience. It can also mean gathering ideas, gathering truth, and different opinions. If you look at Kings 1, here it says, "Oz yikahal Shlomo", that Solomon convoked, the elders of Israel, and this is when he read, dedicated or he dedicated the temple on Sukkot time, those of us and I said this in the pre party, who remember the episode two times ago about the revolution of the Aleph Beit, we know that in the time of Sukkot, was this "VaYakel" this commandment to publicly read the book of the Torah. So I will almost venture to say my pet name for Kohelet is Mr. Sukkot, in a sense, because what he's doing is he's bringing the themes together, that we've kind of been discussing for a while, and we're going to get into how deep that is this idea of this short breath, I absolutely love Alter says it. Also, Rabbi Sacks, talks about it. And he says, everything to do with life in Judaism refers to a breath. So there's a "Neshama", which comes from the word "Linshom" to breathe. There's Nefesh. there's Ruach, which is wind. And what he says "hevel" is, is a very short breath. It's a very superficial breath. It's that breath of the fleeting breath. And what he is saying is that the sense that we're going to get from the book that follows is the fleetingness of life. But it comes at a moment where maybe that's it's all we have. And so I think all of these kind of themes come together. And if we think about Sukkot, there are so many words that have to do with in gathering. It just occurred to me You know, they always say the Eskimos have so many words for snow. Here we have Ketzir, the "hag Hakazir or the Hag Ha'assaf" these are the gathering of the crops. We have the lulav in the Etrog and the Arba minim (four species) that have to be bound together. We have the very word for moed, which is a holiday, but as "Ohel Moed" It's a tent of meeting. It's a time to come all together. So all of these concepts of binding of coming together of gathering of welcoming other thoughts all come to the fore at this moment, and that's why I say that maybe Kohelet is Mr. Sukkak.
Adam Mintz 09:41
Great. I love it. Now the question is, why is that so? Why is Sukkot the holiday of gathering?
Geoffrey Stern 09:51
so I'm going to call on Avraham before he leaves because he started talking about something that I really want to get into. He talked about the difference between cyclical time and linear time. And that short little breath. That was momentary time, where does that fit in Avraham?
Avraham Bronstein 10:12
So before I say anything I want to riff on what you were saying a second ago, that connection between Hakel and Kohelet that was great. Because if you continue in Devarim, right, what we read a few weeks ago where the mitzvah of Hakel is first kind of spoken about. The whole point is, everyone has to be there to hear the Torah being read. . "Lman yishmau ve lilmadu l'yira et hashem Elokehchem" the point ultimately, to arrive at "yira" reverence of God, which is actually the point of the entire book of Kohelet when it comes down to the very end after everything is said and done. "sof Davar HaKol Nishma" The point of Hakel is to arrive at Yira, the point of Kohelt is to arrive at the same place... a connection I never ever saw before or thought about before, but I think now is actually very compelling. So first, thank you.
Geoffrey Stern 11:09
You're welcome.
Avraham Bronstein 11:11
That's great. The second thing is to address what you just asked, maybe we can unpack this a little bit more based on what you said. But the overall sense of what Kohelet is trying to say in the first several verses, and then you get back to it again, is that everything always stays the same that people try to do things that people build things and they accumulate things that they expend effort, and they do all these different things. But ultimately, everything kind of repeats itself everything, the same generation comes generation goes nothing really changes it and to a degree. You know, you're reading this at the end of the year, when one agricultural season is ending and the next one is starting at the same time, the ingathering festival. So last year's harvest is coming in. But the farmers are all getting ready to plant next year's crop. They're already praying for rain for next year's crop. So again, your sense of time moving in a circle where you've arrived at the end but even while you're ending you're beginning again and your in the same place you were a year ago.
Geoffrey Stern 12:22
There is this sense of do Rosh Hashannah and do Yom Kippur and then "repeat". And the thing that really struck me in reading some of the thoughts of Rabbi Sacks is he also discusses the difference between happiness and joy between Osher and Simcha and he makes the difference, that Simcha like that short breath is absolutely momentary, and Osher we talk about Ashray Yoshvey vetecha... all throughout Psalms and other writings we're trying to look for a life well lived. And what he points out and again it kind of touches upon their sense of cyclical or lineal is that we land at this moment between the end of the last year and the beginning of the new and of course, for a farmer that comes where you're pulling the crops and I'm not a farmer, but I know the second you pull in the crops The next thing you do is start preparing the land for the next crop. And it's this sense of simcha is what we call it zeman simchataynu. He says that the simcha that we feel, the absolute joy, unadulterated joy that we feel is of the moment... is that short breath, if we read the rest of Kohelet we're gonna see a sense of eat, drink and be merry type type of Simcha. It's something that's very special and distinct from that kind of linear progression of slow growth over time over maybe a lifetime that we are so accustomed to. We've binged on Judaism for the last two, three weeks, maybe even a month and a half. And this is a very special time that I think Jewish tradition kind of understood that somehow Kohelet, which is from the Wisdom literature, and we're going to get into that in a second, was able to grasp and able to convey more than traditional types of linear Torah texts that have a beginning in Eden and an end in Redemption might have is that the kind of area that you're going to be talking about a little bit. Rabbi Avraham?
14:59
A little bit. Yeah, kind of you're doing the same thing over and over again. But what are you doing a little bit differently this year as opposed to last year?
Geoffrey Stern 15:08
Interesting, I would, I would say that the argument of Kohelet is "not so different". His argument is very humbling from the perspective of someone who believes that the life of us as an individual, and life of us as a people, is a long project is a struggle has a beginning, a middle and an end, and a slow evolution, and investment. I think much of what Kohelet is about and we're not going to be able to read the book today. But stay tuned, go to synagogue and listen to it. It's literally almost a rebellion against that, or at least an alternative side of the coin, in terms of "you know what, it's just a moment and when things are good, take the good and when things are bad look forward to when the sun will shine again." What do you think, Adam?
Adam Mintz 16:06
So I wonder about a slightly different point. And that is what do you make about Kohelet come coming a week after Yom Kippur. When we take life so seriously, "mi Yichiye, Mi Yamut" who will live and who will die, who by fire, who by water, everything is very serious. And all of a sudden comes King Solomon or whoever it is; Kohelet and says haveil havalim hakol hevel. That everything is Vanity of vanities or breath or whatever the word may be. What do you make of that reading kohelet right after Yom Kippur?
Geoffrey Stern 16:51
I think that no one can say it's unintentional. That's the one thing I think I can safely say. But I do believe the intention is rather strong. And I do believe that your question is a wonderful segue into what I'd like to spend the rest or at least a large portion of the discussion discussing, which is that co Kohelet comes from Wisdom Literature. We all know that King Solomon was not referred to as a Torah scholar. He was referred to as a wise man. And that is not simply an adjective or a description. It is a trigger. In the Ancient Near East, there is much literature that is called Wisdom Literature. And those of you who know Shai Held he's a Rosh Hayeshiva at Hadar. Well, I took a course from his father at Columbia, and his name was Moshe Held, and he was an expert in Ugaritic and Akkadian and he explained what the difference is between wisdom literature and Torah, and you will listen to these three rules, and it will make you listen and read differently. When you study Kohelet, when you study Ecclesiastes, or Proverbs, or even the Song of Songs or Job. Number one, it's only about the individual, nothing to do with a nation, it's about a single person. Number two, it's unhistorical. There's no nationalism, the name of Israel is never mentioned, the only difference and I underline only, between the wisdom literature of our neighbors, the Sumerians, the Mesopotamians, and the Egyptians and us is that when they cry out to god, they might cry out to three gods, we cry out to one ... it's monotheism. But otherwise, you couldn't find something more stark, then wisdom literature as something that was shared by every nation and society in our neighborhood. It's practical, and Professor Held ends by saying that anybody, anybody who studies a book like Kohelet or Ecclesiastes and doesn't understand this difference is operating with a false eyeglass. And, unfortunately, we tend to break down that barrier and homogenize Wisdom Literature with Torah. But as you all know Torah talks about the people of Israel Torah talks about history in terms of Egypt in terms of Sinai, none of those terms would ever find themselves in wisdom literature and the real key is when we say Eitz Hayim hi L'machazikim ba"; "that it is a tree of life to those hold on to it" that comes from Proverbs. And we have homogenized that I would say kidnapped it. And we talking about Torah. But it's not about Torah. It's about Wisdom. When we read Proverbs, and we say "listen to the "Torat Imecha" listen to the Torah of your mother. It doesn't mean Torah, it means the wisdom of your mother. So Held and other scholars need us to understand. And this really relates to the question that you asked Rabbi Adam, about why are we reading this book, it's not only reading this book, it's reading a book from a totally different tradition than the Torah tradition. And it is included in our, in our canon, we call it TaNaKh, Torah, Nevi'im veKetuvim. Ketuvim is the written books of Wisdom Literature. So they're probably accepted as different as they are because they were written in Hebrew, and they were part of our culture. But it's a stark difference. And I think I'd love to hear your comments on this. But I think what it does is it raises the stakes in your question. It's not simply Why did we pick one of the 24 books to read on Sukkot when we had other choices? It's why did we pick one of the most representative books of the common wisdom, the common practical guidelines? And yes, the cynical and I would say fatalistic viewpoint that was shared by all humanity to read after such a Jewish month?
Adam Mintz 21:52
So I just want to I want to strengthen your question. There's a rabbinic teaching in something called Masechet Sofrim that was written around the year 800. And it says that on Shabbat Hol HaMoed Pesach we read Shir HaShirim (the Song of Songs) because Shir Hashirim is about a love story. It's about spring time, it's perfect for Pesach. That we read the book of Ruth on Shavuot, because it's about acceptance of mitzvot. It's about conversion, whatever that means. And it's perfect for Shavuot. We read Esther on Purim, we read a Eicha (Lamentations) on Tisha B'Av. What's amazing about that teaching in Masechet Sofrim is it does not mention that we read Kohelet on Sukkot. That seems to be a later tradition. That was not part of the original tradition. And it might be that there's something in that Geoffrey, it was it was more communal, the community felt after the heaviness of Rosh HaShannah and Yom Kippur that we needed a book like Kohelet.
Geoffrey Stern 23:10
I think so. I'd like to just for the purposes of sharing my discovery that goes back 40 years about Near Eastern Wisdom Literature, to read some parallel texts. So in Ecclesiastes 1: 2 we read "Hevel Havalim, which now we know is a short breath, a short breath, otter futility, utter futility what real value is there for a man in all the gains he makes beneath the sun, one generation goes another comes, but the earth remains the same forever." Here's from The Epic of Gilgamesh, "Who my friend can scale Heaven, only the gods live forever under the sun. As for mankind numbered are their days, whatever they achieve is but the wind, even here though art afraid of death." There are stories about and parallels to this concept of riches that comes up, or even scholarly pursuits. Gilgamesh goes on, "do we build a house forever? Do we seal contracts forever? Do brothers divide shares forever, does hatred persist forever in the land. Since the days of yore, there has been no permanence, the resting of the dead how alike are they? Do they not compose a picture of death, the commoner and the noble?" These themes about the difference between us is less than what we have in common the Pauper in the king both end up in the same place, that riches won't give you anything. These are themes that are shared by all of humanity, and didn't change as a result of the revolution of the Jewish people. And if anything, if anybody knows anything, I believe in the in the past six months of Madlik, I believe that there is much that's unique about Judaism and we contributed so much. But we get to this moment. And we say, you know, it's all said and done, we've changed the way we celebrate the New Year. The other nations they make their earthly King into their ruler, we make God into our ruler we change the way we read our texts, other traditions hide it in a holy of holies. And let only the priestly caste read it. We democratize it, all of the changes that we've discussed, all of the revolutions that were led by the Hebrew project, when it's all said and done in Yom Kippur and Rosh Hashannah are all over. I think what we do is we make a an amazing stop. And we say, but at the end of the day, we're still human. At the end of the day, all we have is that short breath. And I think that, too, is an amazingly humbling, but also liberating concept. And maybe that's where the simcha comes in.
Adam Mintz 26:30
I think that's great. I think that that's really a nice, you know, a nice explanation, kind of for the evolution of Kohelet as almost a continuation of Yom Kippur. It's interesting that right after Kohelet that we have Simchat Torah which is really a celebration of the whole process, right? It's a celebration of the whole month, and that you can't have the celebration without having both Yom Kippur. And Kohelet. They're both part of the celebration, one without the other isn't good enough.
Geoffrey Stern 27:09
I mean, I totally agree. And it also makes us look a little bit differently at Yom Kippur and Rosh Hashannah, which actually are not really in history, either. They're really about us, as a universal people (humankind). If you think about the themes that I described before that are unique to the wisdom literature and the wisdom world. It's kind of interesting. Now when you look back, that you can see that Rosh Hashannah is actually a very universal holiday, we celebrate the birth of the world, or some say the birth of man. We we discuss who rules us and who doesn't. And then on Sukkot, even though there's an attempt to tie it into the exodus from Egypt, and it's not a great attempt, you know, everybody argues and says, Did they really the Jews really live in thatched roof structures? Or did they live in actual tents. But the point is, that there's this temptation to try to bring so called back into the other Regalim, the other pilgrimage, holidays, and make it kind of historic, but on the other hand, it's in nature, it's out of the house. I mean, you have to believe even in the days of the temple, they moved out of the temple and went into this sukkah. It literally takes what makes us human. And it brings us outside and I have to say that one idea, one thought that I had you mentioned Simchat Torah. You know, I said a second ago that in wisdom literature, when you say to "torah", you don't mean the Torah that was revealed or given at Sinai. When you say "torat immecha", you mean the wisdom of your parents, of your elders, have prior generations of lives already lived? And I wonder whether we have the license to celebrate one or the other or both torot... meaning to say this this confluence of finishing the yearly public reading of the Torah which is an amazing democratizing event. But there's also simchat torah, Simcha as described by by Rabbi Sacks which is this momentary, just take life by the coattails and laugh when you can and cry when you have to. And that torah that wisdom the simchat torah.... I really just thought about it kind of this morning when I was thinking about simchat torah. Do we have that license? Do you give me that license? Adam,
Adam Mintz 27:10
I give you that license. I love it.
Geoffrey Stern 30:09
So it's, it's, it's really an amazing book and amazing tradition and we Jews, who always talk about how distinctive we are and how different we are ... on the culmination.... And I think you really can refer to Sukkot as a combination as a climax. And the climax of the climax again, is shmini atzeret, which again, the word ottzer means to gather in to retain, to keep everybody around. But the climax at the end of the day is when all is said and done. And now I'm gonna sound like I wrote wisdom. Sof davar Hakol nishma... what do we have, we all have the same sun and sky over us, we have the same end. It's such a universal message. And it's such an unvarnished message because if you read the wisdom literature, whether it's Jewish or Sumerian, or Mesopotamian, it doesn't pull any punches ever. You know, we can beg for our lives and for rain on Yom Kippur. And Rosh Hashannah. But when you read the wisdom literature, it makes it very clear, you can beg all you want, but the God or the gods, they act using their own logic, and all we have is just what we can grasp in a breath.
Adam Mintz 31:40
I think that's great. I think that there are so many different pieces here. I think that that's great. You know, so many Roh hashannah and Yom Kippur piece. The idea of the breath, I think Rabbi Sacks really captures so much by talking about the fact that hevel means a breath, I think that's great.
Geoffrey Stern 32:00
So I couldn't finish without going to one of my favorite folk songs of the 60s, which is Pete Seeger's Turn, turn, turn. And it probably is the first, maybe only time that a writer literally took the words of Scripture, and turned them into a hit song, and turn turn turn really just captures both in the title. And also in the lyrics. You know what we're talking about, that when all is said and done, it's just a cycle in a sense. And all we have is the ability to go one step at a time, go forward, there's a time for love. There's a time for hate. There's a time for peace. And what he added was, "I hope it's not too late". And what what I was surprised to find out is that first of all why he wrote this song, his agent told him Pete, cut out the revolutionary songs, no one wants to hear any more about changing the world. And for some reason he had in his notebook, the words of Kohelet. And he submitted them, and in his mind, Kohelet was a guy with a long beard and sandals, who was definitely a rebel rouser. But the agent said, It's from Scripture. Finally, you gave me something that I want. And a few years ago, Pete gave 45% of the royalties from the song to the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions. So he made a political statement. He kept 50%. And then he said, 5%, he added on because he added, "I hope it's not too late". So those were his own words. But this story gave me simcha when I read it, and it showed us how we have to take the words that we study and that we read, make them our own dance to them, clap to them. And I just want to wish everybody an amazing Simchat Torah, whatever torah you're celebrating, and that we should all savor the moment and be able to savor those small little breaths that we make. And I have to say, Rabbi, it's been a wonderful few months I reading the Torah with you. And one of the things that I will be celebrating is our partnership here every Friday, thank you so much.
Adam Mintz 34:47
You know, what more can we say next Friday. We get together to study Bereshit. That's an amazing thing. Rabbi Avraham talked about cyclical time and linear time. What an amazing thing that we go back to the beginning isn't it?
Geoffrey Stern 35:02
We start all over Turn, turn, turn.
Adam Mintz 35:08
Shabbat shalom. We are going to post this as a podcast. And I used to end every podcast with some music so you guessed it. This week, I will add a recording of Pete Seager singing, turn, turn, turn. And let's hope it's not too late. Shabbat Shalom and Hag Samayach.
Parshat Ha'Azinu - With the Yom Kippur liturgy fresh in our minds we explore a disturbing, persistent and infantile argument for forgiveness… that God forgive us for His sake. Using equal measure of Chutzpa and shaming, we argue that God, as our Father and as our Creator is ultimately responsible for our sins, the sins of his children/creations. We ask: How does God Respond? How should we respond?
Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/347781
Transcript:
Geoffrey Stern 00:01
Welcome to clubhouse Madlik disruptive Torah every week at four o'clock eastern. And we are recording this session and we will publish it on your favorite podcast platform as Madlik. So go ahead and give a listen. And if you do, please give us a star a two and a good review and feel free to share it with your friends. This week's parsha is Ha.azinu, And it is Moses's swan song to the Jewish people. And at times it can be pretty rough on the Jewish people. So it's in Deuteronomy 32. And there were three themes that I want to focus on today. But let's go ahead and read the verses in question. So it begins "Do you thus requite the Lord O dull and witless people. Is not he the father who created you, fashioned you and made you endure? Remember the days of old consider the years of ages past, ask your father, he will inform you, your elders, and they will tell you." So it starts by referring to a concept we've seen before, which is God, the Father, and God, the Creator of you. And then it goes on to say, "and he said, I will hide my countenance from them, and see how they fare in the end, for they are a treacherous breed, children with no loyalty at all." So again, the focus is on children, who just do not follow in the footsteps of their parent, their Creator. And God introduces this concept of "hester panim", hiding his countenance from them, and says, see how they fare in the end. And the third theme is finally God says, You know, I would have destroyed you "I might have reduced them to no it made them memory cease among men, but for the fear of the taunts of the foe, their enemies who might misjudge and say, our own hand has prevailed. None of this was wrought by the Lord." And this is another argument that we've seen before, where Moses on many occasions says to God, if you destroy this people, what will the goyim say, what will the non Jews say? What will the Egyptian say? What will the world who has been watching this amazing project of taking a ragtag group of slaves, giving them freedom, bringing them into the desert, and building a new vision for social justice and society? What will happen if they are destroyed? What will everyone say about you and your project? So we have these three themes, God, the Father, God, the Creator, God, saying, I've had enough, I will hide my face from you and see what becomes of you. And finally, you know, I would have destroyed you, if not for what that will do to my street cred to what the world will say about you. And I want to pick up these themes, because they are so primal, to the story of the Bible, the five books of Moses, which were ending, so it's only natural that we can go back to the beginning, and look at the very first sin that was ever perpetrated. And of course, that is the sin of Eve, when she ate of the apple. But when God comes and confronts Adam, with this sin, what does Adam say? What is the response of man, of humanity to being confronted with sin? Genesis 3: 12, "the man said, the woman you put at my side, she gave me of the tree, and I ate." And as Rashi says, Here, he showed his ingratitude, "Kofer b'tovah". The idea that when man is caught sinning, the first thing he does is he blames his creator, he blames that being who gave him the break, who gave him that wife to be at his side, it's precisely there that he says, if you had not given her to me, I would not have failed. And this is a recurring theme that we're going to pick up throughout the Bible. And it's clearly to me in any case, a troubling one. In terms of blaming God or defining God, I should say, you have even Abraham, if you remember before Sodom, and he's saying to God, how can you destroy these people if you find 50 if you find 40 if you find 10 and he finally says "Far be it from you, Shall not the judge of all the earth deal justly?" It's again, he's not blaming God in this case, but he certainly is talking to God in a very assertive manner, saying that listen, God you have street creds, you are supposed to be this just being you can't act unjustly. I mean, even that smacks a little bit of, let me say it Chutzpah.
Adam Mintz 05:36
There is a very fine line between chutzpah, and the way that he speaks to God, I would agree 100%. You know, you kind of get the impression that God was much more human in the Torah, And therefore they could speak to God like this.
Geoffrey Stern 05:55
Yeah, and of course, we all know that the Torah speaks in the language of man "lo dibra Torah ela b'lashon b'nai adam". So whether it's God being more human, or the text and our Holy Writ being written in a way that we can understand, it's irrelevant. But I think you're absolutely correct. In the sense the Bible, gives us something that we can wrap our arms around, and in our perception of God, we perceive God to be just, so he has to act just and if he doesn't, we can complain against him. And that's a good message. But later on, when the children of Israel are in the desert. And they start complaining whether it's when the mana falls or when there's not enough meat, or when the spies come back. And at one point, the Gemora in Avada, Zahra puts the words into Moses as saying, "Moses said to the Jewish people, ingrates, children of ingrates, when the Holy One bless it be he said to the Jewish people, who would give that he had such a heart as this always... the point is that according to this piece of Talmud, every time that the Jews complain, and they say, God, you took us out of Egypt, you bought us here. It's all your fault. Or the reason it says ingrates son of ingrates is because he refers back to what Adam said to God. There's this overriding sense, not because God is the only one to complain, but maybe he's the biggest target, that children of Israel actually act almost like children who are constantly coming back and saying, not that we failed, but that you failed us. You created us, you bought it, you own it type of thing. This ingrates, children of ingrates Kofi Toba Benei, Kofu Tova.
Adam Mintz 08:08
Yeah, you're like that? That's a very strong image isn't it?
Geoffrey Stern 08:12
Absolutely. And it's, it just seems like a strange way to kind of move forward. Nothing good can can come out of it. Unless I'm missing something, you know. We were talking before how the the Torah is written in the language of man, but we still can control how we perceive things and how we represent things. And we're representing a situation where God yes, sometimes can inspire us, but on the other hand becomes a straw dummy or pinyatta that we can just batter.
Adam Mintz 08:56
I think the word is a target.
Geoffrey Stern 08:59
Absolutely. With a capital T. ..... And, and, you know, that's why this this recurring notion of what will the Egyptians say? What will the people of the world say? It's kind of a hybrid argument. It's not only God, you put us in this situation, but because you put this in this situation, you know, have to protect your flank, because people are going to say you started this program, this experiment. You took this raggle rap of a people out of Egypt, you said that slaves could be free people, and we're failing. And so it not only is it your fault, but humanity will cast blame on you as as a failure at the most lowest level. But as Someone who has given up and walked away.
Adam Mintz 10:04
That's an important idea, by the way, the idea that God will be a failure. I think there's something to that. God is very worried that people will think him a failure. "lama Yomru Mitrayim laymor" Right? Why should the Egyptian say that God took us out to kill us in the desert? It's a very strong idea.
Geoffrey Stern 10:33
And I think, stepping back for a second, what it really reminds us of is that this whole project, the project of the Bible, is for all humanity. We've touched upon this theme in previous episodes, where God says, You know, I tried with Adam, I tried with Noah, it failed. I really wanted this for all humanity. I didn't want to have chosen people. But this became my plan B, or C, or D, my default strategy. But ultimately, it's important what happens in this program, because the world is watching. And I think that's the most maybe favorable way that we can characterize this argument of what will the rest of the world say? But certainly, I find it a little pathetic. I have to say,
Adam Mintz 11:34
That's interesting. Pathetic. Tell everybody. Why do you think it's pathetic?
Geoffrey Stern 11:38
Well, again, .... you were given great opportunities. And the Jewish people, certainly while they came from a very troubled background, they were given by this God amazing opportunities, they saw the Red Sea part, they saw the revelation at Sinai. And given that, and given the opportunities that they've been given, to dream about going back to Egypt, and to blame God for putting them in this situation does smack of .... I can't say it better than Rashi: ingratitude.
Adam Mintz 12:21
Right. I mean, that's the word ingratitude. And that's the word of the parsha is ingratitude. Let's just to go back to the parsha, the way you introduced it for a minute. It's interesting that everything's going to work out, okay. That ha'azinu ends on a high note, .... that you're going to find God and then everything's going to end up working out. Okay. We know that that's not always the case. Things don't always end up end up. Okay. It's kind of interesting, isn't it?
Geoffrey Stern 12:55
Well, absolutely, absolutely. And, you know, again, here's a case where the Jews are being put on the spot, put on trial and being castigated, and they come back and they say, well, it's all your fault. You put us in the situation, you're talking about those situations where no one's castigating them, but life is tough. And again, they go back, and they blame their parents so to speak, I want to pick up on that theme of the Father, because in Numbers, so we're not talking midrash, we're not talking commentary. We're talking the book of Bamidbar/Numbers. Moshe is in one of these situations that he's in multiple times, where God says, let's just cut the cord, I will destroy this people, and I'll begin afresh with you. And Moses turns back in Numbers 11, verse 12, he said, "Did I conceive all this people? Did I bear them that you should say to me carry them in your bosom as a nurse carries an infant, to the land that you have promised on oath to their fathers?" You can't but take away from this, that Moses is almost, again saying to God, I'm not their father, you're their father, you cannot put on me this blame and this responsibility of carrying them. But again, it comes back down to if I were the father, or in this case, God, you are the Father, you gave birth to them, you created this project. You need to fulfill your promise, even if they let you down. So the two themes are kind of inextricably connected.
Adam Mintz 14:50
You know, I saw an amazing story before Yom Kippur. The story is of a man who sits down before Yom Kippur and he takes out his book And the book has a list of all his sins. I did this wrong, and I did this wrong. And then he opens another book. And the other book has a list of all the things God did wrong.... you know, you killed this person, this person died of cancer. And there was a flood and there was a hurricane and all these things, and the man looked up to heaven, He says, God, I'll make you a deal. If you forgive me, I'll forgive you.
Geoffrey Stern 15:27
Well, you know, that sounds like one of these wonderful Hasidic stories.
Adam Mintz 15:33
it is Yeah, but it's kind of related to your point.
Geoffrey Stern 15:37
It is. And I would go, one step further. Some of the Hasidim, especially the Breslevers, would go out into the woods, and they would pray to God and call Tata, tata, my dad, my dad, they focused on the real parent child relationship. And I assume that that has good aspects of it. And it also has some negative aspects too,
Adam Mintz 16:04
right? For sure. I mean, it's just, you know, like all these Hasidic stories, it's just to kind of give you an impression, but it's a strong impression, I think.
Geoffrey Stern 16:14
I agree. I was thinking about this during all the liturgy and prayers of Yom Kippur. And I was really struck by the fact that this argument that we have kind of uncovered the one of slight ingratitude slight chutzpah, where the sinner turns around and says to the accuser, in this case God, Hey, buddy, you put me in this spot. It's actually very well presented in the liturgy. So the most famous prayer is Avenu Malkenu. And Barbra Streisand does a great job of singing it. We all love it. In the Talmud there's an amazing story about a situation where there was a drought, and a rabbi was unsuccessful. Rabbi Eliezer was unsuccessful in getting the rain to come. And Rabbi Akiva, one of our buddies and friends went ahead, and he invented this prayer. And he said, Avanu Malkenu lmancha Rachem aleynu" which means God our Father, for your sake, have mercy upon us. And of course, you could say that I'm kind of picking words here. But there was no question that later when they added to these verses, they said, if not for us, then for your sake, but it's clear from the perspective that he gave it number one calling god father and emphasizing that fatherly relationship, and then saying again, it's for your sake, do it? Does he mean for your sake? Because you gave birth to us? Is it because for us sake, because of what others will speak? Well, this question of in the Avinu Malkenu which is such a significant part of our prayers, Rabbi Akiva introduces both the "avinu" part that God is our father, but also this this little insight that we've been working on, which is because your our father, it's lamancha do it for your sake. And I think that, that's very key to the argument. The other place where it comes up is the most beautiful poem and prayer that we have, it's like "Clay in the hands of the pot potter". And it seems like just a beautiful little story based on verses in Jeremiah and other prophets. "We say like clay in the hands of the potter, if he wills, he can expand it, if he wills he can contract it. So too, we in your hand, preserver of kindness, heed the covenant and not the accuser. Like stone in the hand of the Mason." It's a beautiful, beautiful poem, but is it not doing the same thing? Is it not basically saying, hey, God, we're the Golem and you fashioned us. We are the statue. We are the rudder. We are the gem. Call us what you want. But at the end of the day, you made us You made a covenant with us. You need to protect us against the accuser. Is it not the same argument?
Adam Mintz 19:59
The answer is it does sound like the same argument doesn't it? What you're saying Geoffrey is it's chutzpah?
Geoffrey Stern 20:11
Well, I am and I always thought it but then I was reading Jonathan Sacks' Machzor and he actually brings up Shemot Rabba, which is a midrash. Where it says, What is the meaning of We Are the clay, you are the potter. And it says "Israel said, master of the universe, you have caused it to be written about us like clay in the hand of the potter, so are you in my hand, Israel, therefore do not leave us even though we sin and provoke you for we are merely the clay and you are the potter, consider if a potter makes a jar and leaves a pebble in it. When it comes out of the furnace, it will leak from the hole left by the pebble and lose the liquid poured into it, who caused the jar to leak and lose its liquid, the potter who left the pebble in the jar as it was being made. This is how Israel pleaded before God, Master of the Universe, You created us with an evil inclination for my youth, as it says for the inclination of man's heart is evil from his youth. And it is that that has caused us to sin, since you have not removed from us the inclination that instigates us to sin." And Rabbi Sacks points out that the whole argument is based on a plan words. We talked about "atah Yotzrenu" that you created us and we are homer b'yad haYotzer". We are material in the hand of the Yotzer. And there's the Yetzer HaRah" So it makes the case that all of our deficiencies be blamed on our Yotzer on that who created us. So it's it's not only what I hear, I think the rabbi's heard this as well,
Adam Mintz 22:07
That's very, very good. That's a nice idea. Where does Rabbi Sacks say that?
Geoffrey Stern 22:11
Well, he says it in his introduction to the Yom Kippur Machzor, he has a whole paragraph on clay in the hands of the potter. And it's in the in the notes for that for this session. But he quotes Shemot Rabbah and of course, it's the rabbi's who who make this case. And he goes even further to say that, maybe, and this is something that a theme that I have not brought up, is that maybe we don't need to attribute this to a parental relationship, rebelling against one's parents or blaming every deficiency on one's parents. Maybe it's just dawggone chutzpah. And he says the Gemora in Sanhedrin says that when it comes to prayer, you need some chutzpah so it's complicated. It's complicated, like parent children relationships. And we probably can't get away from it. But certainly to identify this issue of constantly blaming God for our deficiencies, or blaming our parents for our deficiencies is something that has its place but also can be played out a little bit. I think.
Adam Mintz 23:36
I think that's really nice. I mean, I think that's a that's a really beautiful idea. You know, We miss Rabbi Sacks, this is just about a year since his passing, and we miss Rabbi Sacks. And you see the amazing insight he has to this is really beautiful.
Geoffrey Stern 23:51
Well, absolutely. The third theme that I brought up was this question of God hiding his face. And I just wonder, I don't want to put any of our listeners on the spot. But if anyone is a psychologist who can talk about parent children, relationships, that would be insightful. What do you do with a child who constantly blames you for all of their deficiencies? We've gone through half an hour where the Jewish people say, hey, God, you took us out of Egypt, you put us into this situation. We are just a bunch of raggle taggle slaves. We have no idea what freedom and responsibility is. It's all you're to blame. We all said yesterday, we are clay in the hands of the potter. God You made us You must have left a marble in the dough, because we didn't turn out so well. It's your fault. And I would love to give as a suggested answer is at a certain point, God says "haster panim". I will hide my face the best thing that I can do Is to wean you of that relationship, is to pull away. And I think that's the third element here, that God says to the Jewish people in the song of ha'azinu. He says, you, you blame me for everything, you forget that I'm your parent in a good way. So "I will hide my countenance from them, and see how they fare in the end". And I think this question of seeing how they fare in the end is normally taken as part of a punishment. Like, we'll see what happens to you now, you know, .... this is what you want, you want that new car or you want that, to do it your way, you don't want to listen to me, well, let's see how that works out. But on the other hand, it might be a blessing. And God might be saying, Listen, I have no choice, I have to pull back. You need to learn on your own, to stand on your own two feet, to stop casting blame going backwards to those who have empowered you. And I'll see how it turns out. And maybe God is saying, hopefully, with a sense of hope, we'll see how it turns out.
Adam Mintz 26:15
I think that's beautiful.
Geoffrey Stern 26:17
I mean, I think that the question of how Sukkot and Yom Kippur and Rosh Hashanna all come together, is maybe part of this, this answer, where we're literally moving out of our house, God (our dad) is kicking us out. And we go into the sukka. And we only have selves, and maybe a few pieces of branch or straw protecting us. The the word that the Psalms talks about is the same word as God uses when he hides his face. It says that you shall be (and this is from the Psalm that we read all through the High Holidays and into Sukkot). And that is "and he will shelter me in his sukka, on an evil day", we create our own shelter. We create our own life, we have to stand on our own two feet. We are surrounded by the beauty of nature and the crops that we have grown. And maybe that's part of the answer. But that certainly is part of the answer for those of us who may be it doesn't resonate. In terms of the liturgy in the services that we do in the synagogue, where we try the blame game, and maybe after Ne'eela we're ready to step outside, and to welcome our new selves with a smile and the simcha that you talked about Rabbi a few weeks ago.
Adam Mintz 27:45
I think that's beautiful. And I just want to wish everybody Shabbat Shalom, and enjoy hag samayach. And look forward to seeing everybody next week. Maybe next week Geoffrey, since it's Shabbat Hol HaMoed, and we read the book of Kohelet, Ecclesiastes, we could choose something from Ecclesiastes.
Geoffrey Stern 28:02
That's a great idea. Okay, let's let's think about that. Shabbat shalom. And for those of you including Stav and Yohanan, and anyone else who wants to continue the conversation, welcome to the after party. Stav. How are you my friend?
Stav Stern 28:20
Oh, good. Geoffrey. I'm live from California, from Los Angeles traffic. And you just brought up, I came in a little late. But you just brought up something in me because I was thinking during this Yom Kippur for the first time, I have fasted wholeheartedly in a while. And I was thinking a lot about forgiveness. And then I realized that most people or I usually think about asking forgiveness on Yom Kippur. But this time, I was really into also the idea of giving forgiveness. And, you know, when you talked about blaming God for making us imperfect, with the yetzer hara, and all that I was thinking, is also part of the ideal, so to forgive God in any way for that, and just came up to me and I wonder your thoughts?
Geoffrey Stern 29:20
I definitely think that's part of it. I mean, there's another prayer that says at the end of it "aval anachnu v'avotenu Hatanu", that we and our parents have sinned, and I always was curious, why does it say we and our parents have sinned? Again, is it part of this strategy of saying, hey, it's not just me, it's it's my parents also. Or are we talking about that God (our Father in) heaven? The is the avotenu... Hey, God, were both not blameless here. If we're talking as a nation, you freed us You put us in the desert, we didn't have a clue about freedom and responsibility. If it's talking about us as individuals, it's a it's a real heavy load that that we're asked to do as we kind of journey and navigate through this world. And while it's probably not healthy, to totally blame God, I do think that the relationship is such whether it's because of Avinu Malkenu that he's both our king and our parent, but he's also a member of a covenant. And the covenant is two ways. So I think that's a wonderful insight. I am so into Sukkot right now, it's amazing how you can switch gears, but I'm ready to move out of the house. I'm like a little kid who's moving out of the house for the first time. And I look at my, my father, both in life and in heaven. And I just smile and I say, you know what, Bygones are bygones. I'm out. Now, I'm going to make my own way. And you're going to be a part of it. I think you kind of go through the whole process. But I do think that forgiving God is, as as dastardly as it sounds, it's, it's probably part of the process as well.
Stav Stern 31:24
Thank you, Geoffrey.
Geoffrey Stern 31:26
Thank you Stav. Okay. Well, unless there's anybody else who has any suggestions or questions. I am going to wish everybody a wonderful year, a Shabbat Shalom, and get out there, build a sukkah or find a tree to sit underneath this shade. And just enjoy these early days of Fall. And be thankful for the two feet that you can stand on and the air you can breathe, take a deep breath in and a deep breath out. And maybe that's the ultimate reason why Sukhot is the final the final day of forgiveness and rejuvenation that were given. So Shabbat shalom. Thank you all for joining
Parshat Vayeilech - We review the septennial Hakhēl convocation where the Torah is read publicly as an opportunity to explore the revolutionary nature of the Hebrew Alphabet from both a social and technological perspective. In so doing, maybe we shed some light on the proliferation of alphabetical acrostics in the Psalms and later liturgy and piyyutim.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/346294
Transcript:
Geoffrey Stern 00:00
Welcome to Madlik disruptive Torah. We are every Friday at four o'clock here on clubhouse Eastern time. And we go ahead and record this. And then we post it as a podcast called Madlik. And it's available on all of your favorite podcasting channels. And if you like what you hear today, go ahead and listen to it as a podcast and share it with your friends, and give us a few stars and say something nice about us, in any case, this week portion Vayelech. And it's Deuteronomy 31, for the most part. And in Deuteronomy 31, verse nine, it says, "And Moses wrote down this teaching, and he gave it to the priest, sons of Levy, who carried the Ark of the Lord's covenant, and to all the elders of Israel. And Moses instructed them as follows, every seventh year, the year set for shmitah, at the Feast of Booths, which will start in another week or two, when all Israel comes to appear before the Lord your God, in the place that he will choose, you shall read this teaching aloud, in the presence of all Israel, gather the people, men, women, children, and the strangers in your communities that they may hear. And so learn to revere the Lord your God, and to observe faithfully every word of this teaching. Their children too who have not had the experience shall hear and learn to revere the Lord your God, as long as they live in the land that you are about to cross the Jordan to possess." And then a few verses down, it finishes off by saying, "When Moses had put down in writing, the words of this teaching to the very end "ad tumam" , Moses charged the Levites to carry the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord saying, Take this book of teaching and place it beside the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord your God, and let it remain there as a witness against you." So Wow, this is a pretty fundamental law, it touches upon a public reading of the Torah, it touches upon the seventh year, the cycle of the shmita, of the sabbatical year that we are starting as we speak. And it also talks about placing that Torah scroll, if you will, into the ark right next to the 10 commandments. So rabbi, what says this to you?
Adam Mintz 02:47
So I want to go to the end, it's so interesting that the Torah scroll plays a role here, it all seems to be about strengthening our commitment to Torah and to God, and therefore everything has a Torah scroll that is right in the middle of it. And I think that's really, really interesting. At the end of each shmita cycle, they used to gather all the people in Jerusalem, the men, the women, the children, and the king used to read the Torah. So really, even the sabbatical year, is about strengthening our commitment to Torah.
Geoffrey Stern 03:28
I totally agree. But I have to confess that when I tell people, and I've been telling everybody I can, trust me, that this is the sabbatical year, unlike the Sabbath that occurs every seven days. And I'd like to think, we can discuss this on another afternoon. I'd like to think it was one of the Jews greatest contributions to culture and society, a day of rest. It's actually a statement of human rights because you rest your servants rest to animals were at rest, that everybody kind of gets whether they keep the Sabbath on a Saturday or Sunday or a Friday, or they just understand they have to reboot once in a while. But the idea of the seventh year cycle, the sabbatical that has only really survived in academia. And I hope it's still the case where academics take off a year to broaden their horizons, to travel to see other academics and maybe go out into the field. It struck me when I read this portion, that Wow, there actually is a connection because mostly when we think of the sabbatical year, we think of letting the land life fallow, and all of the other things I discussed before, but there is clearly an intellectual aspect of this and that's what you were talking about Rabbi in terms of both faith and understanding The idea was in this sabbatical year, we all have to give ourselves a chance to be exposed to that which is important to us. But it kind of works both ways. Because on the Sabbath, we also read from the Torah publicly, and the rabbi's understood the connection between this because those of you who have been in an orthodox synagogue and know that the first Aliyah, the first calling up to the Torah, is for the Cohen. And the second one is for the Levi The Tom wood learns it literally from this verse, if you will call. It says that, in verse nine, that Moses wrote down this teaching, gave it to the priests the kohanim, sons of Levi. From here, the rabbi's learned that the colon gets the first Aliyah and the Levi gets the second. And then of course, the Israelite gets the third and onward. But I'm much less interested in the law. And I'm more interested in the connection the rabbi's took from this annual reading or the I should say, the seven year cycle of reading it in the sabbatical year, and reading it every week. In both cases, we're kind of doing this amazing public discourse of our most important texts.
Adam Mintz 06:20
Yes. I mean, and I think that's a super interesting thing. The fact that the Torah, even though study is an individual act, we do it by ourselves, we do it with a havruta (study partner), with one other individual. But actually, the reading of the Torah is always a public act. That's something fascinating, isn't it? Geoffrey. Right, the Torah is a public act, we read it in the temple, we read it in this Synagogue, it's always public.
Geoffrey Stern 06:50
I totally agree. And we're going to get a little bit more into that in a second. But before we do, the other thing that is kind of interesting to me is that the reading of it is also a conduit into the future. And you see that in two ways. If you recall, in verse 13, it says, and their are children who have not had the experience shall hear and learn. And the idea is, even though they were speaking in the present tense, and as it said, they were crossing the Jordan into the promised land. This was not to be limited to the people in the room, so to speak. This was the vehicle for transmitting this experience into the future, this interactive, maybe immersive reading of our sacred texts in public, placing them in a tactile form on the side of the shattered and full 10 commandments was an amazing, both commentary and commitment to what the written and spoken word can do in terms of transmitting ideas and values into the future.
Adam Mintz 08:05
I couldn't agree more with that. I think that that's a very important thing. And that's why you know, we're kinda not focusing on this, but this is the end of the Torah. This is the third to the last portion in the Torah. We have Ha'azinu next week, and then on Simchat Torah, we finish the Torah with Zot HaBracha. This is the end Geoffrey. So whatever is going on now is a lesson forever.
Geoffrey Stern 08:32
I love the fact that you say it is the end, this is it got it both gives this statement more importance. But it also raises another fascinating Talmudic discussion. And that is: the last six or eight verses of the Torah are written after, in the narrative, after Moses dies. So the question comes, how can it be in our verses that Moses gives the complete Torah to the priests and the tribe of Levi? If in those last few verses are things that clearly he could not have written? And the Talmud gives two answers. One answer is: You're right. Moses, wrote everything except the last eight verses and Joshua wrote the book under his name, the Book of Joshua, and the last eight verses, but what I find so dramatic and those of you who were with us last week know how much drama there can be in our wonderful Torah. I love the answer. That was Rabbi Shimon's. And he says, Is it possible that the Torah scroll was missing a single letter, but it has said take this Torah scroll. Rather until this point, the Holy One blessed be He dictated and Moses repeated after him and wrote the text, from the point where it says that Moses has died, the Holy One, blessed be he dictated, and Moses wrote with tears", just an unbelievable image of someone waiting their own obituary, so to speak. But again, the reason I bring it up is because it really parallels this concept of having the children who had not experienced listen to it. Even in the ending of the Torah, it is understood that the writing of the Torah either continues in this hand of other people like Joshua, or that we are all part of a narrative, and we can't experience every part that we're in. But by hearing it and listening to it, we become a part of that narrative. And to me, Moses writing and tears streaming down his cheeks, it's just almost too much to bear.
Adam Mintz 11:04
I mean, Geoffrey, you're not so surprised, because as we all know, if you're anybody, The New York Times has your obituary on file, right? famous people get their obituaries written ahead of time. So it's interesting, the whole idea of, you know, writing your own obituary, I'll just tell you that there was a rabbi, his name was the Vilna Gaon, a great Rabbi in Lithuania, in the 1700s. And he says that the word for tears "Dema" can also be translated as the word "demua", which means mixed up. And he says that what happened was that God commanded Moshe, like a Scrabble board to take all of the letters that would appear in the last eight verses at the Torah, but not to arrange them in order. And Joshua was the one who arranged them in order.
Geoffrey Stern 12:01
Wow, that absolutely blows me away. And we are going to come back to it but to give you a little taste of how we're going to come back to that is, so much of the Yom Kippur liturgy has to do with that alphabet that you just described. Whether it's the "Ashamnu" that is an alphabetic acronym and has our alphabet or whatever. So this story that you just told of the Vilna Gaon explanation of Joshua putting the letters together is something that really resonates with me and we are going to come back to. Michael Posnick welcome to the Bimah.
Michael Posnik 12:45
Pleasure to be here. I just have a question. Is it possible that the word for tears could be from "dom" from the"demama" that Moses wrote this?
Adam Mintz 12:59
Like in in "Unetaneh Tokef" "v'Kol demamah daka yishoma"
Michael Posnik 13:04
That's right that he wrote it in silence...
Adam Mintz 13:06
It's nice. Technically speaking, the root of the word dema is Dalet Mem Ayin, the root of the word 'dimama" meaning silence. is Dalet Mem Mem. These are two different words. It's a nice sermon. But technically speaking in terms of language, it's not really the same word.
Geoffrey Stern 13:32
And of course, you have Aaron who after his two sons died, it says "vaYidom", and normally translated as silent. Is that the word that it should be translated?
Adam Mintz 13:44
The word "dom" is "demama" We say in Unetana Tokef, We blow the mighty Shofar "vekol demama daka Yishama" But the sound that we hear is a silent or quiet sound.
Geoffrey Stern 14:06
Fantastic. The truth is, and this will also come up in our discussion, that there are those who believe and I think the the most prominent proponents of this theory, were Martin Buber, and Franz Rosenzweig. And their current student who's a professor named Everett Fox, who believes that much of the Torah has to be listened to as much as read. And therefore it gives you a little bit more, I think, flexibility and wiggle room - poetic license if you will, to make some of these connections. But even if, from a strict grammatical point of view, there are limitations. Then there's also the pun and I think that the biblical text and certainly Talmudic texts We're very sensitive to words that might have been different, but sounded alike that conjure up certain emotions and certain responses. So I think there's no question that the connection that you made Michael is is there at some level.
Adam Mintz 15:14
Yeah, very nice. And especially because it relates to Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur with Unetana Tokef. It really is just right. So thank you so much, Michael.
Geoffrey Stern 15:23
So let's, let's move on a little bit. The title of today's episode, if you will, is the Aleph Beit Revolution. And the reason why it is a revolution is there are scholars... the one I most recently read is somebody named Joshua Berman, who wrote a book Created Equal - How the Bible Broke with Ancient political thought, who believe that what happened when the Aleph Beit was created in Canaan was as revolutionary as the printing press when it was created in Europe. And we all know what happened when the (Guttenberg) printing press was created. within a very short time, not only did people for the first time get to read their Bible, because that was the first book that was written and popularized publicized. But they were people like Luther, who were able to get out a mimeograph machine, so to speak, and start posting things on the doors of the church. And all of a sudden, our whole revolution occurred within Christianity. And you could even argue maybe the Judeo-Christian tradition, because people were all of a sudden exposed to text in ways that they never were. And these scholars argue that when the Jews, the Israelites were in Canaan, they were surrounded by two empires who pretty much used cuneiform and hieroglyphics. These are highly intricate ways of expressing whether it's numbers or events, or narratives or stories, using pictures, and the vocabulary was so large, that only the professional scribes could, could master it. So it was something that was never given to the general public. And even when they had, like the Gilgamesh epic, or Homer and Euripides, these were things that were written on stele on stone, they were hidden within the temple, even during the New Year ceremony that we discussed before called Akitu in Babylon. It was literally the king who read these things in private in the Holy of Holies, if you will, and what these scholars are saying about the alphabet, which has 22 symbols, the word that we use for the alphabet in Hebrew is "otiot". And those of you who are sensitive to the Hebrew knows the power of the word "Ot", it is a symbol, but from those symbols, you can ultimately put together any sort of concept. And all of a sudden, the written words of the Torah, were now publicly available to the congregation. And notice here it says, men, women and children who are here and who are not here, it was literally a revolution. As big as the revolution we discussed in prior weeks, where God says, You have no other kings besides me, I'm your only King. You don't worship anybody else here too, you get your information directly from the source, and you can interact with that information. And this was an amazing revolution that is on par with anything else that came out of Canaan and the ancient Israelites and included with Hebrew was Akkadian and Ugaritic, and Phoenician and actually, the Greeks got the 22 letter alphabet, from the Phoenicians, they've said it themselves. When we talk about the Delta virus, we have alpha, beta, delta, there are no words like that in Greek, those are words that come from the Aleph Beit gimel dalet, dalet, is delta, Aleph is alpha. As we approach the new year. This is revolutionary with a capital R.
Adam Mintz 19:56
Yes, I mean, I'm not an expert in alphabet, but yeah, this is all All fascinating material fascinating.
Geoffrey Stern 20:02
And it puts into a totally different perspective, this concept of the public reading of the text. We think read, you need someone who is literate, who can literally read. But in the Torah, the word that we use is "Li'Kro". And "Li'kro" is similar to what I was saying before, when I talked about Buber and Rosenzweig, it equally applies to reading as it applies to listening or hearing... to calling out. And so really, I think that the this image of the Torah ending, and it's saying that every seven years, and by extension, every seven days, the Torah is to be read in a vernacular, which literally means a people's language, and can be discussed, really ties into so much that we've been talking about on Madlik in terms of the ability for man to own and introduce and interact with our holy texts.
Adam Mintz 21:19
Michael, You actually began this conversation? With your discussion of the word to my mind? Do you have any thoughts on this?
Michael Posnik 21:30
Just a few come up, I've had the good fortune to be studying Nehemiah. And there, when it's described, when Israel read the Torah, it was read in four different ways. It was read exactly as the text presents it. And then there was someone who did the vernacular so that people could understand that if they didn't know the Hebrew, and then there were two other ways, which are not quite clear what's meant. And on Rosh Hashanna I attended a service of the New Shul, which was outdoors, a couple 100 people in a park in Brooklyn, and, and the Torah was read was held up by two gentlemen, and a 13, or 14 year old girl layned (chanted). And then she layned a couple of pesukim (verses). And then a man, a man with a beautiful voice sang the translation of those pesukim And then Frank London, the trumpeter played the emotional life. On his trumpet. It was very, very, very powerful. So it goes out to the mind, it goes out to the heart, it goes out to the body in the sense that if you listen to it, you might act differently, which would be a great benefit for all of us.
Adam Mintz 22:55
Hey, Geoffrey, that's amazing, because that's really what you said. And that is the experience of reading is actually much deeper than the way we understand reading. But it's about listening. Reading and speaking is where you didn't even discuss the fact that reading is music. And Geoffrey we can actually talk about the fact that the Torah is read in a special tune. And actually on Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur that tune is a little different reflective of a more somber kind of Rosh Hashannah and Yom Kippur spirit. I mean, it's extremely striking; the tune for the Torah reading. On Rosha Hashannah and Yom Kippur at least to me is one of the highlights of Rosh Hashanna and Yom Kipper.
Geoffrey Stern 23:40
Absolutely I have to echo what you said, Michael, I went to an African American synagogue in Chicago outside of Chicago. I believe the rabbi's name is Rabbi Capers C. Funnye Jr. (an African-American rabbi, who leads the 200-member Beth Shalom B'nai Zaken Ethiopian Hebrew Congregation of Chicago, Illinois) He's literally a cousin of Michelle Obama. And they read the Torah exactly as you describe. And it's exactly as the Talmud describes it, it was with a "Mitargaminan" with a translator. So the person would read the verses "Bereshit Barah Elohim et aha Shamayim ve'et HaAretz" And in the same chant, someone would say, "In the beginning, God created the heavens in the earth." And it was such a moving experience because we forget so many times when we read from the Torah publicly, what an empowering spiritual, and I would say, revolutionary, democratizing thing that we are doing in terms of "you need to understand this". This is not something that's hidden. This is not something that we don't want you to understand. We want you to ask every question and to provide your novel explanation. And there's the music, you're absolutely right, you can approach it on every different level.
Michael Posnik 24:56
What you said before, about reading is also listening And the question is for each of us, what are we listening to? While that's going on. What are we hearing? And how deeply does the listening go? In in real terms, what are we actually hearing? or listening to? When we hear the words of the Torah? This is a real question, I think for all of us, and not just the Torah, the davening (praying) all of it, what are we really, really listening to? What are those words? Really? How deep do those words go? Because they come from a deep place. Do we hear it? how deeply do we go?
Geoffrey Stern 25:42
I totally agree. The only thing that I would add and I want to pick up on Rabbi Adam's earlier comment about the Vilna Gaon saying that when Joshua wrote the last eight verses of the Torah that describe Moses death, Moses had actually scrambled it, Joshua put out the letters, and had the letters combined. And for those of you who know, Hasidic stories, about the High Holidays, you probably have all heard one version or another of the beautiful story. It's the last service on the holiest day of the year of Yom Kippur. And the name of the service is Ne'ilah, because the gates of prayer are about to close. And everybody is thirsty and hungry, and waiting for those gates to close, and for the shofar to be sounded so they can all go home and eat. And there is the great Hasidic rabbi, whether it's the Ba'al Shem Tov or the Maggid of Mezrich, who knows who is standing and waiting and waiting, and the stars come out, and the sun goes down, and he's waiting, and he's waiting. And finally, 20 minutes after he should have closed the ark, he closes it. And all of the students come and the people say what happened. And he said, there was a little peasant boy in the back, and the peasant boy had never gone to a Cheder, never gone into Hebrew school, never learned anything except the Aleph bet. And all he was doing was repeating over the letters of the alphabet of the Aleph Bet, and saying, God, you put them together into the prayer, and the Ba'al Shem Tov said, we've been here for 24 hours, we've been here for 10 days, we've been here for the whole month of Ellul, and we haven't been able to break through the gates of prayer, and the purity and the intensity of this child's repeating over the Aleph Beit (in the same way that Joshua repeated it over, according to the Vilna Gaon story) is what has opened up the gates of prayer. And I just have always been struck by that question, because yes, Michel, it is the depth of the message. But sometimes, it's just the sound of the letter possibly, or in this case, coming from my kind of research in the last few days. Maybe it's just the revolution of that alphabet, the fact that we all have the right and the ability to portray ourselves and to express ourselves. But I love that story. And I love the fact that yes, it's at every level.
Adam Mintz 28:33
I mean, that story captures really, what, what it means to to appreciate experience. I mean, here, Geoffrey, you're really jumping from reading to experiential. And I think that's probably what Buber meant. You need to experience the text, not just to read it.
Geoffrey Stern 28:54
Yeah, the prayer that we say that really comes to mind is the Ashamnu new prayer. It's the prayer where we confess all of our sins, it's only said on Yom Kippur, and it's in alphabetical order. And according to Buber, who you just mentioned, the reason why the Ba'al Shem Tov explained, is he says, if you're doing your sins, there's no end to it. So luckily, the alphabet has only these 22 letters. So we can we can end somewhere. But again, it just seems throughout the whole day, and I encourage all of you to pay attention to the machzor to the prayer book. There seems to be such an emphasis on the alphabetical acrostics, whether it's in the poems in the Piyuttim, or whether in the Ashamnu prayer, and there's something special there. There's something special about the alphabet and I'm not talking even on a mystical level, just that we revolutionized the world and we were part of that revolution, in giving every Jew and every human being the ability to decode the meaning of past generations and make their contribution into the future. And that's an awesome responsibility, but also an amazing capability that we have
Adam Mintz 30:19
Amazing. So how are we going to bring this back to, to the shmita? and to the Torah that was placed in front of the people. How did how does all this relate to that Geoffrey in our last minute?
Geoffrey Stern 30:33
Well, it just seems to me that the fact that this rule was brought up at the very end of the Torah, almost as the climax, shows how important it is the contribution of our tradition, that the Torah and the words that are written on it, are so so valued. Anybody who comes to a synagogue is so impressed by the fact that there are no images but the ark opens up and we worship our book, we are called the People of the Book. And that's our contribution that the value of the written word and the spoken word and the heard word and the transmission of that word. And the conversation is ultimately one of our most proudest and most awe inspiring contributions to the world. And to me, it's something that we have to rejoice in and also be obligated by
Adam Mintz 31:35
that's a beautiful thought Geoffrey, as we enter Yom Kippur, I want to wish everybody a Shabbat Shalom, thank you, Geoffrey, and g'mar Hatimah Tovah. Everybody should have an easy and meaningful fast and we look forward to next Friday. So on Yom Kippur, you can be looking forward to your Madlik class the following day, that we're going to be talking the parsha of Ha'Azinu next week. Shabbat Shalom, everybody.
Geoffrey Stern 31:58
Shabbat Shalom and an easy fast and a wonderful Shabbat to you all. Look forward to seeing you next week.
parshat nitzavim (deuteronomy 30)
Join Geoffrey Stern, Rabbi Adam Mintz and Theatre Director and Professor Michael Posnik in a live recording of Madlik Clubhouse as they explore the verse in Deuteronomy 30 that proclaims that the Torah is not in Heaven. We explore it in context and in the agada. We take a literary journey into the iconic story of the oven of akhnai.
Sefaria source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/345182
Transcript:
Geoffrey Stern 00:00
This week's parsha is nitzavim and you are listening to Madlik weekly disruptive Torah. And by disruptive, we mean Torah that hopefully makes you think about the Torah slightly differently, from a new angle, with a fresh pair of lenses, revisit old friends, as I often do, or meet new characters, new stories and react to them in a fresh way. And we record this clubhouse, and we post it as a podcast on all of your favorite podcasting platforms. So if you miss it, or if you want to share it with somebody, if you want to give us a few stars and a nice review, go check out Madlik. And so we want to get started, this is actually a very special week, because it's the last Shabbat, the last week of the year. So we have to finish dramatically. And today, I'd like to say this is the dramatic version of Madlik because we are going to be discussing a story in the Agadda, which is the material, I think I know it's been made into a play. But who knows, it could be even a movie coming to a theater near you, because it has so many turns to it. And so many different characters with character flaws and a storyline that is engaging. So, let us begin, we are reading from Deuteronomy 30. And the Torah says, speaking about the Torah, it says "It is not in the heavens that you should say, who amongst us can go up to the heavens and get it for us and impart it to us that we may observe it. Neither is it beyond the sea that you should save Who among us can cross to the other side of the sea and get it for us and impart it to us that we may observe it." So it seems to be a pretty straightforward sense of the Torah is here. You don't have to go far. What do you think Rabbi is the straightforward meaning of "Lo Bashamayim Hi", that the Torah our teaching our tradition is not in heaven, and it's not on the other side of the sea,
Adam Mintz 02:36
Firs tof all Geoffrey, thank you so much. It's a great parsha to end the year with. I think what it means is that the best excuse you can give his Torah is too hard observance is too hard tradition are too hard. Tradition is for the Super religious, for the people who can appreciate all of this. The answer is absolutely not. It's not in heaven. It's not far away. It's in our hearts and inside our mouths, it's up to us. It's right there. For us. It's the word I like to use in this portion is it's accessible. And we have to remember the Torah is accessible. If Torah is accessible, then we can we can reach it also.
Geoffrey Stern 03:21
I agree with you totally. And I would read translate the phrase "Lo Bashamayim hi" that it is not in heave as it's not in the sky. In other words, I think if you look at the two verses together, one says it's not up in the sky. And the other says it's not beyond the sea. It's very temporal. It's saying you don't have to go look anywhere else. You don't have to go on a trip, you don't have to go on an experience. You don't have to go find yourself a yogi. And I think in the Devarim Raba, it gives a bunch of explanations, but one says "it is not in heaven". They said to Moses, our teacher, but hey, you said to us it's not in heaven. It's not in the other side of the sea. But where is it? He said to them in the place that is close in your mouths in your hearts to do it. It is not far from you. It is close to you all." And I think that's exactly what you were saying. It's almost to say, you know, people searched the whole world to find something only to find. They had it all along. I think that even looking at it and thinking of heaven in terms of a sense of heaven and hell or heaven as the abode of God. The truth is if you look up this word in the five books of Moses, it typically means sky. So, so that we are going to launch a journey that began In the Talmud, where all of a sudden, this simple verse of saying, hey, it's not a pie in the sky, it's not up in the sky, it's right in your own hand, transformed and became something very dramatic. And I think it's a great example of what we were talking about in past weeks, how everything in the Torah, whether it's the activities that we're commanded to do, or the texts that we read, can take on a life of their own and be different things to different people as we move forward. So there is a famous story. And it is considered, I think, one of the most favorite stories and one of the most famous stories in the Aggadah, which is the the tradition of allegory and of myth and of stories in the Talmud, as opposed to strict laws. And it's known by the name of the oven that is the the subject matter. Its in Baba Mitziah 59b And it starts by talking about rabbis discussing a particular oven that was formed in the shape of a snake, you got to kind of think of yourself as forming a playdough snake and then making it into an oven. So there are lines or spaces in between, and the rabbi's are discussing something very technical as to whether it is kosher, or if it's "tahor", if it was pure or impure, and we don't need to get into the details. But we do need to know that one of the rabbi's whose name was Rabbi Eliezer he said to them that he believed that it was kosher. And the rest of the rabbi's said, No, we think it's impure. And so on that day, Rabbi Eliezer, who believed it was kosher gave all the possible answers in the world and the rabbi's did not accept his explanation. So this is one Rabbi named Rabbi Eliezer. He has a against a bunch of rabbis. And then he went on to say if the law is like me, he says, Let the carob tree prove it. And sure enough, a miracle happened and the carob tree was uprooted from its place 100 cubics. Some people save even 400 cubits. And the rabbi's answered him and said one does not say bring a proof from a carob tree. So Rabbi Eliezer said to them, if the Halacha is in accordance with me, let this stream prove it .... the aqueduct prove it. And all of a sudden, the water on the aqueduct started moving in the opposite direction. And they said to him, one does not cite a proof from a stream. Rabbi Eliezer started to get blue in the face, and he says if the halacha is in accordance with my opinion, let the walls of the study hall prove it. And sure enough, the walls of the study hall leaned inward and began to fall. Rabbi Yehoshua scolded the walls and said to him, if Torah scholars are discussing Torah with each other. What does it mean to you? What is your involvement? So the walls did actually not fall out of deference to Rabbi Yehoshua, but they didn't straighten up in deference to Rabbi Eliezer until today, they still remain leaning. Finally, Rabbi Eliezer came to the end of this thread, and he says, if the halacha is like me, if the law is with me, let heaven prove it. And a divine voice a "bat Kol", came down from heaven and said, Why are you arguing with Rabbi Eliezer, the halaqa is always according to him. At this point, Rabbi Yehoshua stood on his feet and said, "Torah Lo Bashamayim hi", the Torah is not in heaven. What is the relevance of the phrase "it is not in heaven"? He said, since the Torah was already given at Mount Sinai, we do not regard a "Bat Kol" a divine voice. And it says "Acharei Lerabim Lehatot", we go after the majority.... This is kind of like a Beatle song. There are many stops here. We could definitely stop here. But I'm going to go One more little insight before I stopped for our first discussion. The Gemora says Rabbi Nathan, one of the rabbis who had been arguing against Rabbi Eliezer happened to meet Elijah the Prophet on the street. And he said to him Elijah what was God doing when this discussion was happening? and Elijah the prophet said he smiled, and he said, "My children have defeated me. My children have defeated ME."Nitzchuni Bonai, Nitchuni Bonai". What a story and we're not even halfway through. Rabbi, Michael Posnik...., what do you think of this story?
Adam Mintz 10:18
So I, Geoffrey I'm also interested by the last line that you added, "my children have defeated me"? Is that good or bad? I mean, are we supposed defeat God? Or is that a criticism? What's the end piece? But I'm gonna turn it over to Michael, because Michael is gonna give us a dramatic insight into the story.
Michael Posnik 10:41
Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it's the only place in all of our literature where God smiles or laughs.
Geoffrey Stern 10:54
I hope that's not true. But
Adam Mintz 10:56
I don't think that's true. But you know what, but it's good anyway, even if it's not true it's a good insight.
Michael Posnik 11:03
if there's another one, then that would be nice to see that but so you asked if it was good or bad. Gods smiled or laughed. And I think he understood the picture and that he couldn't do anything about this. He gave the Torah and people have to address it according to their their needs. There's also a question here. I understand the oven as being really about the community and Rabbi Eliezer, because there seems to be a question about one of the stones or part of the oven was repaired. And because of the repair, the question was whether the odd stone or the odd stones that have been repaired, made that made the oven unclean, or unable to use it to kasher anything. And this to me, I read about as this community there are people in the community who are like the odd stones. Are are they to be counted in the minyan (quorum of 10 Jews), or not to be counted in the minyan and if they behave differently if they react differently? If they were kind of exiled. And the story unfortunately plays itself out. That Rabbi Akiva comes to Rabbi Eliezer who's now excommunicated, becomes into Herem, so he's out of the community, the community tosses him out.
Geoffrey Stern 12:42
Well, let's not jump ahead too much. We don't want to give away the surprise ending!
Michael Posnik 12:47
Well the surprise ending is a sad surprise. So those are just some thoughts that I think it is our responsibility to address the questions that come up in the Torah. I also wonder about the rabbi's need for power to hold the community together. And Rabbi Eliezer seems to be in the way to a kind of unified view in the community. These are massive questions that we're constantly dealing with, do we really go with the majority? Or is the minority view acceptable? This is today, this is in our world as well. So just some thoughts. nothing terribly dramatic, but just some thoughts.
Geoffrey Stern 13:31
Let me let me focus a little bit you mentioned about God smiling, let's let's take a second to look at some of the words that are used here. The word for smile is "Chiyuch". And inside of that, I believe is is Chai, which is life, and certainly humor. And this has a lot of irony in the story. It has a lot of tragedy, and God is all there in the drama and in the smile. The other word that I love here is "nitzchuni Bonai" , which is typically translated as having "defeated me, "netzach" can be to to be victorious, but as Rabbi Riskin pointed out, "Netchak", can also mean eternal "netzach Yisrael" and so Rabbi Riskin translates this as my children have defeated me, "my children have eternalized me." And before I open that up to discussion, remember when Rabbi Eliezer asked the walls of the Beit midrash" to prove him right? If you remember that was the only instance where the rabbi's jumped in and said to the walls of the Beit Midrash of the study hall. Don't listen to him Don't go all the way because we are engaged in the discussion of Torah the word that they used is "Amar Lehem Talmidei Chachamim nitzachim ze et zeh", that we are discussing, we are battling over Torah one with with the other. Again, the word netzach. Here. So I think, at the most basic part of the story, as we kind of pause, right here is yes, you have all of those elements that you described, Michael, you have the question of the individual, you have a question of the authority of the community, you have the question of, are we looking for truth? Or are we looking for compromise. But certainly, the reason a story like this lives forever, is because God is smiling, and we are doing what he wants us to do. And ultimately, that might be why the Torah is no longer in heaven. It's kind of like a father or mother who teaches their child something, and then has the Glee of watching their child take it somewhere that maybe they hadn't even thought of.
Adam Mintz 15:58
There's a lot there. You just said, I love the idea, Rabbi Riskin's famous idea that has been saying for many years, that my children have eternalized me, that arguing with the God is good, that shows that we're alive, that shows that we're thinking it's such an amazing idea, isn't it? "Nitzchuni Bonai.. they've defeated me, but they eternalize me by defeating ....it's the same word.
Geoffrey Stern 16:27
Absolutely. So we could stay here for the rest of the day. And I actually always thought that the story, as I just told it, was the key to the amazement and the beauty of this story, but it goes on. So now the rabbi's said, Okay, what do we need to do against Rabbi Eliezer, so the first thing that they they did is they put all the ritually pure items that Rabbi Eliezer said, were pure, and they burn them in a fire. And I know all of the images that that brings up amongst us. And then they said, Let's reach a consensus. And let's ostrocize him and lets put him in herem, the word that they use to put him in herem is kind of interesting. And it's one that a play that Michael was involved picked up on, instead of they say cursing, they say blessing, but it's understood that they just didn't want to utter the words of Herem of ostrasizng a Jew. So they they basically ostracize him. And then they have to figure out how we going to convey the message to him that he is ostracized. And so now we have another giant of the Torah raise his hand. And Rabbi Akiva says, I am his beloved disciple, I will go lets an insanely person go and inform him in a callous and offensive manner. And he would thereby destroy the entire world. They're going to excommunicate someone who can move carob trees and water in different directions. So what did Rabi Akiva do? He wrapped himself in black, he sat for cubics away from Rabbi Eliezer as you would sit from someone who is excommunicated, and the details are all there, I invite you all to go read them. And it goes dramatically. He rent his garments. He removed his shoes. Rabbi Eliezer said What happened? Who died, he started to cry, he shedded tears. And all of a sudden things in the world started to get afflicted and destroyed just because Rabbi Eliezer himself started to cry. And then the anger was great that day. And he finally realized that he was being excommunicated. You could not sugarcoat this message. And then the story goes on to Rabbi Gamaliel, who was the head of the Sanhedrin and was involved with this decision. And like the prophet Jonah, he's on a boat, and the water, the water is raging, and the boats about to sink. And he says to himself, he says to God, it seems to me that this is only for the sake of Rabbi Eliezer ben Hercanus This must be for what happened to him and he stood on his feet and he said Master of the Universe. It is revealed and known before you that neither was it for my honor that I acted in ostracizing him, nor was it for the honor of the house of my father, rather for your honor, so that disputes will not proliferate in Israel, and as a response to sea calmed from its raising, and Ima Shalom, we get a woman in the story. This is the wife of Rabbi Eliezer. She knows that if Rabbi Eliezer ever put his head down on his arm and says the Tachanun Prayer where he cries out to God for that which has befallen him the world will be destroyed. And so she makes it her mission never to let him say the Tachnun prayer because, guess what her brother is Rabbi Gamliel. And sure enough she's successful until one day, maybe it was because she thought it was Rosh Chodesh the new moon when you don't say Tachnun, maybe it was because a poor ani came to the door, but her attention was swayed, he said Tachnun. And the next thing we know a shofar blew announcing the death of Rabbi Gamliel. And the story ends and she says, Why did this happen? EMA shalom said, this is the tradition that I received from the house of my father, all the gates of heaven are locked, except for the gates of 'Ona'at Devarim' verbal mistreatment. And that is the end of this story. And as far as I can tell, the only pragmatist the only player in this story that is guiltless is possibly the walls of the Beit Midrash that compromised and didn't fall down. But every everybody else is so much to blame. What are your thoughts?
Michael Posnik 21:27
Geoffrey? It is truly a dramatic story. Because at the moment when God smiles or laughs, there's a lightness to the whole thing. And there's a sense of winning as it were, there's a sense of completion in the community. But that laughter turns to tremendous tragedy and grief and the death of the prince of the Sanhedrin and the murder, through Tachanun... through prayer. It is a devastating tale. And I know the translation at the very end, which he says through the one who has been verbally abused. I know there are many other translations... I read one that said that all the gates are closed except the gates for the broken heart. And this story, I think, is a broken heart. It's not about an oven. I mean, it's about an oven, which is somewhat ironic and strange. But there's broken hearts all the way through this. And those rabbis who won the day as it were over God, they grieve. I think that oven was probably never used to get it's it's quite a powerful, dramatic story. I always think that the comic mask and the dramatic mask tied together with one string. It's not two separate masks. It's one and this story's really indicative of it. The last thing I want to say is Rabbi Akiva having to do that work. It's so close to the holiday now. It's so close to Rosh Hashanna, when we all must go and do work. That's difficult to do on ourselves and forgiveness, things like that with other people. So it's very moving moment. Rabbi Akiva going in black, and having to having to give this message. Geoffrey, you read very dramatically, I have to say I would cast you in a minute.
Geoffrey Stern 23:39
Was was this play ever performed? I know you sent me a script from a Daniel (Danny) Horowitz,. It's called a page of Talmud... was it ever performed?
Michael Posnik 23:48
It was performed when Donny wrote it in Tel Aviv sometime in the 80s. I produced it at the 92nd Street y with the Talking Band. And it was done. About a year ago, maybe a year and a half ago. Yoni Oppenheim produced it downtown in the theater with a company of people. They did that one and Donny Horowitz also wrote the story of Kamtza bar Kamtza", which is also not a happy story. Needless to say but very powerful. Yeah, it was produced, and maybe other places too. I don't know.
Geoffrey Stern 24:28
Amazing
Adam Mintz 24:31
it is amazing. Michael, I want to just go back to your idea of putting together the comic with the dramatic. Is it an interesting interlude. The God is smiling, even though it's such a tragedy. Aren't you struck by that?
Michael Posnik 24:49
That's why I went into the theater. Because ou never can resolve that. And the theater and all poetry and really good art does not let you resolve things like we try to do in real life? Like we tried to win the day with a halacha or whatever like the rabbi's. The world is resolvable. And so we are bound to live in, in the midst, in between those two amazing powers, we have to come out whole in some way. Well, that's our job.
Geoffrey Stern 25:23
But to me, it's the question of when does that occur in this story, it occurs right before they break back to the present and start burning Reb eliezer's stuff, and before they excommunicate him, where he smiles, it's rather an amazing place. Because if you recall, they said two arguments. One is that the Torah is not in heaven. And 2, that we go Acharei L'Rabim L'hatot. that we go after the majority. And that's amazing. Because if you look at Exodus 23, which is what they quote, Exodus 23 says, You shall neither side with the mighty to do wrong, "Lo acharei l'rabim" . And if you look at Rashi, on that, he says they are Halachik interpretations of the sages that go against the wording of the text. Athis is the part of the story that I think most people take away, and they don't get into the Sturm und Drang afterwards, that he was smiling, because his children had taken the text in a direction, either not meant, not intended, or even in a whole new directiion. And if it had ended there, maybe it would have been a nice story. But I think the challenge becomes when they therefore want to burn his vessels, or in his books, quiet him and stop him. And you know, the good of the, the whole, for that sake, that becomes a little dangerous. And Michael, you shared a text with me, which is absolutely unbelievable. It's from the Brothers Karamazov. And it's chapter five, the Grand Inquisitor, and there it talks about a regular day in Spain, where the Grand Inquisitor was killing some Jews burning them at the stake. And then all of a sudden, people look to the church and there's an infant that had died, and a holy person comes and brings that child back to life. And then Grand Inquisitor knows who it is. So he locks him up in jail. And literally, it's a similar parallel story to ours where the Grand Inquisitor says, I know you are Jesus the Lord. And you can't come back, you can come and change the rules because we don't need you. For 1500 years we clerics have been changing the rules because man cannot live with the freedom that you gave. So it's fascinating in terms of those who are supposed to be listening to the words of the Spirit can change it, and that can be good, but then they can silence it. And that is bad.
Michael Posnik 28:12
It's very interesting question also about the supernatural. All of the proofs that Rabbi Eliezer brings are supernatural and miraculous. And when the people asked Jesus to jump off the top of the synagogue, he refused, as he said, I don't want your faith to be in the supernatural. I want you to have faith because you have faith not because of something amazing... carob tree, or the water or the walls, or even a bat Kol. He wants people to believe so it's a very interesting conversation about how the super and how we live with quote the supernatural. And is there such a thing? And why do we keep longing for it? So the church, the Grand Inquisitor says, Yeah, we have them in the palm of our hand, you could have to but you didn't know you wanted them to be. You wanted them to be real mechen And not believe in something because of some kind of miraculous. Miracles aren't the whole thing. So in that sense, the rabbis saw one thing with the rabbis burning the stuff the burning the stuff is, is like the extra 500 people that were killed at the end of the Purim. Megillah.
Adam Mintz 29:30
Wow, Michael, there's a lot of stuff here that you're that you're pulling together. I think, Geoffrey, I appreciate that you brought Michael in because I think you're right. You really have to catch the dramatic moment. There's the religious moment. But there's the dramatic moment in this story. And it could it be that the dramatic moment is even more powerful than the religious moment.
Geoffrey Stern 29:52
So I totally agree. We only have a few more minutes, and I can't but ignore the parallels to The High Holidays that are coming upon us this sense of on'ah devarim you're right Michael It doesn't say onah devarim it doesn't say, depriving somebody throughwords it just says on the app. And those of you sensitive to the language know that on Yom Kippur, the key is onitem et naphshechem.. that we should make ourselves kind of suffer. So there is a balance here that the worst thing that one can do is use the same words and if Rosh Hashannah and Yom Kippur are about anything they're words, they can save, but they can also they can also hurt. The real takeaway for me is, I always thought of this story from where we started and where we ended, and I never asked myself why was the story told? And maybe that's because in the Vilma Talmud, this literally forms on one page. But if you turn the folio and see how this all began, the rabbi's were discussing this sense of humiliating somebody, they said on the previous folio, it is preferable for a person to engage in sex with a woman who is possibly married, then humiliate somebody else in public "yalbim pnei haveru b'rabim. Then it goes on to say that Rav Hisda says all the gates of heaven are to be locked except for the gates of prayer for victims of verbal mistreatment. And then it goes on to say that apropos of this statement, we learned a story about a tanor (an oven) about Rabbi eliezer. So it isn't about where the Torah comes from. It's not about how we can change the Torah as much as we love that kind of stuff on Madlik. It's not about anything except what they did to Rabbi Eliezer. About how after God smiled, they didn't know how to end the joke, and they had to become in the name of unity. They ostracized somebody, and as we head into the holidays, we have to know that yes, neilah is coming and the gates of prayer will be closed, but there's only one thing that can pierce those gates, and that is the cries of somebody who has been hurt and what that means is on the other side, that with words, we can provide solace and we can provide uplifting thoughts and support and maybe that will open up the gates too but this is an amazing pre Rosh Hashannah Pre yom kippur story, I believe.
Adam Mintz 32:46
Amazing. Geoffrey, thank you so much. Thank you, Michael, for your insights today. Shabbat Shalom, everybody we say Shana Tova, when we see you next year, we'll be in 5782. But the Torah continues, we're coming to the end everybody. Join us as Vayelech next week. A short portion, but short and sweet and it's a wonderful portion Geoffrey Shabbat Shalom and shana tovah to everybody.
Geoffrey Stern 33:10
Shanah Tova to you all.
parshat ki tavo (Deuteronomy 26) a recording of a discussion between Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz on Clubhouse as they explore the roots of the concept of the Chosen People looking at the Favored sons and wives of Genesis and at the concept of Covenant and antecedent Hittite suzerainty treaties. Join us as we ask whether Tevya was right and should God choose someone else for a change?
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/343219
Transcript:
Geoffrey Stern 00:00
This is Madlik, and we do disruptive Torah, which means that we look at one specific verse or thought in the weekly portion, and maybe look at it with new eyes, new lenses, and maybe taking it in a new direction that's not totally traditional, or that is not the one that we all grew up with. But today, I'm hoping to be very interactive, because the subject matter today cuts to the core of the Jewish project. And that is this question of being a chosen people. And my guess is that whether personally, or as a part of the Jewish people, all of us have, in one way or the other had to address what it means to be chosen, and therefore should have an opinion, on what chosen is, and and that opinion can go all the way from, it's a wonderful thing to it's probably the worst idea that we ever had. And I think Tevya summed it up very well, as he many times does. And he turned to God and he said, "Dear God, couldn't you choose someone else for a change?", because he understood the dark side of being chosen. But in any case, we begin on Deuteronomy, chapter 26: 18-19. And what will be surprising is how rare it is, for Chosenness, to even be mentioned. So it says, and the Lord has affirmed this day that you are as he promised you, his treasured people, "Am Segula", who shall observe all his commandments, and that he will set you in fame and renown and glory, high above all the nations that he has made, and that you shall be as he promised a holy people to the Lord your God." So in this one verse, we have this rare mention of "Am Segula", and I'll explain how rare it is. It only occurs in four other verses in the five books of Moses, we have a linkage to observing the commandment. So there's an obligatory aspect of being chosen. And then to us moderns, I think we have the most challenging part of being chosen. And that is that he will set you in fame and renown and glory high above all the nations. And that is the triumphalism, the exclusionism, of what it means to be chosen. And then it finishes and says that you will be a holy people. So I'm going to start with you, Rabbi.
Adam Mintz 02:58
So thank you, Geoffrey. It's a great topic. And I wonder about the relationship between being chosen, and being holy, the Torah tell us in the book of Vayikra (Leviticus), that we should be holy, "Kidoshim Tehiyu" . And the question is, does God choose us because we're holy? Or does God choose us, in spite of the fact that we're not always holy? Now, first of all, I think we need to break this down an to say, what does it mean to be holy? Rashi says, on the verse that says we should be holy, holy means to be separate Holy means to recognize that we're not like everybody else. We don't do like everybody else all the time. Sometimes we have to be different. We need to be holy, we need to be seperate. But what's interesting, and this is an idea that's emphasized on Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur. That is the idea of the promise that God made to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, that promises that even though you're not always holy, even though you're not always going to do the right thing, I have chosen you to be my people. I have chosen you to be my people in good times and bad times. In return for that, you choose me to be your God. So I think I'd like to talk about that today. And that's the idea. Does God choose us even when we don't deserve to be chosen? And I think what's amazing about the story is if you read the Torah, that seems to be that God chooses us even if we don't actually deserve to be chosen.
Geoffrey Stern 04:44
Well, that is certainly going to come out today as we explore the sources. But certainly, whether we are distinct because we are holy or we are distinct because we are better none the less inherent in the idea of this chosen people is in fact that we are different in some way. And that we should take that as somehow either a compliment or an obligation. So I said that it's mentioned just very few times in the Bible, in Exodus 19. It says, "Now, if you obey me faithfully and keep my covenant, you shall be my treasured possession, "Li Segula" among all the peoples, indeed, all the earth is mine." So here we have another element to this concept of being a chosen people. And that is this concept of a covenant. You know, a covenant is a legal term. It's between two parties, and it has certain conditions. And again, it means that as you were saying, and you raise this question of not always being holy, I would add to that, the question of not yet being holy meaning to say, is this choseness, is this part of developing relationship? Is it a reward? Is it kind of like, seeing the potential, and all of these things are going to come up today, as we kind of look at the sources, before we delve into the sources, the other two times that "Am Segula" is mentioned are both in Deuteronomy. And it's one of these unique occurrences that doesn't happen very often, where the same verse is word for word, verbatim, repeated twice. It says, "for you are people consecrated to the Lord your God of all the peoples on earth, the Lord your God chose you to be his treasured people." And the only other time that I can recall that we have word for word, the same kind of formula repeated is the 10 commandments. And so it kind of ties into this concept of a treaty of a covenant of a Brit. And so what we're going to do today is actually indulge me into two different ways of looking at this chosen people that have always intrigued me. One is looking at the story of Genesis. You could read Genesis from the beginning till the end, and say, This is a book about show choosing, choosing one son over another, choosing one wife over another, it is all a narrative, all of the complex kind of soap opera type of drama, is all caused by the same dynamic that we run into when we talk about our chosen people. So I always was thinking that's where I would look. And I was hoping someone would write a book. And lo and behold, I did a search. And someone wrote a book exactly on that subject, which is to use the concept of election and choseness in the narrative of Genesis as an insight into what actually it means to be chosen. And the other thing that I was exposed to maybe 30, 40 years ago, is they discovered these Hittite treaties between the king and his vassals. And they saw that they resembled very much the kind of Brit or covenant ceremony that we have in the Bible. And the question was, how did they bare light on this whole concept of being chosen? So with your permission, what I'd love to do is to start looking at Genesis from a totally new perspective. And we're doing that to a large degree, the writings of a guy named Joel Kaminsky at Smith College, and he wrote a book in 2007 called "Yet I love Jacob, we're claiming the biblical concept of election". So the first drama that we get in in Genesis is Cain and Abel. And you all know this story. Cain is the older Abel is the younger, Abel brings a sacrifice of meat because he is a herder. And Abel brings a sacrifice of vegitation and wheat because he is a farmer, and God accepts the sacrifice of Abel of the meat, and doesn't accept or rejects the sacrifice of Cain. And of course, the first thing that we know is based on our prior weeks of discussion where we see the Bible has a real good bias for vegetarianism over meat is we would have thought God would have made a different decision. So maybe the first takeaway as we look at how God chooses is that "Strange are the ways of the Lord" , you never know what's gonna determine a Divine choice. The second thing that happens is those of you who have read the story know that Abel is not a big part of the story. The dialogue is with Cain, who after his sacrifice is rejected. God speaks to him and says, you know, don't, don't don't be concerned about this. You know, it's okay. He realizes that Cain's face has dropped, and the focus on the first election in the Bible is not on the chosen, it's on the unchosen, and that is fascinating. And then of course, we know that Cain kills Abel does a terrible sin, genocide, if you will, because there are only two people on the earth in those days, besides Adam and Eve, and maybe Seth, and he does not get therefore the blessing of Divine Will, and having God looked down upon him favorably, but the dialogue continues. He's a wanderer. He says to God, God, they're going to kill me. So again, it is rather strange or illuminating. That the first instance of God choosing someone, the narrative focuses more on the one that was not chosen than the one that was chosen. Have you ever thought about that? I had never thought about that rabbi.
Adam Mintz 11:52
So I want to tell you, Geoffrey, that is an amazing idea. I have never thought about that. I mean, of course, it's right there. It's obvious. But what does that mean? That God focuses on the unchosen God focuses on giving the unchosen a chance. I mean, if you want to be dramatic about it, Geoffrey, you wonder if Cain had given a different answer. Maybe he would have been saved somehow. And we wouldn't have had the story the way we haven't. Maybe God was giving him a chance, now in the end, he didn't observe it, and he killed Abel and that was the end of it. But maybe God has the conversation with the unchosen, because the unchosen is the one who needs the help. Abel didn't need the help. He was he was okay, he was covered, Cain needed to help.
Geoffrey Stern 12:45
Absolutely. And of course, and we're gonna see more of this later. We cannot but ignore the fact that Abel was not the first born. We always say Cain and Abel. That's because Cain was the firstborn. And in God's first choice, he picked, not the obvious, not following the rule of primogeniture. And he picked the second son. And to me, I never thought of Cain and Abel as the first election story. Michael, I'd love to hear your comment.
Michael Posnik 13:31
As always, as always, a Hiddush (novel interpretation) somewhere in there, but I do have a question. Is this the very first time we encounter death in the TaNaCH (The Biblical Canon)? It seems as I recall, there's no other moment of death. And I remember a theater piece that George Henkin did a long time ago, when Cain and Abel are wrestling, and Cain kills Abel, but doesn't know what he's done. He tries to shake him awake, he tries to lift him up. But we don't have death yet in the TaNaCH. So that's all.
Geoffrey Stern 14:08
I think that's a great insight. I mean, we had death as a hypothetical we had, if you eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge, you will die. And we have the curse of death. But this is probably the first instance of actual death. Would you agree Rabbi?
Adam Mintz 14:26
There's no question that that's right. I mean, the question is, what do you make of that? I mean, that of course is right. Now what's the "therefore" Michael? This is the first incidence of death. I mean, we learn a lot from the first instance of death. Let me say it another way. It's fascinating that the Torah doesn't wait very long to talk to give us a death story. Chapter 3. It's already at the beginning. You have the story of the of the expulsion from The Garden of Eden. There's not going to be death in the Garden of Eden because the Garden of Eden is perfection. So actually, if you want to take it this way, Geoffrey, the very first story in the Torah is the story of death is the story of killing, Man leaves the Garden of Eden and they kill ... and there's death.
Geoffrey Stern 15:21
So I'd like to add to that, and I think it's a really insightful insight is that not only does death first come up, but death first comes up as a result of a choice and a choice (favoritism) made by God, if you will, and so, you know, my first inclination is, this whole concept of a chosen people really does suck.... Aren't we all loved in the in the eyes of God,... so forth and so on. And I have to say that some of the traditional commentaries, even say the same thing, if you look at the Seforno on Deuteronomy our verse. "it says, to be a treasured nation, so that he may achieve with you what he hoped to achieve with mankind, when He created man saying, Let us make man in our image." This Seforno to me is brilliant, because it does say that the ultimate goal had actually been not to make a choice, that everybody's beautiful in his own way or her own way. But nonetheless, the second you start making choices, you start getting jealousy. And in the extreme, you have death. So let's go to the next story that this book brings up, which also includes death. And it's the story of Ishmael and Isaac, or Hagar and Sarah. And in two weeks time are going to be in synagogue or zooming in and listening to the Torah reading for the first day of Rosh Hashannah, and it's hard to believe, but the first Torah reading that we read, on the first of the ten holliest days of our calendar, is about, again, the rejected son. It's about Sarah kicking out Hagar, and her son is Ishamel she's threatened by them, because she feels that her son is the chosen one. And this story then takes the point of view of Hagar, and Ishmael and Ishmael is about to die of thirst. And then God goes ahead and saves him and blesses him. So it is again. it's so illustrative that in the second big story of choseness, we have, again, the concepts of life or death. And I should have mentioned that we have a new theme here. And the new theme here is, you could say it's a difficult consummation, it's a difficult birth. Or you could say it's a miraculous birth. So Sarah, and Abraham, who are the chosen are having difficulty bringing a child in, they have their firstborn son, Ishmael through a maidservant named Hagar. And then they believe that it is Isaac, who's the fully chosen one. So you have this concept. And I once heard that there was an adoption agency for a Jewish children, and it was called Chosen Children. And whether it's true or not, it's an amazing name. Because I think part of this theme is that if you are born miraculously, or if you survive a death defying moment, whether it's being thirsty, as Ishmael survived, or Isaac almost being slaughtered in the binding of Issac The Akedah, in a sense, you belong to God. And so you are an adopted child. But again, we have this sense that if you are chosen, coming with it comes a lot of pain and struggle. I just love the way this book and I encourage any of you who are interested in tracing these concepts to get it. But again, these themes come up over and over again, in all the future themes. We're going to have this question of a difficult or miraculous birth, we're going to have the sense of the one who is not chosen is nonetheless blessed in his or her own way. And we have the sense being chosen isn't a walk in the park. It's difficult for all concerned.
Adam Mintz 20:07
I mean, let's let's, let me take your last point first. And that is the fact that choseness is difficult, choseness is opportunity. But choseness is also obligation. And I think that's really the point you're making. And that's a huge point. You started the half hour with a discussion of Tevya. You know, "couldn't you choose somebody else", he understood that being chosen is obligation. I'll just tell you something. When you convert somebody to Judaism, the way the conversion process works is that the conversion candidate studies all the laws or many of the laws, then you take the conversion candidate to the mikvah, and you kind of give them a kind of formal test. And then they get ready to go into the mikvah. And the very last thing that you say to the conversion candidate, before they go into the mikvah before they become Jewish, what you say is, you should know that you're now joining a chosen people, and being chosen has a lot of responsibilities. And not everybody in the world understands and appreciates the fact that we're chosen. It's always struck me that that's what we tell the Convert at the last minute.
Geoffrey Stern 21:35
And of course, the Convert is literally choosing to be a part of our people.
Adam Mintz 21:42
In spite of the fact that choseness is a challenge.
Geoffrey Stern 21:49
One of the ideas that I was thinking of is, is choseness a choice, and certainly in the sense of a convert, they are choosing to be part of our chosen community. You know, you can't help but realize when we talk about Ishmael, that we on the first day of Rosh Hashannah are going to be hearing his story, and not the story of Isaac. But there are billions of followers of Islam, who actually believe that Ishmael was the son who was taken by Abraham to the binding, and they substitute Ishmael for Isaac. So it seems to me that one of the questions that is raised in my head is; Is this our narrative of being chosen, and are others are permitted and almost encouraged to have their own narratives of being chosen? But certainly whether you answer that question in the affirmative or not, even in our own tradition, we've had two instances. So far, we're the one who has not chosen almost becomes the center point of the story, at least that part of the story that we've looked at, which to me is just absolutely fascinating. So let's move on to the next story. And that is Jacob and Esau. And here, unlike the previous story, where you had two mothers, you had Hagar and Sarah, and I should say that this concept of choseness is known to disrupt people, so that maybe Ishmael and Isaac did not have the best relationship. But we can't but realize that it spilled over to their mothers who didn't have a good relationship. This choseness tears families apart. Now we get to Jacob and Esau, and we have a single mother with twins in her womb. And in Genesis 25. It says, "and the Lord answered her two nations are in your womb, to separate people shall issue from your body, one shall be mightier than the other. And the older shall serve the younger." So if we thought that there was a trend and from two episodes, you can't have a trend yet. But if we started to sense that Cain and Abel, it was Abel, who was picked, he was the underdog. He was the second born. In the story of Isaac and Ishmael Isaac was the second born. Now we have the Bible actually say it, that it is going to be Jacob, who is the second born, who will rule over the older. And this choice by God is very disruptive. And it is disruptive in the sense that it goes against the traditions, the concepts, the assumptions of the ancient Near East, and even our own Bible were in Deuteronomy 21. It says if you have two sons from two wives, and One is loved and one is not, "he must accept the firstborn, the son of the unloved one, and a lot to him a double portion of all he possesses." So the choices that God and His agents are making in Genesis are flaunting the assumptions and the norms of the ancient Near East. And in that sense, we have a new element to choseness. And that is a sense of radicalism.
Adam Mintz 25:32
I love that. I love that idea. radicalism. Choseness is radicalism, because of the way that it developed. Let's just again, take a step back choseness doesn't have to be radical, because it could be that the older one is chosen. But the way the Torah represents it, the older one is never chosen, you're chosen on merit, not on birth order. And that is radical in the Torah. And you're absolutely right, Geoffrey the Torah wants that to be radical. The Torah wants you to sit up straight and say, Wow, the Torah is breaking the rules. And it might be what you quoted from last week's parsha, that if you have two wives, and you have to still respect the son of the older son that's a technicality. That's in laws of inheritance. But what they talk about in the book of Genesis is not the laws of inheritance. That's really the concept of who's gonna continue the Jewish people. And that was not based on birth order that was based on merit. And the Torah is very radical, that the younger one seems to always merit. By the way, it doesn't end in Genesis, Moses is the one who merits to be the leader, even though clearly Aaron is the older one. And Aaron doesn't get it, Aaron gets a consolation prize. He is the high priest, but he's not the leader of the Jewish people.
Geoffrey Stern 27:13
We're so engrossed in this conversation, the minutes are running by, but I would like to pose and this I have not seen in writing. And so in a sense, this is a little bit original. But we always think the opposite of chosen, this is not being chosen (rejected). And I would like to suggest that the opposite of being chosen, is being entitled. And I think the adopted child is the best example that one could pick. The idea that the firstborn, and that is whether it's the firstborn in a family, or it's an established hierarchy of class or nobility, that they are entitled to have (power) certain things. The fact that the Bible shows an absolute bias, and it's outspoken. It goes all the way through Joseph's story... Joseph is the son of Rachel, Rachel is the daughter of Laben. She's the second born daughter, this doesn't only refer to men, when Jacob picks her And Laban switches the vail, Laban winks at Jacob the next morning and says, We don't do things that way. Here. We honor the firstborn. Jacob was rejecting the first born when he picked Rachel, Jacob, who loved Joseph was loving the youngest over over Judah. So this is a rejection of the entitlement, and an embrace of and I won't say someone who deserves it, and that's where we get to the crux of the message, and we're running out of time. So I'd love to talk about the Joseph's story a little bit. It's very clear in Joseph that when he is young, not only does his father make a mistake in picking him and giving him this beautiful toy of a wonderful multicolored coat, but he doesn't understand what it is to have certain powers, certain abilities. He taunts his brothers with his dreams, you will bow down to me he is an immature chosen person, and his brothers are no less immature by selling him. He goes on to Egypt. And again, he's chosen .... this guy is on the make, he's going to rise to the top. And it's only after he's in jail, that he's called on to interpret a dream for the first time, does he say, and God has given me this ability, and he's gotten the humility. So I think we learned from this part of the story That, in fact, being chosen is as much of a challenge, is as much of seeing the potential that one needs to pick. And I will say that part of it has to be choosing to be chosen. And that's where I kind of want to end and I'm happy to extend our conversation. But these Hittite treaties that I referenced earlier on, were between the main King, and a bunch of different vassals, and they sounded very much like our 10 commandments, because they start by the king saying, I did this for your parents, and I took you from here, and I brought you to here, and therefore you have to be loyal to me. And what the radical difference .... we've used this term already today, with the covenant of being chosen, is that God gets rid of the ruling class, and he doesn't pick another king. And we've discussed this before he picks the children of Israel. And he says to each person, I have this relationship with you. And that, I think, is what was radical about the choseness and the covenant that we see. And in fact, this whole concept of being chosen? Is it a difficult concept? Yes. Is it one that comes chock full of suffering? Absolutely. But I'd like to say that, to my mind, the idea of being chosen is the idea of not being entitled, The idea that if you choose to be part of our movement, and it was a movement of unaffiliated "apiru", which became "ivrim" who came into the land of Canaan, who rejected all of the ruling class, and decided to make a new society, if you choose to join us, you are chosen. And if you choose to live by the old rules of entitlement and class, then maybe you're going to have your own blessings. But the blessings of this choseness are unique. And that's kind of what I come away with. It's a very challenging concept. It's one that we can debate forever. But it's also one that is chock full of ideas that that relate to all of us who have families, who have sibling rivalries, .... it's very grounded in real life.
Adam Mintz 32:27
Thank you, Geoffrey. I think that's great. I'll just add one little point and that is, and even when you choose to be chosen, the road is bumpy. And Joseph is the best example of that. Nothing is simple, right? The decision to be chosen is difficult. And then the road of choseness is difficult. This was a great topic. It's a great topic before Rosh Hashannah. We look forward to seeing everybody we still can get it one more Shabbat before Rosh Hashannah. So next week, "Nitzavim" have a great Shabbat Have a great week, everybody enjoy the last week of summer. And we look forward to see you next Friday.
Geoffrey Stern 33:03
Anyone who wants to stay on and continue the discussion are welcome to do so. But this was very special, I hope you all enjoyed. And that each in your own way will choose to be chosen and to choose and empower others as well. As we go into Shabbat, the only thing that I will add is that the blessing that we say over our children on Friday night is the blessing that that Jacob made to Joseph's two children, Ephraim and Menasheh And to the form, he moved his hands in two different directions. And he put his right hand on the youngest son, and true to form Joseph said to him, Hey, Dad, that's not the way we do things. And the real reason I believe that we make the blessing on Menasheh and Ephraim on Friday night is number one, it's a blessing from grandparents to their grandchildren. And when you bless your grandchildren, you know that the continuity of some of the ideas that you hold, near have a future. but also, we have no record of Ephraim and Menasheh so in a sense, it is a little bit of the resolution of the whole challenge of choseness, that here were two brothers. Clearly one had different talents than the other. One got the main blessing, the other got another blessing, but they all live together and at the end of the day, that I think is the biggest challenge of being chosen. Shabbat Shalom.
Parshat Ki Teitzei - When was the last time you listened to the lyrics, poetry and sounds of the mitzvot? Join Geoffrey Stern, Rabbi Adam Mintz and special guest poet, Haim Nachman Bialik in a live recording of our weekly disruptive Torah on Clubhouse. We are told that there never was nor never will be a case of the Biblical Rebellious Son and that we are simply to be rewarded for its study. We explore how all of the commandments provide similar rewards for those willing to listen to their lyrical nature.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/342083
Transcript:
Geoffrey Stern
Madlik is weekly disruptive Torah on clubhouse. But we record every week. And we then publish as a podcast. And we're available on all of the major podcast platforms. And you are welcome to give us a few stars and give us a review. And this week, I want to thank our faithful listener Bob, for doing just that giving us some stars, five stars, you can't get better than that, and a beautiful review. So thank you, Bob. And I invite all of you even if you've been on the clubhouse, to check out Madlik on your favorite podcast platform, and give us a review and a few stars and thank you for that. So this week, the name of the Parsha is Ki Teitzei and as Rabbi Adam said in the introduction, it has more commandments more Halachot and mitzvot than any other parsha. And I am only going to focus on one Halacha and it might be considered the most unique Halacha in the Torah and before I tell you why it's unique. Let me read it to you. It's called Ben sorer u'morer otherwise known as the Rebellious Son, and it goes as follows in Deuteronomy 21. "If a man has a wayward and defiant son, who does not heed his father or mother and does not obey them, even after they discipline him, his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his town at the public place of his community. They shall say to the elders of his town, this son of ours is disloyal and defiant. He does not heed us. He is a glutton and a drunkard, thereupon the men of his town shall stone him to death. Thus you will sweep out evil from your midst, all Israel will hear and be afraid." Boy, that's a powerful one, especially this week when we are reading about the Taliban. It certainly brings parallel to a very fundamentalist strict notion of the law and how one keeps people observant. So why is this unique? It's unique because the Talmud in Sanhedrin says that there has never been, and there will never be a ben sorer u'morer; a rebellious son, it was given to us this halacha, this law, this practical injunction was given to us so that we made "darosh umekabel schar" we may expound and receive reward. So first of all, Rabbi, is this a mainstream opinion? Or is this a unique opinion? And what's at issue here?
Adam Mintz
So, first of all, it's a great topic. I mean, there's nothing like ben sorer u'morer. The idea that you have a wayward son, and that you put him to death, actually, before he commits any crime, because better he should die innocent than die guilty. That the first point which is amazing. But the second point is that it never happened. And the reason we studied isDrosh vekabel schar, which really I would translate to mean, let's learn a lesson from it. What lessons can you learn from how you handle a rebellious son? But it happens to be Geoffrey that if you go on in that Gemora, the opinion of Robbie Yochanan, who was a rabbi who lived in Israel in Tiberius, around the year 400, he says, quote, "ani rei'iti" I saw a wayward son in my life, "veyashavti al kivro". And I sat on his grave, meaning it did happen. And he was punished. So actually, there were two opinions. I don't know which opinion is more prevalent. But there were two opinions. One opinion is it never happened.... And one opinion is yes it happened, and I saw it with my own eyes, and I sat on his grave. And I thought we were going to talk about what are those two opinions. They're so different in their views? One opinion is that it never happened. The other opinion is I saw it and I sat on his grave, how do you come two such different opinions?
Geoffrey Stern
Well, and that also begs the question of what does it mean to "sit on his grave"? Did he sit on his grave and cry? So the question then becomes this that we say, "never happened and never will happen? Is that descriptive or is it prescriptive? Is it to say it never should happen. And it reminds me of the Mishnah actually in Makkot that literally talks about the death penalty in general. And you know, those of you who have read the Old Testament, the Hebrew Bible know that it is full of Mot Yamut "Die you shall certainly die". But this is what the Mishnah says in Sanhedrin. "It says the Sanhedrin that executes someone once in seven years, is characterized as a destructive tribunal. Rabbi Eliezer b. Azaria says, once in 70 years, Rabbi Tarfon and Rabbi Akiva say, if we had been members of the Sanhedrin, we would have conducted trials in a manner whereby no person would have ever been executed." So here too I don't know whether the Talmud that you quote, which is beautiful, about the rabbi who said he actually saw a ben sorer u'morer whether that is distinct from or an agreement with, because of the fact that he sat on his grave. And at least in my mind, I think he cried.
Adam Mintz
Good. I liked that a lot. Now, of course, the question of whether or not they ever actually carried out the death penalty is the same debate that we have in 2021. whether or not we're in favor of death penalties. And basically, what the rabbis say is that we don't want to actually carry out the death penalty. But we want you to think that if you violate Shabbat, you deserve to get the death penalty, we're not going to kill you. Because that's not what we do, because that is counterproductive to kill you. We want to try to rehabilitate you. But the idea is that we have the death penalty on the books. And maybe that's what Rabbi Yohanan says, I saw, I sat on his grave, I cried. It really happened. Or maybe it didn't really happen. The point is that we need to know that we need to rehabilitate those kinds of children.
Geoffrey Stern
So so far, we've really discussed, I would say, black and white, life or death. But in this parsha that you so aptly said, contains so many laws, many of the laws refer to personal status. And the one word that I think, puts shudders down, anyone who follows Jewish laws of identity is the word bastard or Mamzir. And that occurs in Deuteronomy 23. And basically, it says that someone who is a Mamzir, and that we'll describe in a second, cannot enter into the congregation, even to the 10th generation. And it is as close to a social death sentence as you can get. And just as you brought up the death penalty is something that reflects on a current discussion, it's a very heated area of debate, even till today, in Israel, this law of status where a child is born, and maybe the parents didn't get a proper divorce and had a child and the child is then called a Mamzir. Again, it is something that there are many, many people that look at and say, well, it's a law, it's on the books, and it has to be enforced. And of course, like anything that relates to power, there's the potential for it to be misused. And in the in the source papers that I shared with you, Rabbi, I had heard many years back and I think it was in a lecture by Rabbi Riskin, the colloquialism or the phrase Ain Mamzerim B'Yisrael" that there are no bastards in Israel. And what was meant by that was that any Rabbi worth his or her salt would find a way, some way, any way to make sure that this law was really in the same category as the rebellious son in the sense that it might be on the books, but it never was put into practice. Have you heard this notion of "Eyn Mazmzerim B'Yisrael" and even if you haven't, does that resonate with you in terms of Jewish learning?
Adam Mintz
Geoffrey, that I heard that phrase "Eyn Mazmzerim B'Yisrael" from the same source you did: Rabbi Riskin and when you asked me earlier this week, to find the source, so I was able to do something that we weren't able to do in the early Rabbi Riskin days. And that is I googled it to see where'd Rabbi Riskin come up with it. And, you know, he's very creative and very good Rabbi Riskin, but I couldn't find it anywhere. So I think that the explanation that you gave is really right on the mark, what Rabbi Riskin was telling us "Eyn Mazmzerim B'Yisrael" It's not a comment about sexual relations between man and woman and whether they got divorced or whether they didn't get divorced, or all of that. Nothing to do with any of that. What it has to do with is about the rabbis, Are the rabbis willing to be creative and courageous enough to always find a way to get people not to be called Mamzerim. I think that's a very, very important voice. And what Rabbi Riskin was saying was exactly like you said, if you're worth your salt, you can figure out how not to have someone be a Mamzer. And that's exactly the same idea. As if you're worth your salt, you're going to make sure that there's no such thing as a Ben Sorer u'morer and maybe Geoffrey, that even follows to the other opinion. "I saw a Ben Sorer u'morer" , and I sat on his grave, and I cried because I wasn't able or the rabbi's weren't able to get him out of that status. And that's a tragedy, because "Eyn Mazmzerim B'Yisrael", the rabbi's need to have the ability, the creativity, the courage to get these people out of that situation.
Geoffrey Stern
And I would like to interject a personal story an account that I have that puts some meat on this concept of if you are worth your salt. I have a friend a roommate from yeshiva came from a town. Norwich Connecticut, his father was the Orthodox Rabbi there. And about 15 years ago, he was living in Israel, he came to see me and I said, Well, what are you up to? He says, Well, I'm going to Norwich, Connecticut. And I'm going to make a marriage improper to disallow a marriage. And he explained to me, and this is just I think, interesting. So we can all understand how these things work. A student showed up to the yeshiva, and his parents had been remarried. And his mother's first marriage was in Norwich, Connecticut. And he had not gotten an orthodox divorce. So my friend Shmuel was going back to his hometown, and he found people who knew one of the witnesses for that first wedding. And he wanted to invalidate the marriage by invalidating the witness... And he would ask, Well, did he ever gamble? Did you ever see him playing cards, and he would find some way that would make the first marriage nullified. And again, you have to do what you have to do. And the Halacha is something that can be and seem very splitting of hairs, full of minutia and technical, but in a sense, what he was doing was full of humanity. And the challenge, of course, is there aren't enough rabbis who have the learning, who are dedicated to doing it for not only a student that shows up at the Yeshiva, but for any Jew. And that's and that's really the challenge.
Adam Mintz
Well, Rabbi Riskin would love that story. Because"Eyn Mazmzerim B'Yisrael", your friend had the courage to make sure that this child was not going to be called a Mamzir.
Geoffrey Stern
We could spend probably the rest of the half hour just talking about how maybe Judaism, or laws that seem more rigid or dated or even Taliban-like, have been nullified and changed. And that would be a perfectly good use of our time. But I want to take the discussion in a totally different direction. Because I am intrigued by the fact that the rabbis said that this Halacha of the rebellious son was there only for us to discuss and learn. And it seems to me that there's an aspect of what some consider the dry halakhah or the daily practice of the Jew, that we all need to listen to, that it is a language in and of itself, looking at the Halacha at Jewish observance, as a language more than even a religion or a code. And every Shabbat when I say my prayers, there's one verse that I say after the Shema, that I think of in this regard, and it says Ashrei Ha'Ish Shyishma l'mitzvotecha" "Happy is the person who listens to the commandments". And what I want to do for the balance is to explore not only capital punishment and not only questions of status and these earth-shattering laws, but potentially how every one of the Jewish traditions and customs can be looked at in a whole new way. And we're given a license by this kind of takeaway, throwaway comment of the rabbi's to look at the whole corpus of Jewish observance as a lyric as a language as something that we can smile to, dance to, struggle with, but interact with in the way that we do maybe with a poem.
Adam Mintz
Okay, great.
Geoffrey Stern
So I'm inviting a third player to our to our panel today. Unfortunately, he's not alive, but his name is Haim Nachman Bialik. And he was considered the national poet of Israel. He actually made Aliyah, lived in Israel, but he died in the 20s before the state. But what you might not know about him is that he started as a very observant Jew, he went to the Yeshiva in Velozhin. And he actually went there. So his grandfather would think that he was studying and then he went, and he became the great poet that he was. And he saw in the paper that they closed the Yeshiva in Velozhin, and so he had to rush home because he knew his grandfather would know that he wasn't at the Yeshiva so to speak. But he in his later days, when he was no longer observant, wrote a three-volume tome on the Aggadah. And the Aggadah is the legends of the Jews. The Aggadah is always contrasted to the halakhah. There's the law and there's the fable, there's the practice, and there's the narrative and the stories. So you would expect that someone like him, would really be a major fan of the legends of the Jews, and not so much for the Halacha. But he has an article that he wrote called the Halacha and Aggadah, and in the source feet, if you if you go to the podcast when it issues early in the week, you'll see the source sheet there. I have the full text in both English and Hebrew, and it's worth reading. It's very lyrical, but in it, he actually makes an argument that the Halacha is as much a song, a poem a lyric as anything else. So with your permission, I'm going to read a little bit and then I welcome all of us to to kind of discuss, he says "halakhah and Aggadah the law and the legends are two things which are really one two sides of a single shield. The relation between them is like that of speech to thought and emotion or the action and sensible form to speech. Halacha is the crystallization the ultimate and inevitable quintessence of the Aggadah legend. The legend is the content of Halacha. The legend is the plaintive voice of the heart's yearning as it wings its way to its Haven, Halacha is the resting place where for a moment the yearning is satisfied and stilled. As a dream seeks its fulfillment in interpretation, as will in action as thought in speech as fruit. So Aggadah in Halacha. But in the heart of the ruit, there lies hidden the seed from which a new flower will grow. The Halacha which is sublimated into a symbol and much Halacha there is, as we shall find becomes the mother of a new Aggadah, a new legend, which may be like it or unlike it, a living and healthy law is a legend that has been or will be. And the reverse is true. Also, the two are one in their beginning and their end." So it's really so lyrical. And I had to read it in his words because he is a poet. But here was a man who literally and we'll see he gives some concrete examples of how he saw the song in the minutiae of the law. Does this resonate with any of you in terms of the music in Jewish custom and activity?
Adam Mintz
I think what he's telling you is that Halacha means the way we live. The minute you describe the way we live, all of a sudden, that's a legend. All of a sudden, that's a story. That's the tradition. Everything in this week's parsha... all these 77 laws are part of the way we live. If it's the way we live, it's a legend. This week's parsha tells us if you get divorced, you have to write a get (divorce document) if you get married, you go through the formalities of a marriage ceremony of a Chuppah? Those aren't laws, those are legends. So it's the stories, how many stories have come out of those two laws? And he can't distinguish between the two? Is it a law? Is it a legend? Is it a legend? And is it a law. And the truth of the matter is that the law leads to the legend. And then the legend leads right back to the law. I feel exactly what he says.
Geoffrey Stern
So I was thinking of this, when a week or two ago, we discussed vegetarianism. And this whole concept of eating meat Basar Ta'aiva" (meat of desire), only on special occasions. And again I was struggling with the fact that so much in the Bible seems to lean towards vegetarianism. And I was wondering, where does it bear itself out? Where does it come through? And then I started thinking of all the laws that I've studied whether it's for Hanukkah, whether it's for Shabbat, of if you have limited resources, what do you spend it on? If it's on Shabbat? Do you use the money that you have for the candle for the wine for the meat? And it seemed to me that again, this was looking at the life of the Jew. And you really understood then, in ways that you and I never could, what Baser Ta'aiva" what the meat of desire... that moment of when every pintela Jew, every poor little peasant could feel something and it was that treat, not a part of everyday life. So to me that was an example of where the minutiae of the Halacha that might be dealing with something very monotone and trivial, actually bore within it, a whole weltanschauung of the Jewish people and their relationship, to poverty, to spirit to a little treat once in a while. And to me, it was the answer. I really felt that in my heart that no, our tradition has spoken about the place of eating meat at special times at Holy times. And it's spoken loud and clear, even if I don't find one piece of prose, or one piece of narrative that directly touches upon it.
Adam Mintz
I think that's a beautiful example. I mean, I think right off the mark, poetry and prose, narrative and law. What he's saying is, those are just words, really, they merge into one entity, and that's really Jewish life.
Geoffrey Stern
So I'll give one more example that he brings. And he talks about a law of carrying on Shabbat... you're not allowed to carry in a public domain. And it says, a man may not go out on the Shabbat with a sword or a bow or a shield or a club or a spear. Rab Eliezer says, they are ornaments, and therefore may be worn. But the sages say they are only a disgrace, as it is said, and they shall beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore. Here we have, and this is Bialik. Here we have ideas about beauty and ugliness in dress-and whence are they taken? From the words of the sweet singer and the great seer. And in what connection? In connection with carrying on the Sabbath. So again, what he's saying is that in these minutia, if we listen to the commandments, .... and let's not neglect to say that there's no question that Judaism is an orthopraxy it's correct practice more than an orthodoxy correct belief. And so much of what we do is dictated by how we do it and what we do but in that seems to me to be just a beautiful song. And I think that's the flip side of saying that some laws are just written on the book. They're just for us to study. And actually, isn't that what we do on Madlik?
Adam Mintz
That's right. I mean, it's hard, though, Geoffrey to know how you distinguish between the different kinds of laws?
Geoffrey Stern
Well, absolutely. But I would argue that really, we should not relegate this to different laws, but that every law has this element within it. And that's, I think, what my big takeaway is. Bialik goes on to say, he says, "not all laws, Halachot are equal or are the same and unproductive. Another bears fruit and fruit that reproduces itself. one is like an empty vessel that is put away in a corner till it is wanted. Another is like a vessel that is uninterrupted use, always being emptied and filled again with something new." So I think what we do is we look through our narrative to find practices that have fallen into disuse, or misunderstood or taken in one direction. And we have the license to take it in a totally new direction. Lately, I've been very stiff. And I've been doing a lot of yoga. You know, many of the yoga teachers give you a thought to think about and give you a practice to aim for. And I just thought wouldn't it be magnificent to combine yoga and Tefilla, I want to call it yogafilla. The idea is to take the bowing that we do already in the tefilla. It's there, ... When we are thankful we say "modeem anachnu Lach" and we bend our knees and our knees are "berchayim", which is the same word for "bracha" to bless. So I'm just saying this is kind of little things that have come up in my past week, where I look at the Halacha, I look at the practice at the minhag. And I'm saying these are vessels that might have been emptied. But they're there for us to fill up.
Adam Mintz
I think that's right, first of all, tell you that I think there's a synagogue on the west side, Romamu where they have yoga on Saturday morning, followed by tefilla, so come to the west side. And you can do yoga and tefilla. But the idea is really exactly right. And I think that's the idea that the law, what you sometimes think of ..... you needed to relax. So you're doing yoga. And what Bialik would say is no follow the Halacha. Because even though the Halacha feels rigid, but actually the Halacha gives us the ability to play out that narrative, and to live our lives in a special way. Jessica, you asked to come up?
Jessica
Oh, I just wanted to quickly say that the Cantor from Romamu is here on Fire Island. And she's amazing. So that's all thanks. I
Adam Mintz
Send her our regards and tell her she got a shout out on Madlik this afternoon.
Jessica
I will do that. Thank you.
Adam Mintz
So Geoffrey, the ability and the choice of Bialik's poem this week, when the Parsha is so filled with laws. I think it's so special, and really gives us something to think about. We started today with ben sorer u'morer and whether or not that really happened. And we go from there to the question about generally, about what the role is of law within the halakhic system. And Bialik really gives us kind of a poetic view of what law is all about. And I think we can use that in ben sorer u'morer, and we can use it in so many other places.
Geoffrey Stern
I totally agree. And if you haven't sensed from the tone of my voice, I discovered Bialik recently, but it's so personal with me. He has a poem that he calls "Before the Book Closet". And it was written while the secular Jew was spending three years aggregating all of the Aggadot and it's coming back to the Beit Midrash, to the study hall. And he says "Do you still know me? I am so and so. Only you alone knew my youth. You were my garden, I learned to hide in your scrolls." And then at the end of the poem, he says, "and now after the change of time, so my wheel of life has brought me back and stood me once again before you hiders of the closet, and once more my hand turns among your scrolls and my eye gropes tired among verses." And so with me, I studied Torah in my youth. And when I study Torah at this stage in my life, it is revisiting my youth and I am trying to see if I have that relationship. But I would argue that all of us studied our texts when we were young. And we need to find ourselves and to see if we are recognized once again in those texts. And that is, I think, the invitation that the rabbi's give us about the ben sorer u'morer.. . And the last thing that I will say is, you know, Bialik, was a rebellious son. He was told by the head of the Velozhin Yeshiva as he left, just don't write anything bad about us. But the truth is, we are all also rebellious sons, even though the rebellious son doesn't exist and if we aren't, maybe we should be, but we have to rediscover ourselves and rediscover the mystery and the magic of our ancient texts. And with that, I bid you all Shabbat Shalom.
Adam Mintz
Shabbat Shalom, Geoffrey. That was an amazing discussion today and Bialik was beautiful as he always is, and ben sorer u'morer. Shabbat Shalom to everybody. Enjoy and we look forward to seeing everybody next week. Be well, Shabbat Shalom,
Geoffrey Stern
Shabbat Shalom.
A live recording of Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz as they explore the Torah’s visceral disgust for the monarchy and how this rejection sheds light on the New Year Festival and it’s powerful message.
Link to Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/340788
Transcript:
Geoffrey Stern
This week's parsha is Shoftim. And it is the first time that the Jewish people ask for a king. And so I'm just going to go ahead and read Deuteronomy 17. Because this is the first time that not only is the Jewish people asking for a king, but frankly, we'll see in our discussion. kingship is not that much emphasized throughout the Bible till now. So again, we start almost like last week, trying to put it in the context of entering the land. It says, "If after you have entered the land, that the Lord your God has assigned you and taken possession of it, and settled in it, you decide, I will set a king over me, as do all the nations about me, you shall be free to set a king over yourself, one chosen by the Lord your God, be sure to set as a king over oneself one of you own people, you must not set a foreigner over you who is not your kinsmen. And then it goes on to further limit what the king can do, you shall not keep many horses, or send people back to Egypt to add to his horses, since the Lord has warned you, you must not go back that way again. You shall not have many wives, you shall know amass silver and gold in excess, he shall have a copy of the teaching of the Torah written for him on a scroll, and he shall read it regularly. And then it goes on to say, thus he will not act haughtily toward his fellows, or deviate from the instruction to the right. or to the left." We've seen many times where the Jewish people have gone to Moses, whether as a group or individuals and asked for exceptions to the rule. But I think this one is really striking, in that if you had to give one argument to Moses, or God, I think the last thing you would ever say is, I want to do something because the nations around me are doing it. I mean, that is a really bad strategy, seeing as so much of what Moses and God are trying to do is to create a distinctive narrative. But sure enough, that's what they do. And then God goes ahead and says, or, the Bible says you can have it, and then gives a bunch of limitations. So what is your read on this Rabbi, what what is going on here? Is this totally unique in terms of the type of give and take that we've seen, when the Bible, the Torah is being tweaked as the rubber hits the pavement and the Jews come into the land of Israel?
Adam Mintz
First of all, thank you, Geoffrey, this is a great topic. And I think that you really hit on something that's so important, the uniqueness of the message of the Torah. And the fact that the Jews want to be like everybody else. You see, think about it for a minute. The Jews were slaves in Egypt, they've been 40 years in the desert. That is the unique story. Nobody else has the story. And finally, after all of this, 40 years of the desert, and all the all the trouble and all the this and all the that they finally have a chance to be like everybody else. Wow, what an amazing opportunity to be like everybody else. And they kind of slip up, because they tell God, hey, God, we want to be just like everybody else. And God basically says (the story doesn't play itself out here until the book of Samuel) then you're not like everybody else. And you can't have a king, because God is the only king that you have. But the fact that the Jews want to be like everybody else really tells you what they've been thinking for 40 years. Enough is Enough of all these miracle stories. We just want to be regular people.
Geoffrey Stern
You know, there's another clue here, where it says, "Do not keep many horses, or send people back to Egypt to add to the horses, because I have warned you You must not go back that way again." It's almost a recognition that this is a full retreat from everything that's been accomplished till now. It's almost as though you're going back to Egypt, not so much with the horses, but with the whole endeavor, asking for a king, a Pharaoh, if you will. And you're almost surprised by the lack of drama here, it's almost a factual response: Okay, you want a King, this is what the limitations are going to be, you can't have a lot of horses, can't have a lot of riches can't have a lot of wives, and you got to read the Torah a lot. I think you're absolutely correct. This doesn't really play itself out until we get to Samuel. And in Samuel, it's almost as though we're reading two galleys of the same story. You know, I've talked a lot about when exactly the book of Deuteronomy was written, but we can put that to the side and look at Samuel, because in the version that we have with Samuel, it gets a lot more emotional. And they're they come to Samuel. And they said to him, also appoint a king for us to govern like all the other nations. And Samuel was displeased. And he, (like Moses, in the old days) went to God and say, God, what should we do? And God says, "It is not you that they have rejected, it is me they have rejected as their King." So God is saying, this is a total rejection of all that we've worked for. And the Hebrew term that he uses "ki lo otcha ma'asu ke oti ma'asu" ... if you know, yes, you know, the word meese or meeskite means something that is detestable. It almost works into the fabric of our story, you know the cornerstone that was rejected by the builders, "Even She'moasu habanim" in a sense, you are turning the table on God, and you are rejecting God outright by asking for a king. I think that there's so much emotion here that we have to stop almost, and wrap our hands around what is happening here? And how personally, if you can say that, God is taking it?
Adam Mintz
Yeah, I mean, there's no question that God takes it very personally, I think that's not the surprising part. The surprising part is the fact that after 40 years, this is the case that makes the Jews kind of, you know, jump up and say, we want to be like everybody else. The idea of being like everybody else, is very much not a religious idea. to this very day. It's bad to be like everybody else. If you're religious, whatever religion you have you're defined by being different than everybody else. If you want to have a title for today, the idea of being like everybody else, is a very problematic idea in religion.
Geoffrey Stern
If we were to stop here, you would be absolutely correct. And what I mean by that is, there's a lot of truth to what you're saying. But being different can kind of be like you dress in white, I'm going to dress in black, but in Samuel, he actually puts some meat and what is distasteful about having a king and a ruler and a monarch. So it's not simply, you are just trying to blend in and assimilate. It's really you're giving up on a whole set of values. Listen to what Samuel says, and he warns them, what will happen to them if they have a king, "he will take your sons and appoint them as charioteers and horsemen and they will serve as outrunners for his chariots. He will appoint them as his chiefs of his 1,000s and his 50's or they will have to plow his fields reap his harvest and make his weapons and the equipment for his chariots. He will take your daughters as perfumers cooks and bakers, he will seize your choice fields, vineyards and olive groves, and give them to his couriers. He will take the 10th part of your grain and vintage and give it to the unichs and courtiers. He will take your male and female slaves, your choice young men and your asses and put them to work for him. He will take a 10th part of your flocks and you shall become his slaves. The day will come when you cry out because of the king who you yourselves have chosen, and the Lord will not answer you on that day." So it's really not so much that you're making a mistake, because you're blending in and you're losing your cultural identity. You're really making a very profound mistake and you can't but hear in this, the clacking of the armour and the chariots there's war here there is putting people into subjugation. You are asking to give up. God, you're throwing him away, and you're taking on a ruler who's going to subjugate you.
Adam Mintz
Yeah, I mean, that just makes it all that much worse. It just shows how near sighted the Jews are, that they just want the immediate power, or the sense that they're like every other nation, the long view, which is the God takes care of them better than anybody else that doesn't seem to figure in their minds.
Geoffrey Stern
Michael?
Michael Stern
I was hearing it so different not to take a king of the material world in the physical world, but to gain and earn sovereignty over ourselves. And to, you know, in different programs, it's: have a higher power of my understanding. And if everybody met in their own higher powers and this kingdom over my hurt angry child that wants to wear armor and go out and kill people, my little girl that shamed for being in a man's body to other cultures, you mentioned we're the only one with that story of 40 years in the desert, I don't know how long the blacks were slaves. And they are having identity crisis too. How do we find the king within, for the sovereignty of our inner nation, so that we can see who's aho, who's sitting in the captain's seat, to watch over the domain and listen to the hurt child to the angry to the competitive, and so on. So I just wanted to say that's what I heard in the process.
Geoffrey Stern
I love that. You've almost kind of artistically joined the two, two narratives together the distinctive one of remember who you were, and how unique you were, and that you were slaves, and that you were poor, and that you didn't have those horses. And I forgot to bring the punch line here where Samuel really combines it all. And he says, "We must have a king over us that we may be like all the other nations let our King rule over us and go out at our head and fight our battles." So it is fascinating that he kind of combines the fact that you want to be like everybody else. And everybody else is out there, seeing who has a bigger stick, and you want to join that and you're losing everything that makes you unique. So I think that one can only conclude from this, that the Torah is totally against the Monarchy, totally against having a king. And we all know how profound a distinction that made for the Jewish people in the sense that the temple was built by Solomon, ..... I just watched an episode or two of CNN called Jerusalem the other night. And, you know, this is when we became truly like every other nation, where we established our cultic Center, and we established a monarchy and a king. And the Torah in these two visceral paragraphs is so much against it, how do we take that as a commentary on what we've become? So much of what is in Judaism revolves around the monarchy and and and us becoming a nation amongst the others?
Michael Stern
Well, I really love the different perspectives and if we're coming from a past that proves that we were like the other nations, maybe we need to adjust it because we still have presidents who are like kings and so on, and have self sovereignty and internalize the whole story. And hopefully the higher power is one, in my understanding.
Geoffrey Stern
Thanks! I'd like to move move on a little bit and talk in terms of one of the solutions to this problem. A few paragraphs later in Samuel 9, they go out and they anoint the the new king, and the word that they use is anoint him ruler "Mischato le'nagid al amey Yisrael" and those of you who have an ear for the Hebrew knows that anointing meshiach is is the same word is used for the Messiah. And so I'd like to jump ahead, a little bit of time to Zacharia, and talk about what Zacharia's vision of this king, which is optimized, I would say, for lack of a better word, to get around all of the negative problems that we just described. in Zecharia 9 it says "Rejoice greatly fair Zion, raise a shout for Jerusalem. Lo your king is coming to you. He is victorious, triumphant, yet humble, riding on an ass on a donkey foaled by a she ass. He shall banish chariots from Ephraim and horses from Jerusalem. The Warrior's bow shall be banished, he shall call on the nations to surrender and his rule shall extend from sea to sea and from ocean to Lands End." And sure enough, that's the vision of Melech Hamashiach the king anointed the Messiah, who doesn't ride on a horse put on a donkey is not haughty, but is humble, and calls for the nations of the world to have peace. So I think as you look through our tradition, one of the answers to this problem of the rejected monarchy is the acceptance of another more enlightened monarchy. Do you see Rabbi a kind contiguity between this negative aspect of the political King, and the acceptance embrace of a redeemer King?
Adam Mintz
I absolutely do. And it's great that you bring those verses, let's take the first point, the idea that Meshiach, the Messiah, is the anointed one. You know, it's not only in Jewish culture, that we appoint a king by anointing him, that seems to be the way in the ancient world that they used to appoint a king by anointing, which is interesting in itself, which means that other religions, other cultures may also have had a messiah type of figure, an anointed one. But clearly in those verses, what you see is, that kingship is not automatically bad. kingship is problematic, because it's political, because it's self serving. But if you have kingship that is religious, then there is no problem with that kingship. That point is a very important point. And that's what the Messiah leads to. You know, there's a question... Maimonides writes, that when the Messiah comes, the world is going to be exactly the way it is, it's just the Jews will not be subjugated by another nation. So what you see is that the Messiah is not going to change a lot of realities. He's going to change only the fact that the Jews are not subjugated. So even the role of the Messiah, vis a vis the role of the king is kind of interesting to consider.
Geoffrey Stern
So I prefaced my comment by saying, this is a direction that the commentators take it. It's not necessarily the one I believe in or I embrace. And those of you who know me know that I'm not a big fan of the concept of the Messiah. So what I would like to do as we move forward, is to say, yes, one way to fix this distasteful concept of a political King is to create a more spiritual King. But there's also another way out of this. And I think what I would like to explore is a comment made by one of the modern scholars that I was reading, who says, you know, the truth is, until you get to this moment, in Deuteronomy, God is never referred to as King. God is referred to as a father figure, as a spouse, as a parent, as a shepherd, but the truth is not very much referred to as a king. And the the commentator brings this in the context of our Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur holiday season, where those of you who have attended know, especially on Rosh Hashanah, it's all about making God, anointing God, the king. We take prayers that we say every day of the year, the formula for a blessing is Baruch Atah Hashem... Melech Haolam" King of the universe. And we make it even more impactful, we change words. In our prayers to say King instead of God, but at the end of the day, it's all because we lived in a world that was full of kings. And even though God did not embrace this formula, once the Jews came into the land and asked for a king, he or she had to back into it. And the modern-day historians and academics all say that the New Year holiday, whether it occurred in the Fall or the Spring, that was rampant in Babylonia, in Egypt, all were variations on making the king of flesh and blood, renewing his lease, so to speak, anointing him from God, and praying for the future (of himself and his people). And in a sense, if any of those Babylonians or Egyptians were to walk into our service, where we were making a kingship rite as well, they would be baffled, because there was no king to be found. Because what we were doing was making God the king. And so in a sense, one of the strategies, the most profound strategy that we have in our religion, to get around the corrupt notion and the corrupting notion of a political King, a king that rules over us, is to make God the king, replace the human King with the godly King, not necessarily a role that God asked for, or wants but a way of saying that no man rules us, only God rules us. And I think that's the best context for looking at our high holiday services, that we again, are taking an institution that was out there, this kingship, and we are turning it on its head, it's a major paradigm shift. How does that resonate with with all of you,
Michael Stern
That resonates really well, that we are creating a new concept and that fits in with my understanding that God is within and we have a choice within and I have to find the path that aligns with my higher power, that King of my domain, and I have many citizens inside of me, I call it the captain, not with the ship of fools. And so it really fits in well. And I think this equality among people, and that the Jews won't be demoralized and killed, and homosexuals that was over 40 years, and that it was illegal and considered a crime. And the Blacks and there are so many that we could meet in a new place. So a new inner sovereignty. Sounds good.
Adam Mintz
I like it. Also, Michael, I love kind of the rethinking of what King means and what Messiah means. I think your real issue is not so much in King. It's in the Messiah. And I just wonder just for a minute to think about what the relationship is between the Messiah. And the king as described in this week's parsha. You know, Geoffrey, you made a jump, you jump to Zacharia where King and Messiah seem to be interchangeable ideas. Actually, when you look in this week's Torah portion, though, the word Messiah doesn't come up. I know that the king is anointed. But like I said before, all kings are anointed. What's interesting is the idea of the fact that I think in today, in the Torah, reading tomorrow, there's no idea of a religious Messiah, there really is an idea of a king. what the people want, when they say, Asima alay melech... place upon us as a king. They want a political King. They're not so worried about the religious King. They've had Moses as their religious King from the beginning. That's not so exciting. What they want is they want a political king. Asima alai melech.
Geoffrey Stern
So I would agree with you to a degree. clearly one of the fixes is to have this king read the tTorah all the time and hold the Torah all the time. And that, again, is a concession. What I'm trying to say is, and I think that Erich Fromm said it the best, he said "obedience to God is also the negation of submission to man." In other words, when Samuel told God that they wanted a king, God said, You don't understand. They're rejecting me. And if you look at it, and you flip it, you can say the opposite as well, that by accepting God, you're rejecting any sort of leadership role or subservience to man. And it's almost as if, and this is the the feeling that I have on lRosh Hashanah when I say Ain lanu Melach ela atah", there is no king other than you. What I'm saying is I am radically free, that there is no power besides a God that I need to answer to. And you can just as easily do that. Almost from a secular point of view, you can say that the message of Rosh Hashanah is that we are radically free. You know, there's something that we do on Rosh Hashanah, we talk about the Malchiyut which is the kingship of God. And then we talk about this strange thing of blowing of the shofar, and remembering the blowing of that shofar. And a lot of commentaries go to great ends to try to figure out what the connection is between making God King and blowing the shofar. And I'm just going to let out what my theory is. My theory is that we are approaching a sabbatical year. And in the sabbatical year, every seven years, slaves are released, and they are released when the shofar is blown. The Liberty Bell in Philadelphia is a bell but the verse on it says, and you shall cry out, freedom throughout the land. What ultimately happened, according to the Talmud, is that on the first day of the Rosh Hashanah, all of the slaves that were indentured servants were freed. And on the 10th day, the shofar was blown. And they literally walked out free. And I think ultimately, what Rosh Hashanah then becomes, is, yes, we're making God King. But the takeaway, the impact on us is that we are all those indentured servants who are listening to the sound of this so far, and being freed. And there's a responsibility clearly with that freedom. But ultimately, at the end of the day, that is the radical message of Rosh Hashanah. And I believe it's the radical message that the Jews in our parsha are rejecting. They want to go back to Egypt, they want a ruler they want somebody to serve, so to speak.
Adam Mintz
First of all, that's a fascinating explanation. But it's interesting, Geoffrey, that when they say "asima alai melech" "place upon us a king". They don't say we want to go back to Egypt. The Jews know how to say we want to go back to Egypt. They say it and they say it again. And they say it again. But here, they don't say it. Isn't that interesting? They just say we want a king. It doesn't seem to be related to Egypt.
Geoffrey Stern
It doesn't. But it relates to the whole project, in a sense. I mean I think it's obviously much more flagrant when they say, you know, we used to have watermelons and good meat in in the fleshpots of Egypt. But here, if you really think about it, so much of the Exodus story from Egypt, was about rejecting the rule of the Pharaoh and his priests. And in a sense,here, as I said, before, a God is being ultimately rejected by this request. And the way I see it, because you asked about what I see is the connection to the Messiah. I think that even the Messiah is still saying that we need something we need somebody. In our tradition, the first four books of Moses God never refers to him or herself as a king, never needed that modality. And in a sense by asking for this political King, and embracing it, and getting Jerusalem and getting the monarchy and all that, we've gone on a very long detour, which includes having a humble king that can ride on a donkey and can solve our problems. But at the end of the day, this is where I stand, I stand that we're better off having no king at all, having this radical freedom and looking at our spiritual inner life, as Michael describes it, or as a godhead as that paternal maternal love-mate, child even. And ultimately we don't need a boss. And this is the beautiful story of that indentured slave who after seven years says to his master, I don't want to go free. I like it here in my little Egypt, so to speak. And you take him according to the Torah to the doorposts and you pierce his ear. And Yohanan Ben zakkai says, Why do do you pierce his ears and inKedushin it says, "the Holy One blessed be he said, from a voice on Mount Sinai, that for me, the children of Israel are slaves, which indicates that they should not be slaves to slaves. And yet this man went and willingly acquired a master for himself, therefore, let his ear be pierced, "lo avadim l'avadim", ultimately, at the end of the day, if we accept God, as our only power, on Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, we are free. And if we don't, we are slaves to some sort of slave. And I think that is ultimately the message of the rejection of the monarchy. And the acceptance of the message of Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur.
Adam Mintz
That beautiful I'd say we're slaves to a slave, even if that slave happens to be a king. That the last irony of the whole thing, that we're slaves to a slave even if that slave happens to be a king,
Geoffrey Stern
or a Messiah maybe
Adam Mintz
or a Messiah. Beautiful. Thank you so much, Geoffrey. Thank you, everybody. Enjoy Shoftim. Have a Shabbat Shalom and we look forward to seeing everybody next week.
Geoffrey Stern
Shabbat Shalom
A live Clubhouse recording of Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz as we explore the origins of ritual slaughter, the implicit bias of the Torah to vegetarianism and the origins and limitations of carnivorism in Judaism. We also highlight the contribution of Judaism of mindfulness when it come to our food supply and where we go from here.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/340004
Transcript:
Geoffrey Stern
So welcome to Madlik disruptive Torah and this week is Parshart Re'eh and in two, little verses it pretty much makes the only biblical reference. And maybe not even a reference but a kind of an allusion to laws that practicing Jews take very, very seriously. And that is the laws of kashrut; of slaughtering animals. And I must say that when I first stumbled upon this, I was amazed by how little is there. So let's jump right into it. It's Deuteronomy 12. And it says, "When the Lord enlarges your territory, as he has promised you, and you say, I shall eat some meat, for you have the urge to eat meat, you may eat meat, whenever you wish. If the place where the Lord has chosen to establish His name is too far from you, you may slaughter any of the cattle or sheep that the Lord gives you, as I have instructed you, and you may eat to your heart's content in your settlements." So clearly, this was written at a point where if you take it into the context that it's supposed to be written in, which is when the Jews were first coming into the land, and they where already understanding that they were going to enlarge, they already somehow had an intuition that there was going to be a centralized temple. And that's what the references to the place where the Lord has chosen to establish his name. But what is assumed here is that, number one, you can only eat meat in that chosen place at the temple. And as many of you know from the Passover sacrifice, that was a sacrifice that sacrificed to God, but eaten by a group of people. So eating of meat, one can assume there was a time where you could only eat it around the temple. And here is the permission to eat it if you're too far away to eat it in the temple. And it doesn't give any rules for slaughtering it. It just says an illusion, "as I have instructed you" Kasher Tziviticha. So I'm going to stop now, before we dive into the many nuances of this. But rabbi, what what did these two sentences mean to you?
Adam Mintz
Well, the first thing is very important again, that meat was only eaten as part of the sacrifices, meat was considered to be a tremendous luxury. You couldn't eat it just be yourself. It had to be part of religious of religious experience. That's a huge transition from eating meat as part of a sacrifice to eating meat for dinner and having a hamburger, having a barbecue at home. That might have been the biggest transition that the Jews experienced when they entered the land
Geoffrey Stern
I think you're correct.... both when they entered the land, and possibly when they first entered the land with a traveling tabernacle. And before the temple was built. This also and I kind of alluded to, we don't know exactly when it was written, you know, when there was a tabernacle in Shilo. And there were other places that had these tabernacles the religion was more distributed. But when it became centralized in Jerusalem at the temple, that was also a moment just like coming into the promised land was a moment. And so what we're seeing is ..... as if we didn't know that the practice of Judaism evolve .... clearly evolved, whether from the days of the desert into the promised land, or from the days when it was a decentralized tribal conglomerate to when it becomes centralized in Jerusalem. But I want to focus for a second on a word used. The English is "if you desire" "you may eat meat when you have the urge to eat meat." In the Hebrew it's "Ochla basar ki toevah nefsha" if you desire to eat meat, because your soul craves for it. The word "Ta'aiva" is it carries baggage I believe in Hebrew, if you called somebody "Ba'al Ta'aivah", it's a glutton pretty much. It's someone who's driven by their desires, even in the Bible itself. In the desert when there was the the Riff Raff, the Erev Rav, and they were complaining. It says in Numbers "ve'tayavu Ta'aivah" they had this gluttonous craving. And when they were punished and killed for their craving, the name of the place that they were buried "Kivrot HaTaiaivah" was "the Place of the Gluttony". So I wonder, and I ask you, Rabbi, when we read this, is there that sense of social criticism? And is this sort of a concession? Or am I just taking this out of context?
Adam Mintz
No you are definitely not. I would just tweak what you said Geoffrey to say. I think the Torah doesn't say that every time you eat meat, that it's bad, that it's gluttony. I think the Torah is concerned that it has the potential to become gluttony. You I have to be very careful. Originally the way the Torah was careful said that you only are allowed to eat meat, if part of that meat is going as a religious sacrifice. So therefore you're not going to be irresponsible, if it's going as a religious sacrifice. So I think being a "Ba'al Ta'aivah" is connected to meat. And therefore they needed to restrict, and to limit the ways in which you are allowed to eat.
Geoffrey Stern
Yeah, and I forgot to mention another important one in the 10 commandments, right after it says "do not covet your neighbor's wife. It says You shall not crave your neighbor's house "Lo Tai'avah Beith Re'echa" so it definitely has this sense. And it does carry some social baggage. I hear what you said. But I have to say also, that what we have is a juxtaposition here of meat that is sanctified and sacrificed in the temple, and meat that is "basar Ta'eivah". And it could mean meat outside of the temple that any meat outside of the temple is, "Ba'asar Ta'eivah" . All I think what you're saying, which is interesting is that when you do eat meat, outside of the temple, you have to make sure that there was a religious or spiritual element to it.
Adam Mintz
That is what I'm saying, because that that will protect you against the "Ta'Aivah" issue.
Geoffrey Stern
We're going to get into maybe the history of, of eating meat, and in the approach of the Bible to eating meat in a second. But before we do, it is a good case study in how the Bible, the Torah deals with the less than perfect characteristics that we humans have. In other words, it understands that people have these desires, and we don't live in a black and white world. And I think this becomes then kind of an interesting case study. So before we dive into the development of eating meat, let's also use this as an opportunity to understand where the laws that we have of "Shechita" came from. So Rashi focuses on this verse. And the fact that in verse 21, God says, "you may slaughter the sheep, and the cattle that the Lord gives you, as I have instructed, you" "Ka'asher tziviticha" , And Rashi says that, from here, we learn that there must be an Oral Tradition because if you read The Five books of Moses backwards and forwards, you will never find any of these laws there. You know, there's a joke that I once heard, that says that in Rome, they found some copper sthreads one foot down in an excavation. And they said, This proves that the early Romans must have had a phone system. And the Greeks didn't want to be outdone. And they dug down two feet, and they found some threads made of glass and they said, Well, we must have had a fiber optic system in our day. And then the Israelis didn't want to be out done and they dug down four feet and they found nothing. And they said, Well, we must have had a cellular network. So this is a situation where we have nothing in the written law about the laws of Shechita. And the laws of Shechita are very extensive, and Rashi wants to bring from here a proof. He doesn't simply say that, Oh, well, those are commanded in the Oral Law. He says from here the fact that it was referenced, an Oral Law or commandment was referenced. We know that the Oral Law exists. So that is kind of an interesting maneuver. But it does speak to how much of the the regular practice of Judaism is contained in the Oral law.
Adam Mintz
Yeah, well, the interrelationship between the Oral Law and the written law is an amazing topic isn't?
Geoffrey Stern
It certainly is. And for those who study the Talmud, they know that there was so many diverse opinions, that sometimes you can go back and find an opinion that was not a mainstream opinion. But it certainly means that nothing is written in stone. But that, in fact, these laws that are so critical to the lifestyle of so many Jews are not contained in the written law. And it's always important that you know, your sources so that you know that something is based on Torah, in terms of the Written Torah. And some things are based on the Oral tradition. And so you got to give credit,
Adam Mintz
Geoffrey you make an interesting point now, and that is to know the difference about whether it's biblical or whether it's rabbinic. And somehow if it's biblical, it's more important. I'm going to tell you a little secret. The rabbi's often tell us that the rabbinic law is more important, because they were afraid that people would be lax on the rabbinic law. So they try to make an extra effort to make a big point about the rabbinic law, which is a very, I mean, obviously, it's self serving. But it's interesting
Geoffrey Stern
Abolutely. And in this case, you got to give them credit for acknowledging that it's [only] in the Oral Law. And I think that's something that I was also found important, they might emphasize the importance of the law, but they also emphasize full transparency. Noy, welcome to the platform. I'd love to hear from you.
Noy
Hi. Hi. I just have a question. Are you Orthodox Jews?
Adam Mintz
This is a wonderful discussion, because this is not orthodox, conservative or reform. We're just studying the text. Everybody is equal in this conversation.
Noy
Yeah, yeah. But I wanted to know. Just wondering, Thank you. We're all equal in this conversation. We don't make distinctions.
Geoffrey Stern
And I think that in general, when it comes to studying the texts, it's not important who you are, or what you believe, but that you're studying.
Noy
We all believe in God. Hasdhem.
Michael Stern
Thank you Shabbat shalom. I have a question. Its as if we were if we say that we're Chosen and we were given this information 100, hundreds of years ago, that eating meat has to be in "midah", in some sort of balance and not gluttony, as you said. And so now we're discovering on documentary movies, how the meat farming, meat raising industry is causing, I think, 50% of the issues with the carbon dioxide.... one of the largest factors in climate warming. And I'd like to ask you guys, if we were given this information that raising of meat for eating, and not for some maybe religious sacrificial purpose, which sounds good to me now, compared to the eating industry of meat, that we would not have climate change challenges, and what role we as Israelites and Jews have in bringing this wisdom and knowledge to humanity as the chosen people who could say, Hey, guys, it's been told 1000s of years ago, or whenever the Torah and all this information was passed down. So if somebody could address this, that would be great. So
Geoffrey Stern
I think that you're absolutely correct. And before we go into the history of vegetarianism, .... because I think you're gonna see that the bias of the Torah is very much towards vegetarianism. But before we leave these verses, I think one of the things that's so exciting to me about this discussion, and I alluded to it before by saying it's not black and white, that there are degrees, and that one of the rabbi's said about this verse, that it says, when you expand your territory, he said the Tortah taught that it is a desired behavior of a person should consume meat due only due to appetite, meaning to say you should never eat meat, pell mell, as just, you know, I have meat and potatoes every lunch, that's the way I'm built. That's the way we are, you should save it for special situations where you have a craving, and that craving could be psychologically based. It could be nutritional based. But I think what you was saying, Michael, in terms of in "midah" in moderation, in context and in exerting a certain self discipline. And I think that's the the flip side of gluttony is not abstention, the flip side of gluttony is to do things using using moderation. And I do believe that it's a striking example. I don't know how many other examples in the Torah there are like this. Many times in the Torah, it's either "assur" it's forbidden or "pator" , it's permitted. But how many times does it say it's good in moderation. And I think we are seeing something here. And the environmental issues that you raise are critical. Meaning to say that there was certain things that we really have to moderate. And we have to do them thoughtfully.
Michael Stern
So why have that's great, but why haven't we used our brilliance and our influence... we're great influencers... take it out of the study room and say, Wait, this is a mission? I mean, to say, "wait, this is a proving that it's self sabotaging humanity, this planet could explode in 50 years. And all this talk if we are the people that God spoke to, we have a responsibility, and not to be worried about fighting for land, or maybe let's fight for the land and fight for the planet. What I don't understand how we don't take it out of the discussion room and say, "Planet God has spoken to us."
Adam Mintz
So Michael, I just want to say your question is better than my answer. But I want to tell you that the yeshiva and Riverdale Chovavei Torah at the end of July, just last month, a couple of weeks ago, they had an entire day that was dedicated to climate control. And they dealt with these issues. And there were many people at that conference who believe Michael, exactly what you said is we need to take it out of the study hall and we need to, you know, we need to teach the world about what the Torah's laws are and how the Torah wants to protect the environment and what we need to protect the environment. So I wouldn't say that it's it's mainstream Michael, but it's no question that the issues that you raise are issues that are being raised now in the Jewish community, and you know, the things that people are talking about.
Michael Stern
That's great to know. Thank you Rabbi
Geoffrey Stern
And I think part and parcel of that is that Judaism gave the world something which I think is amazing. And that is thoughtfulness..... eating thoughtfully. And that is a gift that we've given. But I think what is happening in the last 100 years at least. And it's accelerating every week, is that society is passing Judaism by because Judaism spent a lot of time looking at the food chain... if you want to look at "Shechita" ritual slaughter as looking at the food chain, that has become much more important. If Judaism has used the laws of kashrut to talk about the quality and the qualifications of people involved with the slaughter of animals, again, modern society is starting to look at ethical issues. Do you pay your employees at the slaughterhouse properly? Do they have health benefits? When we buy food, we are more interested now than ever, not only in the nutritional value, but on the whole supply chain. And sometimes being the early adopter of something, the first mover is an advantage. But sometimes you get overcome with your own achievements. And I think that now and we're seeing movements along this, there's a movement that talks not about Kashrut, but about "Yashrut" meaning being Yashar is straight being ethical. And this is an organization that will say, you know, maybe the meat is slaughtered in a humane way. But you also have to make sure that the workers are paid. And if it's not, it's not kosher meat. I think that is the real challenge, it might start at the study hall, but it means opening up the parameters of the discussion, Mike, welcome to our platform, what's on your mind,
mike
I ws thinking about what you said. Real quickly, my background is, I grew up in a, very moderate Chabad Lubavitch family I'm not Chabad any more, but you know, growing up to seeing my family, the way they do things when it comes to like Kashrut. They'll pay attention to all these details about okay, we have this and has a "K" on the box, we'll buy this meat. But they won't think about the fact that this meat has all these hormones injected into it and all these other things that make the meat just terrible products, whether it's meat or processed food, it seems that I'm not just picking on an orthodox, but it seems that we as a people have got our values just totally misplaced. That's why I was all I wanted to say for now.
Adam Mintz
Okay, I mean, Thanks, Mike, for your comments. I mean, that's, you know, Michael has brought that up. And we appreciate that. And we understand that maybe the Jewish community has a responsibility. And I think to Geoffrey's credit, the choice of, this idea of Kashrut and Yashrut, this is only one piece of Kashrut and Yashrut ... this conversation that we're having today, and it's recorded and everything, and we have a whole bunch of people who were listening, maybe this is going to make this a point of conversation, which will allow other people to, you know, to join in to understand some of these issues. We have Ethan on the line. Would you like to join the conversation?
Ethan
So I'll try to keep this brief so we can keep the conversation moving. When we were talking about the opposite of gluttony, not being abstention, but moderation. I guess my question is, does that tie back to when we were discussing in previous weeks when you're going to be a Nazir and you have to bring a karbon Hatat at the end of the period of Nezirut. And while there are different different explanations, one of the explanations for why you bring a Korban Hatat is that you decided to entirely abstain from partaking of wine and you forbade yourself, you know, some of what is available to enjoy in the world.
Geoffrey Stern
I think it's definitely related and I was thinking of that as well. Moderation they used to attribute it to Maimonides, the golden rule. So to speak, not not too far to the right, not too far the left, but moderation. And I do believe that in this particular law, we can call it a concession. We can call it the Crooked Timber of Humanity. But yes, we do have desires and any any form of law or religion that doesn't take into account those desires, I think, ultimately rings false. And so whether it's the ability for someone to become a Nazirite, if they have an issue with some substances, or whether it's someone to end their abstention. These are all beautiful things that are written into the Torah law that has become a part of culture, I think, and we can be proud of it. But I think we also have to understand that these should empower us to go further. And that's, I think, what's so fascinating about the discussion that we're having, and the question of how we can go farther. So I want to just move forward a little bit and talk about the history of meat eating in the Torah. And the truth is that, in Genesis, when the world is created, it does not give men permission, to eat meat, to take the soul from an animal. In fact, it says, all of the foods and the plants that I give you shall be for you for food. It's only at the time of Noah, that when Noah took those animals Two by Two into the ark, that in a sense, Noah was given sort of our rights, because he had saved the world that he could then eat. So in Genesis 9, it says "every creature that lives shall be us to eat as with the green grasses", so it's referring back to the earlier part of Genesis where all mankind could eat was the green grasses. Now you can eat animals. And that's why, even by Jewish law, we have 613 commandments, but Jewish tradition believes that people who descended from Noah which is pretty much everybody has been descended from Noah because he was the only survivor of the flood. They cannot eat a limb from a live animal. It's called "Ever Min Ha"chai" so this was the first dietary constraint associated with being Corniverous, eating meat. And I'd like to wonder what everybody else's takeaway in terms of Noah's loophole, so to speak, for for eating meat, I should say that nature kind of changed after the flood, maybe people didn't live as long anymore. So it's kind of a recognition in the Bible of a new epoch, a new transition. And maybe meat was necessary at that point. But certainly there are two sides in my mind, because on the one hand, Noah saved all the animals and therefore has certain rights. But I believe once you save somebody, you also have obligations. And I think that that's where these laws of supply chain and sources of our foods and how we harvest our foods come into play? What are your thoughts on that?
Adam Mintz
So thank you very much, Geoffrey The idea that no one is given permission to eat meat is very much connected to the question of authority, before the flood, man wasn't in control. And that's what led at least the way God understood it to complete anarchy, after the flood, there's a more organized system, and the organized system is that man controls animals. And in a sense, you know, the Torah tells us at the end of chapter two, that Adam couldn't find a mate. And if you read the Torah carefully, it sounds like Adam went on a date with every single animal. And he didn't find a good mate. And therefore God took a woman from his side. But it seems like the relationship between animals and humans was one of equals. After the flood, God realized that was a bad way to be, and therefore he gave people dominion over animals.
Geoffrey Stern
and I would just add that with Dominion comes responsibility. And that's why I never understand why evangelical Christians and fundamentalist Christians don't take environmentalism more seriously because it's so natural for someone who believes in The Genesis story who believes that God created the world and made us the guardian of the world, that we have to take that guardianship so seriously. I think that the the takeaway from today's discussion of these verses is at the most basic level, we have to be thoughtful about what we eat, and where our supply chain is. And I also believe that when Jesus talked about on the laws of Kashrut, he said something that could have been in the Talmud, he said, "it's more important what comes out of your mouth than what goes into it". But I think what what he was saying was very similar to the discussion that we're having. And that is that these rules, and this goes to Mike's point, should never be about reading labels only, and should never be about crossing T's and dotting "i"s, that would sell it so short, it's about our evolution, it's about our growth, it's about our ability to, to become better guardians of ourselves and of the world. And to not only take into account the fact that we have certain desires, and to master those desires, but I think also to use those desires in a good way. It's such a powerful weapon that we have, we wake up in the morning with a bounce in our step because we desire to do something and we have to harness that power, and the food that we eat in a in a way that's sanctified. And I think that if you do look at Judaism, while I am surprised that vegetarianism isn't more widespread, given the history of it. You know, why great scholars and great pietists and religious leaders don't focus on vegetarian more. But what we do have is that the time to eat meat is in a sanctified moment, on Shabbat for instance. There zemirot talk about on Shabbat we have meat. There were people who were vegetarian by necessity not by desire, who were poor, but on Shabbat, they would have that Basar Ta'aivah" that meat of desire. So I think all of that says there's so much for us to learn about the laws of kashrut in their larger sense and I wish us all a Shabbat Shalom, of fulfilling any "taiaivah" that we have, and harnessing it in a good direction.
Adam Mintz
Amazing. Thank you, Geoffrey. Thank you, everybody. Shabbat shalom. Look forward to next week.
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse Friday July 30th as we wonder whether the practice of Judaism outside of the land of Israel just that…. practice? We explore a Rabbinic opinion that the land of Israel is so central to the religion of Israel that the religion can only be observed in the Land. In so doing we question whether the practice of Judaism in and outside of Israel is different in kind rather than degree and what this says about the nature and relationship between the two communities?
Sefaria Source Sheet Here: www.sefaria.org/sheets/338763
Transcript:
Geoffrey Stern
Welcome to Madlik disruptive weekly Torah. So it turns out that today is kind of a third in a series and it wasn't an intentional series. But the truth is, if you recall, about two weeks ago, we talked about Tisha B'Av and we talked about how in the second paragraph of the Shema, it does something unique, where it says to the Jews, if you don't fulfill the commandments, I'll cast you out of the land. And we talked about the implications of that. And then last week, we talked about the Shema itself, that iconic call to faith, and what its implications are. So this week, that second paragraph in the Shema that we read, or traditional Jews read twice a day, is actually part of the weekly portion. And it it starts by saying, as we've quoted in the past, "and if you don't keep these commandments, the Lord's anger will flare up against you." This is Deuteronomy 11: 13 - 21, "there'll be no rain, the ground will not yield the produce, and you will perish from the good land that the Lord is assigning to you." And that's kind of where we stopped. But then it does something kind of remarkable. And it says, and I'm using the translation here, the standard [JPS] translation, "therefore impress these words upon your very heart, bind them as a sign on your hand, and let them serve as a symbol on your forehead." And most of you who have seen traditional Jews and seeing what is called the phylacteries, or Tefilin, knows that this is not allegorical, this is actually traditional Jews. And they have samples of these going back to the caves of the zealots of bar kochba, actually, would attach and strap these phylacteries; boxes containing these particular verses onto their arms, and as frontlets between your eyes. But what is interesting is that especially in the English translation, I don't see it so much in the Hebrew, but it connects it "therefore" impress these words. There's a connection between being kicked off of the land and putting these Tefilin these phylacteries on your arms and on your forehead, the third eye maybe. And Rashi picks up on this, and he does see the connection and that's why maybe the translation is true to this. He says that even after you have been banished, make yourself distinctive. The word in Hebrew is "hayu Metzuyanim b'mitzvot" , that the mitzvot the commandment should distinguish you by means of putting on the Tefilin and putting the mezuzah on your door posts, so that these shall not be novelties to you when you return. And then he quotes a verse from Jeremiah, which says, set thee up distinguishing marks, which in Hebrew is "hatzivi lecha tziunim'. So what is actually remarkable, at least to me, and we'll see if Rabbi Adam you are in agreement to me, is, although the commandment of Tefilin had already been commanded, in the Bible, what Rashi is doing either to justify the repetition of the commandment, or to just explain the context of putting it right after the threat of being exiled, he makes a connection and says something that, to me is dramatic. That actually, the command is only if you live in Israel. But if you are outside of Israel, you nonetheless should do what we consider to be basic Jewish traditions of putting on the tefillin so that you won't forget them when you come back, so that you should distinguish yourself. It almost makes the most basic practice of Judaism into literally a practice, practice until you return to the land. Am I reading it correctly? Rabbi Adam.
Adam Mintz
So I want to say that the verse, the Rashi that you picked up is such an important Rashi because the impression that Rashi gives is that the ultimate purpose of performing mitzvot, of doing the commandments is only in the land of Israel. And then everything outside the Land of Israel is just practice. Now, that's almost a scary idea. Because that really means the Judaism is only Judaism in the Land and everything that you do outside the land is only practice. But that's what Rashi seems to say. And he says that the Tefilin specifically, are something that we do outside the land, to remind us of the commandments, so that when we return to the land, we'll be ready to continue performing the commands. The question to me really is does Rashi really mean that? Rashi, who lived his whole life in France, who never made it to the land of Israel.. Do you think he believed that Judaism is only practiced in the land of Israel, that it's only practice outside the land?
Geoffrey Stern
I mean, this is such a radical idea that I just want to just give Rashi's source, so we're very clear about it, he quotes the Sifrei. And in this source sheet, the Sifrei is quoted completely. And it even gives an analogy. It says a king was angry with his wife, and she returned to her father's house, the king said, continue wearing your jewels so that when you return, they will not be new to you. And so, again, I don't think that you can read it any other way. I would say, and I think you'll agree with me, Adam, that, we're looking at an opinion here, the the Sifrei, even Rashi, who's quoting the opinion, this is a thread, this is a way of looking at Judaism, clearly not mainstream. But I'd like for the rest of the day to explore it, because it is so radical. So you ask whether given this, is it possible that Rashi thought he was just playing house, so to speak his whole life? That he never really put on Tefilin, but he was only practicing putting on Tefilin? So I think that in itself raises a question. You know, I love the expression in yoga, where it's a practice, I love the use of the word practice, when somebody is a practicing physician, for instance, you know, maybe what we're doing is we're detracting by asking that question, of the value of practice. And maybe the idea is, and this is what might be radical, that at least outside of Israel, you are constantly trying to get to a further point, if that's what practice is, and maybe that's not so bad. How does that strike you?
Adam Mintz
That is interesting. The idea of practice? Well, let's take it back a step. Your first point, which I think you made at the beginning a couple of minutes ago, which was really good was that actually, the Tefilin follows the fact that were thrown out of the land. So in a sense the Tefilin is a punishment, means you're thrown out of the land. So you have to wear your Tefilin, since you can't really fulfill the commandments properly, at least wear your Tefilin which are practice. Now, if you take it that way, practice is really an important piece of it. But practice is a sad piece, because that's what we have to do, because we're being punished by being thrown out of the land.
Geoffrey Stern
I mean, but can one really take it as a punishment in the sense that I think the assumption is that wearing the Tefilin and keeping the commandments in Israel is something that is completely authentic and sui generis, you do it for its own sake, it has its benefits, and it's only outside of the land of Israel, that it becomes something that is a practice. So I'm not sure I can see it as a punishment. Unless, when you really get a little contrived in saying, well, you have to do it, even though it's really not the real McCoy. But you got to do it anyway, either as a punishment or something to keep you distinctive. I mean, I think what I'd like to take from your question is, let's look at the flip side. What does therefore wearing Tefilin in Israel mean? And again, if part of the wearing of Tefilin is to make you distinctive, and anyone who's ever seen anybody wearing Tefilin, it is very distinctive. If you ever are about to knock on the door, the first thing I always do is look to see if it's a Mezuza to see if it's a member of the tribe, so to speak. So these are two commandments that distinguish the Jew very much in exile. So maybe the flip side of that is, well, then what do you even need them for in the land of Israel? That to me is is, is an interesting question as well.
Adam Mintz
Good. That is an interesting question. Let's take both points that you make. The first point you made is that both mezuzah and Tefilin are visible, highly visible, meaning the mezuzahs on the doorpost, you can identify a house as being a Jewish house. And Tefilin is on the person. We all know that to see a Jew wearing Tefilin, it's distinctive. Wow. Like, that's exactly the right word, Geoffrey. It's distinctive, it makes them special, it makes something different. And I think that's an important idea. Now, according to the way Rashi is presenting it, Tefilin plays a much more minor role in Israel than it does in the diaspora. Because the whole idea of remaining distinctive is not important in Israel, because by definition, we're distinctive in Israel. So that I wonder about that, I wonder what Rashi would say about that. So I don't think we're necessarily going to solve this problem. But I think the crux of the question is a whole other layer? And that is, is Judaism, in Israel and outside of Israel, one and the same thing? Or is there a total distinction between observing these commandments when one is outside of Israel and one is in? Now we all should know that there are commandments that are called "Teluyot B'Aretz", that are dependent on the land. So it's clear that if there is a rule of letting the land life fallow every seven years, the sabbatical law, that only applies in the land of Israel. And this is a very mainstream idea that that commandment is not applicable outside of the land. What this particular train of thought is saying is that really, every commandment when practiced in Israel, is different in kind, not in degree when practiced in Israel, and practiced outside. And I think the fact that we're struggling with how Tefilin is meaningful in Israel and how it is meaningful outside of Israel, maybe tells us that we're not even showing a bias. That Tefilin might mean one thing, Shabbat might mean one thing in Israel, and it might mean something outside of Israel. But clearly, this particular midrash commentary is raising a very important question. Even that is very timely, in a time where the communities living in Israel and outside of Israel, see things so differently. So now you're raised another point. And that is what is the difference between Judaism in Israel and Judaism in the diaspora, Jewish observance in Israel and Jewish observance in the diaspora? You know, there is a theory, Geoffrey, that's become very popular, which is that the observance of commandments is much less important in Israel than it is in the diaspora. Because in Israel everybody's Jewish. So therefore, you don't need to observe the commandments. It's only the diaspora that you have to observe the commandments. What do you think about that?
Geoffrey Stern
Well, again, it's it's part and parcel of this whole impression that we have. For instance, there are many secular Jews that go to Israel for the first time, and they leave kind of disappointed. They were expecting everybody to be dancing the Hora and wearing a kippa. And even though they're not traditional, they expect Israelis to be traditional. It's as much the question of perceptions of the two communities of each other. And I do believe that there are Israelis who will argue that as you say, once you're in Israel, you you don't have to "work it" so much. Whereas a family like mine living in Connecticut must put its foot down, the kids can't go out Friday night, we have to keep a Shabbat Friday night dinner in order to retain our character. In Israel, if the kids go out, they're going to be with other kids, and they'll keep Shabbat in this similar way. But you can say the flip side of that argument too that there are Jews living in Israel, that believe that Judaism in Israel is hyper-Judaism, that you are so close to the source that you're able to practice on a higher level. So I take your comment only as one of many different lenses that we see this distinction between Judaism in and outside of Israel, I would just love to add my favorite aspect of this in terms of the one community looking at the other. In vernacular, Hebrew or Yiddish. If you call somebody an Am Haaretz , it typically means an ignoramus. But modern scholarship, academic scholarship has shown that the truth is it was a term formed in the Babylonian exile. We all know the Babylonian exile was one that kind of reinvented Judaism, wrote the Babylonian Talmud, and they would come back to Israel, and they would see the arm Haaretz, the people who were living on the land, the the ones that didn't go into exile, and many of the innovations or higher emphasis on maybe purity, and tithing and stuff like that were not followed by those who had remained in Israel. So it's almost the first instance of the two communities, the Diaspora and the resident community, seeing Judaism differently, developing Judaism differently, and maybe being a little bit presumptuous [pejorative] about how to define each other.
Adam Mintz
Yeah, I mean, I'm with you on all of that. I think that that's all interesting. Now, how that relates to the fact that Tefilin is a reminder, and kind of, from observance to culture, but maybe that's a good job, maybe that's interesting.
Geoffrey Stern
You know, I'm also kind of reminded of the, the Zionist thinkers, and each one of them had their own kind of take on this. But all of them said that the life that the Jew has led 2,000 years in exile was an anemic existence. So if you went to Aleph Dalet Gordon, who was a labor Zionist, he would say how, for 2000 years, Jews did not work with their hands did not toil the soil, because they were not permitted to, but they lived this artificial, anemic existence. And if the Jewish people are ever to become naturalized, become a whole, they need to go back to their land, and rediscover the fullness of human activity. And there were other thinkers, like Achad HaAm who wanted a revival of Jewish culture and language. Ben Yehuda would say the same thing about a people who basically kept alive its language in prayer, but didn't speak it anymore. And so I do think that from their perspective, kind of living in exile was very much this practice and wherever we could we try to retain as much of the aspects of national identity that we could. But ultimately, these aspects of our natural human life, social life would only be true if we came back to the land. So it's kind of an interesting parallel between the religious thinker who's behind this midrash between Rashi's comment, and the secular Zionists who also felt that living outside of Israel was anemic and therefore was pretty much just playing religion, playing culture, playing language,
Adam Mintz
Its interesting, the secular Zionist. Why did they think the living outside the land was anemic? It wasn't because of an observance of mitzvos. They somehow felt as if Judaism, just by the very definition needed a homeland?
Geoffrey Stern
Well, I think with regard to religion, their argument would be similar to the one you made a few minutes ago, which is that because we didn't have a language because we didn't have an economy, because we didn't have all of the accoutrements of a natural life, what we could develop was our religion. And therefore we developed this religion way beyond where it should have been, relative to the other aspects of our lives. And that, therefore, when we come back to the land of Israel, religion has to reassume its, relativity to the other forms of life. And I think from that perspective, yes, that would be where that argument comes from. But again, it seems to me even today, when you have, and I see this, especially amongst liberal progressives, and I count myself guilty, as charged as a progressive, but sometimes it's very different, what a progressive will say, who lives outside of Israel, and one that lives inside of Israel. And the most basic difference is the one that lives inside of Israel probably has a son or a daughter, in the army. And Ben Gurion made the statement that his ideal was one day, we would live in our land, and we would have thieves and prostitutes just like anybody else. And what he meant to say, what he meant to say is, in Israel, all of this ideology that we had, and especially progressive ideology, the rubber has to hit the pavement, it's one thing to talk as a consultant. And it's another thing to run a company, it's one thing to write an ideology, and to talk about universalism. And then it's another when you have your own backyard, and when you're worried about the safety of your children, and you have your own love for the land, and they are conflicts and things are not as black and white. And things are not as clean and crisp and clear. But to the Zionists that was the challenge. That's the challenge of moving from practice, to the actual hard work of, not only building a state, but living a life as a citizen of a country and of a culture, so forth and so on.
Adam Mintz
I think that point is really a beautiful point. And what's amazing is that how we've come full circle from that Rashi that basically says that we wear Tefilin as a sense of a punishment, or as a sense of retaining our distinctiveness, even in the diaspora, to come to this idea of an appreciation of the land is really a beautiful idea. I think Rashi would love that idea. Do you want to open it up, Geoffrey to the audience and see if someone has some thoughts on some of this,
Geoffrey Stern
I'd love to I'd love to hear whether on this subject we're talking about right now or even Judaism as a practice or Judaism, both rooted in land and above time and space. Anybody who's listening? if you are Israeli too, I'd love to hear your perspective on how sometimes you see the difference between our traditions as practiced in Israel, and outside of Israel. But as we wait, I want to go back to those Zionists who argued about this anemic existence. And that I really do believe that those who are super critical of Israel, even those who love Israel, but are super critical of Israel. You know, it's not an argument from the perspective of unless you live in Israel, you don't have a right to criticize. It's more of a perspective of if you don't live in Israel. It's hard for you to understand what it's like in the same fashion, as it's hard to understand what celebrating a holiday is in the land where it took place, from celebrating it as a reminiscence, or as a reminder, and I think that's kind of part and parcel of this discussion today. We're not taking the moral high road, we're just saying that it's clear from this Midrash, that existentially living in the land; being being there. And I can't help but use the metaphor of "not in my backyard", where so many people take a position, but you really don't know what their position is, unless it does happen in their backyard. There's an amazing podcast from the New York Times, that talks about a group of people that petitioned the city to move a public school into their neighborhood so that it could be more integrated. And when the school was ultimately moved, none of them, not one to a T sent their kids there. And these are radical progressives. So I do think this is an invitation for us all, to look into the mirror. And to ask ourselves, and this is moving away from even the Israel situation, if you don't live in the land, if it's not your backyard, is your vision, is your perspective going to be the same as if you are there?
Adam Mintz
I couldn't agree with you more. And I think that's, that's the challenge. And the answer, of course, is that your perspective is different in Israel; good and bad, right? I don't know that you want to say that it's better. It's just different when you're there.
Geoffrey Stern
Hello, Michael
Michael Posnik
Once again, thank you very much, gentlemen. Just a number of things. I don't know if they're all connected. But the first thing that came to mind at the beginning of the event today, was that practice makes perfect. And it may well be that all the practice that's going on here is aimed at a kind of perfection, but the practice itself is moving towards perfection, always. So that's one thing that comes. On the other hand, Carnegie Hall might be compared to Israel in this discussion. The other thing that came to mind was something I was studying with Misha about Nehemia. And when they came back, and Ezra built the wooden tower and read the Torah, to the people, which people you called Am Haaretz which is such a beautiful understanding of that phrase, not dismissive at all, just the people who live there. They cry, the people who are listening to the Torah and it's not clear whether they're crying, to hear the law again, and to be reminded of the law, or they're crying because they neglected or did not have the opportunity to practice or to live in the law. And Nehemia says to the people don't cry, just listen. I guess that listening is also a very profound practice as well. So again, thank you, just a couple of pieces of something to consider.
Geoffrey Stern
I think that's a beautiful thought. And it takes me back to this concept of, we're not necessarily saying one is better than the other. I mean, this concept of practice. By definition, you mean to say that you're going somewhere you're striving. And if the flip side of that is a certain level of smugness, and a certain level of I've already arrived, then I do think that I don't necessarily take the comment by Rashi as one of punishment as a as much as fact. But I do want to bring one more piece of Talmud that has always fascinated me, and it's at the end of the Tractate Ketubot. And it says that those who live in Israel "Keilu Yesh Lo Eloka", those who live in Israel, it's as if they have a God, and those who live outside of Israel. It's as if they don't have a God, and I think on the superficial level, that ultimately means that in Israel, you're closer to God and outside of Israel, you're far away. But it does say,"keilu" as if, and I wonder sometimes whether those living in Israel, and I see it when they come here, and they come out into the diaspora, and they see how hard Jews in the diaspora work on preserving the traditions work on preserving the identity. And in a sense, there's a sense sometimes of awe, and I think that the two different cultures and can literally benefit from each other, and the culture, you know, outside of Israel, .... and I won't even say Israel anymore, outside of the land of comfort, outside of the land of having arrived as opposed to the land of wanting to arrive, striving to arrive, those people, it's as if they don't have a God, because they're striving for that God, and the ones that feel rooted in the land as if they've already arrived, and they have nowhere further to go. It looks as though they have a God, but maybe they don't. And that to me is what lies at the bottom of this whole concept of belonging and not belonging, of arriving and not arriving, of totally feeling, comfortable. We were in Morocco, and the Moroccan community divides itself into two. One is the "Mityashvim", the people that live there belong there, those were our Jews that arrived with the Romans, and were there before the Spanish Inquisition, and the others are the "Mitgarshim", those who were exiled from Spain and came there. So they have in the same country these two concepts. And I would suggest, and maybe this is the thought that we should take with us, is that we both need a little bit of both, we both need to be able to have that comfort level. But we also have to feel a level of striving and practice trying to get to the promised land. And if we ever get to a promised land and feel we've arrived, we're probably dead in the water. So you always have to have I think both aspects.
Adam Mintz
Geoffrey you couldn't end on a better note, the idea the necessity to strive, and the idea that if we ever think we get there, then we fail. I wish everybody a Shabbat shalom. We should continue to strive. You know, the summer months, Geoff and I were talking at the beginning of the know, these parshiot we don't talk about them enough because it's the summer but there's such amazing material here. And I think in this paragraph of the Shema, we have the idea of striving. Let's all strive, let's have a Shabbat Shabbat shalom. Thank you, Geoffrey, and we look forward to seeing everybody next week. Parshat Re'ea, be well everybody.
Geoffrey Stern
Shabbat Shalom.
Parshat Vetchanan (Deuteronomy 6) Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Roy encounter the iconic call to Faith of the Shema Yisrael to explore the complexity of faith and especially the contribution of the Musar Movement
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/337360
Transcript:
Geoffrey Stern
And today, we are going to discuss the one sentence that pretty much I think every Jew knows about has heard is our calling card and it is this Shema Yisrael that's found in in Deuteronomy 6: 4. And I'm sure we could just spend the whole afternoon just talking about what Shema means to you and means to me, and we definitely you're going to do that. But we're also going to use it as an excuse to look into my background in terms of the Yeshiva, I studied in a Musar Yeshiva. And there were certain insights that I got into the moment of Shema that I want to share. But let's start by saying Roy, what does? The Lord is our God, the Lord is one Shema Yisrael. Why is it so iconic? And what what does it mean to you when you say it twice a day.
Roy Feldman
I mean, the simple meaning is that it's accepting the yoke of heaven. It's a declaration that is kind of unambiguous, that we accept God as the sole creator and sole ruler of the universe, Shema Yisrael Hashem Elokenu Hashem Echad. It's very unambiguous. It doesn't waver at all. Even if we have, you know, some thoughts about theology or different feelings about God or, you know, wrestling with God in some ways, at different times, twice a day, we kind of just set those aside and say Shema Yisrael twice a day where we don't waver and don't have any compunctions about saying that. And that's an important way to bookend the day. It really, opens the day, and it closes the day. We say Shema in the morning and at night, before we go to bed. And so I think that's the real statement of the Shema that whatever happens in the middle of the day, and whatever thoughts we might have, we bookend the day with this declaration that we accept God,
Geoffrey Stern
I think that's absolutely correct. This sense of accepting the"Ol Malchut Shemayim", the kingship of God. And I love the fact that you say that it's kind of a moment of intense focus and acceptance. And that serves as a wonderful segway to the story that really impacted me and will serve as the crux of this conversation. So I went to a Musar Yeshiva... the Musar movement was started, I believe in about the 1700s, 1800s, about the same time as the Enlightenment, and possibly as a response to the Enlightenment in Eastern Europe by a rabbi called Rabbi Yisrael Salanter. And I was fortunate to go to a Yeshiva, that was headed by Rabbi Shlomo Wolbe, who studied under the alter from Mir, Rav Yerucham Leibovitz. And he told this story as follows. He said, once a student was saying the Shema and Robbi Yerucham came up to him. And he said to him, so did you say the Shema with Kavanah, with intention? And the student replied, Well, of course, Rebbe.. totally. And he said, so. Let me get this straight. When you said this Shema, you accepted this yoke of heaven, on your feet, and everywhere that you're going to go the rest of the day and the rest of your life and on your tongue, in terms of everything that you're going to speak, your hands and all of your actions, your mind and all of your thoughts, your heart and your emotions. And let me ask you something, did you feel like rebelling? And the students stopped and he paused? And he says, Rebbe, Hash Veshalom! God forbid, I never felt like rebelling. And Reb Yerucham turn to him and said, my boy, you've never said the Shema in your life. I found that story is so powerful. And I guess representative of what the Musar movement is, because it took something that should have such a purity of intention. And as you were saying this kind of focus [and unambiguity]. It even includes in it the word "One" "Echad" what word could we pick that represented harmony any more than the word "One"? And here this Reb Yeruchum introduced that if you didn't have the unharmonious feeling of rebellion. If you didn't feel a twitch of unacceptance then you probably haven't said Shema with intention at any time in your life. Roy before I give you a little bit more of my further reflection on that story, what what does that story say to you?
Roy Feldman
It's an amazing story that actually brings to mind a similar or a parallel ... that if you don't wrestle with God.... What the story is really saying is that if you don't wrestle with God, that you don't really believe in God, you don't really have the real feeling of Shema. Eliezer Berkovitz, who was a Jewish philosopher who passed away a couple decades ago, in Chicago, has a book called Faith after the Holocaust where he kind of tries to account for having faith, in light of the terrible evil that was the Holocaust. And in the introduction to that book, Berkovitz writes that if you did not have questions of faith, if when you were faced with the death camps, and with the murderous Nazis, you didn't say, "Where is God now?" Then you yourself, don't really believe in God? Because how could you not have a problem with God, if we believe in that great God, that's all good and all knowing, and all powerful and just wants good for us? If that's the God that we believe in, then when faced with such evil, if you really believe in God, then you have to question God at that moment. And that's very similar to the story that you were just telling, with, with the questions of saying the Shema, but wrestling with Shema, rebelling against God. Each one of us faces, difficulties in life, whatever our difficulties may be, and some are greater than others. But at any point in our lives, we are faced with situations in which we really have to ask "Where is God for us now?" And why is God doing this? or What does God intend by doing that? And I think that's really the crux of that story about the Shema.
Geoffrey Stern
I couldn't agree more. You know, even if we just focus on the the wording, what started as a simple expression of faith, when when Rashi looks at it, he says, Well, no, actually, there's a progression here. Shema Yisrael Hashem Elokenu Hashem Echad. Here, O Israel, the Lord our God, and the intention there is maybe the God of the Jewish people, one day will be the one God meaning will be accepted by the whole world. And so even in that there's maybe less of a sense of conflict. But there is a sense of resolution. And that faith is not something that static, that's faith is something that has to grow. And I think you and I would both agree that probably the the biggest catalyst for growth in faith is turmoil, is the sweat, the work of building one's faith, whether on a national universal level, or more importantly, on on a personal level. So even baked into the phrase, he's not all together, he or she is not one yet. We have to work at it.
Roy Feldman
Yeah, I think that's absolutely. That's absolutely right.
Geoffrey Stern
The other thing that's kind of interesting, and of course, clubhouse, and a podcast is an audible network. But if you have the Torah sitting in front of you, you'll see that the word Shema, the Ayin the last letter of the word Shema is a very large, and the Dalit at the end of Echad is also very large and the rabbi's explained that the reason for this is if you change the letter of Shema to an Aleph it means Shemma... "maybe". And if you change the letter, Dalet at the end of the Echad, which means "one" to a Resh, which looks very similar, it means "acher" it means "others" and of course it makes you think of "Elohim Acherim" other gods. So it's almost as though the Masoretic text and the tradition that we come from is looking at this very simple positive formulation of faith and baking into it all the possibilities for hearing wrong, misunderstanding it. If you listen to a traditional Jew say the Shema at the end they go "Echaaaaaaa D" and again, that tradition comes from stressing the fact that it's a Dalet and not a Resh. It's it's kind of fascinating, isn't it?
Roy Feldman
It is fascinating and not only do we do stress that Dalet at the end to make sure it's a Dalet and not a Resh, but many traditional Jews are also more careful about pronouncing all of the words of the Shema correctly, even more so than they are about the rest of the service for that same reason to make sure that we're saying everything exactly right and as intended. So there'll be no questions about what we're saying with the Shema. I think another interesting thing about the Shema is that we call it the most famous prayer in Judaism, but in reality, it's not a prayer. We've been saying it's a declaration, and it's really a declaration that precedes the prayer. The rabbi's in the Tractate Berachot in the Babylonian Talmud, note that one is always supposed to proceed the Shemona Esrai with the blessing of Go-al Yisrael, which is really the final blessing after the Shema itself. I think that one of the meanings of that is that in order to pray in order to stand before God, and make requests for good health, and for a livelihood, and for sustenance, and for for peace, and for all of these things, before that, we have to make a declaration that we accept God. So it's interesting that many people think of it as a prayer, but it's really not a prayer. It's a declaration of sorts.
Geoffrey Stern
Yeah, I think that's absolutely true. Although, it could be aspirational, especially if you take it from the perspective of what Rashi said, and the fact that It reflects a hope and a desire, as opposed to a reflection of the current state. But I want to discuss a little bit further this really talent that the rabbi's, but I would say the Jewish people have for seeing in a statement both itself and its opposite. And I think that's what Rab Yeruchem was saying in terms of "and you never rebelled". You know, the flip side of faith, real faith is this radical sense of rebellion. And if you don't have one, you don't have the other. And it's the summertime and I'm thinking back to when I was a camper at Camp Tovah Vodaas. And that was not a Musar Yeshiva, it was a more of a Hasidic Yeshiva. And the spiritual head of that Rav Moshe Wolfson, we used to take us students out into nature. And as many of us are this weekend in nature, and he quoted a paragraph in Pirkei Avot; the Ethics of the Fathers. And it says "if one is studying while walking on the road, and interrupts his study and says, how fine is this tree? Or how fine is that newly plowed field, the Bible accounts to him as if he was mortally guilty". "ke-iIlu Mitchayev beNafsho" as if he had done the worst sin. And sitting there in nature, the rabbi said to us, how could that possibly be? And he said, so here's the correct interpretation. He says, if you are studying Torah, and you look at nature, and you think that that's an interruption, you are guilty and your soul is guilty. It's not that it is an interruption that you interrupt your study, but that you think that it's an interruption that you don't understand that the beauty of God can be found in the Torah in the revealed law, but it can also be found in nature. And I thought that it contained in that little story, too, is a wonderful lesson to us. But the bigger thing is how you can take a phrase and turn it on its head, how you can find an insight that goes 360 degrees in the opposite direction. And this is really Jewess approach of Yeah, you're right and you're also right... Elu V'Elu Devrai Elohim Hayim.
Roy Feldman
Yeah, that remark reminds me of the expression, "don't let school get in the way of your education". that's similar to the the Rabbinic passage that you just quoted. That is don't let the law and wonder of nature, which is really God's creation, be an interruption to your learning. It really is part and parcel of your learning. Just as there are many elements in education that aren't formally part of school, but they really are an integral part of one's education. And we see that in so many different areas of where something seem like they might be a distraction. And some things really are a distraction, let's not pretend like there's no distractions, but don't let things that seem like a distraction but can really be valuable sources of spiritual growth or intellectual growth get in the way of what we perceive to be the formal learning.
Geoffrey Stern
Absolutely. So so I want to go back to the Musar movement and use my experience there and to share with with you what my insight is into the Musar movement. Most people translate the Musar movement as an ethical movement in Judaism, a focus on ethics. And I think that there's a very, very small part of that, which is true because all of Judaism focuses on ethics and being a good person. I think what sets the Musar movement apart is that one constantly is working and working, and sweating the details of even the most obvious thing like God is one. Like, we need to be observant and learn from all things, whether nature or not. There's a verse in the Torah that says that "im Bechukotai Telechu" that you should walk in my laws and the Sifra, the commentary explains that walking in God's laws means "amaylim B'Torah" it means struggling with the Torah. So if I had to represent the Mussar movement, it really looks at all of Judaism and says you have to struggle with everything. You can't take any obligation [at face value]. You know, when I was at that Yeshiva after a year you were invited into a Va'ad that might meet at midnight, twice a week. And you might take the simplest concept, you might take the concept of being thankful of being hopeful, the concept of belief, and we would literally spend six months focused on it. The Masgiach , Rabbi Wolbe would give us actual [thought] experiments that we had to do in terms of understanding what it means to be thankful and not being thankful and when that thankfulness is self serving, and I think that really, what I would love to share with you all today is this sense of, if you've never questioned what thankfulness is, then you've never been thankful if you've never understood what pain is and hardship is from both sides. I think that's what the Musar movement really... is the magic of it, that it gave to me. And that I have found the most intriguing part of my love affair with Judaism is that nothing can be only be taken at face value. And there's always this struggle in a good way. We can't forget that the word "Yisrael" is the name that Jacob got after struggling with the angel. Matt. Welcome to the platform. What what's on your mind today?
Mathew Landau
Hi, everyone. great conversation. Thank you. Well, I'm just back from Italy. And I was in too many churches. And it's sort of when I was davening on Tuesday, I was looking at the liturgy again, and I had a question I want to be a Musar for a second and sweat a detail .... when you talked about the Shema (I may be misquoting you, but you suggested something like the whole world will come to no one God). So in the Aleynu prayer, that paragraph that begins Al Keyn Nikaveh l'cha". "Therefore, we put our hope in you" and it goes on to say that very soon that you'll remove all detestable idolatry from the earth and false gods will be utterly cut off. I was curious from a maybe a Talmudic perspective or what Roy thinks about that interpretation. I spoke to one religious friend of mine that he knew of one Talmudic track. That that meant that that's when the Messiah will come and I won't name names, but I think there's some people we know that may wish to put the whole messianic concept of Judaism to the side. And so therefore, does it mean when we're davening this part of Aleynu that we're thinking that everyone's going to come around to either being Jewish or just being their own thing? But having no idolatry? I'm curious. Thank you.
Roy Feldman
Yeah, I think that's that's a great question. That's the famous part of the liturgy, so often sung at the end of Alynu, and the people who come to synagogue know that part of the liturgy, I think the key to understanding that line is understanding the word "Shem". Beyom ah'hu yiyeh Hashem Echad u'shemo echad" , God will be one, and his name will be one. And what's "Shem" usually means in the Bible is translated a reputation. For example, the Ba'al Shem Tov, the founder of the Hasidic movement, he was the master of a good name, that means he was a master of a good reputation, he had developed a good reputation for himself as being a spiritual counselor, so to speak. And that's if you look throughout the Bible and see what that when the word shem or name is used, name means reputation, how you're known, and we use that in English, too. He has a good name in the community means reputation. So I think when we save that line of the Aleynu prayer, what it means is, on that day, God will be one, which he already is, God is already one, and his reputation will be one, meaning everybody in the world will understand that God is one. It doesn't mean everybody's gonna be Jewish, it doesn't mean. I don't know what the Messianic undertones of it are. I can't you know, messianic era could be a very generic phrase, that means sometime in the future, when the world is at peace, and there are simply no problems in the world. That's the era towards which we hope the world is going. And so that's the simplest interpretation of "on that day God will be one and his name will be one". Not only will he be one, which is, you know, the metaphysics of it. He already is one. But his reputation will also be one ... there won't be a time when everybody kind of acknowledges that.
Geoffrey Stern
I think that it is clear that if you look at Rashi's comment, he's probably talking along the lines that both you, Roy and Matt are talking in terms of Messianism. But I think it's so obvious there is so many religions and practices of spirituality that are looking for the ultimate harmony, the ultimate one, you know, the Buddhist comes to the hotdog stand and they asked, What do you want on it? And he goes, I want one with everything. So that we all want ultimately, to find a world that lacks dissonance, that truth is obvious. And I think that's a way that you can harmonize what Rashi is talking about, which is the struggle for oneness, is a struggle. And it's a continuum over time, but it's an aspiration for harmony, and whether that harmony is personal, whether it's national, whether it's universal, I think it's how you take it and how it works for you. Elise welcome to the bima
Elise Meyer
Hi, Shabbat Shalom, everybody. I love that you were talking about harmony because the point that I wanted to make is that I recently was called upon to write a haiku in honor of a friend for one of these horrible zoom birthdays. And in doing a little bit of research about Haiku, which is the Japanese poetry form where five syllables are followed by seven syllables and then five syllables. These are poems that are used to connect a person to nature and to the universe. Most of them are related to the seasons or some sort of natural phenomenon and it occurred to me that "Shema Yisrael Adnoey Elohenu Adonai echad" is a perfect Haiku... She ma Yis ra el, Ado noy el o hey nu, ado noy ech ad" .
Geoffrey Stern
Wow, we heard it first here on Madlik. That's That's beautiful. That's absolutely beautiful. Thank you for sharing that Elise.
Elise Meyer
Well thank you for everything that you do to bring us to a higher level.
Geoffrey Stern
So I would like to finish up.. we were we talked Matt about you were going into churches and we talked a little bit about haikus and Buddhism. When I think of how I would characterize the Musar movement, this struggling with Torah, I actually think of a Lutheran theologian, a German theologian, who actually was very much against Hitler, and he was, he was killed, sent to a concentration camp and then ultimately hanged for being part of the plotters to kill Hitler. And he came up with an amazing phrase and the phrase is "Cheap Grace", cheap or costly grace and he like thinkers similar to like the Kotzke Rebbe or Kierkegaard spent his whole life arguing against religion without the fiz, platitudes. Just blind faith mumbled over and over again. And I believe that this this Cheap Grace, Cheap Belief, nothing comes easy and the beauty in the struggle and the joy that I think is reflected in the Shema. And Shema has a very rich history of being with the Jewish people and individual Jews at heights of joy and at depths of sorrow. But what it is, is that it's not cheap, is that it represents inside of it in one little phrase, as you say Elise, a Haiku, but also an aspiration, this struggle between the notion of one God and many gods of dualities and harmonies. And I really do believe that the story that we started with about if you can say it and accept everything in it and not rebel, then you've never said it is so true. So I thank you why for joining us, Matt, Elise for coming up to the bima I wish us all an amazing Shabbat. This is Shabbat Nachamu, which again is the flip side of mourning of Tisha B'Av. And now comes the the joy. If you plant in tears, you reap in joy type of thing. So let's all be joyous. Let's all have Shabbat and make sure that for many generations Shema Yisrael Adonoi Elohenu adonai Echad.
Roy Feldman
Amen. Thank you so much for inviting me, Geoffrey, this was a wonderful conversation. Thank Mathew and Elise for joining us.
Geoffrey Stern
Thanks so much.
A conversation between Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz on Clubhouse where we explore the sanctification of powerlessness in Rabbinic Judaism and the internalization of failure. We discuss the tendency of Jews to seek fault in themselves as individuals and as a people as part of a harmful pattern that gave rise to anti-Semitism.
Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/335498
Transcript:
Geoffrey Stern
What are you going to be talking to your congregation about? Either on Shabbat or Tisha B'av or both?
Adam Mintz
I'm going to give them a sermon that was written by Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch in 1855. And in 1855, Samson Raphael Hirsch, in Germany, the Orthodox Rabbi in Germany, talked about a preacher who 20 years earlier, you know, a rabbi Reform rabbi, who had ordered his congregation on Tisha B'av night to wear their finest, most beautiful clothing, and to come in to celebrate a Tisha B'av night in the synagogue, because he believed that mourning was over. There's no place for self evaluation and for mourning and for thinking about the past, it was a time of emancipation of hope. Hirsch's entire sermon was why that was wrong. That it's exactly when you're doing well, that you need to be humbled, and you need to fast addition.
Geoffrey Stern
So that really ties into some of the things that I'm going to be discussing. So we're perfect. That's perfect. I remember one summer I was at Camp Torah Vadaas for Tisha B'av and my dad came up with a friend to visit me. And we were sitting on the floor with ashes on our forehead. Yeah. And he you know, it from his perspective, it was probably very similar to when Franz Rosensweig walked into a shul for Kol Nidrei, you know, it was so dramatic. He always used to talk about it. And clearly, it is very dramatic. You would think, walking into a typical traditional synagogue on Tisha B'av that something terrible happened last week, not 1,900 years ago.
Adam Mintz
That's right. Not not 2000 years ago.
Geoffrey Stern
And I think the night that my dad came, it was thundering and lightning That's a good segway to say welcome to Madlik. And we are disruptive Torah every week at four o'clock Eastern. And we are recording, and therefore this recording will go on to the Madlik podcast, which typically gets published on Sunday, and becomes part of the record. So welcome, all of you. And that's not to inhibit any discussion. It just means that what you say will go down into posterity. So we normally talk about the portion of the week that is read in synagogues on a particular week of Shabbat. And this week, we have the beginning of the book of Deuteronomy Devarim, which has begun in the cycle. And we also have on Sunday, Tisha B'av. So I had wanted to talk about Tisha B'av, it's something that I've been given a lot of thought about for the last few years. But as I was also studying the book of Deuteronomy, the very first verse and the very first comment by the traditional classical sources, formed an amazing introduction to what I want to talk about. So you should know whether you higher biblical critic, or you're a classical scholar of Judaism, somehow or other the book of Deuteronomy is the fifth book of the Torah, but somehow it's different. It has a different voice. It has a different perspective. The higher biblical critics think that it might have been even written at the time of Ezra during the Babylonian exile, and that'll become relevant later. But whether you believe that or not, it has a different function and a different purpose. And it recaps many of the things that were said in the prior four books of Moses. So in this sifrei Devarim, it says, "These are the words which Moses spoke", and it asks the obvious question, well, Moses has been speaking for the last four books. So what do you mean to say "these are the words that Moses spoke", and it says that we are there taught "Sheharay divrei Tochachot" that the words in the book of Deuteronomy are words of rebuke. So even this classical source is questioning the purpose, the function, the intention of The Book of Deuteronomy, and it's positing that the purpose of it is to rebuke, to check, to take castigate or forwarn the Jewish people. And then in Devarim Rabbah, which is also a very old classical commentary, it adds to that. And it says, In the name of Rav Acha the son of Rabbi Hanninah If you're going to rebuke the children of Israel, why have Moses do it? Why have a friendly do it? Why wouldn't you have Bilam rebuke? The children of Israel, enemies are much better at criticism. And it answers that it's was decided that because Moses loves them, he said, rebuke them, rather than to have the rebuke of our adversaries, if we're going to be held in check and account, let those who love us do it. So before we segway into that the commemoration of the destruction of the temple on Tisha B'av, that contains many texts of rebuke, I just want to open it up to conversation rabbi, in terms of the purpose of Devorim, the insight that I bought from these classical sources. Where do you stand
Adam Mintz
it was really dramatic. First of all, Shabbat Shalom, and it's exciting. We're beginning the fifth book of the Torah. That's always exciting. And Devarim has been a problem, literally, since the beginning of time, exactly what is the role of Devarim, and that midrash that you quoted that classical source that you quoted, which tells us that Devarim is different because it's rebuke, because it's Tochacha is really a very interesting idea. Because that really talks about I think, Geoffrey, what is the role of Moshe? Is Moshe, a defender of the people, or is Moshe a rebuker are of the people? And then let me just raise that a step, maybe being a rebuker is also part of being a defender. Maybe if I want to defend you, sometimes I have to be willing to rebuke you. So maybe that's really the tension here in Devarim. And that's what exactly is Moshe's role. At the end of his life. This is the last 30 days of his life. At the end of his life, what is his job, rebuker? Or defender? Or and/or, rebukr? are rebuker/defender, really two sides of the same coin?
Geoffrey Stern
I think that's a great question. And obviously, we feel like we've been living with Moses. So many of the previous podcasts where he was totally surprised, totally undermined by the people that he really carried out of Egypt. There's a real dialectic here between the leader and the flock, so to speak. And so I do think that's a great question. I wanted to give an example of what one would mean by rebuke, or at least the way I take it, from something that everyone who is at all familiar with the prayer book would be aware, the iconic Sh'ma prayer begins with the call to faith, Sh'ma Yisrael. And then the first paragraph that we say, is all about you should Love the Lord your God, with all your heart and with all your soul. And by the way, that comes from Deuteronomy. But then the second paragraph that we say, starts out in the same way that you should do it with all your heart and soul. But then in Deuteronomy 11: 16, it says, "Take care not to be lured away to serve other gods and bow to them, for the Lord's anger will flare up against you, and He will shut up the skies so that there will be no rain and the ground will not yield its produce, and you will soon perish from the good land that the Lord is assigning to you." And I think as I was trying to understand because I never thought of Devarim, of Deuteronomy, as necessarily full of rebuke. It's not simply rebuke, but it gives a sense of the tenuous nature of the Israelites, the Jewish people on this land, the really conditional nature of it, and that if you misbehave and if you don't follow the rules, and if you don't love your neighbor and take care of the the widow and all that you will be shucked out, you will be put into exile. And that to me again is a perfect segway into a commemoration of the destruction of the Temple, but it really was the destruction of the first and the second Commonwealth. It's where we lost our political independence. And sure enough, that is I think, and I'd love to hear what what you feel about it, Rabbi, that is the biggest leverage. That's the biggest stick that Moses and Moses as the spokesman of God is waving .... I'm taking you into the promised land, I might not be able to come with you. But be aware that if you do not fulfill your side of the bargain, you will be kicked out.
Adam Mintz
I would agree with you. It's interesting, that exile is the classical punishment. And obviously, that's true. And I think you see, that's true, because what strikes me most about Tisha B'av, of all the traditions that we have, is the fact that according to tradition, both the first and the second Temples were both destroyed on the ninth day of aV, let's be honest, what is the chance of that? What is the chance that both temples are going to be destroyed oN exactly the same day? And I think the idea is that the date is not what's so important. It's the idea of emphasizing the fact that exile is the ultimate punishment, that whenever bad things happen, whenever you you don't behave properly, that you're going to get be exiled. There's a wonderful midrash that says that the reason that the temple was destroyed on Tisha B'av is because when the spies came back from their trip to Israel, and they gave a bad report, it says that the Jewish people cried that night. And it says thatVaivku.. they cried and the rabbi's say about that, that you cried Bechiya shel Hiunam.. you cried an unnecessary cry. Because there was no reason for you to cry You should have trusted in God. I'm going to establish a reason for you to cry. That's such a powerful idea. You cried for no reason, you cried that you're going to have to enter the land. And therefore as a punishment, you now are gonna have to be in exile. That's the punishment, exile is always the punishment.
Geoffrey Stern
So I'd like to pick up on what you said about somehow the confluence of bad things on Tisha B'av, the First Temple and the Second Temple. And we can we can say, okay, it was a coincidence. But at the end of the day, more and more things started to happen, a bad for the Jewish people in Tisha B'av. And in a sense, it wasn't so much self fulfilling prophecy. It is that word got out that this was the day of calamity. So if your Yemach Shemam... the Nazis wanted to beat the Jews, or there was a pogrom in the works, it was more likely than not that if it was around Tisha B'av, they would attack them on Tisha B'av. In the nomenclature in the vernacular in Israel today. If you meet somebody and they have a long face in Hebrew, you don't say "What's with the long face"? You say what's with Tisha B'av face? The newly elected President of Israel, Isaac or boogie Herzog coined a phrase, he was being critical of Netaniyahu, a number of years ago, and he was criticizing him for trying to scare and frighten the Jewish people and running a politics of fear in fright. And he called it the Tisha B'av syndrome. So even Jews and non Jews who do not observe Tisha B'av, they understand what a Tisha B'av face is, they understand the inport that it has for the Jewish people. So it's almost grown beyond the particular day. But you are right, it's focused, and it's focused particularly on one type of calamity. And that is the Jewish people losing autonomy, losing political autonomy and any control over their their well being and decisions that affect their life.
Adam Mintz
And I think that's a very powerful point. Really, really powerful. The idea of exile. We don't think Geoffrey today about exile much. When you think about a punishment to a country, you talk about losing your autonomy. You know, you think about a country that doesn't do well, they're not going to be exiled. France is not going to be exiled from France, the UK is not going to be exiled from the UK, New Yorkers are not going to be exiled from New York. It's actually an idea that had its moment. I don't think exile is something that speaks to people the same way anymore. And that's why I think and this is an interesting question, that when we talk about Tisha B'av now, we kind of are using a language that is not so familiar to people, and therefore we try to talk about Tisha B'av, in a language that people will understand, even though exile is not something we really understand anymore.
Geoffrey Stern
So so I'm going to say something rather radical, even for Madlik disruptive Torah. And it's really going to be the premise of the rest of our discussion today. And that is that, you know, we Jews, lovers of Israel today, are always asking the question, why when you criticize the Jews, or when you criticize Israel? Do you question its right to exist? Why can you criticize us like anybody else? There are plenty of progressives, who are critical of the way the US operates in Afghanistan, or how it treats minorities in this country. Never do they say, "and therefore you have no way to live there". Why is it always Israel that we question the right to exist. And what I want to say that is slightly radical is here, and I want to pick up on what you were saying a second ago, Rabbi, here, the lever that we introduce to the world is if we are bad, we become stateless. And we introduced this concept that we are unique, and that our connection with the land and our political autonomy is tenuous and contingent. And I think that we always throw up our hands, us lovers of Israel, and they go, why are they treating us differently? And what I would like to kind of explore for the rest is so many of the tropes of anti semitism, actually are the flip side of the arguments that we are seeing in our own tradition. And I'm starting with this argument that if you Jews are bad, you're going to be kicked out of your land.
Adam Mintz
Right. Okay. And do you think that that resonates with people today?
Geoffrey Stern
So so I think for me to make that argument, I've got to drill down and continue, because I do agree with you that it's fairly sophisticated to say, Oh, yeah, most people living on this planet know about the second paragraph of Sh'ma, where it says, if you don't behave, we're going to kick you out of the country. So let's delve into this a little bit deeper. My guess would be that if I asked the typical knowledgeable Jew, about why the temple was destroyed, specifically the Second Temple, they might tell me a story about two guys named Kamtza. They might go into the Talmud, and look for all of the reasons that different rabbis have given through the ages for why we lost the the Temple and the land. And I can assure you that not one of the answers given by those rabbis, is authentic or practical, because I believe the reason that the Temple was destroyed is because we got in the way of the Roman Empire. That's the long and the short of it. It wasn't about me. It wasn't about you. It was about the fact that Israel is somehow between Babylonia and Rome, and in the First Temple we got in the way of the Babylonian Empire, and in the second we got in front of Rome. The rest of my argument is going to be that we were very successful in teaching the world the perspective that we Jews have, that does relate our condition to our moral and religious adherence. And that everybody who was a follower of Christianity and a follower of Islam is aware?
Adam Mintz
Good. So there is an awareness of this kind of punishment, and it's a religious awareness of this kind of punishment. It's not political. It's religious.
Geoffrey Stern
Yes, yes,
Adam Mintz
That's an important distinction. I think
Geoffrey Stern
So there's two books and two thinkers that I want to really rely on, and one is Ruth Weiss, Professor, I believe at Harvard, who wrote a book called Jews and Power, and the other is Yitz Greenberg. But let's start with Ruth Weiss. The premise of her book is exactly the question that I just asked, which is, how did this happen? How did this become so persuasive? And she starts with Josephus Flavius now Josephus Flavius was a Jew, who moved over to the Roman side. And he asks, Why was the Tmple destroyed? And he gives a bunch of reasons. And one of those reasons even refers to "what caused the Romans to purify the temple". Now I get it. He was on the payroll of the Romans. He was a Roman historian. But he he lists again, just as the rabbi's of the Talmud do, a bunch of assassinations that were incurred by sectarian fighting. He talks about all of the corruption that was there. And Josiphus was translated into every language of the civilized world. He and the rabbi's were literally on the same page, in terms of ... and this is a quote, "when the Romans came to purify thee from the internal pollution". And if you understand what the ramifications of that is, that not only the rabbi's and not only the Roman historians, but ultimately the the Jews themselves promulgated this concept that if bad things happen to the Jews, it's because we sinned. I think you can begin to see that, in fact, yes, every one of..... I wouldn't even call it the Abrahamic religions, I would call it the successionist religions, the religions that believe that they replaced the Jews. And that really did feed into their narrative that they replaced the Jews because the Jews had sinned. And proof evidence, number one is look at the Jews, take a look at that ghetto, take a look at these people who can't farm the land, (because we won't permit them to do it.) So I do believe there is a direct connection between our perception of what brought on the the trauma of Tisha B'av and the world's perception.
Adam Mintz
I think that's a really, that's a powerful idea. I wonder... you talk about the succesionist religions, do the other religions focus on exile the same way? The Muslims have the idea of exile.
Geoffrey Stern
I'd love it if we have a historian and a comparative, either religion or archaeologist or a sociologist here. I think that getting back to the way I began the discussion with the rabbi's of the Midrash saying, if the book of Devarim is about rebuke, why not get the enemies of the Jews to mouth that rebuke? I think the knee jerk reaction is that civilizations are criticized by their enemies, and they are not at least (and now I'll get into washing one's laundry in public), certainly not publicly are they criticized in the ancient world in the medieval world in the world of the Middle Ages. We can talk about modern times later. But no, I don't think that number one. Other religious cultures are so so self critical. And to answer your question, I don't believe especially because Christianity and maybe Islam too were not as rooted in a particular locality or location. But certainly even if one gets away from the location, it's really, the destruction of the Temple was more than just exile from a particular piece of land. It was the end of the Temple culture. It was, for a large degree, the end of a language. I mean, I believe that Rome even changed the name from Judea to Palestinia just to literally make Israel Jew-free.
Adam Mintz
know or have an idea. I always say it that way, the end of an idea, Jewish autonomy, as reflected in the temple was a religious idea. We have been working for the past 2000 years to restore that idea, the prayer service, but we call davening is an attempt to restore what we lost on that day, in the year 70, when there was no longer a Temple, how do you get back to that idea of connecting to place and to God, without something. And that's what the prayer service did. Instead of sacrifices. We had a prayer service, we had this idea of three times a day, we had this idea of synagogue, you know, synagogues a new ideas, synagogue really only came about after the destruction of the Temple. Because when there was a Temple, you weren't allowed to have synagogues, because the synagogue was the Temple. But once there was no more Temple than all of a sudden they created synagogues. So we've been trying to restore that idea. Now, I think Geoffrey been interesting conversation, maybe for another time and to say, did we do a good job, because I would make the argument, we've done an amazing job, we actually have replaced that idea that it's not the same as having a Temple. But we have done very well in terms of unifying the Jewish people. And I think Tisha B'av is an example of that. The fact that Jews around the world know that it's Tisha B'av whether they fast or they don't fast, but they know that it's Tisha B'av , they know that it's Rosh Hashanna, they know that it's Yom Kippur means the idea is maintained.
Geoffrey Stern
So I think that you you make a compelling argument for the fact that the rabbinical response, actually, was greatly beneficial. And the proof is in the pudding, we survived for 2,000 years of exile. Again, as long as we're talking about what makes the experience of the Jewish people unique, you can't say that about a lot of cultures or religions. So I would like to segway and use your question to segway a little bit away from Ruth Weiss and into Yitz Greenberg. Ruth Weiss is actually a conservative thinker and she is very into realpolitik, and as her book progresses, and I really think anyone who's interested in the subject, should read it. She's very critical. She writes at the beginning of her book, that her book is "against the tendency of Jews to seek fault in themselves as part of a harmful pattern, I hope to expose". So the whole purpose of her book, and she will look at a statement that you just made now, which is "Well, we survived didn't we?" She would critique that as the pacifism that we survived for 2,000 years bending over like Fiddler on the Roof, saying this too,will pass is what kept us in exile so long, but I want to go to a religious thinker. And Yitz Greenberg believes that if there were two epochs of Judaism before the Holocaust, meaning when we were in the land, then after we were expelled, that literally turned Judaism on a dime. I think that one of the things that you were just saying a second ago, is that the paradigm shift that Judaism went through, after the Temple was destroyed, was just just unheard of in the history of religion and of society. They the rabbi's literally changed the face of Judaism, and yet Greenberg believes that the Holocaust is a similar episode. It is the Third Epoch of in Judaism. And he argues that those who say that we all you know, It's it's bad, but look at all the other bad things that have happened to us. He points to instances such as the Spanish Inquisition that created the Kabbalah. He focuses on the Shabtai Tzi and the false messiah, as something that that totally created the Hasidic movement and all that. So we do have to react. And we do have to change Judaism. But in his case, the Holocaust is on a different level. And what he argues is that after the Holocaust, we can no longer follow.....and here he's in agreement with, with Ruth Weiss. And he's also in agreement with you the type of Judaism that enabled us to survive, to get through it, to persevere, under great odds no longer worked. He argues that without the State of Israel, there would probably have been another two Holocausts since 1945. His famous phrase is that "power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely, and powerlessness is worse than all". And he makes a very compelling argument, that now we have to stop blaming ourselves, we have to take responsibility for our future that the God of maybe exile was the God who is hidden. The God after the Holocaust is a God who says you have the keys, you control your own fate. It's all up to you. So it's almost a religious push for the secular to take over the role of that. And again, you should read his work as well. But it's a fascinating turn. And it segways into what you will be talking about tomorrow, Rabbi, in terms of when do we celebrate Tisha B'Av? So before we talk about celebrating Tishas B'av? What are your feelings about Yitz Greenberg's approach? Do you feel that the Holocaust changes everything?
Adam Mintz
I think the Holocaust changed everything. I think the question we have to ask is and I think that's a question that is really the next chapter in Yitz Greenberg's book is what's the therefore? So the Holocaust changed everything. The State of Israel changed everything. What are we supposed to do about it? I'll tell you a little story. in the service on Tisha B'Av, in the afternoon service, the Mincha service, there's a paragraph that we recite on Tisha B;Av, it's the only time we say it the whole year long mincha on Tisha B'Av. It's called "Nachem". And it says God should console us. And in Nachem, we talk about a Jerusalem that is destroyed. And many of the rabbis in Israel, Yitz Greenberg included, he changes the entire language of this paragraph. This paragraph talks about "and the city that is in sorrow, laid waste, scorned and desolate, that grieves for the loss of its children that is laid waste of its dwellings robbed of its glory, desolate without inhabitants." I don't know Geoffrey the last time you were at the Waldorf in Jerusalem, but that is not a description of the Waldorf in Jerusalem. And these rabbis have taken out that paragraph. And they basically said that that's just not true anymore, that the Holocaust changed everything. But we have to realize that the traditions, the way that traditionally Tisha B'Av has been looked at is just not true anymore. And we have to be willing to recognize that. I'll just tell you one more story. Rabbi David Hartman ... the famous David Hartman, before he moved to Israel was a rabbi in Montreal in 1967. It was a Six Day War.... Israel reconquered Jerusalem in June. That Tisha B'Av, the tradition is that David Hartman in the afternoon of Tisha B'Av took his family on a picnic because he said we can't fast the whole day. Tisha B'Av is just not the way Tisha B'Av used to be anymore. We can't have Jerusalem and still observe Tisha B'Av the same way. I think those ideas are very powerful ideas.
Geoffrey Stern
So Rabbi as usual, you created a greast segway for me to to finish up. But I think what everybody is kind of echoing is that even the rabbi's of the Talmud understood.. in Taanit they say whoever mourns for Jerusalem will merit to see her future glory. In the Tractate of Rosh hassanah it says that when there will be peace, that all of the fast days that are associated with the destruction of the Temple will be feast days that you won't be able to have a funeral on, you won't be able to do anything related to mourning, which seems kind of strange until you couch it slightly differently. Whereas on Tisha B'Av we mourn our powerlessness. On a Tisha B'Av that is commemorated after we have our own State. And after we have power without putting any silver coating on power, power is a responsibility. But we can celebrate our power as we mourned our powerlessness. And I think that's why we do have to start considering segwaying from a Tisha B'Av of mourning, where we mourn our powerlessness to a Tisha B'Av of celebration, where we celebrate respectfully, our ability to control our own destiny, and to take the future into our own hands.
Adam Mintz
Thank you, I think that's beautiful. Shabbat shalom everybody. Have an easy and a meaningful fast, and we look forward Geoffrey to many years of celebrating Tisha B'Av in a smart and productive way, the way Yitz Greenberg talks about it.
Geoffrey Stern
Amen, Shabbat Shalom to you all.
Adam Mintz
Shabbat Shalom, everybody, bye bye.
Parshat matot - This week, along with Rabbi Adam Mintz and Rabbi Raphael Davidovich we discuss compromises and differences of opinion relating to the Biblical borders of the promised land and the modern State of Israel. We explore how these discussions might actually be the only way out of the current conflict. So throw away your maps and pull out your sacred texts and lets discuss the Compromised Land.
Link to Sefaria Source Sheet here: www.sefaria.org/sheets/334569
Transcript:
Geoffrey Stern
This week, we have a new episode in asking Moses for an exception to the rule. This week, the Jewish people after 40 years wandering in the desert have finally come to the border. They've actually already conquered some land outside of the land of Israel, just to get passageway they're about to cross over the Jordan River. And two tribes; the Reubenites and Gadites approach Moses. And the Bible starts by saying they owned a lot of cattle. And they noted that the land on the west side, the West Bank of the Jordan River, were really good for cattle. And they said, Would it be okay? If we stayed here? And Moses, as seems to be the standard falls on his face. And says to them, does that mean that you're questioning the whole endeavor, that you're not going to come and take the Promised Land. And he even talks and reminds them, that a whole generation, their parents, had also come close to the border, had sent the spies over, and then had had their second thoughts and doubts, and decided, again, not to engage in this endeavor of gaining the Promised Land. And he says, The Lord was incensed that Israel and for 40 years, he made them wander in the wilderness. And he says, and now you a breed of sinful men have replaced your fathers to add still further to the Lord's wrath against Israel. So again, he's shocked by their question, the way they phrase, their question is kind of interesting, too, because they say that what we want to do is we will build places for a cattle to graze, and we will go ahead and build places for our families to abode. And then we're actually going to come with you and help you conquer the land. And until the project of fulfilling the promise of the Promised Land is fulfilled, we will not go back to our settlement here on the West Bank. But until that time, we will fight along with you. And at this point, Moses comes back, and he talks not so much to God, but I think to the other leaders, and to Aaron, and the priests, and he says, if you will commit to do exactly that, then I will permit you to stay on the West Bank of the Jordan River. And it really goes on and on in terms of each of the different steps. And that I think is the last time .... I might be willing next week. But I think it's the last time that the people of Israel, or a segment from the people of Israel asked for an exception. And Moses came back and gave them the exception. So Rabbi, in your opinion, what makes this story worth a whole chapter in the Torah? And what are the lessons and what are the takeaways?
Adam Mintz
Okay, first of all, this is an amazing story. It's about exceptions. But ultimately, in the end, it's about what commitments are the Land of Israel means, because what we have is we have the two tribes of Reuven and Gad. And basically, they're willing to say we're willing to put ourselves on the line, to be able to live where we want to live. Now, they didn't necessarily have to offer that. But they decided to offer that. And it shows what their commitment to the land is about. And I think that's very important. Yu know, the whole Torah, they're always complaining about going into the land of Israel, why'd you take us out of Egypt, we should have stayed in the land of Egypt and all of these things, right? The Miraglim, the spies come, and they say bad things about Israel. And now you have a group of people who are willing to say, we're putting ourselves on the line, to be part of Israel to fight the battles before anybody else settles down. We're gonna fight with everybody. I think that's a wonderful lesson.
Geoffrey Stern
So it's interesting that you kind of see In the, the the members of these two tribes, someone who is virtuous, their intentions were good. And you would put them in the same category as the daughters of Zelophechad, or Jethro. They were good and well intentioned.
Adam Mintz
that's a good term.
Geoffrey Stern
Well intentioned and in a sense, selfless, because what they were saying is they will fight for the rest of the nation to redeem the Promised Land, and then they would go back to the houses. But I sense in the commentators that there's actually a bias in the other direction. In other words, Rashi picks up on the fact that when they said, We will build sheepfolds for our cattle, and then they say, and we will go ahead and build homes for our children. Rashi said, "asu Ikar Ikar vehatfal tafal" they actually were materialists that they show their colors, in terms of caring more about grazing rights and prosperity. And I think, in a sense, the way they're introduced also kind of places them as someone whose intentions in fact, were very materialistic. So how do you square that with your circle?
Adam Mintz
Good. I mean, there is no question that Rashi is critical of them, or Rashi says that they're interested, they're interested in their self-interest, right? Where is it going to be better for us? I'm really taking a different view. Rashi decides that these tribes are no good. Rashi doesn't like people who break with the norm. Rashi thinks that everybody should do the same thing. I don't think that that's the way that we're necessarily trained. I think that we're trained that it's okay to be a little different. And that if you're willing to make a commitment, that it's okay to be different. So I understand Rashi, I'm not a traditionalist as Rashi in the same way, in terms of the fact that everybody needs to do the same thing.
Geoffrey Stern
Well, I think that's wonderful. That's why you and I are made for each other.
Adam Mintz
Tere we go. Madlik. That's right.
Geoffrey Stern
So so let's talk in biblical terms, it would be called the Promised Land, and in modern day terms, it would be called Zionism. In a sense, the Reubenites that Gadites, were the first Jews to live in the galut [Diaspora] so to speak, in other words, they were saying you can go into the land, we want to live outside of the land. I think historically, the fact that they live there, ultimately became part of Greater Israel. But in that moment, in any case, they were acting very similar to Jews, like you and I, who live in New York, who say, we are going to do everything we can to support you in the building the dream of Zion and the Land of Israel. But we're actually going to live on the other side of the river so to speak Is is this the first instance .... and it's funny, it's it happened even before they took the land, they already had these outliers.
Adam Mintz
Yeah, well, I mean, by definition, it's the first example. They're just taking possession of the land. And they're outliers. I think the Torah is really making a comment about how they feel about these outliers. Now, Rashi has one view, and I presented another view. Obviously, there are different views about these outliers. But clearly, this is the story of the outlier. It's different than the daughters of Zelophechad . The daughters of Zelophechad , are making sure that they get an equal portion. That's not about being an outlier. That's about protecting their own interest. It's really a different story than the daughters of Zelophechad .
Geoffrey Stern
Well, absolutely. Do you do you give any import to the fact again, I've already mentioned that the Bible seems to go out of the way to say that they own cattle and that they were looking for land suitable for cattle, ...cattle cattle. Do you think that this is part of a tension throughout the Bible that we haven't discussed before, between agriculture and cattle grazing (herders and ranchers). Between vegetarianism, if you will, and a culture of raising cattle. Of the wanderer, the grazer and the land holder who prays for the rain, who tides the crops. There are so many laws of Judaism that have to do with agriculture, in a very positive sense that it almost becomes the paradigm. And cattle grazing and certainly of slaughtering animals was almost limited to the temple. I don't believe that it was even permissible to eat meat outside of the temple culture.
Adam Mintz
That's right.
Geoffrey Stern
Is there any of that going on here?
Adam Mintz
There might be. They're clearly making an argument to the fact we need more land, because that's the way our that's our livelihood, and our livelihood needs more land. Now, you wonder, I think, Geoffrey, this is an interesting question. What did the other tribes think about the request of Reuven and Gad. T Torah never tells us, but it's left open for our imagination. What do you think to Torah thought?
Geoffrey Stern
It makes it seem that the key issue that Moses had was, number one, are you going to be included in the draft? Are you going to help the rest of the people? If we let you pursue your own private interests and your different lifestyle? Are you going to still be committed to the national movement? That was one thing, the other argument that Moses makes, which I find even more fascinating, is he harkens back to when the spies came back, any Harkens back at great length, because he says you're going to be doing the same thing, you're going to be taking away the idealism. We all were looking forward to going into the land until the spies punctured that bubble. And here you are at this precipitous moment, we're going into the land. And already you're taking away from from the whole, from Clal Israel, if you will, but he doesn't really put any words into the mouths of the leaders of the other tribes or to the priests either. So I don't know how to answer that. But I do find it fascinating, where his concerns were,
Raphael Davidovich
that's interesting. You say he doesn't put words in their mouths. You wonder, about why the leaders of the other tribes, you know, when it came to the spies, they weren't so quiet, all of a sudden, here they are quiet? And you wonder why that is?
Geoffrey Stern
Well, I mean, you know, again, we only can read what what's in the text, and we can't read in between lines. There are two words that are kind of interesting to me. One is they talk about, okay, so after you fulfill your obligation, you will come back here, and it'll be an "ahuza". It'll be a holding for you. And the other word is we're crossing the Jordan, you know, the word "Ivri" Hebrew comes from the word "L'avor" to go over. And certainly, one of the references or associations that we always have, is that we crossed over the Jordan, or in the case of Abraham over the Tigris, but the point is, we were coming home. And the cattle grazers are still wanderers so there's also that tension between coming home [to settle] and ending the wanderings in the desert or of the diaspora. And then there is the other side of it is well, we've gotten used to this life and we like this untethered existence. And then there's this sense of what is the land to them anyway, is it is is something that ... we just passing through? What does "achuza" actually mean?
Adam Mintz
So that's a very good question. What is what is the attitude of these people towards the land? These two tribes? What's their attitude? What about the other tribes? Do they have a different attitude towards the land? Does everybody recognize the holiness of the land? I think from the story in the Torah it's very hard.
Geoffrey Stern
Yeah. I mean, I think at the end it says "Vehoyta ha'aretz hazot l'chem l'achuza liphney Hashem" that this land will be to you, "achuza" a holding in front of God? You know, I'm reminded that actually does the land really belong to any of us? And that it doesn't talk about "achuzah L'olam" forever. So it does raise these questions. There's so much talk about coming into the Promised Land. What does that even mean? Is it our land to live on our or is it something that we own? You know, I don't think we'll ever know. But I know that these issues are there, even if we just look at the simple words. This conflict between a wandering people and people that comes home?
Adam Mintz
Maybe we should open it up Jeffrey and see whether we have some some opinions Michael, anyone else who wants to hear their views? You kind of threw out a lot of ideas today
Geoffrey Stern
Absolutely. So if there's anyone who would want to comment on what we've been talking about in terms of the first time that the Jewish people came to the land, and the first time that the kind of borders were started to be made both physical borders and borders between lifestyles, Raphael, welcome.
Raphael Davidovich
Thank you. Fascinating conversations. I just want to point out, that it was mentioned that Rashi objected to the tribe of Reuben and Gad for their request. But that's not necessarily the case. You know, that's not necessarily the voice of the Torah itself. And I just wanted to make sort of a point, not so much in defense of Rashi. But more in defense of the point that Rashi makes. To me, it seems fairly clear from the narrative, not only of Reuben and Gad, but meaning the long arc narrative that you see at the end of the book of Joshua, that what Reuben and Gad's request, while it was honored, was not considered appropriate. And you see this in two ways. One way is that the fact that they were on the other side of the Jordan, led to their being separated from the Jewish people or the Israelite people at a much earlier stage. There's a Midrash that makes the point that they were exiled, leaving me for the remainder of the 10 tribes, and also that they had distanced themselves. And they almost started a civil war later on at the end of the book of Joshua for wanting to build an altar, which led to a big misunderstanding there. But sometimes, while a Jew might feel he wants a little bit of distance from other Jews, it's ultimately not really a good thing. And I think that's why Moshe never apologizes for his initial rant. It's not as if Ruben and Gad say no, no, listen we'll help as soldiers. And Moshe says, Oh, I apologize for the misunderstanding. You know, the point is left unresolved. And it seems to me that the narrative voice of the Torah feels that all things being equal, what they did was not considered appropriate. So I just wanted to sort of register that that voice, you know, that point of view,
Adam Mintz
okay. I mean, you're you're reading it, within the Chumash [Text of the Torah], and I'm suggesting that there might be two ways to read the book.
Raphael Davidovich
I understand. I heard that other way. But I think ultimately, given the distance. not only in Chumash. But like I said, there are many things in the Torah that foreshadow later stories that take place in the Nevi'im [Prophets]. And I think this one foreshadows the greater distance that would occur later. I think there's a strong point, not just in Rashi's way of looking at it.well,
Geoffrey Stern
I think Raphael that what you emphasize, is this healthy discussion about the different ways that we can look at these tribes, and the unintended consequences in later history, but I think ultimately, like any situation like this, the real issue to me, the real excitement to me is that from day one, this Promised Land was a Compromised Land, meaning to say that these two and a half tribes came even before they got into the brand new car, they already had issues. And were talking about, can they add a trailer? Can they sit in the backseat? It was spanking new. We look at Israel today with all of the different factions and all of the different opinions about who owns what land and how we should cut our borders. And to me, the biggest takeaway is: There is one discussion that had relates to their intention, and where they fall within the commentaries and within history. But there's the other issue. And I want to bring it into the not the not so distant present already, that even from the get go, there were discussions about where the borders were, whether you were in or whether you were out whether you were a purist or were detracting from the movement. And that is pretty amazing .... that already from that time this occurred. If I wanted to take it up into the present in modern Zionist history, there was a big discussion between Weizmann and Ben Gurion on the one hand, and Jabotinsky, on the other hand about what the boundaries of the future State of Israel should be. And Weitzman and Ben Gurion were willing to compromise and Jabotinsky did not. And the main issue was whether the borders would be on both sides of the Jordan or the Jordan would actually be the border. So it's fascinating that the story that we have in front of us is actually a prequel to an argument that related to the founding of the State of Israel. Jabotinsky, wrote a song that became actually the anthem of Herut and the rejectionists who felt that Ben Gurion should not make the compromise. And he has verses in it. The refrain is "two banks has the Jordan, this is ours. And that is as well. It's stretching from the sea to the desert and the Jordan, the Jordan in the middle two banks has the Jordan, this is ours. And that is as well." And it's fascinating that this concept of enlarging the borders, so that what happened in the parsha that we're reading with the Reubenites, and the Gadities went ahead and said they wanted to live outside of the borders, that actually changed the facts on the ground, and it became a new border. And it just seems to me that it's so fascinating when we talk about what the borders of the land should be, and how we should even look at these borders, that we can't but help go back to that first moment when the Jews hadn't even passed over the river. And already they were having these kinds of discussions. And I should say, compromises .... so I wonder what everyone's thoughts are in terms of it almost becomes it's a land of compromise. And it's a land where different people have different visions from the get-go.
Michael Stern
I kind of envision that the Promised Land and when the Israelites crossed over that that was like, opening up an oasis that would flood the whole planet, with the milk and honey with this divine consciousness and mistaken, of course, human frailties of thinking started to think about borders. And it was really just a key in a lock. And In came the Israelites in the alchemy was ready to flood the whole planet with divine consciousness. And so I just wanted to add that feeling that I have that we really could just forget about all the human limitations and borders and strife and see it as an oasis that was unlocked to release that to the world but humans got in the way.
Adam Mintz
Nice idea. And Michael, finish up your thoughts. Is that a good thing or a bad thing?
Michael Stern
Oh, I think it's a good thing that it isn't about borders and it's really about going back to the moment and put the key in the lock and let this be the work. To make one holy planet, and of course, you have to start with a seed. And why run after the leaves when you can go back to the seed and then grow a tree of life on the whole planet that goes everywhere and brings everyone together, and no borders and global citizenship and consciousness.
Adam Mintz
Fantiastic... I love that idea.
Geoffrey Stern
But I want to take maybe a little bit of what Michael was saying in a slightly different direction. And that is, yes, I think that Jerusalem and the Promised Land have always been both a reality and a metaphor. And there is absolutely no question, especially in their later history where the two could live simultaneously. But unfortunately, for people living on a particular piece of land, the metaphor doesn't help. And that, ultimately, is what borders and conquest and troop movements and relocation of citizens always ends up. So I would like to talk about an amazing situation that is happening as we speak in Israel. And the New York Times had an article in July 4th, and it talked about how the secular peace effort has pretty much died. And that this might be a moment in time for people who are knowledgeable and committed to religion, to actually start talking about the issues that are dividing the Palestinians and the Israelis. And the example that they give. And the reason why it's happening right now is as you may all know, there is a new party that is a part of the Knesset, and part of the coalition, the ruling coalition. It's headed by Mansur Abbas. And it's called Raam. And unlike what one would think that it's would be a secular party. It actually is a Muslim Brotherhood type of party, it's absolutely committed to Islam. It's one of those instances where exactly the type of person that you think, could not reach out and compromise, is seeing the ability to make the livelihood of his people better. And the times gave a history of this person who had a teacher named Sheikh Abdullah Nimr Darwish, who was put in Israeli jail because he was part of the Muslim Brotherhood and when he came out, he did a turnabout, and said that actually, the Muslims living in Israel, should try to obey the laws. And he met up with a Rabbi Michael Melchior, and the two of them ( he since has passed away. But Rabbi Melchior has continued and clearly his student who is the head of the wrong party has continued) seeing the future seeing the potential of religious people who can read a text like we're reading today, and can discuss the issues from the perspective of religious categories of thought that they in fact, are the ones who are most equipped to look for ways out I mean, even if it's the most basic thing that the concept of the state does not exist, either in Islam or in biblical, or Talmudic Judaism. The idea that you can make covenants and those covenants can be permanent, they can be temporary, the fact that you can live on the land, but every 70 years, the land reverts back to somebody else, and looks at land ownership, totally different. All of these categories are religious categories that we study week in and week out. And sometimes we look at ourselves and saying, why are we studying these texts that have no relationship with human affairs and politics and people's lives? And the truth is, it might actually be the opposite. And I'm just intrigued by this movement of religious scholars being able to sit down and to figure out ways that we can communicate, because clearly religious scholars have more in common than they have apart. And I'd like to open that up for a short discussion and comment or just leave you with that thought.
Adam Mintz
That's a great thought. I think, Geoffrey, if we leave it at that, I think we've done a good job. And it's amazing that we took it back from Reuven and Gad and we took it to modern politics and some of the some of the real achievements in the State of Israel. That's really nice. idea, a good way to end this conversation about this parsha.
Geoffrey Stern
Fantastic well, Shabbat Shalom
Adam Mintz
Shabbat Shalom to everybody. Enjoy the parsha, it's a double parsha. I look forward to next the next week with everybody.
Geoffrey Stern
Absolutely. Shabbat Shalom.
Parshat Pinchas - A live recording of Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz on Clubhouse as we use the intriguing case of the Daughters of Zelophechad to explore Patrilinear and Matrolinear decent in Judaism.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/332756
Transcript:
Geoffrey Stern
Welcome, everybody. This week's portion has a story that is typically referred to as Zelophehad's daughters. And you'd figure because they always called daughters that they don't have names. They don't have identities. But the Bible in Numbers 27 says the daughters of Zelophehad, and it says their names: Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah. So they did have a name and what they came to Moses for was that they did not have a father. Their father had passed away in the wilderness. And they were worried about the allotment of land in the holy land that was divided up amongst the 12 tribes. And they were worried that since the portion that you received was passed on from father to son, that since their father did not have a son only had five daughters, that their allotment, their inheritance, their legacy would be lost. And they said: "let not our father's name be lost to his clan, just because he has no son." So I'm going to stop right there and ask you, Rabbi, what does this story mean to you? Is it a woman's lib story? Is it a purely transactional story? What does it mean to you?
Peter Robins
So I mean, on a basic level, it's transactional, of course, just how they divide the land. It's women's lib, but it's also the ability of people standing up to Moses, and saying to Moses, this is not fair. To me, that's even more interesting. Now, the fact that it's women doing it makes it more dramatic in the 21st century. But actually, from our perspective, just the ability to stand up to Moses and to say, Moses, this isn't fair, we deserve to have our share in the land is really an amazing thing.
Geoffrey Stern
I love the fact that that's the point that you You touched upon, because I started to think to myself, how unique is this situation? And I came up with two other cases, I'd be curious to know whether I missed any but the first case is when Jethro, the father in law of Moses shows up in camp, so to speak, when the Jews get out of Egypt, and there he sees his son in law, Moses adjudicating from early in the morning, to late at night. And he says to him, in Exodus 18, "the thing you are doing is not right, you will surely wear yourself out. And these people as well for the task is too heavy, and you cannot do it alone." So here's a situation where maybe he doesn't confront Moses, maybe Moses doesn't go and say, Well, let me ask the boss. But ultimately, it is also an outsider, if you consider women kind of on the fringe, here this father in law, who's not Jewish, uses his powers of observation, and says this is not sustainable. And the other instance, and this is an instance that we went into in detail is right before the first Passover, when the unclean Israelites came to Moses, and said, How could it be that we will not be able to experience the holiday? And that's when Moses minimally gave them Peach Sheni, a makeup Passover, and maximally adjusted the whole calendar? So my first takeaway from your comment and from this list is, is this the complete list? And two since in each case, God or Moses was so accommodating? I say, isn't it a shame that they didn't come and ask Moses more questions and push him further?
Peter Robins
Yeah, that's kind of an interesting take on it, is why they stopped there?
Geoffrey Stern
I mean, it just shows you the power of being engaged. You've got to ask and maybe that's the first lesson that we should learn from the daughters of Zelophehad, that if something doesn't seem fair, something bothers you, go ahead. And if it has to do with Judaism, we have a very receptive religion. God loves to hear from us write Him a note ask him a "Sheaylah" , send in a question.
Peter Robins
We joke about that, but that actually is what makes this story so sore story so special, the idea that you can actually ask God a question or that Moses has to ask God a question, you know, is something that's so surprising. That's just not the way the rabbinic system works. The rabbinic system is based on the fact that God doesn't really play a role. It's the rabbi's who play the role. But here we have God being an integral part of making this decision.
Geoffrey Stern
Absolutely. The other thing that occurred to me is that all of these three instances have something in common. Unlike Korach, who was splitting hairs and making an argument, these three instances seem to have in common that they are arguments from sustainability. The argument is, this is not going to last, this is not a practice that can continue over time. So whether it's the daughters of Zelophehad, who said, you know, we've just kind of revealed a crack in the system. If this will continue. It's it's not even about us. It's about keeping the integrity of the tribal allotment. In the case of the Passover. It was a question, in my mind, a big question about the Hebrew calendar, and how does one fix it and in the case of setting up a court system, clearly, that was something that was again, I think Jethro says it the clearest when he says, This can't go on. And so I'm wondering what what you anyone in the audience thinks about this question of sustainability. In other words, if we have a practice, I've brought this subject up before, for instance, the the, the issue of taking interest on a loan, it might work in some societies, but an agrarian society where you have to buy your crops and your seeds and stuff like that. It just wasn't sustainable. And and even though the Bible rants against it, the rabbi's went ahead, and they created a loophole. And so I'm wondering what can we learn from this about changing the law, modifying and modulating our practice, based on the argument that if we continue at this rate, we won't continue to exist, that we'll be throwing out maybe the baby with the bathwater.
Peter Robins
I mean, sustainability is an interesting idea generally, how the Torah deals with with sustainability? I mean, are you talking about sustainability in terms of fairness of law, or you're talking about it in terms of dividing the property?
Geoffrey Stern
Well, I mean, again, Jethro says it the best, you know, he says, that, if you continue doing this, you wear yourself out and the people as well, the task is too heavy for you, you cannot do it. So I'm not talking about sustainability and a fairness mode. And I'm certainly not talking about it in an ecological way. What I'm talking about is an institution, a custom, a practice a law, that if one continues doing it, life will cease as we know it. Other issues, the case of interest where either the farmers will not be able to run their businesses, or they'll be forced to break the law. In the case of Zelophehad's daughter, as you point out, the whole integrity of the tribal system, and the allocation will not last. So you have a choice, either you say, Well, this is the way it's written. And we'll have to give up on this sense of having the allocation for each tribe. The point is, you can't have it both.... it's a catch 22 it's, it's a social institution that cannot persevere, it cannot continue. going in the direction that it's going. It's not practical. Maybe it's an argument from practicality that I'm trying to say,
Peter Robins
yeah, maybe the word is practicality rather than sustainability.
Geoffrey Stern
So is there is there something there there? I brought the example of taking interest but are there other instances? I've brought up this concept of "Tircha D'Tzibur" (incoveiencing the community) or "gezera she lo hakehilah yachol l'amod bo" , there are there are rules that are given that if the determination is made. It's too difficult. It's too stark. We can't go on this way. Is that more widespread in the development of Jewish law in your mind?
Peter Robins
I think that that's a very important idea in Jewish law, the idea that people can't handle it, you can't Institute such a law is a very important principle in Judaism. That's what you call practicality and sustainability, if the system is not sustainable, because the people just can't rise to the occasion, you know, Geoffrey, take the simplest example, you know, in, in the diaspora, for whatever reason, we have two days of every holiday, except for Yom Kippur. Why don't we have two days of Yom Kippur? It's because it's not sustainable. People can't fast for two days of Yom Kippur. Right? That's a perfect example. We should have two days of Yom Kippur, but it's not practical. The system couldn't, can't survive that way.
Geoffrey Stern
Yeah, I think that's a wonderful example. It's kind of where the, the rubber hits the road, so to speak. And it makes you wonder, and again, you know, this is it. This is a question that people will have to use nuance for, when when does it become something that is too difficult? You know, clearly, if you have a rule that maybe was fine in the past, but people are finding too difficult. That's another question, can something become unsustainable? I see that Peter Robins is here. So Peter, you are on the stage. And I'd love to hear your opinion.
Peter Robins
I think you're going down a slippery slope. Where it is mutability, sustainability, and slippery slope are intermingled. And I give kudos to your definition of rigid laws being changed, because they're not sustainable. But I start out by asking the question, if you ask God a question, how do you know what the response is and where I end up is? That your conscience becomes the response? The question of sustainable and immutability, though, is a slippery slope. And I just wonder how diluted the tenants become when they become changed?
Geoffrey Stern
I think you're asking two questions. And they're two great questions. You know, the easier question is, how do you know that it's God speaking? Is this just a ruse? Is this just a face saving technique that can be used? And when can it be used? Does it disappear with the end of prophecy? Or is there a statute of limitations? I think that's a great question. And and of course, the slippery slope, part of it, is the question of used and abused, you know, who decides, and at what point do Jews come and say, you know, walking to Shul is not sustainable. We used to live in urban areas, or we used to live before the car and the highway, and now we're spread out. And, you know, can we ride to shul? And of course, I think there are movements within Judaism that have argued that that's precisely where one has to use a an argument like this, but clearly, it is a slippery slope, especially if you're an orthodox rabbi. So Adam, what what do what is your response?
Peter Robins
I mean, slippery slope is a tricky business. You know, I understand what Peter is saying, you know, you have to be able to draw lines, but you also need to have flexibility. If you don't have flexibility in the system, then the system is going to fall apart. So you talk about walking to shul. You know, the Conservative movement in 1960 decided that the movement was not going to survive, unless they allowed for driving to shul on Shabbat. 60 years later, they now write and they say that the Conservative movement made a mistake, that they lost community and orthodoxy maintained community because people had to live close by. The Conservative lost community there. So they made a mistake in the sense of figuring out the slippery slope, or whether it was practical. And I think that's so interesting that that's the consideration. That's what we think about now. Did they go too far? Did they fall down that slippery slope? What do you think Geoffrey, did you think the Conservative movement fell down that slippery slope?
Geoffrey Stern
Well, I do think that, in addition to being a slippery slope, there is the issue of unintended consequences. And I think that there is no question that if one was to make a determination, that riding to synagogue is a necessary evil, one would have to do it with their eyes wide open. And when I say that, I mean, that clearly the optimal situation is that maybe we have smaller synagogues that people even in a suburban or rural area, can live closer to, and if you are too far away to walk, you start another synagogue. And I do think that that is a solution that is, is very positive. So there are alternative solutions to every problem. And definitely, one needs to think but I think my answer to you is, sometimes you need an experiment like that. In other words, you cannot always know what the unintended consequences are. And so you need to be flexible enough to try something and then have the self confidence to admit when a mistake was made.
Peter Robins
That's a big deal, Geoffrey, that's not so easy for people, you know, to admit mistakes, is hard.
Geoffrey Stern
Especially if you're in the God business, I guess.
Peter Robins
I guess that's right. Peter, what do you want to say? Yeah, Geoffrey and rabbi, I think that slippery slope is I think, harsh. My takeaway from the conversation between and among the two of you, is that survival of the religion and its people, trumps any type of rigidity, that morphing into adaptability becomes the imperative.
Geoffrey Stern
I think maybe it's more of an art than a science. And I do think that the takeaway for me is that you have to ask, you have to speak up, no matter how, what position in the society you hold. You don't have to be a leader, you can be a woman, you can be on the periphery, you can be well meaning non Jew, you can be someone who's quote, unquote "unclean". That's the takeaway to me, and that you need to be flexible and try. And if there's a mistake that gets made, I think that you just have to have the self confidence to admit it. I do think, though, that if we're going to talk about something that is very meaningful, and relates very much to the ability of the Jewish people to survive, we have a another direction that we can go in our discussion today, in terms of the daughters of Zelophehad. And the direction that I want to take us in, is this is the first instance of women arguing for a matrilineal society, meaning to say the assumption of these daughters was that they lived in a patrilineal society, and their father died, and there was not going to be any inheritance to them. And his name would no longer go on, and that you certainly couldn't pass on his tribal affiliation through them. And I know the traditional answer will be, well, whether you are Cohen, Levi or Yisrael goes through your father, but whether you're Jewish, goes through your mother. And what I would love to spend the rest of our afternoon discussing is the fact that that's not altogether clear, number one, and number two, that you could make a case that this is the only instance that we see in biblical Judaism and Torah Judaism, that women were given some ability under certain circumstance to be able to exercise a matrilineal descent. And I'd like to quote a Mishnah. And, of course, the Mishnah is First / Second century, so many, many years after this instance (of the daughters of Zelophehad). And again, you'll hear in the in the Mishnah, that matrilineal descent is only for certain circumstances. So the Mishnah says as follows "Every place that there is a Kidushin (marriage) , and there is no sin, the child goes after the male. And it goes ahead, and it gives many examples..... the ones that I just gave where the father is a Cohen, where the father is a Levite, so forth and so on. And then it goes on to say, however, in a case where there is a sin, whether it's a question of a Cohen, who's not allowed to marry a divorced woman, or a widow, or someone who marries somebody who's a Gibonite. it makes a whole long list. And at the end of the list, it says, that "this one who engages with forbidden intercourse, according to the Torah and cannot join in marriage with that person. In that situation, the child goes after the mother." So if you if you hold in your mind, the situation of Zelophehad's daughters where they were in a situation where it could not continue through that the males. So it had to be tweaked to go through the females, (and of course, this is not the place to have a very deep textual understanding of the text). But what the text actually is saying that any case where the Kiddushin the marriage cannot be fulfilled, such as marriage with a non Jew, in that case, the child goes after the mother. And so this is absolutely radical for us, because we seem to believe that in every instance Judaism goes through the mother, where the Mishnah is saying that similar to the case of Zelophehad's daughter that was an exception with extenuating circumstances. So too Matrolinear descent, is based on extenuating circumstance. And now I'll paint it in much more social context. A girl gets raped. And she's not accepted by the the Canaanites or whatever. And rather than have her not affiliated with anybody, the Rabbis say your child is yours, and it's Jewish. And that, to me is the clear reading of this text. So rabbi, what is your sense of the history of this unquestionable belief that we seem to have that Judaism in all cases goes after the mother?
Adam Mintz
Yeah, so that is of course, fascinating. Now, you have to believe that the reason for matrilineal descent goes back Geoffrey is something you said at the beginning. And that is about being practical. And that is you always know who the mother is, you don't always know who the father is. Right? That's a very important consideration. So if you had to determine what the lineage is, I know what the lineage to the mother is. I don't necessarily know what the lineage who the father is. So therefore, the default seems to be that you go through the mother matrilineal rather than patrilineal. descent.
Geoffrey Stern
So I think that that's an explanation that I've heard before, and clearly, correct me if I'm wrong, but when somebody is, God forbid, sick, and we make a prayer for them for the reason that you just raised we say it after the mother because we know who the mother is. So there's no question that there was a strong basis for your argument. Alternatively, you cannot say that passing on one's tribal affiliation is meaningless. So, if in fact, we are willing to overlook this surety that we get from the mother when it comes to all sorts of things inheritance law, tribal affiliation, one could ask, why was there this disconnect for being Jewish? And of course, you could argue, well your religion is much more important. But I would argue that while it's a good argument that you're making, it's clear from this text, that When the rabbi's instituted this situation or instance of matrilineal descent, it was for this specific instance. And I just want to say that when I grew up and the Reform movement came out, and said that they were willing to accept patrilineal descent meaning to say that in Reformed Judaism, I think I'm correct in saying that whether your father is Jewish or your mother is Jewish, if one of the parents is Jewish, the kid is Jewish. We all went up in arms, we said that they were going to rip Judaism apart, and so forth and so on. It was a higher bar then when they said, you know, maybe you can light a fire on Shabbat or something. When I did some research, I found and it blew me away that the Reform movement actually wrote a traditional responsa. And in their responsa, they quoted the piece of Mishnah that I just said, and one other, and they said, "the report offers a sociological interpretation of the reason for matrilineal descent. In illicit unions, the woman with a child had no recourse but to return to her own people." So it's amazing to me, number one, I have to give credit to the Reform movement for actually going to the trouble of writing a traditional responsa. But I also believe that they were saying something that, just as the case of Zelophehad's daughters, a social situation prompted us prompted God prompted Moses his spokesman to make a change. In the case of matrilineal descent, it was a beautiful thing, and it stayed. But it somehow totally eclipsed, the more natural, the more widespread patrilineal descent and I was a member of Rabbi Riskin's, synagogue, Lincoln Square at that time, and I remember and I've googled articles that he wrote against these Reform rabbis. Fast forward 30 years, Rabbi Riskin is now living in Israel. And an Israeli soldier whose parents came from the Soviet Union, was tragically killed in battle. And his name was Lev Pascale. And he died in the Lebanon War. And he was about to be buried in the military cemetery, which is a Jewish cemetery. And all of a sudden, the military rabbi said no, his mother was not Jewish, he cannot be buried. And unlike a situation that might have occurred like this, in any other town or instance, in Israel, when it came out to the public, the public universally around Israel said here is a man, a young boy who gave his life for the State of Israel. And you are trying to deny him the the ability to be buried in the military cemetery. And at that point, rabbis, such as Rabbi Riskin, started to delve into the texts, and lo and behold, they started to come up with arguments that there is something to patrilineal descent, I'm going to stop before I actually start bringing some of the arguments. But rabbi, where were you in this in this argument? Is this something that is dynamic at this point, is this is there some movement here?
Adam Mintz
So I mean, that story that Rabbi Riskin story is a very powerful story. I mean, I think the answer is, is it dynamics? The answer is, yes, it's dynamic. But I wanted to go back, Geoffrey, to how you started. And you said that when you were a member of Lincoln Square Synagogue, and the Reform movement said that they accept either patrilineal or matrilineal descent that everybody was up in arms. The reason they were up in arms is because they were afraid that all of a sudden, we were defining Judaism differently for different groups of people means you could be Reformly Jewish, but not Conservative or Orthodox Jewish, and they became very much afraid of that. That at the very least the definition of what it means to be Jewish needs to be standard for everybody. So I think that even though of course, what Rabbi Riskin found out and the fact that there is room for patrilineal descent, but I think the idea that when you go out on a date, you have to wonder, are you Jewish, according to the Reform movement, Jewish according to the Conservative movement, or Jewish according to the Orthodox movement, I think makes it complicated. Doesn't mean it's impossible, and maybe long term. American diaspora Judaism is gonna have to address these issues, because these are the issues that have to be talked about by everybody. Because we can't have a situation where you're Jewish for one and not Jewish for another.
Peter Robins
Can I ask a question here?
Geoffrey Stern
Of course,
Peter Robins
what is the definition of a Jew under the Law of Return?
Geoffrey Stern
I believe it's one grandparent. And I'll go further than that, and say that the State of Israel took the same law as l'havdil eleph havadlot, Hitler took. Hitler would kill you if you had one Jewish grandparent. And I don't know if there's a connection or not, but the State of Israel would accept you if you have one Jewish grandparent.
Peter Robins
Why wouldn't the religion take the same point of view?
Geoffrey Stern
Well, because the religion Church and State in Israel are divided and close at the same time. And of course, the religion follows the halakhic, the legal thinking, and one has to formulate a legal argument. So we only have a few more minutes. Let me just tell you what Rabbi Riskin came up with, he found that the first Sephardic Chief Rabbi of Israel, made the following ruling. He said, if your father is Jewish, and your mother is not, you can't look at that person the way you would look at someone who had no connection to Judaism at all. And when that person decides to come back, "Hozer haYeled l'ikar zaro" that child is coming back .... he's coming home. And so unlike when someone converts, they have to go through all these classes. And they have to agree to accept all the laws and all of that. This rabbi said, it's different. And of course, Rabbi Riskin said, and that is the way it should be in Israel for a soldier, but it doesn't work in the diaspora. The point that I'm trying to make is, this is an area like any area in Judaism, that you can ask questions, and you can get surprising answers. And I think that, ultimately, is the lesson that we have to learn from the daughters of Zelophehad. And more to the point we don't ask just intellectual questions, but questions that affect people's lives. And I think in with regard to intermarriage, clearly, in terms of American Jews, the new Pew study came out. And if you take away the Orthodox community, 75% of the Jewish community is now inter-marrying. But more than a point, more than 50% of them are raising their children in some level of Judaism. So I think in terms of sustainability of our people, but also the human issue, the social issue we are entitled to ask these questions, to have these discussions, and to know that there is never a black and white answer, and that is my takeaway from the Zelophehad.
Adam Mintz
Thank you. That was really a very good takeaway. I thought this was a great conversation. Thank you, Geoffrey, something to think about for all of us. Shabbat Shalom, everybody. Happy July 4th. I look forward to seeing everybody next week.
Geoffrey Stern
You got it ... Shabbat Shalom. Thanks for joining.
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse Friday June 25th as they identify the miracle of the Talking Ass as a singular gratuitous miracle which serves as neither a sign or lesson, punishes the wicked or provides a victory to the children of Israel. We use this as an excuse to explore the refreshingly ambivalent attitude of the Torah and Rabbinic Judaism to miracles.
Link to Sefaria Source Sheet here: www.sefaria.org/sheets/331556
Transcript:
Geoffrey Stern
Welcome to Madlik on clubhouse every Friday at four Eastern. This week's parsha is Balak, which is about a Moabite king who looks out into the desert and sees the children of Israel on their way about to cross over his country on the way to the promised land. And he is concerned he's scared. The actual word that is used for him being scared is "vayagar", which is interesting, because it's the same root as the word for stranger. But fear of the stranger we'll leave for another time. What interests me today is that he sent out some messengers to hire a Moabite prophet named Balaam. And the messengers go to this Balaam and ask him to curse the Jewish people. And Balaam says, Well, I have to sleep on it. And he truly speaks to the Lord our God that night. And the Lord says, You can't curse these people, they are blessed. And he goes back and forth with these messengers, and they offer him more and more money. So he takes another night. And finally he cajoled the Lord into letting him go to at least meet with the King Balak. And on the way there, he's riding his donkey, and his donkey sees an angel at the end of the road, maybe they were on a bridge. And much like the story of the Black Beauty, the donkey turns to the side, and Bilaam whips the donkey. The donkey sees the angel again turns to the other side, this time he scrapes the leg of Bilaam. And now Bilaam is really angry and hits her again. And finally "the Lord opened the ass's mouth. And she said to Balaam, what have I done to you that you have beaten me these three times? Balaam says to the ass, you have made a mockery of me. If I had a sword with me, I'd kill you. And the ass said to Balaam Look, I am the ass that you have been riding all along until this day, have I been in the habit of doing this to you? And he answered No." And so we have a story of a donkey talking. And what is remarkable to me is that it's just part of the story. Bilaam doesn't doesn't say: "Wow, I didn't know that you could talk" he responds to the donkey. And so I'd like to use this as an opportunity to understand and to explore the function, the place, the value of miracles, in religion in general, and in the Jewish and ancient Isralite traditions in particular. And we will explore all the different variations of miracles that appear in the in the text. But to me, this is striking in just kind of being gratuitous. Being there, for no good reason could have been the angel himself talking to Bilaam. So the question that I raise is what is the function of the donkey in this story. And then in general, what is the place of the miraculous in Judaism
Adam Mintz
The Torah is full of miracles, the receiving of the Torah, the splitting of the Red Sea and the 10 plagues. What's interesting is talking animals. The only other talking animal, that we have is the snake at the beginning of the Torah, where the snake talks to Eve. And it's fadinating to compare the snake talking to Eve to the donkey, talking to Bilaam. First of all, it's interesting about the choice of animals. Now I'm not an animal person. So to me, all animals are the same. So I don't know why in one case, you choose to snake and in the other case you choose a donkey, just choose one animal so I don't understand why there's a different type of animal. But look at the first case of the animal speaking, the snake tries to trick Eve. The second time, the donkey actually tells the truth to Bilaam. What's the purpose of the animal speaking, both to trick Eve and to tell the truth to Bilaam. I find that to be an interesting question.
Geoffrey Stern
I like your comparison. I would like to kind of broaden the question not so much of animals speaking, but of nature being changed of breaking the rules of nature. But I do think that even if you look at it from that point of view, there are different types of miracles that we see in the Bible. There are miraculous salvations, the splitting of the sea of Reeds. Clearly, when this small band of Jews wins a battle, that's a miracle. But it's a functional miracle. And there are other miracles that we'll explore today. But to me, what strikes me about maybe both of these miracles, besides the fact that there are animals talking is it almost seems like it's gratuitous? You know, you sometimes you see a movie, and you say, you know, they didn't need that sex scene, it was a gratuitous sex scene. In this case, I don't think you really needed the donkey to talk, I think that maybe the angel could have spoken. It almost doesn't seem to be inherent in the story in the case of the snake. So the snake really was tempting Eve. And of course, this was very early on, in the kind of the segmentation of the animal world and the human world. So you can even make a case that maybe the snake sheds its skin, so it's immortal, or it was immortal in the old world. Oreven better yet. Let me try this distinction between the snake and the donkey. This snake could very easily be associated with Satan. And the donkey, as you said, was speaking from a good place, from God. It doesn't surprise us. If Satan goes.... the evil in the world goes and breaks the rules. But the question of why this donkey spoke of why we needed it to speak. And is it unique from that point of view, from our point of view of gratuitous miracles, if you will? What do you do about that distinction?
Adam Mintz
That's a great question. So the snake has a job, because the snake is there to trick Eve. And maybe you needed something out of the ordinary, to trick Eve. She wasn't going to be tricked in a normal way. But what role did the donkey play? Actually, Geoffrey, you can ask in a more basic question, just in the story of this week's parsha. What role does the donkey play? If you were to delete the word donkey, would it change the story at all?
Geoffrey Stern
I totally agree. And that's why I you can call it superfluous. You can call it gratuitous. And it doesn't even seem to get the reaction one would expect. Bilaam doesn't say oh, my God, a talking donkey! He just answers it. He says you've made a fool of me. Like he talks to donkeys every day. So I want to suggest that this is not strange only to us. There is a passage in Pirke Avot (The Ethics of the Fathers) that talks about 10 things being created on the eve of the first Shabbat right after creation had been finished, at twilight, Ben Hashmashot. And it lists a bunch of miracles. It says the mouth of the earth which I assume is a relationship to Korach, the mouth of the well. The mouth of the donkey which is a clear association with the the donkey in our story. The rainbow the manna, the staff of Moses, I guess when he was in front of the magicians in Egypt. And the bottom line of it is this mishnah in Avot. First, 2nd, 3rd Century AD has a problem with miracles. And what it is ultimately saying unless I'm reading it wrong, is that every time one of these miracles happened, it's almost like an algorithm or a hack written into creation. So that donkeys did not speak. But somehow they threw a little piece of code into the donkey heritage that at that moment on that bridge that donkey was going to speak and it's far fetched, but what's not far fetched is they're clear unhappiness and unwillingness to accept that the rules of nature change. And what makes that remarkable to me is, these are rabbis, these are members of a religion, and is not religion based on breaking the laws of nature on a higher authority ..... on miracles? To me, this bias against changing the world and for nature, and the rules of nature is very impressive. What's your read of this Mishnah?
Adam Mintz
I think I want to take it back for a minute. It says here that these things were created Ben Hashmashot. What do you make of that? They were created in the last moments of Friday? It's almost as if they're not part of the normal creation. They were snuck in at the last minute when nobody was looking. Right? That's the first question you have to ask. It's telling you that they don't quite fit into nature. But what is the idea of Ben Hashmashot?
Geoffrey Stern
To me, it's, as you say, the code was written, the the product was created. And somebody in this case God threw in a few secret back, (if I was a programmer, I would know the right word). But back codes, that at the precise moment that they were necessary, they would do what was needed to be done. But ultimately, it was pre ordained, it almost smells like either God cannot or will not make changes in the laws of nature besides these 10 or 11 changes. That to me is what is impressive, but the hashmashot, the Twilight part of it is, this is a fuzzy area. This is whether it's an afterthought, or a little tweak, or Twinkle, I don't know.
Adam Mintz
Good. I think that that's good. But I think that what we're actually doing Geoffrey, logging up all of the oddities of this talking donkey. When he was created, what he did, how was he different than the snake? Right? And it's all gratuitous. It's not necessary. So not only does the Torah make a big fuss about something that doesn't need such a big fuss, but the rabbi's seem to make a big fuss about something that doesn't need such a big fuss does not interest you also?
Geoffrey Stern
Well, well, it does. I mean, it's hard to say that the Manna was gratuitous. So I don't think that they are lined up necessarily against gratuitous stuff. But what they are saying is it's a very strong, I would say, an powerful expression of the rabbi's dedication and commitment to the laws of nature, that we do not live in an arbitrary world where either God or other spiritual forces can play with it. And I think that you could actually make a case that this kind of general approach, which I would love to characterized as being either neutral towards miracles, or almost anti miracles, led to great scientists coming out of our tradition, such as my Mainmonides, who clearly picks up on this discussion in many of his writings. Who believes that there is a science out there, there are laws of physics and laws of chemistry and all that, it's not arbitrary. It's like Einstein said, "God does not play dice with the universe". So that's on a scientific level. But even on a spiritual level, it seems to me they didn't get a rise from the miraculous. And in fact, they had to go out of their way to come up with this theory, to downplay the miraculous and from a spiritual community and from a 2000 plus year old religion, whether now but certainly in the past where we lived in a magical world and there was magical thinking and many times it was associated with religion, they didn't seem to buy into it, and that's what strikes me as so interesting.
Adam Mintz
Good, I like that. I like that connection to Maimonides. This is really the clash between miracles and science. This is how you started when you asked me, are there miracles? And the answer is, yes, there are miracles. But how do you explain miracles in the light of science? Now, Geoffrey, when you talk about miracles? Would you say that this story of the talking donkey is like the splitting of the sea?
Geoffrey Stern
So I think not. And that's why I said, I find the story of the talking donkey unique because it's gratuitous....I was going to kind of parse different types of miracles that are in the Torah, you know, they say that Eskimos have 100 words for snow. Well, it seems to me the rabbi's have a bunch of words for the miraculous. There's a word called an "Ote" a sign. But again, it's not gratuitous, because we call Shabbat, an "Ote" a sign We call Tephilin, an "Ote" that you put on your arms. And from that perspective, where it was a change that caught your attention, the change was not significant because of the change, it was significant because it was a symbol, it was a sign. Another word that's used is a "Mofet" and that goes more in terms of things that are changes in nature, like the 10 plagues, like the splitting of the Red Sea, that inflicted God's wrath or power on sinners, I guess you could include with that. Even Korach, although we're going to get a second to the word use there (Nes). But again, these were very practical, and they didn't necessarily have to be impossible, they might have been improbable. This splitting of the Red Sea is is something that was miraculous because it came at the right time, at the right instant, but it could be explained. All of the magicians were able to explain everything that Moses did with the staff, which was included in our list. So besides "Mofet" and "Ote". The other one is "nes", which is I think a common word for miracles.
Adam Mintz
But what does the word "nes" mean? "Nes" is like a flag a marker.
Geoffrey Stern
It is but if you recall, when God tested Abraham before the the sacrifice of Isaac before the Akeda, it said "v'Hashem Nisa et Avraham", he tested him and Nachmanidies explains that it is a flag it is something that rises up, but it's also a test. In other words, it's an opportunity for us to reveal our strength or power, our perseverance. And there were more words for miracles and we'll get to them in a second. But for these most common words are symbolic, as much as they are changing nature. They are morally, ethically, spiritually edifying in case of testing Abraham, and being able to survive the test. So, again, I do think there is an issue of a gratuitous miracle. And the funny thing here is that it doesn't even refer to Bilaam's donkey talking as a miracle. It's so funny that it just kind of puts it into the narrative without making any changes. But again, if we're using this as an excuse to explore the biblical version of miracles, it too says with the rabbies, I think, very little value for gratuitous miracles. There's no point just impressing people, by changing nature and saying up there must be a god there must be a spiritual element. The changes in nature are either to protect, to defend, to punish or to edify and to serve as a symbol.
Adam Mintz
Okay, all this is great. Now, I have another question. What do you make about the fact that the Donkey spoke with non Jewish prophet? You think that's significance? Of all the all the ways to use the donkey? Isn't it a funny way to use the donkey?
Geoffrey Stern
I think it's beautiful that the prophetic power of Bilaam the Prophet is also taken for granted. And that teaches me that God speaks to all people. Why in this particular instance, was there a use of a donkey? I don't have an answer for you. What I'm more impressed with is that Bilaam is without any explanation, understood that he can go to bed at night and speak to our Lord, which is his Lord. But I don't have an answer about the donkey being used to speak to him in particular.
Adam Mintz
Now, Michael, I think has jumped up as a speaker.
Geoffrey Stern
which we will always welcome.
Michael Posnik
A question, What does Bilaam learn from that moment? when nature is upside down? What does he actually learn when everything he wants to do? According to his plan and his desires and strategies? What does he learn from something that is completely incomprehensible to him? What changes does that bring about in him?
Geoffrey Stern
If you read the text, his answer to the donkey is the only insight that we get. And what he says is you have made a mockery of me. And this is a parallel with the story of Black Beauty, the horse that saves the life of the rider. These horses and animals that save us, they all seem to get punished. But in this particular case, Bilaam is embarrassed. It almost seems as though he has this ability to be a prophet. He wanted to exploit it for money. He literally wants to do what he's asked to do, but he can't. And now he's embarrassed. And I think it gives us an insight into him. He's not our typical vision of a prophet in terms of being a pure person. He seems to be someone who can tap into these powers, and is able to exploit them. Rabbi what's your feeling?
Adam Mintz
I think Michael, I think you've identified a problem in this text, meaning what is the significance of that piece of the story? I just want to turn it and take some of what Geoffrey said, and some what Michael said. And I want to just pull back a minute, Geoffrey, to what you started with, about miracles. And I want to know where you think this miracle of the donkey speaking, falls in the Torah's kind of List of miracles? Is this a big miracle? Is this kind of, beside the point miracle? You called it gratuitous? That's something else. That has to do with the fact that it's unnecessary? What about in terms of like, changes of nature? Do you think having an animal talk is as big a miracle as splitting of the Read Sea?
Geoffrey Stern
So we're where I'm going, in my mind with this is using the donkey who is for better or worse, a universal symbol of a lowly creature, a creature of labor, a creature that gets no respect a cousin of a horse who is is a beautiful creature. And that kind of is is echoed in Bilaam's comment. You're embarrassing me, you know, maybe if you were a lion or something with more stature. We have to assume the donkey was picked with intentionality. And I think that the message that the donkey is sending, therefore, is very also humble, and down to earth. And I guess I promised that I wouldn't leave everybody in a cliffhanger as to how the whole story turns out. But I do at this point want to say that Bilaam ultimately, his arm is twisted, and he has to deliver some sort of blessing or curse and it turns out to be a blessing. So the blessing that he gives is in every synagogue as you walk in, it's "MaTovu Ohalicha Yaakov, Mishkenotecha Yisrael" "How goodly basically are the tents of Israel, which, again, a tent is as humble a life, pastoral nomadic life as you could ever have. And to me, the whole story is a celebration of the simple things in life if you want to be trite, it's helping us recognize that there's a miracle in the most simple things. So that to me kind of ties together why a donkey was used in this particular situation, and what the takeaway was either from Bilaam or from God through the mouth of Bilaam. Orna, I'd love to hear your thoughts.
Orna Stern
The voice of God that was talking through the donkey because the same way whenever God wants to speak to us and he speaks through animals.... the snake and they are all lowly animals .... the humbleness of God that he talks to us. The message from the snake was beautiful message because that Adam and Eve should leave Gan Eden to go explore the world. And then Moses that he spoke to Pharoah also through the snake. And every miracle that happended like Isaac. The ram that was caught in the tree. It'a all about animals .. the voice of God. The message is so beautiful. It's also for nowadays. "Shevet Achim gam Yachad" We all need to love each other, to respect each other everywhere in this country oin Israel. With anti-semitism and everything.
Adam Mintz
I just want to say Geoffrey, I think it's important to say that, you know, given what happened in Florida this week (A collapse of a 12 story building with 150 souls killed), you think about "Ma tovu Ohalecha Yaakov" the blessing is the most simple thing. Where we live is the most simple thing. But we rely on it. And you see what terrible things can happen in even in the most simple thing that we have.
Geoffrey Stern
Absolutely. You see the images of, of children talking about their parents or grandparents or parents talking about their children. It's it's really just harrowing how this building was pancaked down into rubble. But it does remind you that in the structures that we live our lives and those lives are based relationships. And what I was thinking in terms of this kind of takeaway, in terms of ultimately Bilaam could have been used as a mouthpiece to give any message, but ultimately, the blessing that he gave related to just the simple community of these Bedouin/nomadic Jews in the desert. So I was thinking of another type of statement in the Talmud, I think I might have even quoted it before, where a woman matriarch asks a rabbi, "After God created the world", and I don't give her credit for knowing this, but not only created the world during the seven days of creation, but even during that Twilight period, after you did it all. "What do you do with yourself? Because she obviously understood that God is not changing nature on a regular basis. And the answer for those of you who know the stories is wonderful. And it says that God is making matches "Misadech Sheduchim" he is joining people together. And it's a wonderful story, and it goes on. But it reminded me of this song in Fiddler "Miracles of Miracles, Wonders of Wonders". And if you remember the lyrics to that song, it almost is identical "It says wonders of wonders miracles of miracles, God took a Daniel once again, stood by his side and miracle of miracles, walked him through the lions dead. And it goes down through the walls of Jericho, and it talks about the Red Sea splitting and it talks about every little miracle or large miracle that God did. But he says "but the most miraculous one of all, is that out of a worthless lump of clay. God has made a man of me today" My dad gave me a book called Wonders of Wonders by a Columbia professor. And it talks about everything that went into writing the play. And so I did a little research. And I looked for, were they aware of this midrash that God is misadech shiduchim. And I was surprised that the writers of most of the lyrics were Jews, but were very remote from the Jewish background. And literally, they came up with an idea of miracles. And according to this book, they were in a motel, and they grabbed the Gideon's Bible, and they started looking for miracles to put into lyrics. But to me, they were spot on. And maybe it's because this idea we Jews have that the real miracles in life relate to human beings, to the ability of us to find connections with each other, for the abilities of us to have hope when there should be no hope. Those are the true miracles. And to me, that's what Ma Tovu Ohalecha Yaakov is all about.
Adam Mintz
That's really nice. I like that as an ending. I think that's a beautiful way to end a discussion. You said it was a little light today. I think talking about miracles is not light at all. I think there's a lot of real good substance in here.
Geoffrey Stern
Well, thank you for that. I agree. And I think that the the donkey certainly got his money's worth today, because he triggered this wonderful conversation.
The Red Heifer purifies the defiled and defiles the pure and is universally taken as a commandment that defies reason and logic. According to science, for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction so where's the illogic? Even according to Rabbinic scholars such as Saadia Gaon and modern scholars such as Jacob Milgrom there is nothing unreasonable about this enigma. So why is the ḥoq of the Red Heifer so troubling. Why does it keep God up at night?
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/330146
Transcript:
Geoffrey Stern
So welcome, one and all, to Madlik, another week of disruptive Torah. And this week the parsha is parshat Chukat, which we're going to find out what it means but Chukat is "the law". And the law that is under discussion is the law of the red heifer. And those of you who know your Old Testament know that the laws of purity are a big feature of biblical Judaism, temple Judaism, and those laws of purity relate mostly to impurity that is gotten from death or anything to do with death. And the red heifer is, as we are told in Numbers, 19 is the antidote. And what what happens is the priest takes this pure red heifer that has never carried a yoke and slaughters it, and sprinkles the blood and then mixes the ashes, with some water and hissop and cedar wood, in Crimson stuff. And then it is set aside and used to sprinkle miraculously, on those people who have come into contact with death. And that should be a pretty straightforward thing. It might sound very strange to us moderns but many things in the temple in terms of a sacrificial cult sounds strange. But for some reason, and that's what the subject matter of today is, this one is singled out as being stranger than strange. And therefore, the focus is on the word that God says, numbers 19:2 this is the ritual law that the Lord has commanded zote chukat hatorah, and all of the commentators and we are going to struggle with the fact that the the sense, this is a strange Chok. This is the showcase, the poster child of a law that has no rationale, in fact, is a irrational. And you have to obey, because God commanded it. And I should add the key point that the Cohen who goes ahead and prepares the sacrifice of the red heifer, and his helpmate, who cleans his garments, anybody involved in the preparation of this elixir, who is going to take away the impurity of death, himself becomes impure. And so I'm going to open it up to discussion. Rabbi, what about this struck all of the commentators as so strange that it had to be singled out as an example of a law that has no logic?
Adam Mintz
So that that is such an interesting question, the idea of a chok, of a law that has no logic, the idea that the same thing that makes people pure, make people impure, I think really bothered the rabbi's. They could not get their arms around that. Because basically, purity and impurity are opposites. So how was it possible that the very same thing that can make you pure can also make you impure? I think that really bothered the rabbis. And I think that that's what led them to call this thing of Chok. By the way, the word Chioke in the Torah doesn't always mean something that you can't understand. Sometimes it just means a law. So Para Aduma the red heifer is really a unique situation, a unique case. And it's this idea, this kind of confusion between purity and impurity. And I think that's a key term, the idea of confusion.
Geoffrey Stern
So first of all, I mean, I love the fact that you talk about a confusion, but what came to my mind and I wasn't actually even going to talk about this is isn't there a fine line between the profane and the pure. In other words, whether we've talked about it before the pride of following God's laws and the pride in oneself, you know, a harlto a temple harlot is called the Kadesha which comes from the same word as Kadosh. I mean, you could you could say, well, doesn't this happen all the time that something that is close to pure doesn't quite make it actually becomes profane. But if we look at the commentators like Rashi is the first one, he doesn't seem to imply that it was troubling so much to the rabbi's, as it was to our detractors. He says, Because Satan and the nations of the world taunt Israel saying, What is this commandment? And what reason is there for it? On this account, we say it's a Chok that God using the word Choke, all the commentary say it's also something that you kind of niche into stone you Chok Chaakti? I have kind of carved this this rule. It's not for you to question. But do you think there's an aspect of this that isn't so much that it was troubling to the rabbis, as it was troubling, or it was a it was a point of polemical discussion where people would come to the Jews? And say, this thing is so strange, your religion makes no sense.
Adam Mintz
I'm thinking about that for a minute. You think that maybe we're worried about what other people will say about us? Do you think that generally, Torah is worried about what other people will say about us? You know,
Geoffrey Stern
You wouldn't think so.
Adam Mintz
I'm surprised that you suggested that because I wouldn't have thought so.
Geoffrey Stern
So, I mean, if you look at bamidbar rabbah, which is another source in the source sheet, it says a Gentile asked Rabbi Yohanan Ben zakkai. These rituals you do they seem like witchcraft, you bring a heifer burn it, take it's ashes. And if you read that whole thing, his thing is not so much that something that is impure becomes pure and defiles the the person who's doing it, he seems to be bothered by sprinkling some water and puff, you're instantaneously pure. So there were two instances in the commentaries. Both of them have this polemical aspect to it. And that's why I don't think I came up with it on my own. I was struck by that myself, when I was looking at the sources, and before I let you respond, do the rabbi's care what the nation say? I think, yes, there's a verse in Deuteronomy that says "Ki hi Chochmatchem ubinatchem b'enai hagoyim", that the Torah is the wisdom of the Jews in the eyes of the nations. The amount of times that Moses argues with God, when God's ready to blot out the Jews. And he goes, God, what's everybody gonna say? You took us out of Egypt, and you killed these people. So I do think there is a strong element what will the goyim say, certainly in the discussion about this law, but in general,
Adam Mintz
You see, I guess my question is like this, Are we worried about what the goyim will say? Or is that just a midrashic trick to kind of emphasize a problem that we have with these laws? And we kind of then put it in the mouths of the goyim. I don't know how much difference that makes, but I'm just raising that as a possibility.
Geoffrey Stern
When we say what will the goyim think we're really speaking like, Jews who have lived in exile for 2000 years? I don't think that would be fair for this young movement of Jews in the desert. But they did feel that they had a movement I believe, and the rabbi's too, we're in a world where maybe Judaism already because it was parleying itself as the believer in this one invisible God, maybe it was even taken to a higher standard. But in any case, there seems to be a question of the benchmark, the level of Judaism and does this somehow conflict with it. And I think you touched upon that by saying, we like to have an ideology we like to have a religion that is squeaky clean, everything fits into it's place. And this is not so not so understandable. I think the other aspect of it that came up in my research is what big of a problem it is. And this, of course, is the famous Pesikta, which says that Moses goes up into the heights of heaven. You know, there are a few Midrashim that say, what did Moses do 40 days and 40 nights when he was up in heaven. And so here is one of the renderings, he goes up and he sees the Holy One, blessed be he is engaged in the study of the Torah. And he's studying the passage of the red heifer, citing a law in the name of the sage who stated it. And Moses said before ahim: Master of the Universe, worlds above and worlds below are in your domain, yet you sit and cite a law ascribed to flesh and blood. And Michael, I know you love the drama and you love the theater of the Torah. This is a play, I think, of going up to heaven and seeing God number one studying man's Torah. Well, is it man's Torah? It was Torah that God wrote and gave to man. But here he is engaged in the study of the red heifer. It, so to speak, keeps God up at night. What do we make of that? And either a theological level or in terms of the discussion that we're having?
Adam Mintz
I want to just add to that question, Geoffrey. Why does the heifer have to be red? I mean, does that seem significant? Is it just because a red heifer is so rare? So therefore, it wants to show you that you have to go out of your way to find the red heifer? Is that what it's about? Or is there something deeper in there?
Geoffrey Stern
I mean, last week, I said that Techelet, it was the Pantone color of Judaism. And now this week we're discussing red. In my mind anyway, this has to do with life and death, there's no question about it. And one is using the red have to take away whatever it is that death tarnishes us with; the impurity that we get from death. And so in my mind, whether it's the blood or whether it's the color of the heifer itself, that's my natural association was with the blood. But again, the fact that it impurifies the pure, it's the fact that you take these drops of water, and magically make somebody pure. And then there's the other element, which is that it's outside of the temple. All of those three things, you almost get the sense that this is a solution, in search of a problem. It's almost as though there's something strange about this law, what is it? It keeps God up at night? the nations of the world taunt us with it? The problem of the problem is almost harder than the problem itself. To me, that's what kind of struck me.
Adam Mintz
Well, I mean, to rephrase what you just said, Geoffrey, it seems like the Torah makes the red heifer a lot more complicated than it has to be. We could accomplish the same thing, by having a ritual that was much more direct, and much more simple. Why are rituals generally complicated? You know, you think about the Pascal Lamb, you have to put the blood on the door post, you have to eat the whole thing. There are a lot of details in these sacrificial rituals. You think that's important, or you think that's just the way it was?
Geoffrey Stern
Michael, what are your thoughts?
Michael Posnik
My thought right know is this. I find that this question of the red heifer with all the energy we have to try to quote "figure it out", is an opportunity for a little humility. Certain things we say we understand, they seem to fit in with the entire system, we're content about that, but here is the exception, which in a certain way, proves the rule. And so I would say that it's not to be solved in that sense, because it is outside the possibility of solution, it is a way of acknowledging the fact that there is a space is a place for us to not know. And to either just accept or to surrender to it, or to let it go. So that's my thought right now, it's not to solve the problem. It's simply to say, Alright, we'll make an effort. But it's a place where I have to surrender what I think I know what my mind thinks it knows. So that's, that's my thoughts are right now. I like the fact that it's a puzzle not to be solved. No matter how hard you bang your head against the wall, it's not going to be solved. You have to surrender to it, if you want to.
Adam Mintz
Definitely a nice explanation, that the complexity is a reflection of the need to surrender. If we understood it, there wouldn't be as much surrender because what you understand you don't surrender to you understand it, but if you don't understand it, then you have to surrender I like that a lot.
Michael Posnik
You want to understand everything? N
Adam Mintz
No, I like that.
Geoffrey Stern
So I would like to play the devil's advocate a little bit and continue along the trend that I was looking at is that the problem of the Red Heifer is not so apparent and that we might be misguided in in what we understand the problem to be. For instance, if we look at the Law of Conservation of Matter for every reaction, there is an equal and opposite counteraction. Saadia Gaon says I don't get what is so complex about this whole rule. He says that you know, heat can make certain foodstuffs soft, but you boil an egg, it gets hard. Food can be beneficial to someone who's hungry and detrimental to someone who's already eaten a meal. Certainly medicine can benefit the sick and hurt the healthy. The world is full of things that can affect different people in different ways. He doesn't use this example but you know, it's a known saying in the Torah that for those who are zocher (privledged), the Torah is a sam hachaim It's a medicine of life. And for those who are not zocher, it's a som haMavet. It's, it's a poison, we can study the same text, we can be exposed to the same revelation, and we can take away from it. Two different opposing things. And I think that's an amazing, beautiful lesson. Maybe it's sophisticated enough to become a little bit of a mystery. And something that is not obvious at first glance. We were talking a little bit before we started today, I'm reminded of the wonderful expression that's attributed to pretty much everyone out there of comforting the afflicted and afflicting the comfortable, you know, is that the role of a leader of a Rabbi of a journalist so I think that at a certain level, it's it's not necessarily something that is so far beyond our ability to fathom, it's certainly not something that would keep us awake at night in terms of something being bothersome. It's a sophisticated point of the world that it means different things to different people, that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. And so I just wonder, what is it that Michael or you Rabbi feel, is so complex about this message that something can make one person impure and the other pure?
Michael Posnik
Just I was thinking before about wine, for example, something really simple even though we don't understand what it is exactly. You can use wine for purity and you can use wine for impurity. And then I was thinking about language, Geoffrey, we can use this gift of language to bring death to people we can embarrass and shame people which I think the Talmud equates with killing someone really and we can use language as we are here to uplift and nourish and raise. In that sense, the ambiguity or the complexity is in a certain way, practically how it's used. I don't know if this relates exactly to the question of the heifer. But it strikes me that we have a certain responsibility to use what we have, in an appropriate way, if we know that there's an appropriate way. So that's, what comes up for me. I'm not, I'm not seduced by what you call complexity. I think, as I said before, I think recalling complexity is just something that the mind says, Oh, this is complex, because I don't understand it. I'm perfectly happy to not understand. And then I have a choice where as I say, whether to do it or not do it. So that that's where I'm coming from today.
Geoffrey Stern
I love the fact that you brought it back to death, and you talked about, you know, sometimes the stakes are high. And if you embarrass somebody, the Talmud says it is like killing him. And so I think that, to me, the secret of the the challenge of the Parah Adumah cannot be far away from the challenge of death itself. And I don't want to raise the stakes too high. But to me, one of the clues is in a piece of Talmud, that ends the story of the Parah Aduma. And the next story that follows the story of the parah Aduma, is the death of Miriam. And Rabbi Ami says, Why was the Torah portion that describes the death of Miriam juxtaposed to the portion dealing with the red heifer to tell you just as the red heifer atones for sin, so too the death of the righteous atones for sin, and it seems to me that what is keeping kivi'yachol, as if to say, God up at night, and what is making the challenge here is that in the world that the Torah is operating in, there seems to be this inextricable connection between salvation and death. So that it comes out of a world where there was child sacrifice, and obviously, it has a whole life of sacrifice itself in the temple. And somehow, if you've sinned to redeem yourself, something has to be killed. And getting back to your point, Rabbi Adam, about the question of the red here, it seems that in order this whole notion that the death of the righteous atones, I think we're really at a crossroads here, that both Judaism and Christianity at the same moment that that Roman was saying, this sounds crazy. This sounds strange was struggling with how do you get salvation? Do you need someone to die in order for someone else to live? And you know, there are books that have been written lately. Jon Levinson wrote a whole book about the idea of the death of the son in Old Testament as opposed to only in Christianity. He says, this didn't come up [out of no where] the idea that a God or righteioous person has to die, in order for salvation to be reached. And he traces it through the Akeda, the sacrifice of Isaac. But the idea again, that someone has to become tuma, in order for someone else to become tahur. It's not so much just a kind of cognitive or an intellectual question or mystery. It's something that really hurts home. There's so much in religion in general, but certainly Old Testament Judeo-Christian religion, about this need for something bad to happen in order for something good to happen, whether it's "ha zorim bedima brina yikzaru" (You plant in tears and reep in joy) or whether it's that a generation has to die in order for a new generation to go into the promised land. That's what I kind of saw as the real challenge here. It wasn't the intellectual inability to understand how some things can become pure and some things impure. But it was like this Gordian knot between the necessity for your purity to come at the expense of somebody else's impurity. That's kind of what struck me. And that I will agree with you, Michael, that is a mystery that does not have a solution. I'd like to break the knot. But it seems to somehow be written deeply into our DNA.
Michael Posnik
That's really beautiful, about the dynamic of what we call life and death. And their relationship, and whether they're interdependent on one another, or they simply happen, we witness it, and try to see the connections between these things. You say God was up studying this passage, he might have been enjoying himself. Just really having finding pleasure in something that becomes a poem, rather than a piece of text, or a piece of text. He might have just enjoying the wonderful conundrum of that. The unknowability of it, still stay with that.
Adam Mintz
Complexity is what makes it so exciting.
Michael Posnik
You like it!
Adam Mintz
The complexity is what gives it meaning. If it's not complex, it doesn't really have meaning. If it's too simple, it doesn't have real meaning. An interesting idea, Geoffrey. I mean, from my perspective, if you look at the word Chok, and you know, you can look at any lexicon and it will tell you every word how it's used throughout. I think the most common usage for it is that it is something that is written in stone. It's a law of nature. In Jeremiah, it talks about Chukat Yoreach ve'kochavim" the law of the moon in the stars. If you look at other places, Kings "B'chukat haGoyim", these were established rules. And my sense is here that the tension here the thing that intrigues us so much, and intrigued the rabbis and intrigued those who were polemisizing with them, is how can you break this? How can you change this, and in a sense to me, it wasn't simply that God was studying the Torah. And I don't see any reason why he wasn't enjoying himself. It doesn't say he was upset. But he was in studying the Torah. And he was studying it because there was going to be some sage, because he was studying the Torah of man. So he wasn't studying what was written in His Torah, but the Oral Tradition that came out of it, and, and to me, it's almost as though the mystery the puzzle of this Red Heifer this Chok that seems to be written in stone. I'm not sure what great sage he was referring to. I would like to think that it was Rabbi Akiva. And Rabbi Akiva at a certain point says something that is sung from the top of one's lungs at L'og B'Omer It's considered a very kabalistic thing, but it's a beautiful thing that he said. And Rabbi Akiva said, How fortunate Aae you Israel before whom you are purified? And who purifies you? It is your Father in heaven, and I will sprinkle purifying waters upon you and you shall be purified. And he says, "Ma Mikveh Metahir et ha Temaim, Af Hakadosh Baruch metahir et Yisrael", just as the ritual bath purifies the impure. So too the Holy One, bless it be he purifies Israel. And from the context that we're studying, it's almost in contradistinction to the red heifer, where the mikveh, for the pure waters of the mikvah do not become impure when one is sprinkled with them. And of course, if God ultimately is the one who purifies us, God does not become impure by purifying us. And I don't know, I don't know if this was all part of the tension at this moment in history, where the temple was destroyed. were, theyre were new possibilities and there were needs to break out of the old mold. Because I don't think that either Christianity or Judaism successfully broke out of it. Martyrdom was very big in in Judaism and part of the martyrdom was to bring the salvation. And that's the sad part of it. It's one thing to die because one has to for one's faith, but to do it in order to bring salvation to believe that there has to be a connection between death and giving up one's life in order to bring salvation is what so troubles me. And this Rabbi Akiva beautiful, saying, seems to me to point at a possible way out.? A possible way out of what? Of the complexity.
Geoffrey Stern
His model, if you look at it, from the perspective of our discussion, does not have anything that is impurified by purification. I think if you look at this saying that it says how fortunate are you Israel, to know who purifies you, and the idea is that you can be purified, you can have salvation, without the need for whether it's the Egel Arufah, the red heifer, but also this cycle, this Gordian knot, of sacrifice and of death in order to to create the potential for life. It kind of came to me as I was reading over this and saw this the saying of Miriam's death and the death of a tzadikim could bring life. And knowing even that Rabi Akiva himself was a martyr. It gives you another route out. But it also makes you understand, I think, what the mystery, the challenge and what the turmoil of the whole question of the red heifer.
Adam Mintz
I like that a lot. I like turning the complexity of the Red Heifer into martyrdom. I think those are related topics. I think that's really, really interesting. Thank you so much, Geoffrey. This was an amazingly interesting topic today.
Geoffrey Stern
Thank you, Rabbi. Thank you, Michael.
Adam Mintz
Shabbat Shalom, everybody I'm looking forward to next week.
Geoffrey Stern
You got it Shabbat shalom. See, well then.
Parshat Korach, Numbers 16 A “Talit that is wholly blue” (טלית שכולה תכלת); arguably the first fashion statement, has entered popular Jewish and Israeli folklore and culture. We use this popular account of the Korach rebellion to continue our exploration of the Bible’s rejection of class privilege, pride, entitlement, and the corruption that they invite and a democratized vision for Judaism and Israel.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/328788
Transcript:
Geoffrey Stern
So this is our first fashion edition of Madlik. And we are talking about, a story that probably emerged because of two texts sitting next to each other in the Bible. Last week's parsha/portion ends with a law about wearing a four cornered garment with tzitzit; with these little tassel strings that those of you who have seen ultra-Orthodox Jews walking around, and it's sticking out so well can see it because it is an antidote to following one's eyes. It's so that "lo taturu acharae levavchem... that you do not taturu. If the word taturu sounds a little bit like touring or tourist, that's because it's kind of connected to the story before it, which was the spies that we discussed last week, who did make the mistake of following their eyes and not their vision. But this week, on the other side of that obligation to wear the fringes ..... one of those fringes by the way was to be made of "techelet" which is a royal blue dye that we'll get into. But right after that in the Torah, the namesake of this Portion, which is Korah, rebels against Moses and he literally leads a rebellion against Moses. And basically in the Torah text itself. It says that he says you have gone too far. For all the community are holy... all of them. "Rav Lachem" too much for you. "Ki Kol HaEdah, Kulo Kedoshim" Lum kudos him. He makes what seems to be a very democratic argument that says why do we have, when it comes to spirituality when it comes to spiritual leadership.... Why should we have leaders? Are we not all holy? Is not every individual endowed with a spirit of God? But the Midrash Tanhuma spins from this, forgive the pun, a wonderful story. And what it says actually happened was that Korach was inspired by the four cornered garment with that one little thread of blue hanging down. And he said, you know, if you have a garment that is "Kulo Techelet" . That is all made of this beautiful royal blue dye, does it still need fringes to make it kosher, acceptable? And of course, the argument that he was making was that since every Jew is holy, the fabric of the Jewish people is one that is "Kulo Techelet" ... we are all royalty. We are all royal blue. So Moses and Aaron, why are you taking the mantle of leadership? And before I just ask you, Rabbi Adam, what your initial thoughts to this story are, I should mention that the story some stories in the in the Midrash are buried and forgotten. And some have entered the vernacular, have entered folklore that is widely known. And in modern day Hebrew, if you say about somebody that he is "kulo Techelet" or he's a "talit she'Kulo Techelet" , that he is a talit that is all blue. Basically what you're saying about him is that he is holier than thou, that he considers himself holier than thou. So this kind of story has lasted the test of time. What does this story mean to you? And why Rabbi? Do you feel that it has become part of the vernacular?
Adam Mintz
So I mean, I think just to answer your second question, first, it's become part of the vernacular. Because the themes of this story are so familiar and so popular. The idea that "Beged she'kulo Techelit" that you know that you're holier than Thou, that's a criticism is something that's so familiar, people have grabbed on to so I think that the idea here is the following Rabbi Soloveitchik, Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik, who was the rabbi in Boston and the head of the Yeshiva University for over 50 years. He always explained the following. He said, what was the argument? a garment that's completely blue? Why does it need Techelet. the second half of that midrash says, What about a room that is full filled with Jewish books? Does it need a mezuzah? Also the same idea "Bayit Maley Sepharim", does it need s mezuza? Common sense. The answer is Ironically, that yes, it needs in mezuza. And yes, a beged shekulo techelet requires tzitzit, even techelet tzitzit. And that is that not everything in life is common sense. Makes sense all the time. And therefore, Korach comes and he rebels against Moshe. And he says it's not fair. Everybody's holy. Why Moses have you taken the mantle of leadership? The answer is it's not fair says Rabbi Soloveichik. It's not logical. But God wanted a leader of the Jewish people. And therefore, what Rabbi Soloveichik calls this story is the Common Sense Rebellion? And the answer is that not everything is common sense.
Geoffrey Stern
I think that's a fascinating interpretation. And I love the fact that you bought in the other part of the Midrash, which talks about the holy books. And I think what I'd like to explore is that although it seems that Korach is a popularlist and wants to democratize our wonderful religion. The truth is that if you dig down into the story, this was an intertribal discussion, because he wasn't saying that all Jews, all humanity should be able to have access. He literally and this is the fascinating part of the story. He didn't make a hypothetical argument when it came to the talit like he did with the books, he literally went to a tailor. And he had fashioned hundreds of these blue garments, put them on, and they made a statement. But I think it's the first instance of someone who was feigning themselves as a populist, using popularist language, but was actually very elitist. He was arguing that why amongst the tribe of Levi, Aaron and Moses, are you claiming the mantle of leadership, we all have the same exclusive privilege. And we all of us Levis, should be in a power of leadership. So I think, in addition to the common sense argument that he was making, he actually was more couching his argument in common sense. But he actually had a very ulterior motive. And the other thing that I love about bringing in the books of the library, is, you know, when we dance on Simchat Torah, we raise the Torah. And sometimes if you don't have a Torah, you raise a book. And if you don't have a book, you raise a child. And I think the sometimes when you make an argument, the fallacy is embedded in the argument. And in this case, I think the common sense argument is that every Jew every "Pintela Yid" if you will, has holiness. But he was taking advantage of that. And I think, really, what I'd love to explore is the whole concept of Techelit itself, which is actually very expensive, and is literally Royal Blue. It was something that only people with stature and prestige and power could wear. And in a sense, God's commandment of having that one little strand of Royal blue. And worn by every Jew was actually a message that I think, went totally contrary to the intent of Korach if not to, at least the way he packaged it.
Adam Mintz
You find it fascinating that it's royal blue, that it was blue that was special for royalty, and the Korach claimed that that was allowed to be used by everybody. And shouldn't we have certain things that are only allowed to be used by royalty, by special people? I mean, that's an interesting question, Geoffrey, as it relates to today, because the question today is, is there still place for the British royalty?
Geoffrey Stern
I'm gonna, I'm gonna ask Michael to speak in a second. But before I do, I just like to address that point. The point that I was trying to make was that, in the big scheme of things, there was not going to be a priestly caste. And that when God says to the Jewish people, that you should be a "mamlechet Coahinim ve'goy Kadosh", you should be a kingdom of priests. He was literally saying every Jew as white and dowdy and simple as they are, deserves that little thread of royalty. And I think that Korach was trying to, hijack that message. But he wasn't earnest. And I think the reason in my mind in my interpretation that Korach was [considered] a sinner was not because he made the argument, you can call it from common sense, or the argument that all of Israel has a piece in the Torah was that he wasn't being earnest, and that the real lesson of that little thread of blue of roayl blue on every Jew, is that we're all we're all priests. But Michael, I'm interested in hearing what you have to say.
Michael Posnik
I just have a question was rebelling against the God? Or was he rebelling against a political situation?
Adam Mintz
Well, that's such a good question. Maybe it's the same thing.
Michael Posnik
If it's the same thing, then he shouldn't have been punished.
Adam Mintz
Why rebelling against God is bad and rebelling against the political situation that God creates is also bad.
Michael Posnik
God is running. Forgive me, but God is running the political situation. God is in charge of the political side.
Adam Mintz
If Korach is rebelling against God's political situation, then Korach is sinning.
Michael Posnik
He seems to be rebelling against a political situation like we have currently against our king in Israel.
Adam Mintz
Except the king of Israel now has not been appointed by God.
Michael Posnik
Well, you have to ask him about that. I'm going to bow out and listen.
Geoffrey Stern
Well, my sense is that he was rebelling against Moses, and he was using arguments from the Torah that God gave. And so in a sense, he was like saying to Moses, who we all know was the most humble man. But he was saying to him, why Moses, did you take this power for yourself? When the Torah that God gave us says that we can have a kosher garment if it only has one little thread of techelet? And here I am. I'm completely techelet. So I personally would not take from this a mandate against rebellion. Rebellion can be done in in a proper sense. I think a "machloket l'shem Shamayim" an argument that is for the sake of good and heaven is acceptable? I think there are times where, Man, certainly Abraham showed a healthy ability to argue with God. I come back to the fact that this guy Korach was massaging the truth. He was using slogans. He was making himself to look like a popularizer. and he was trying to usurp. And I think to address your point, Michael, he gave a bad name to people who really want to rebel for the right intention. I don't think you can make a case against the Torah and against Rabbinics that they tried to dampen, differences of opinion and argumentation. And I don't think that's the takeaway from this story. But in any case, I do want to come back to this sense of the techelet, which in my mind, is kind of a little bit at the crux of these stories, both stories, the stories of the spies that was laid before it and the one afterwards. And Techelet if you want ... the Pantone color of the Torah, it would be Techelet..... it would be this amazing royal blue. It's the brand identity. And you know, I'm jumping ahead of myself in time and in commentary. But it's no big surprise that when they were heading to the first Zionist convention, somebody said we need a flag. And the flag that they came up with, by their own admission, was modeled after the simple talit, white background with a stripe or two of blue. And again, I think that this concept of the marriage between the white and the blue, between the simple and the pure, and that touch of royalty that we all share, to me is the essence of the argument against actually against Korach and co acts argument that he was a blue blood that he was part of he should have been in the ruling party test as well. That's that's kind of my takeaway. But, but i want to i, and I think maybe we can open that up for a little bit of discussion. It is amazing rabbi, that getting back to what I said earlier about the fact that this story, and this color has gone into the vernacular, that the blue of the tallied the blue of techelet it ended up into the national flag, and that this comment and this conjuring up this image of the story went into the national mindset. it's a really beautiful, I think, commentary on what the rebirth of the Jewish state and the Jewish people was that we kind of rediscovered ourselves, that we want to rule ourselves but what we want to rule democratically, we want to take the Torah, and we want it to belong to everybody. And obviously, the early Zionits were socialists, so it fell into that. What is your you, Michael, you rabbi, anyone in the in the crowd? What is your feeling about the popularization of the concept techelet?
Adam Mintz
I love your image of the techelet. Everybody has a little piece of trechelt. That you think that your blue blood, but the truth is that we're all Blue Bloods. And I think that's an important notion, being God's people make us blue blood a little bit. And you notice, today, some people have gone back to the techelet if you look at their talit, if you look on the strings, the fringes, there are eight strings on the fringes. The techelet is only one of eight. And I think Geoffrey, that's a powerful idea. The idea is that there's just a little bit of techelet in everybody. It's not completely techelet. People who think that they're completely techelet are going to get themselves in trouble.
Geoffrey Stern
I agree. And I think now we're literally on the same page in terms of what the lesson that Korach was trying to hijack, and he gave a bad name, too. But I think what you said about the reemergence of techelet today is a wonderful segue into the next wonderful story that relates to the history of the techelet. Well, first of all where does techelet comr from? it comes from a mollusk it comes from a shellfish, which in itself is amazing. You know, I once heard the reason that we have honey on Rosh Hashanah is because honey comes from a bee who's not kosher. And the idea is, as Shlomo Carlebach used to say, "You never know", "you never know where holiness can come from". So he had this beautiful blue, that sanctifies us all comes from a sea urchin, so to speak, that's number one. But number two, it mysteriously was hidden. Or maybe this is the first case of a species that that died, but in any case, the rabbi's of the Talmud said that we no longer have this blue techelet and that's why for so many 1000s of years, Jews have only had white fringes and you make reference to some modern Jews who believe they have rediscovered thetech elet and are using it again. And I think that's an amazing ecological story. It's it's an amazing story about what actually happened what was behind this disappearance of the mollusk.
Adam Mintz
Yeah, now that that's something, Geoffrey that we'll never know the answer to. But that's such an interesting question. Why did the mollusk disappear? Why was it important that for 2000 years, nobody found techelet? Then all of a sudden with the new State of Israel and with new technology, we all found techelet... I wonder about that. Michael, do have any thoughts about that?
Michael Posnik
I see Korach as the mollusk ..... he himself may have not have been kosher, but he was on to something very big.
Adam Mintz
That's a great littl D'var torah.
Geoffrey Stern
Michael, after all, I've said about Korach trying to usurp the thing you still like Korach? You're still on his side.
Michael Posnik
No, I don't take sides anymore.... I'm too old. But I do appreciate the back and forth. I just think that it's a mixing of worlds in a way. and that was the one I want to ask you, gentlemen, the response of Moses and Aaron to Korach's, rebellion. What do they do? What is their response?
Adam Mintz
Yeah, good question. It's hard to know, what is their response? They kind of take a response from God. And God says to stand up to them, and to prove that Moses and Aaron are the chosen one. But Michael, actually, your question is better than my answer. Cause you want to know what Moses and Aaron were really thinking.
Michael Posnik
I work in the theater. So I always wanted to know, what was the motivation? What was the motiviation behind falling on their faces?
Adam Mintz
Yeah. And I wonder, maybe Moses and Aaron were intimidated.
Michael Posnik
Maybe?
Geoffrey Stern
Well, certainly, if they are what we say they were, which is very humble, it's very hard to stick up for yourself. And, you know, that was a little bit of our discussion last week about getting guts. But I would like to suggest my own theory about how to techelet came to disappear. And I just came across this, this concept when I was young, and after I read the book on Masada. By Yigal Yadin, I read the book on the Bar Kokhba revolt. And this archaeologist slash general, slash Zionist statesman was first and foremost an archaeologist. And he found in a cave in the Judean Desert, a ball of wool that was dyed blue. And of course, his first response was, this is amazing that ....as tough as it was for the zealots. They were keeping the commandments and honoring this wonderful commandment. But being a scientist and being an archaeologist, he sent it to the Dexter Chemical Corporation of New York, and they did some testing and lo and behold, they found out that it was fake techelet... it was Indigo. And this General in a footnote, quotes the Talmud as saying that fake techelet fake die, [was the result of a ] a big black market for it. There was a lot of corruption involved. And he recounts two parts of the Talmud, one that talks about the tests that have to be made because this fake die was so far reaching and available. And the other one was in the section of the Torah, where it talks about, Damn you, if you change the scales, and you cheat people in the list of the great grievances of cheating people. One of them is to provide faketechelet. So my my pet theory is and of course, Yadin says clearly, the zealots thought they had real techelet. So we are, from an archaeological point of view, looking back 1000s of years and finding how how widespread the corruption that was created by and remember, this is roayl blue, it's expensive. Here is a mitzvah not like a piece orf challah, not like a glass of wine, but you need to use something that is roayl and we're giving a little bit of that royalty to every Jew. But guess what, we there's money, there's corruption. And my pet theory, and I have no basis for it was that due to the black market, the rabbis said, we've got to cut the legs out under this, and there is no more techelet. And they hid the techelet. meaning to say that if they had to weigh between putting the onus of purchasing this expensive die, and snuffing out a corrupt market, that was parleying in holy goods. If they had to put that on one side and cancel one of the 613 commandments, they chose to cancel the commandment. And so in fact, techelet was really extinct. And those who have quote unquote, refound it today are in good order, because maybe we we won't have another corrupt market. But that's my pet theory. And it goes so well, I think to the whole flow of the discussion, which is that the whole message of techelet is that it should be accessible to every Jew, that every Jew has that holy thread. And the second that message got tarnished and corrupted. The rabbi's threw it out. What do you think of that?
Adam Mintz
I love that idea. I think that's great. And I think that today, the fact that they found techelet and so to speak the rabbi's or God is giving us a second chance, a chance to all have a piece of that techelet, that royal blue is really a beautiful end to your whole theory.
Geoffrey Stern
Well, thank you, I have to say, personally, I went to what is called a Mussar Yeshiva, it's a whole long story. Maybe we'll deal with it another time. But it was part of a movement started around the same time as the Hasidic movement maybe a few years later, that stress the ethics. And when you came to my yeshiva, it was called Beer Yaakov and the head of it was someone called Rabbi Shlomo Wolbe. If you came into the Yeshiva, and you tucked your tsitsit into your pocket, which was kind of the nice compromise between making sure that your tsitsit could be seen. But on the other hand, you wanted to dress like a Westerner, and you didn't want to stick out too much. If you came to the Yeshiva, and you had those tzitzit in your pocket, and all of a sudden you decided to take them out. Rabbi Wolbe would call you over. And he would say, what happened to you, you became a Tzadik all of a sudden, now you can walk around with you, tzitzit out? And he really in that comment, really touched upon this holier than thou aspect of keeping religion. There's this kind of dialectic, that here, if we keep the laws of God, how do we stop ourselves flaunting it, wearing it on our sleeves, or in this case on the threads of taslit? And so I think really it that also kind of is enamoring to me, the sense of pride, but also humility, that is, is is imbued with this idea of to techelet
Adam Mintz
Well, the idea, Geoffrey, that the very thing that can make us arrogant, is also the thing that makes us humble is a very powerful idea.
Geoffrey Stern
Yup, always, always two sides to the coin. Right?
Adam Mintz
Right. So that the tzitit that go in your pocket, and remind you of God and therefore humble you there, they're flip side of tzitzit that we're flying around, Rabbi Wolbe didn;t like.
Geoffrey Stern
Yeah, I think to sum it all up to me, as I go through the whole arc of the five books of Moses, starting with the clear rejection of the firstborn and primogeniture of every one of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob's kids, the rejection of the firstborn of Egypt and the priestly caste, this amazing statement that we are all a kingdom of priests. I think that this fits right into it and one of the most powerful messages to me of the Torah is it's an argument against entitlement against stratification and the monopolization of the holy and this radical, radical democratization and all Israel has a a Chelek (portion) in the Torah. And I think that's the most powerful message. And it's one that also is in the arc of Jewish history. I feel today we are democratizing study of Torah, who can study where you can study? I think in Israel, it has the potential for democratizing Judaism if we could only get the religion out of the government. That's that's the vision I find that to techelet screams to me.
Adam Mintz
Beautiful. I love it. Thank you so much.
Geoffrey Stern
Well, thank you and Shabbat shalom to everyone.
Adam Mintz
thank you so much. I'm looking forward to next week.
Geoffrey Stern
You got it. Let's all have that little Petil techelet, that little string of blue that lets us know that we have access to the holy and the divine as much as anyone else. Shabbat Shalom.
Parshat Shelach - Geoffrey Stern with Rabbi Adam Mintz, visit with Rav Abraham Isaac Kook, Rabbi Yitz Greenberg and listen to a live recording or Rabbi Shlomo Carlebach. We explore what the story of the Biblical Scouts teaches us about whining, Jewish Power, Jewish Nationalism, Zionism, Jewish Renewal, love and respect for authority? So gird your loins and take a deep breath as we Get Guts.
Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/327812
Transcript:
Geoffrey Welcome, everybody, to Madlik, our weekly disruptive Torah, four o'clock Eastern Time on clubhouse and later published as a podcast. If you do listen to this as a podcast and you want to like us or give us some stars, that would be well appreciated. Today, we are going to discuss, the following narrative. Picture the Jewish people in the desert coming out of Egypt. They're getting close to the border with the promised land, literally the land that was promised to them. And they sent out 12 either spies or scouts to scout the land. And there's one scout from each tribe and they're instructed to go to the country (Numbers, Chapter 13 and 14) to determine whether it's strong or weak, few or many. Are the people that dwell in there, good or bad are the towns they live in open or fortified. Is the soil rich or poor? Is it wooded or not? Really a total fact-finding mission. And the story recounts how they get there. And it's harvest festival and they harvest some grapes that have become almost iconic in terms of how large they were. And then they lodge their report "and ten of them say, we came to the land you sent to us. It does indeed flow with milk and honey. And this is its food." And they showed them the grapes. However, and here's the however, the people who inhabit the country are powerful and the cities are fortified and very large. Moreover, we saw anakites (giants) and they go on as they're talking. The other two was Joshua and a guy named Caleb, and he hushed the people before Moses and he said, let's just go up. We shall gain possession of it. So Joshua and Caleb were enthusiastic about going ahead to the Promised Land. But they continued speaking and they said we cannot attack that people for it is stronger than we. It is one that devours its settlers, Eretz ochelwet yoshveha... a land that literally eats its inhabitants and then they go back and they say the final punch line and it says, and we looked like grasshoppers to ourselves and so we must have looked to them. And ultimately the story ends with obviously God being extremely upset. Here is a people that he took the trouble of redeeming from slavery to freedom, and it ultimately is mired in a slavery; exile mentality. And can't make the switch. And they want to go back to Egypt. They would rather be taken care of and be slaves. And this story ends with God saying, let me get rid of them all, right, now and Moses, I will take you and Joshua and Caleb and the believers into the land. And Moses convinces him not to do that and God forgives them. And the language that he uses to forgive them is the penultimate forgiveness verses of the Torah that we use on Yom Kippur. And ultimately, that whole generation is to die out and a new generation is to come into the land. So I'm going to stop right here and ask you, Rabbi Adam and anyone else who wants to participate, what is the takeaway from this story at even the most superficial level?
Adam There is so much. Thank you, Geoffrey, for the for the introduction and for just kind of the background of the story, You know, at least one piece of the take away is that you need to trust. You need to trust in God and you need to trust in ourselves that the mistake that the people, the Jews made the desert was you know, there were a lot of different ways to understand the report of the spies, but they chose the way that it was the most scary, the most intimidating. They didn't trust in themselves. They didn't trust in God. And that's what got them in trouble. So I think the first lesson is a lesson about trust.
Geoffrey And faith and confidence
Adam Trust and faith I'm putting together correct That's my first take away
Geoffrey But of course, to move you forward, there is that kind of telling comment where they said they didn't say we'd looked like grasshoppers to them. They said we looked like grasshoppers to ourselves, and we must have looked like grasshoppers to them, too. What is that add?
Adam That means that if you're insecure, then, you know, that's your downfall. If you think that your grasshoppers, then other people can pick that up in a minute. And they saw themselves as being weak. And the minute they saw themselves as being weak, they were weak and they'll be able to take advantage of them.
Geoffrey So it's really as much about faith in God as it is about faith in oneself. Self-esteem.
Adam Right. And I'm a big believer that this story is not only about faith in God, it's about faith in oneself.
Geoffrey So to raise the bar a little bit, the midrash seems to have the consensus that this took place on a very perspicuous day in the Jewish calendar. It took place on Tisha B'Av and it's recounted Tisha B'av, as you probably all know, is the day the greatest calamity in the history of the Jewish people occurred. When the temple was destroyed. According to tradition, both temples were destroyed on the same day. And the midrash and the Mishnah gives a long list of other calamities that either foreshadowed or followed afterwards. But this took place on Tisha B'aV. And the Midrash says that when the people cried after hearing the report from the scouts, the Midrash says it was a Bechi Shel Chinam... It was an unjustified crying... a whining if you will. And because they cried, the Jewish people in the desert cried for no good reason. They would be destined to cry for good reason for the rest of the generations. And those of you who know Jewish tradition about Tisha B'av, cannot fail to hear in the bechi Shel Chinam... this crying for no reason, an echo of the traditional reason that the temple was destroyed. And that was because of sinat chinam.... of hatred that was unjustified .... person to person. So what do you make of this counterpoint between these two various reasons for the beginning of all the calamities of the Jewish people beginning at that moment and both using this unjustified emotion?
Adam Let's take that midrash, that Midrash that you quote, Geoffrey, that you cried for no reason. Great phrase... you whine because you whine, I'm going to give you a reason to really cry. What does that mean? What that means is that we need to take a certain amount of responsibility. And if we're going to whine, God is going to give us a reason to whine. We can't whine, we need to be strong, and we need to have courage. We need to have faith in ourselves and in God. And if we can't do that, then God is going to punish us. He's going to give us a reason to cry. I think that's such a strong idea.
Geoffrey And then all that is true. But I want to set it up as a counterpoint to "sinat Chinam". to blaming the destruction of the temple on the sins of the Jews. And what I'd love to do is to paint a picture that was inspired to me by Rav Abraham Yitzhak Kook, the first chief rabbi of the State of Israel, who actually took this midrash of baseless crying. And remember, this is an ultra-orthodox rabbi who breaks with the rest of the ultra-orthodox who believe that it is not up to man, it is not up to us to fabricate of faith and to take our land and to take the initiative. And he says, no, absolutely not that it is it is ours and it is our responsibility not to be small, but to be great. And this baseless whining, if you will, was the core of not only the narrative that we're reading about this Shabbat in this parsha, but is the core of the narrative of exile, of diminution, of oppression of the Jewish people through the ages. And I think if you add on to that context, part of that context is that the Jewish tradition for 2000 years of exile said that the Jewish people were exiled because they did something wrong. And this was something that was begun by the Jews, themselves in the prophets, Jeremiah and others, but clearly something that was literally embraced by the non-Jews who said if you are stateless, you must be deserving of this punishment. And so, in a sense, this baseless whining, this baseless diminution of yourself, I think is a counterpoint. And I don't want to focus less on the sin of hatred one against another and more on the fact of it's a sin that's keeping us away and that somehow or other we have to do something, maybe go to synagogue and pray, as opposed to taking our future into our hands and doing what Joshua and Caleb said, which is let's get up and go and take this land. Do you see that counterpoint Rabbi?
Adam [That’s a very interesting counterpoint. And I think that that's really the lesson of the whole scary counterpoint is the lesson. Right?
Geoffrey I think so. I think so. It's one also of sadness and joy and so Rav Kook, when he describes this, he describes it in the context of we should be rejoicing on Tisha B'av, because one day Tisha B'av is going to be the happiest day. And that day will happen when we take our fate into our own hands.
Adam I want to know what that means, taking fate into our own hands. What does that mean to you?
Geoffrey So I'd like to move forward to answer that question to another theologian who's actually still alive, named Yitz Greenberg. And Yitz Greenberg talks about the Third Era of Judaism. And he actually describes that before the Holocaust, we lived in a world where we were waiting for divine redemption, and we were trying to make ourselves purer so that we would deserve divine redemption. And he says after the Holocaust, many people would want to talk about the "hester Panim", the fact that God's divine presence was hidden. And he says that's the wrong syntax. He talks about after the Holocaust we now have to talk about "was man missing" and that man now has to take into his or her own hands their future. That's his takeaway from the absence of God, which is the positive flip side of that, which is the ultimate responsibility for the presence of man.
Adam What do you make of that? Let me turn it back to you, Geoffrey. What do you think about Yitz Greenberg's comment?
Geoffrey Well, I agree with him very much. And when I kind of felt it in my gut because I truly believe that the renaissance of the Jewish people and the revival of the state of Israel is not simply like the meraglim, the scouts, a story, an episode. I think it is the essence of the culmination of Jewish history. And so I try to make sense of it in terms of the arc of Jewish history. And actually, Greenberg talks in terms of what happened after the Holocaust, in terms of the UN and human rights and national movements and all that. He makes the context even larger. But it really does speak to me and it speaks to me in a sense that is core to who I am as a proud Jew. So it really does resonate.
Adam It's a great I think it's a fantastic argument by Itz Greenberg. And maybe what makes it the most powerful is it is kind of surprising you wouldn't have expected it.
Geoffrey In terms of who Yitz Greenberg is as an Orthodox Jew,
Adam correct,
Geoffrey I mean, I think in a sense what we're talking about is not something that we're kind of creating out of nothing. The truth is that Ralph Kook and especially but also Yitz Greenberg coming out of an ultra-orthodox background, saw it. They saw the real tension between the Judaism of the galut... of the exile and a new Judaism born after the ashes, so to speak, and the revival of the Jewish nationalist dream. It lived itself out, in other words. And I also came from a very ultra-orthodox background. And these are things that you study, and you learn. They're very much alive. This this sense of you talk about trust. It's a different type of trust and faith. It's a faith that God will take care of us. God will provide the answer. And it's ultimately one that I think I really do. I feel like I have to reject. And it's not almost a nostalgic old faith as opposed to a new one. it's a new faith that has an emphasis and an imperative to it.
Adam Yeah. That that idea of a new thing I think is very, very powerful. And that's really what Yitz Greenberg is talking about, is that we have to create for ourselves a new faith and that new faith is a faith that requires a tremendous amount of strength and courage. Can you imagine creating a new a new faith? Well, something that's so counter to everything that we were bought up with in our very orthodox backgrounds, isn't it?
Geoffrey Well, I mean, you know, we listen to whether it's the song of the parting of the sea where we say lo b'bekochi, that it is not with our power, not with our might, that we will survive, but only through God. And Greenberg has an amazing quote that is a variation on something I believe Santayana said, and its "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. But absolute powerlessness corrupts the most". And I think what he was saying here is the powerlessness .... the lack of willingness to accept one's own fate, to accept power, to be a victim, to be a martyr, to play that role is really antithetical to the world and the renewal of Judaism and the state of Israel that we see. And I think it comes up in our discussions today, and I'm not preaching to anyone. I'm preaching to myself here. You know, as we see the discussion about Israel, especially in the last month, rive up and we feel, do we have to stand up for it or do we have to? What is the right balance between empathizing with the poor people in Gaza and the Palestinians and their national dream and ours? And I think that part of what this message told me this week as I studied it and as I read it, is you can care for other people, but you first have to care for yourself. You have to be in touch and understand your national dream before you can embrace someone else's national dream. You have to respect yourself. You can't be a grasshopper or a cockroach. That was the message I took away. And literally I was on the fence in terms of... Let this pass and do we really need to to stick up for ourselves and and make a scene and the take away from this parsha is that, you know, if not us, who then?
Adam Do you think that we all have to share the same dream?
Geoffrey No, no, absolutely not, and I think, if I hear you correctly, you know, would we ever want to totally lose the message of a Jeremiah who says if bad things happen to you, you need to be introspective and you need to look to see what you can do better with your life, both morally, ethically and spiritually? I hope we never lose that. But certainly when it goes to the extreme, when bad things happen to good people, it must be good people's fault. And we have to check on Mezuzahs. I think it is is a sickness. And I do believe we have to be comfortable in saying, damn it, we deserve a full life, too, and we deserve to live out our national and lifelong [national aspiration]. I was at a wedding earlier this week and I couldn't but stop to listen to all the words about one day we will be dancing in the streets of Jerusalem and the broken glass over Jerusalem. And I said to myself, we've been doing this for two thousand years. This is not a political statement. This is who we are. We are those scouts. We are that generation outside of the promised land. And we've got to fight for it. We’ll be respected. I think this was one of the messages of the Zionists, and it's only partially borne out... We'll be respected when we respect ourselves and when we stand on our own two feet and when we have our own army and we have our own language.
Adam Yeah, I mean, that was you know, that was the lesson of the state of Israel that we have to believe in ourselves if we're going to have our own state. If we don't believe in ourselves, then we don't have a chance. It's not that people have to believe in us. We have to believe in ourselves. I mean, that's really nice, Geoffrey because what you're really in this week of the elections and everything, in Israel and they make a government. And what you're really saying is that it's not about people believing in us. It's about us believing in ourselves.
Geoffrey And then I think it's like they always say, "Ve'ahavta l"rayacha Kwemocha" , love your neighbor as yourself. I really do believe that we can we are better when we respect ourselves. And it's trite, but I think it's true. I'd like to go on to another thought leader who is not normally considered a thought leader. He's thought of more as the Singing Rabbi. His name is Shlomo Carlebach. And a few years ago, I came across a recording of him talking about just this parsha. So I'm going to try something new on Madlik Clubhouse. And since it is an audio only platform, I'm going to try to play Shlomo Carlebach... I'm going to invite him, so to speak, on to clubhouse. And I think you'll all be as excited as I am to see the personal direction that he takes this into, because we've been talking a lot about nationalism and movements and he goes in a different direction that I think relates more to Jewish renewal. So let's see if I can get this to work.
Speaker Shlomo Carlebach I just want to give you a little vitamin pill and strength, everybody talking about the Meraglim so much and I'm sure it sunk into you. Anybody who comes back from Israel and tells anything bad about Israel, tell them, my dear brother, the spies destroyed Israel and they didn't lie it's true. Moshe Rabenu says to Yehoshua (Joshua) "God should give you strength not to listen to them. Now, listen to this. Who are the miraglim? The miraglim were the biggest Rebbes of the world 10 big Rebbes. Just imagine yourself, little schmendrick, like you and I. We're going on a mission ... 10 big rabbis. And Yeshua was mamash a pupil of Moshe Rabbenu. The most humble person in the world. Right. All the rabbis sit there, and they say, listen, I want you to know they tell each other it's a bad scene to go to Israel, forget it "A land that eats it's people" don't go there. Do you know, according to the Torah, the majority decides? The Torah! You ask a yid, Torah... right? I want you to know, friends, thousands of Jews would have stayed alive if they would have not listened to a lot of rabbis. I know a Yid in Williamsburg. He lived somewhere, had a wife and 12 children, 1937. He asked a Rebbe: "Should I go to Israel?" He says: "God forbid, Israel is not frum" . He would have had his wife and 12 children. You know why Yehusha is the one to conquer Israel? Because Moshe Rabbenu gave them strength not to listen to anybody. Have enough guts! if the Ribono shel olam shines something into me, that's it. I want you to know there is prophecy .. Eretz Yisrael is deeper than prophecy. Prophecy means I know what's happening. What will happen tomorrow. I know which gilgil (re-incarnation) I am in. It's all cute. It's not what I need to know? The greatest light of Eretz Yisrael is to have enough guts to listen to the deepest depths of my heart, the deepest, deepest depts of my heart. My friends, I bless you and me. If you and I want to conquer Israel, want to make our way to the Holy Land, make our way into Yiddishkite, let's have the guts not to listen to anybody. I want you to know something else. The saddest thing in the world is... I want you to know everybody when they get married, they built their Eretz Yisrael. The Huppah is their Jerusalem. I want you to know, you know, the walking to the Huppah, it's like Avraham Avenu, is walking in Eretz Yisrael. The standing under the Huppah is like Yerushalyim, As it says: Omdos Hayu Ragalenu Yerusalim..." I bless you, friends. Whenever you find your soulmate, please don't ask anybody. Conquer your Eretz Yisrael! Just listen to the inside of the inside. Listen to the great rabbi ... the Mraglim... you know what they said they felt like cockroaches and mamash a giant. Right? I thought you're the greatest rabbi in the world. You afraid? Yeah. To the truth. Jacob teitz, this is my Rebbe? I don't want a Rebbe who's afraid. I don't a Rebbe who's afraid of anything in the world. I need a rebbe who's not afraid. And you know something in exile. It's a cute Rebbe'la. He's afraid of this one. Afraid of this one .. in Exile you can make it. You can even make to receive manna from heaven. Eretz Yisrael, No! Friends, I Bless you to have guts. inside. Inside, inside, inside. When you find your soul mate, just do it. Friends, I tell you something. If you would have asked all the Rebbes. Should we make a little ruach here, a little get-together. They would have asked how big is the mechitza, where do you get the meat. And who is Gedalia, who is Noami? Who is Meyer? Forget me, I'm treif anyway. Hash V'shalom... you're not permitted to do it! and the meantime, Baruch HaShem, Gedalia had the privilege of bringing together 100's of thousands of people. OK friends, Good Shabbos Good Yontov and I bless you to make it to Eretz Yisrael this summer. Don't ask questions, just go Good Shabbos Good Yom tov.
Geoffrey Yeah. So had you heard that before?
Adam That was amazing.
Geoffrey Thank you. I was I was blown away. And by the way, it's edited. He also talks about women learning Torah and he says, are we going to ask a rebbe if we can study Torah? Women can study Torah. It really bridges the divide to the personal, personal, spiritual growth, and it bridges the divide to renewal of Judaism. And I was just blown away by it. So I. I just today came from a funeral of a Holocaust survivor. And her name is Esther Pederseil, and she was ninety-five and she had guts. And if we're talking about guts, I think that we have to definitely reference people like her who are survivors, they're not victims, they're survivors. And when her children spoke, they talked about her love of fashion and style, and they said that was her. That was her not.... Not her revenge, but her way of living. She wanted to live her life to the fullest and as much as she could she, showed that she was in the camp of Joshua and Caleb. And I just think that the lesson is really universal at the end of the day, it's a lesson for us personally. It's a lesson for every people who want to renew their future and get to their promised land. But it's certainly a lesson for us. And I think we should never whine, and we should only choose to conquer what we can conquer and to think highly of ourselves
Adam And to listen only to ourselves, not to listen to others. What a powerful idea.
Geoffrey Yeah, I, I when he kept on saying over and over again, I don't need a rebbe who's afraid, I mean it was very powerful. And he touched thousands, tens of thousands of people with his music but also with the message of renewal and renewal Judaism. And as you said before, what our promised land is, is open to interpretation. But I think the message that one has to grab that and to actively aspire and engage. That is a universal truth.
Adam Couldn't agree more. That was beautiful. Thank you so much for sharing that.
Geoffrey OK, well, Shabbat shalom, everybody.
Adam Shabbat Shalom everybody. Looking forward to next week.
Parshat Beha'alotcha - (Numbers 9: 2-13) Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz recorded on Clubhouse Friday May 28th 2021 as we uncover the relationship between the Biblical Pesach Sheni (2nd Passover) and the later instituted Shana M'Uberet (Leap year). We hypothesize regarding the theological and social ramifications of correcting an irregular calendar based on a seemingly imperfect planetary system.
Source Sheet on Sefaria: www.sefaria.org/sheets/326069
Transcript below:
Welcome to Madlik. My name is Geoffrey Stern and at Madlik we light a spark or shed some light on a Jewish Text or Tradition. We also host a clubhouse every Friday at 4:00pm Eastern time and this week, along with Rabbi Adam Mintz We uncover a relationship between the Biblical Pesach Sheni (2nd Passover) and the shana meuberet, the leap year. We hypothesize regarding the theological and social ramifications of tweaking a calendar created by a seemingly imperfect planetary system. So join us on a date as we explore the Jewish Calendar and hacking the universe.
G Stern [00:00:00] Welcome to Madlik, where every week Friday at four o'clock Eastern, Rabbi Adam Mintz and I, Geoffrey Stern, do a little disruptive Torah learning. And by that I mean we look at subject matters either in a an unorthodox manner, certainly not with a capital O, but in a different manner to get our hearts and minds thinking about Judaism a little bit differently. This week's parsha B'eha'lotcha is in the book of numbers. And the subject that we're going to discuss today is one that those who have listened to the podcast know I love and value so much. And that's the idea of the second Passover "Pesach Sheni". And for the first few minutes, we'll discuss it in very traditional ways. But then we're going to dig a little bit deeper. So let me set the stage. It's literally the Jews are in the desert and it is, I believe, the first time that they will be celebrating the Passover. It's the first or the second anniversary. And the people are instructed to keep the Passover. "b'moado" in it's set time and the verse goes on to say, you shall do it on the 14th day of this month at twilight, "b'moado" in its time and of course, those of us who know Passover is in the month of Nisan. And believe it or not, the very first commandment that the Jewish people were given was not to keep Shabbat and it was not not to steal, it was to make sure that "Hahodesh ha'ze l'chem", that the month of Nisan should be the beginning of the months. So it was a commandment to do with the calendar. In any case, that we understand why whenever it talks about Passover and today's section is no exception, it makes sure that everyone understands it has to be in the spring, it has to be in the month of Nisan. Which leads us to great surprise when Moses is confronted by a bunch of people who come and they say that we are impure and we cannot keep the Passover in its associated time, we don't want to be left out of this iconic annual celebration and what can we do? So Moses said to them, "Stand by and let me hear what instructions the Lord gives about you." It almost sounds like you're talking to an operator at a service bureau and she goes, hold on, I got to talk to my manager. So Moses escalates the call and then he says, speak to the Israeli people, saying, when any of you or your posterity who are defiled by a corpse or on a long journey, would offer the Passover sacrifice to the Lord. They shall offer it in the second month. And he goes on to say that for now and forever, that if for whatever reason and there are a few caveats, but for most reasons that are beyond your control, if you could not observe the Passover ceremony in all of its details in the month of Nisan, you can do it exactly a month later. And so what I would like to Adam is to ask you, what do you think this message tells us about both Passover, but more importantly about Judaism?
A Mintz [00:04:03] I think the idea of giving a second chance is an unbelievable idea. And it's amazing that the Torah teaches it in such a strange way. But it's really about getting a second chance and it's about the fact that people don't want to be left out. They felt that they lost out, that they were able to give up the first Passover. So they got a second chance wiyh the second Passover. And what an amazing lesson about giving back, getting second chances.
G Stern [00:04:31] You know, I totally agree. And that's I think one of the reasons it's so fascinates me. But again, I want to emphasize that, you know, you could say you got a second chance if you forgot to put on tefillin in the morning, you can put it on in the afternoon, or if you forgot to give to tzedaka, you can do it later. But the lesson here is so emphatic because it picks the one holiday that in numerouse places in the tTorah, in the Bible that says you got to do it on time, you got to do it, "b'moado", in its fixed time, and it's precisely that one that it gives that wonderful message that you make reference to, which is you have another chance. You never miss the boat. Don't you think that's remarkable?
A Mintz [00:05:20] It is more I think yes, it is remarkable.
G Stern [00:05:25] So it seems to me though that it's remarkable. But it also raises a question because clearly the message could have been given on another holiday on Sukkoth and it could have been given for another mitzvah. It's almost like there's a conflict, a contradiction in terms that it's speaking from both sides of its mouth. It's saying you've got to do it in its right season. All these guys need to have it at another time. You can do it at another time. And I think that's one of the things that really intrigued me about this and made me starting to think about the Jewish calendar. And the way I want to introduce my thoughts on the Jewish calendar is with a joke. The joke goes as follows. There's a Hasidic rabbi and he's getting on to the flight and he sees that he's sitting next to a nun. And, you know, everybody is traveling home for the holidays. It's in December. And he says, you know, I don't want her to think that we are so insulated that we can't carry on a conversation. So he says, what should I talk to her about? And finally, it dawns on him and he turns to her and he says, So, Miss, are the holidays early or late this year? And of course, that's a joke for Jews who every year before either the high holidays at the end of the summer or before Passover, we ask, are the holidays early or late this year? And the concept of the holidays being early or late, I think is something that is essential and that only Jews who follow what is a combination of the solar calendar and the lunar calendar can understand because we have a calendar that literally follows the moon. So if you follow the stars or the Zodiac, you know that every main Jewish holiday occurs when the moon is full and the 14th of the month and we are very tied into the tides, the warp, the ebb and flow of the of the lunar year. But on the other hand, we follow the seasons or the temps of the the calendar of the year. So it's adjusted. And every year, every so often, every three or four years, we have what's called a leap year in Hebrew. It's an iber shana or shana m'uberet, a pregnant year, so to speak. And that's why Jews have this question of is it early or late? And I would say no obvious biblical source for this. I'm going to argue that maybe "Pesach Sheni" , the second Passover can shed some light on the lunasol leap year. Maybe it has something to say about this hybrid lunar and solar calendar. But, Rabbi, have you ever given that thought in terms of 1) how unique our calendar is and 2) whether there is any biblical source for this very complex fixing of the calendar?
A Mintz [00:08:45] Well, so let's talk about the calendar. We have a calendar baced on the moon, and that's the way our calendar works every month is either twenty nine or thirty days because the lunar month, the month based on the moon is twenty nine and a half. Whereas the year based on the moon is two hundred and fifty four days. The year based on the sun is three hundred and sixty five days. Every single year we lose 11 days. What does that mean loose 11 days? Means that the holidays as your joke has it Geoffrey, the holidays fall out 11 days earlier than they fall out the year before. That happens every single year. That happens to the Moslems, too. That's why Ramadan is never fixed. Ramadan, there's no corrective. Each year. Ramadan falls out eleven days earlier than the year before. So sometimes Ramadan is in the summer. Sometimes Ramadan is in the winter. Just depends. In the Jewish calendar. We have a corrective because we lose eleven days. The problem, with losing 11 is that the Towra describes Passover as taking place during the spring, every three years we lose Passover because 11 days every year, thirty three days, it's a month early, it ends up before the beginning of spring. So therefore, seven times in 19 years, we add a leap month as the corrective. Next year, 5782 is going to be a leap year. Rosh Hashanah. Actually, again, your joke is the night of Labor Day can't be earlier, but Passover is going to be the end of April. It's going to be a very long winter next year because of the correction of the calendar. So that's why we have a unique calendar, because it's not like the Gregorian calendar, which is based on the sun, but it's not like the Moslem calendar that's based only on the moon. It's a combination of the two.
G Stern [00:11:19] That was an amazingly good explanation. I do think that this concept of early or late and we can joke about it is intimately involved with what is unique about the Jewish calendar. As you said, the Christian calendar follows the Roman calendar and was totally solar based. So that Christmas and Easter they occur pretty much based on the Solar calendar and whether the moon is in ascent or not, whether the stars are in a particular alignment, it has no bearing. It doesn't have that connection to that aspect of nature. And the Muslim calendar is intimately connected with the lunar phases, but loses the sense of the trapos of the tropical change of the seasons and is not connected to agriculture. And then obviously it's not connected to times in history happened at a particular period. So I think we can truly say that the Jewish calendar is unique among the Abrahamic religions. And as usual, it's a little bit harder to defend something that is not here or not there. But I think at the most basic level, the idea of being early or late is not a scientific term. You'll never hear in math or in science early or late. If a phenomenon needs to happen, it happens when it needs to happen. And I think getting back to the message that we started with about Pesach Sheni, the second Passover, the make-up Passover, I think baked into our calendar is in fact this concept of it's never too late. But I would add to that and say maybe it's never too early. In other words, not trying to be Einsteinian, but time is relative and there are openings on either side. But in any case, what I have never realized before I started preparing for this week, I had always felt that PesachSheni. the second Passover was for individuals, but it was not for the whole nation. And as a result, I felt that there was no connection between the Second Passover and where literally you are taking Passover and you're saying it's not this month, it's next month, which is what you do in a leap year. And I thought there was no connection to this corrective nature of the Jewish calendar. But I discovered in the Book of Chronicles a story about Hezekiah, who at the time when the Jewish people had been conquered and had fallen into idolatry, there was a religious revival. And he summoned everyone over the Land of Israel for Passover. And it says that the king and his officers and the congregation in Jerusalm had agreed to keep the Passover in the second month. So here is a leader, a king who takes the whole nation of Israel and decides, and he gives an explanation that there wasn't enough time, they didn't have enough time to get purified. They didn't have enough time to come from the suburbs, so to speak. But for whatever reason, he decided that the whole nation should celebrate Passover not this month, but next month, that this month was not going to be the Nisan of the Passover. It was going to be next month. And so a bell rang in my head and I said to myself, well, maybe this is a biblical source for the correction that we do in the Jewish year and maybe some of the lessons that we take away from Pesach Sheni, the second Passover and the leap year are one in the same. And as I said before, it's not only never too late, but never too early either. And what intrigued me further was that there was a sense of sin involved with this. In other words, the the priests who went ahead with the king's decree and celebrated Passover the second month. It says about them that they they they felt bad, they felt ashamed. And the commentaries say they felt the shame because they had caused a leap year. And the king himself brought a sacrifice for atonement, so the rabbis of the Talmud take this and they say that, in fact, he did make a Pesach Sheni slash a leap year for the whole nation. And so, in a sense, from this story, there is a direct connection between the two. And that, to me was exciting. Plus the fact that we kind of have this sense that making this change, after all, it's human beings, we make the change. We decide when there should be a leap year. And there's a sense of kind of, I wouldn't say sinning, but there's a sense of admitting the imperfection of the moment. Rabbi, your thoughts?
A Mintz [00:17:16] The idea of imperfection is such a fascinating idea, the idea that the system isn't perfect the way it is, but the system needs a correction and that is something that really resonates with me. Again, the Moslem calendar doesn't have that. The Moslem calendar believes that it's just the calendar based on the moon and however, it falls it falls. But Judaism is willing to accept the fact that it needs a correction. And I think the idea of looking to make things perfect is really a very important lesson from this whole discussion of the calendar.
G Stern [00:18:06] So I'm a big believer in comparative religion. We've talked a little bit about Christianity, but I'd like to pick up on something that you just said about the Muslim religion doing what I would call it the pure path. They only follow the moon. And there are a lot of studies that Muhammad studied and heard both Christian and Jewish preachers before he wrote the Koran. And I want to read you one part of the Koran that literally talks about this element of sin in terms of correcting God's calendar, correcting or what I call in terms of the subject, hacking the calendar or hacking the universe. And he writes in the Koran, he says, and by the way, in the Koran, the the word for leap year is NASI. And we're going to get to that in a second. But he says, indeed, the Nasi, postponing our sacred month is an increase in disbelief by which those who have disbelieved are led further away. They make it lawful one year, an unlawful another year to correspond to the number made unlawful by Allah and thus make lawful what Allah has made unlawful. Made pleasing to them is the evil of their deeds, and Allah does not guide the disbelieving people. And in their commentaries they talk about those who use this nasi, this adjustment of the calendar to wage wars when a month doesn't permit them to wage war. So they just push it off to the next month, to do business, to build roads, to do all of these things. And I think this gives you a wonderful perspective in terms of what was, in fact radical, both about Islam, which rejected this hybrid calendar. But I would argue also radical about what the Jews did in terms of having a calendar that was understood to be imperfect and needed man to perfect it. And the key word is that he uses the word Nasi. And if you know about the Jewish doctrine, it says, who can decide when the leap year should be? And it says only the Nasi, only the prince, only the leader of the Jewish people. So clearly, Mohammed was aware of what the Jews had done, understood what its implications were, and rejected it. And I would say, by contrast, there was at that time the Jews understood what they were doing and the power of their adjustable calendar. And this, again, brings up this element of sin that we saw with Hezkiahu who felt that, yes, he had to make a change in the calendar, man had to be involved with this corrective action. But nonetheless, we did it with regret because the world was not perfect.
A Mintz [00:21:27] I mean, I think that says at all that idea of the calendar reflecting the fact that the world is not perfect. And number 2) the fact that we have the ability to help make the world perfect, we're not helpless standing by and watching. We're actually part of the process. I think that's an important, extremely important element also.
G Stern [00:21:53] And I think it gives us insight into a very strange story that some of us might be aware of, but maybe not. And that was the rabbis in the Talmud were having a discussion about what witnesses to accept in terms of when the new year was to begin. And in beautiful Talmudic fashion, witnesses came, procedurally, everything that they said was correct, the new moon was announced, which meant based on this new moon, Yom Kippur would be at a designated day. And then the next day, the evidence showed that those witnesses were incorrect. And one of the rabbis, Yehoshua, made the obvious argument. He says, if you claim that a woman is not pregnant and the next day she shows up and her belly is is swollen, you know, you're wrong. But the rabbis didn't accept his argument and they objected to the fact that he was arguing from scientific empirical evidence and they were using the God-given ability to determine what the calendar was. And this is what they did. And it's a remarkable story. The Nasi, Rabbi Gamliel, sent a message to this Rabbi Yehoshua, and he says, I decree against you that you appear before me with your staff and with your money on the day on which Yom Kippur occurs, according to your calculation. So he said to the guy, I need you not only to let us continue, you need to show publicly that the day that you want to be Yom Kippur, is not Yom Kippur. So it just shows you how important this sense of man communally can decide when is holiness. You know, Heschel used to say that Shabbat, which comes every seven days without exception, is a cathedral in time. You know, I would argue that what this is saying about holiness of man made time is it's a pop up in time that it's when we determine it. And this you couldn't get a more powerful allegory story to portray that.
A Mintz [00:24:20] I think that's an amazing story. I mean, what does that story say to you, Geoffrey?
G Stern [00:24:27] It says a number of things. It shows me that the rabbis were talking in a realm that goes beyond empiricism, like I said before, that there is an early and that there is a late and that there are shades of gray. It talks about Rabbini authority that has to be accepted because it's the basis of the social structure. I feel sad for Rabbi Yhoshua who had to show up on his Yom Kippur.
A Mintz [00:25:00] Well that's the worst part, right? Yeah. I mean, that's the problematic part. Why did he force them to show up like that? That's the problem.
G Stern [00:25:12] It gets back to my question about sin. You feel like they had to do it in order to to cement and to support this notion of what a Jewish holiday is and Holiness is. But on the other hand, they had to sin against Rabbi Joshua because what he said was probably right. And it really goes to the heart of what I'm talking about in terms of agreeing that maybe perfection is imperfection, agreeing that although we always talk about you have to be there at the right time, at the right moment, that there is no right time, that we by convention, not by design, make those magical moments. Maybe that's the lesson. But I definitely feel for Rabbi Joshua
A Mintz [00:26:06] Right , we make the right time. it's about human initiative in the process.
G Stern [00:26:14] Yes, yes, and it also raises, again, this issue of of sin, how much in religion, how much in the Torah has baked into it, these kinds of situations. Here, we believe in an infinite, infallible, all knowing God who created this amazing world and here we are and we're fixing it. And here we are, God created it, maybe "as if to say" to teach us this lesson but nonetheless, a world was created that was not perfect. And you know, you can't but not think about the excommunication of Galileo and Copernicus and getting back to Christianity, how the whole world was tied to this, this sense of the sun rotating around the earth and all of the theological implications. Today we don't think in those terms about the theological implications of the stars, of the calendar. But in those days, this was serious, serious stuff. You know, there was one of Copernicus's co-scientists, and he wrote a famous quote. It says, "Had God had consulted me before embarking on creation, I would have suggested something simpler." It's so amazing, but this is what they were doing, what the humility that it teaches us in terms of men of God, women of God, theologians, to have to go into the back room and tweak the system a little bit to get it to work. Copernicus himself said, "the theories of my predecessors were like a human figure in which the arms, legs and head were put together in the form of a disorderly monster." I mean, these guys were excommunicated for their observations and for them kind of reconstituting the whole metaphysics of the day. And I think from that perspective, at the end of the day, that's what Pesach Sheni is about. It's a holiday in time. It talks about the sanctification of time, the first commandment that we have deals with the calendar. And yet and yet we have to tweak it. And that humbles both us, but it also humbles us in terms of understanding any divine reason and divine obviousness of any plan.
A Mintz [00:29:03] So the calendar actually reflects the integration of God's world and human initiative, God's plan and human initiative. It can't work one without the other. God's plan doesn't work on its own, but we can't have human initiative without God's plan.
G Stern [00:29:25] Absolutely. And I think there were scholars who are looking at the Dead Sea Scrolls and you know, there were different groups there. They all kind of rejected the religion of the day. They were out there for purity reasons. And some of them had 60 day cycles in their calendar. But they literally talked about the heavenly calendar and the earthly calendar. And I think that really we're talking about heavenly and earthly and the fact thatit is not a a simple puzzle that fits so nicely together and that it needs tweaking and that our measly senses and brain power are not enough to understand the design. And maybe that's the most basic lesson. And the lesson of "HaHodesh ha'zeh l'chem" that "this should be your month". And of course, we can't ignore the fact that Hodesh, which is month, also means "Hidush" "renewal", it means "invention". And maybe that's ultimately at the source of of what we need to do in our calendar on a daily basis. We need to try to adjust to the forces that we can control and meet and bring together heaven and earth in some fashion.
A Mintz [00:30:59] I really love that, I love the way we put this all together. I think that's great.
G Stern [00:31:04] Thanks. Are there any questions or any comments among our faithful that I can entertain or should we finish early? As the saying goes, we're twenty nine minutes into the half hour, so we're not going to finish too early. But maybe that's the takeaway, that sometimes we can finish early and that because everything has been said that needs to be said. Alice Meyer is invited to come up.
E Meyer [00:31:38] I just wanted to say thank you. That was fabulous.
G Stern [00:31:42] Well, thanks for joining us. It was fabulous to have you. I know you know how much I love "Pesach Sheni".
E Meyer [00:31:48] Yes, we do. Yes, we do.
G Stern [00:31:51] But this week and this week and this week, I went a little deeper.
E Meyer [00:31:56] Was it was I just really I love I love the way you started it. And this was a great session. Thank you so much.
G Stern [00:32:04] Thank you, Elise. Michael, how are you today?
M Stern[00:32:07] I'm great. And another great session. And you go God's will, man's will, Geoffrey Stern, say, shall we end it a minute early? And here we are at four thirty. And just an example of that happening in real time right now.
G Stern [00:32:26] Love it. Love it.
M Stern [00:32:29] Thank you. Thank you, Rabbi. It's great listening to you both. Thank you so much. Shabbat shalom to everybody.
G Stern [00:32:36] Shabbat Shalom. One and all.
Join Geoffrey Stern, Rabbi Adam Mintz and Rabbi Hirsh Chinn on Clubhouse Friday May 21st at 4:00pm (ET). The Torah is ambivalent with regard to the sobriety of the Nazarine. Is the Nazir a holy man striving for greater spirituality or an addict seeking rehab for a moral shortcoming… or both? Rabbi Hirsh Chinn was Geoffrey’s roommate at Yeshivah Torah Vodaath. He was a student of the recently deceased Rabbi and Dr. Abraham J Twersky, who according to his obit in the New York Times was “the descendant of several Hasidic dynasties. Yet he was also a psychiatrist and a respected authority on addiction who was drawn to the 12-step approach central to Alcoholics Anonymous, a program whose origins are Christian….. (see more here). Rabbi Hirsh actually edited a Hagadah written by Dr. Twerski which is based on the premise that “The original passage from bondage to freedom, Exodus, is equated to a person with a substance abuse problem and their passage to freedom through recovery. (see here)
sefaria Source sheet here.
The Biblical Nazarite - lessons in addiction, sobriety and joyful living
-
- במדבר ו׳:א׳-י״א (א) וַיְדַבֵּ֥ר ה' אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֥ה לֵּאמֹֽר׃ (ב) דַּבֵּר֙ אֶל־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל וְאָמַרְתָּ֖ אֲלֵהֶ֑ם אִ֣ישׁ אֽוֹ־אִשָּׁ֗ה כִּ֤י יַפְלִא֙ לִנְדֹּר֙ נֶ֣דֶר נָזִ֔יר לְהַזִּ֖יר לַֽה'׃ (ג) מִיַּ֤יִן וְשֵׁכָר֙ יַזִּ֔יר חֹ֥מֶץ יַ֛יִן וְחֹ֥מֶץ שֵׁכָ֖ר לֹ֣א יִשְׁתֶּ֑ה וְכׇל־מִשְׁרַ֤ת עֲנָבִים֙ לֹ֣א יִשְׁתֶּ֔ה וַעֲנָבִ֛ים לַחִ֥ים וִיבֵשִׁ֖ים לֹ֥א יֹאכֵֽל׃ (ד) כֹּ֖ל יְמֵ֣י נִזְר֑וֹ מִכֹּל֩ אֲשֶׁ֨ר יֵעָשֶׂ֜ה מִגֶּ֣פֶן הַיַּ֗יִן מֵחַרְצַנִּ֛ים וְעַד־זָ֖ג לֹ֥א יֹאכֵֽל׃ (ה) כׇּל־יְמֵי֙ נֶ֣דֶר נִזְר֔וֹ תַּ֖עַר לֹא־יַעֲבֹ֣ר עַל־רֹאשׁ֑וֹ עַד־מְלֹ֨את הַיָּמִ֜ם אֲשֶׁר־יַזִּ֤יר לַה' קָדֹ֣שׁ יִהְיֶ֔ה גַּדֵּ֥ל פֶּ֖רַע שְׂעַ֥ר רֹאשֽׁוֹ׃ (ו) כׇּל־יְמֵ֥י הַזִּיר֖וֹ לַה' עַל־נֶ֥פֶשׁ מֵ֖ת לֹ֥א יָבֹֽא׃ (ז) לְאָבִ֣יו וּלְאִמּ֗וֹ לְאָחִיו֙ וּלְאַ֣חֹת֔וֹ לֹא־יִטַּמָּ֥א לָהֶ֖ם בְּמֹתָ֑ם כִּ֛י נֵ֥זֶר אֱלֹקָ֖יו עַל־רֹאשֽׁוֹ׃ (ח) כֹּ֖ל יְמֵ֣י נִזְר֑וֹ קָדֹ֥שׁ ה֖וּא לַֽה'׃ (ט) וְכִֽי־יָמ֨וּת מֵ֤ת עָלָיו֙ בְּפֶ֣תַע פִּתְאֹ֔ם וְטִמֵּ֖א רֹ֣אשׁ נִזְר֑וֹ וְגִלַּ֤ח רֹאשׁוֹ֙ בְּי֣וֹם טׇהֳרָת֔וֹ בַּיּ֥וֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִ֖י יְגַלְּחֶֽנּוּ׃ (י) וּבַיּ֣וֹם הַשְּׁמִינִ֗י יָבִא֙ שְׁתֵּ֣י תֹרִ֔ים א֥וֹ שְׁנֵ֖י בְּנֵ֣י יוֹנָ֑ה אֶ֨ל־הַכֹּהֵ֔ן אֶל־פֶּ֖תַח אֹ֥הֶל מוֹעֵֽד׃ (יא) וְעָשָׂ֣ה הַכֹּהֵ֗ן אֶחָ֤ד לְחַטָּאת֙ וְאֶחָ֣ד לְעֹלָ֔ה וְכִפֶּ֣ר עָלָ֔יו מֵאֲשֶׁ֥ר חָטָ֖א עַל־הַנָּ֑פֶשׁ וְקִדַּ֥שׁ אֶת־רֹאשׁ֖וֹ בַּיּ֥וֹם הַהֽוּא׃
Numbers 6:1-11 (1) The LORD spoke to Moses, saying: (2) Speak to the Israelites and say to them: If anyone, man or woman, explicitly utters a nazirite’s vow, to set himself apart for the LORD, (3) he shall abstain from wine and any other intoxicant; he shall not drink vinegar of wine or of any other intoxicant, neither shall he drink anything in which grapes have been steeped, nor eat grapes fresh or dried. (4) Throughout his term as nazirite, he may not eat anything that is obtained from the grapevine, even seeds or skin. (5) Throughout the term of his vow as nazirite, no razor shall touch his head; it shall remain consecrated until the completion of his term as nazirite of the LORD, the hair of his head being left to grow untrimmed. (6) Throughout the term that he has set apart for the LORD, he shall not go in where there is a dead person. (7) Even if his father or mother, or his brother or sister should die, he must not defile himself for them, since hair set apart for his God is upon his head: (8) throughout his term as nazirite he is consecrated to the LORD. (9) If a person dies suddenly near him, defiling his consecrated hair, he shall shave his head on the day he becomes clean; he shall shave it on the seventh day. (10) On the eighth day he shall bring two turtledoves or two pigeons to the priest, at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting. (11) The priest shall offer one as a sin offering and the other as a burnt offering, and make expiation on his behalf for the guilt that he incurred through the corpse. That same day he shall reconsecrate his head 2. ב. 2. רש"י על במדבר ו׳:י״א:א׳ מאשר חטא על הנפש. שֶׁלֹּא נִזְהַר מִטֻּמְאַת הַמֵּת, רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר הַקַּפָּר אוֹמֵר, שֶׁצִּעֵר עַצְמוֹ מִן הַיַּיִן (ספרי; נזיר י"ט):
Rashi on Numbers 6:11:1 מאשר חטא על הנפש [AND THE PRIEST … MAKE EXPIATION FOR HIM] FOR THAT HE HATH SINNED BY THE DEAD — i.e., that he has not been on his guard against defilement by a corpse. — R. Eleazer ha-Kappar said, “his sin consists in that he has afflicted himself by abstaining from the enjoyment of wine (Sifrei Bamidbar 30; Nazir 19a). 3. ג. 3. ספרי במדבר ל׳:א׳ וכפר עליו מאשר חטא על הנפש (תענית י"א וש"נ) וכי על איזו נפש חטא בה שצריך כפרה, על שציער עצמו מן היין. והלא דברים קל וחומר ומה אם המצער נפשו מן היין צריך כפרה, קל וחומר למצער נפשו (על כל) דבר.
Sifrei Bamidbar 30:1 (Bamidbar 6:11) "and he shall atone for him for having sinned against the soul": Now against which soul did he sin that he needs atonement? (His sin is) that he deprived himself of wine. Now does this not follow a fortiori, viz.: If one who deprives himself of wine needs atonement, how much more so, one who deprives himself of everything (by fasting)! 4. ד. 4. נזיר י״ט א דְּתַנְיָא רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר הַקַּפָּר בְּרַבִּי אוֹמֵר מָה תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר וְכִפֶּר עָלָיו מֵאֲשֶׁר חָטָא עַל הַנָּפֶשׁ וְכִי בְּאֵיזוֹ נֶפֶשׁ חָטָא זֶה אֶלָּא שֶׁצִּיעֵר עַצְמוֹ מִן הַיַּיִן וְקַל וָחוֹמֶר וּמָה זֶה שֶׁלֹּא צִיעֵר עַצְמוֹ אֶלָּא מִן הַיַּיִן נִקְרָא חוֹטֵא הַמְצַעֵר עַצְמוֹ מִכׇּל דָּבָר עַל אַחַת כַּמָּה וְכַמָּה Nazir 19a As it is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Elazar HaKappar, the esteemed one, says: What is the meaning when the verse states with regard to a nazirite: “And make atonement for him, for he sinned by the soul” (Numbers 6:11)? And with which soul did this person sin by becoming a nazirite? Rather, in afflicting himself by abstaining from wine, he is considered to have sinned with his own soul, and he must bring a sin-offering for the naziriteship itself, for causing his body to suffer. And an a fortiori inference can be learned from this: Just as this person, in afflicting himself by abstaining only from wine, is nevertheless called a sinner, in the case of one who afflicts himself by abstaining from everything, through fasting or other acts of mortification, all the more so is he described as a sinner. According to this opinion, Rabbi Yishmael holds that since the woman afflicted herself by abstaining from wine she must bring a sin-offering, even though, due to her husband’s nullification, she did not actually become a nazirite. 5. ה. 5. רמב"ן על במדבר ו׳:י״א:א׳ וטעם החטאת שיקריב הנזיר ביום מלאת ימי נזרו לא נתפרש. ועל דרך הפשט כי האיש הזה חוטא נפשו במלאת הנזירות כי הוא עתה נזור מקדושתו ועבודת השם וראוי היה לו שיזיר לעולם ויעמוד כל ימיו נזיר וקדוש לאלקיו כענין שאמר (עמוס ב יא) ואקים מבניכם לנביאים ומבחוריכם לנזירים. השוה אותו הכתוב לנביא וכדכתיב (במדבר ו׳:ח׳) כל ימי נזרו קדוש הוא לה' והנה הוא צריך כפרה בשובו להטמא בתאוות העולם:
Ramban on Numbers 6:11:1 AND THE PRIEST SHALL PREPARE ONE FOR A SIN-OFFERING. The reason why a Nazirite must bring a sin-offering when the days of his Naziritehood are fulfilled has not been explained. In accordance with the plain meaning of Scripture, [it is because] this man sins against his soul on the day of completion of his Naziritehood; for until now he was separated in sanctity and the service of G-d, and he should therefore have remained separated forever, continuing all his life consecrated and sanctified to his G-d, as it is said, And I raised up of your sons for prophets, and of your young men for Nazirites, where Scripture compares the Nazirite to a prophet, and as it is written, All the days of his Naziritehood he is holy unto the Eternal. Thus [when he completes his Naziritehood and returns to his normal life] he requires atonement, since he goes back to be defiled by [material] desires of the world. 6. ו. 6. שבת ל״ג ב דְּיָתְבִי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה וְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, וְיָתֵיב יְהוּדָה בֶּן גֵּרִים גַּבַּיְיהוּ. פָּתַח רַבִּי יְהוּדָה וְאָמַר: כַּמָּה נָאִים מַעֲשֵׂיהֶן שֶׁל אוּמָּה זוֹ: תִּקְּנוּ שְׁווֹקִים, תִּקְּנוּ גְּשָׁרִים, תִּקְנוּ מֶרְחֲצָאוֹת. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי שָׁתַק. נַעֲנָה רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַאי וְאָמַר: כׇּל מַה שֶּׁתִּקְּנוּ, לֹא תִּקְּנוּ אֶלָּא לְצוֹרֶךְ עַצְמָן. תִּקְּנוּ שְׁווֹקִין — לְהוֹשִׁיב בָּהֶן זוֹנוֹת, מֶרְחֲצָאוֹת — לְעַדֵּן בָּהֶן עַצְמָן, גְּשָׁרִים — לִיטּוֹל מֵהֶן מֶכֶס. הָלַךְ יְהוּדָה בֶּן גֵּרִים וְסִיפֵּר דִּבְרֵיהֶם, וְנִשְׁמְעוּ לַמַּלְכוּת. אָמְרוּ: יְהוּדָה שֶׁעִילָּה — יִתְעַלֶּה. יוֹסֵי שֶׁשָּׁתַק — יִגְלֶה לְצִיפּוֹרִי. שִׁמְעוֹן שֶׁגִּינָּה — יֵהָרֵג. אֲזַל הוּא וּבְרֵיהּ, טְשׁוֹ בֵּי מִדְרְשָׁא. כׇּל יוֹמָא הֲוָה מַתְיָא לְהוּ דְּבֵיתְהוּ רִיפְתָּא וְכוּזָא דְמַיָּא וְכָרְכִי. כִּי תְּקֵיף גְּזֵירְתָא אֲמַר לֵיהּ לִבְרֵיהּ: נָשִׁים דַּעְתָּן קַלָּה עֲלֵיהֶן, דִילְמָא מְצַעֲרִי לַהּ וּמְגַלְּיָא לַן. אֲזַלוּ טְשׁוֹ בִּמְעָרְתָּא. אִיתְרְחִישׁ נִיסָּא אִיבְּרִי לְהוּ חָרוּבָא וְעֵינָא דְמַיָּא, וַהֲווֹ מַשְׁלְחִי מָנַיְיהוּ וַהֲווֹ יָתְבִי עַד צַוְּארַיְיהוּ בְּחָלָא. כּוּלֵּי יוֹמָא גָּרְסִי. בְּעִידָּן צַלּוֹיֵי לָבְשִׁי מִיכַּסּוּ וּמְצַלּוּ, וַהֲדַר מַשְׁלְחִי מָנַיְיהוּ כִּי הֵיכִי דְּלָא לִיבְלוּ. אִיתִּיבוּ תְּרֵיסַר שְׁנֵי בִּמְעָרְתָּא. אֲתָא אֵלִיָּהוּ וְקָם אַפִּיתְחָא דִמְעָרְתָּא, אֲמַר: מַאן לוֹדְעֵיהּ לְבַר יוֹחַי דְּמִית קֵיסָר וּבְטִיל גְּזֵירְתֵיהּ. נְפַקוּ, חֲזוֹ אִינָשֵׁי דְּקָא כָּרְבִי וְזָרְעִי, אָמְרִין: מַנִּיחִין חַיֵּי עוֹלָם וְעוֹסְקִין בְּחַיֵּי שָׁעָה. כׇּל מָקוֹם שֶׁנּוֹתְנִין עֵינֵיהֶן מִיָּד נִשְׂרָף. יָצְתָה בַּת קוֹל וְאָמְרָה לָהֶם: לְהַחֲרִיב עוֹלָמִי יְצָאתֶם?! חִיזְרוּ לִמְעָרַתְכֶם! הֲדוּר אֲזוּל אִיתִּיבוּ תְּרֵיסַר יַרְחֵי שַׁתָּא. אָמְרִי: מִשְׁפַּט רְשָׁעִים בְּגֵיהִנָּם שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ. יָצְתָה בַּת קוֹל וְאָמְרָה: צְאוּ מִמְּעָרַתְכֶם! נְפַקוּ. כָּל הֵיכָא דַּהֲוָה מָחֵי רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר, הֲוָה מַסֵּי רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. אָמַר לוֹ: בְּנִי, דַּי לָעוֹלָם אֲנִי וְאַתָּה. בַּהֲדֵי פַּנְיָא דְּמַעֲלֵי שַׁבְּתָא חֲזוֹ הָהוּא סָבָא דַּהֲוָה נָקֵיט תְּרֵי מַדָּאנֵי אָסָא וְרָהֵיט בֵּין הַשְּׁמָשׁוֹת. אֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ: הָנֵי לְמָה לָךְ? אֲמַר לְהוּ: לִכְבוֹד שַׁבָּת. וְתִיסְגֵּי לָךְ בְּחַד! — חַד כְּנֶגֶד ״זָכוֹר״ וְחַד כְּנֶגֶד ״שָׁמוֹר״. אֲמַר לֵיהּ לִבְרֵיהּ: חֲזִי כַּמָּה חֲבִיבִין מִצְוֹת עַל יִשְׂרָאֵל. אִיְּתִיבָה דַּעְתַּיְיהוּ. שְׁמַע רַבִּי פִּנְחָס בֶּן יָאִיר חַתְנֵיהּ וּנְפַק לְאַפֵּיהּ. עַיְּילֵיהּ לְבֵי בָנֵי, הֲוָה קָא אָרֵיךְ לֵיהּ לְבִישְׂרֵיהּ. חֲזָא דַּהֲוָה בֵּיהּ פִּילֵי בְּגוּפֵיהּ. הֲוָה קָא בָכֵי וְקָא נָתְרָן דִּמְעָת עֵינֵיהּ וְקָמְצַוְּחָא לֵיהּ. אָמַר לוֹ: אוֹי לִי שֶׁרְאִיתִיךָ בְּכָךְ. אָמַר לוֹ: אַשְׁרֶיךָ שֶׁרְאִיתַנִי בְּכָךְ, שֶׁאִילְמָלֵא לֹא רְאִיתַנִי בְּכָךְ — לֹא מָצָאתָ בִּי כָּךְ. דְּמֵעִיקָּרָא כִּי הֲוָה מַקְשֵׁי רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי קוּשְׁיָא, הֲוָה מְפָרֵק לֵיהּ רַבִּי פִּנְחָס בֶּן יָאִיר תְּרֵיסַר פֵּירוּקֵי. לְסוֹף, כִּי הֲוָה מַקְשֵׁי רַבִּי פִּנְחָס בֶּן יָאִיר קוּשְׁיָא — הֲוָה מְפָרֵק לֵיהּ רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי עֶשְׂרִין וְאַרְבְּעָה פֵּירוּקֵי. אֲמַר: הוֹאִיל וְאִיתְרְחִישׁ נִיסָּא אֵיזִיל אַתְקֵין מִילְּתָא. דִּכְתִיב: ״וַיָּבֹא יַעֲקֹב שָׁלֵם״, וְאָמַר רַב: שָׁלֵם בְּגוּפוֹ, שָׁלֵם בְּמָמוֹנוֹ, שָׁלֵם בְּתוֹרָתוֹ. ״וַיִּחַן אֶת פְּנֵי הָעִיר״, אָמַר רַב: מַטְבֵּעַ תִּיקֵּן לָהֶם, וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: שְׁווֹקִים תִּיקֵּן לָהֶם, וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: מֶרְחֲצָאוֹת תִּיקֵּן לָהֶם. אֲמַר: אִיכָּא מִילְּתָא דְּבָעֵי לְתַקּוֹנֵי? אֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ: אִיכָּא דּוּכְתָּא דְּאִית בֵּיהּ סְפֵק טוּמְאָה
Shabbat 33b when Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Shimon were sitting, and Yehuda, son of converts, sat beside them. Rabbi Yehuda opened and said: How pleasant are the actions of this nation, the Romans, as they established marketplaces, established bridges, and established bathhouses. Rabbi Yosei was silent. Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai responded and said: Everything that they established, they established only for their own purposes. They established marketplaces, to place prostitutes in them; bathhouses, to pamper themselves; and bridges, to collect taxes from all who pass over them. Yehuda, son of converts, went and related their statements to his household, and those statements continued to spread until they were heard by the monarchy. They ruled and said: Yehuda, who elevated the Roman regime, shall be elevated and appointed as head of the Sages, the head of the speakers in every place. Yosei, who remained silent, shall be exiled from his home in Judea as punishment, and sent to the city of Tzippori in the Galilee. And Shimon, who denounced the government, shall be killed. Rabbi Shimon bar Yoḥai and his son, Rabbi Elazar, went and hid in the study hall. Every day Rabbi Shimon’s wife would bring them bread and a jug of water and they would eat. When the decree intensified, Rabbi Shimon said to his son: Women are easily impressionable and, therefore, there is room for concern lest the authorities torture her and she reveal our whereabouts. They went and they hid in a cave. A miracle occurred and a carob tree was created for them as well as a spring of water. They would remove their clothes and sit covered in sand up to their necks. They would study Torah all day in that manner. At the time of prayer, they would dress, cover themselves, and pray, and they would again remove their clothes afterward so that they would not become tattered. They sat in the cave for twelve years. Elijah the Prophet came and stood at the entrance to the cave and said: Who will inform bar Yoḥai that the emperor died and his decree has been abrogated? They emerged from the cave, and saw people who were plowing and sowing. Rabbi Shimon bar Yoḥai said: These people abandon eternal life of Torah study and engage in temporal life for their own sustenance. The Gemara relates that every place that Rabbi Shimon and his son Rabbi Elazar directed their eyes was immediately burned. A Divine Voice emerged and said to them: Did you emerge from the cave in order to destroy My world? Return to your cave. They again went and sat there for twelve months. They said: The judgment of the wicked in Gehenna lasts for twelve months. Surely their sin was atoned in that time. A Divine Voice emerged and said to them: Emerge from your cave. They emerged. Everywhere that Rabbi Elazar would strike, Rabbi Shimon would heal. Rabbi Shimon said to Rabbi Elazar: My son, you and I suffice for the entire world, as the two of us are engaged in the proper study of Torah. As the sun was setting on Shabbat eve, they saw an elderly man who was holding two bundles of myrtle branches and running at twilight. They said to him: Why do you have these? He said to them: In honor of Shabbat. They said to him: And let one suffice. He answered them: One is corresponding to: “Remember the Shabbat day, to keep it holy” (Exodus 20:8), and one is corresponding to: “Observe the Shabbat day, to keep it holy” (Deuteronomy 5:12). Rabbi Shimon said to his son: See how beloved the mitzvot are to Israel. Their minds were put at ease and they were no longer as upset that people were not engaged in Torah study. Rabbi Pineḥas ben Ya’ir, Rabbi Shimon’s son-in-law, heard and went out to greet him. He brought him into the bathhouse and began tending to his flesh. He saw that Rabbi Shimon had cracks in the skin on his body. He was crying, and the tears fell from his eyes and caused Rabbi Shimon pain. Rabbi Pineḥas said to Rabbi Shimon, his father-in-law: Woe is me, that I have seen you like this. Rabbi Shimon said to him: Happy are you that you have seen me like this, as had you not seen me like this, you would not have found in me this prominence in Torah, as the Gemara relates: At first, when Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai would raise a difficulty, Rabbi Pineḥas ben Ya’ir would respond to his question with twelve answers. Ultimately, when Rabbi Pineḥas ben Ya’ir would raise a difficulty, Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai would respond with twenty-four answers. Rabbi Shimon said: Since a miracle transpired for me, I will go and repair something for the sake of others in gratitude for God’s kindness, as it is written: “And Jacob came whole to the city of Shechem, which is in the land of Canaan, when he came from Paddan-aram; and he graced the countenance of the city” (Genesis 33:18). Rav said, the meaning of: And Jacob came whole, is: Whole in his body, whole in his money, whole in his Torah. And what did he do? And he graced the countenance of the city; he performed gracious acts to benefit the city. Rav said: Jacob established a currency for them. And Shmuel said: He established marketplaces for them. And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: He established bathhouses for them. In any event, clearly one for whom a miracle transpires should perform an act of kindness for his neighbors as a sign of gratitude. He said: Is there something that needs repair? They said to him: There is a place where there is uncertainty with regard to ritual impurity 7. ז. 7. שמונה פרקים ד׳:ט׳ וזאת התורה התמימה המשלמת אותנו כמו שהעיד עליה יודעה, תורת י"י תמימה משיבת נפש, עדות י"י נאמנה מחכימת פתי, לא זכרה דבר מזה, ואמנם כוונה להיות האדם טבעי הולך בדרך האמצעיה, יאכל מה שיש לו לאכול בשויי, וישתה מה שיש לו לשתות בשווי, ויבעול מה שמותר לו לבעול בשווי, וישכון המדינות ביושר ואמונה לא שישכון במדברות ובהרים, ולא שילבש השער והצמר ולא שיענה גופו, והזהירה מזה לפי מה שבא בקבלה אמר בנזיר וכפר עליו מאשר חטא על הנפש, ואמרו ז"ל וכי על איזה נפש חטא זה, על שמנע עצמו מן היין, והלא הדברים קל וחומר אם מי שציער עצמו מן היין צריך כפרה, המצער עצמו מכל דבר על אחת כמה וכמה. ובדברי נביאנו וחכמי תורתינו ראינו שהם מכוונים אל השווי ושמירת נפשם וגופם על מה שתחייבהו התורה, וענה השם ית' על יד נביאו למי ששאל לצום יום אחד בשנה אם יתמיד עליו אם לא, והוא אמרם לזכריהו אבכה בחדש החמישי הנזר כאשר עשיתי זה כמה שנים, וענה אותם כי צמתם וספוד בחמישי ובשביעי זה שבעים שנה הצום צמתוני אני וכי תאכלו וכי תשתו הלא אתם האוכלים ואתם השותים, אחר כן צוה אותם ביושר ובמעלה לבד לא בצום, והוא אמרו להם כה אמר י"י צבאות לאמר משפט אמת שפטו וחסד ורחמים עשו איש את אחיו, ואמר אחר כן כה אמר י"י צבאות צום הרביעי וצום החמישי וצום השביעי וצום העשירי יהיו לבית יהודה לששון ולשמחה ולמועדים טובים והאמת והשלום אהבו, ודע שאמת הם המעלות השכליות מפני שהן אמיתיות לא ישתנו כמו שזכרנו בפרק השני, והשלום הם מעלות המדות אשר בהם יהיה השלום בעולם. ואשוב אל כוונתי שאם יאמרו אלו המתדמים באומות מאנשי תורתינו, שאיני מדבר כי אם בהם, שהם אינם עושים מה שעושים אותו מהטריח גופותם ופסוק הנאותיהם אלא על דרך הלמוד לכחות הנפש, כדי שיהיו נוטים אל הצד האחד מעט כפי מה שבארנו בזה הפרק שראוי שיהיה האדם כן, זהו טעות מהם כאשר אבאר.
Eight Chapters 4:9 Eight Chapters is Rambam’s introduction to Pirkei Avot.
The perfect Law which leads us to perfection as one who knew it well testifies by the words, (Psalms 19:8) "The Law of the Lord is perfect restoring the soul; the testimonies of the Lord are faithful making wise the simple" recommends none of these things (such as self-torture, flight from society etc.). On the contrary, it aims at man's following the path of moderation, in accordance with the dictates of nature, eating, drinking, enjoying legitimate sexual intercourse, all in moderation, and living among people in honesty and uprightness, but not dwelling in the wilderness or in the mountains, or clothing oneself in garments of hair and wool, or afflicting the body. The Law even warns us against these practices, if we interpret it according to what tradition tells us is the meaning of the passage concerning the Nazarite, (Numbers 6:11) "And he (the priest) shall make an atonement for him because he hath sinned against the soul." The Rabbis ask, "Against what soul has he sinned? Against his own soul, because he has deprived himself of wine. Is this not then a conclusion a minori ad majus? If one who deprives himself merely of wine must bring an atonement, how much more incumbent is it upon one who denies himself every enjoyment." By the words of our prophets and of the sages of our Law, we see that they were bent upon moderation and the care of their souls and bodies, in accordance with what the Law prescribes and with the answer which God gave through His prophet to those who asked whether the fast-day once a year should continue or not. They asked Zechariah, "Shall I weep in the fifth month with abstinence as I have done already these many years?" His, answer was, (Zachariah 7:3-7) "When ye fasted and mourned in the fifth and in the seventh (month) already these seventy years, did ye in anywise fast for me, yea for me? And if ye do eat and if ye do drink are ye not yourselves those that eat and yourselves those that drink?" After that, he enjoined upon them justice and virtue alone, and not fasting, when he said to them, (Zachariah 7:9) "Thus hath said the Lord of Hosts. Execute justice and show kindness and mercy every man to his brother." He said further, (Zachariah 8:19) "Thus hath said the Lord of Hosts, the fast- day of the fourth, and the fast-day of the fifth, and the fast of seventh, and the fast of the tenth (month) shall become to the house of Judah gladness, and joy, and merry festivals; only love ye truth and peace." Know that by "truth" the intellectual virtues are meant, for they are immutably true, as we have explained in Chapter 2, and that by "peace" the moral virtues are designated, for upon them depends the peace of the world. But to resume. Should those of our co-religionists and it is of them alone that I speak who imitate the followers of other religions, maintain that when they torment their bodies, and renounce every joy, that they do so merely to discipline the faculties of their souls by inclining somewhat to the one extreme, as is proper, and in accordance with our own recommendations in this chapter, our answer is that they are in error, as I shall now demonstrate.
ח. 8. Rabbi Abraham J Twersky
Abraham J. Twerski was an Orthodox rabbi, the descendant of several Hasidic dynasties. Yet he was also a psychiatrist and a respected authority on addiction who was drawn to the 12-step approach central to Alcoholics Anonymous, a program whose origins are Christian.
“He discovered in A.A. meetings the kind of sincere and even selfless fellow-feeling that was often absent in synagogues,” Andrew Heinze wrote in a 1999 profile of Rabbi Twerski for Judaism, the quarterly magazine of the American Jewish Congress. “He was moved by the example of men and women who would willingly be awakened in the middle of the night to go out and help a fellow alcoholic.”
He saw no contradiction between the 12 steps and his belief in the laws of Torah, according to his granddaughter Chaya Ruchie Waldman. “The 12 steps may have been created by Christian believers,” she said, “but it was about spirituality, surrendering to a higher power, and that is synonymous with Judaism.”
Rabbi Twerski melded an eclectic menu of treatments in his work as director of psychiatry at St. Francis Hospital in Pittsburgh. The Gateway Rehabilitation Center, which he founded, was named one of the top 12 rehabilitation clinics in the United States by Forbes magazine in 1987. He also wrote 80 books, many on Jewish topics but many others on addictive thinking and the addictive personality, all of which enhanced his international reputation as an authority on addiction.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/06/science/abraham-j-twerski-dead-coronavirus.html
See:
Artscroll: Haggadah From Bondage to Freedom by Rabbi Abraham J. Twerski (English, Hebrew and Hebrew Edition) Hardcover – February 1, 1995
Hebrew Edition by Abraham J. Twerski (Author, Editor), Hirsh Michel Chinn (Editor)
It is hard to find books dealing with recovery from a Jewish perspective, this book is a great addition to your library. The original passage from bondage to freedom, Exodus, is equated to a person with a substance abuse problem and their passage to freedom through recovery.
Parshat Bamidbar - Was Ben Gurion's vision of a People's Army which united the country and created a melting pot for Israeli Society foreshadowed in the Bible? Does the elimination of a militant and ideologically pure Priestly cast from the Biblical army have lessons for us today?
**Ben Gurion's Peoples Army (From Wikipedia)**
The model is based on David Ben Gurion’s belief that the universality that would derive from this “melting pot” ideal would help create cohesion among members of society, regardless of their backgrounds; this would serve as both a builder of national identity after the establishment of the state, bringing together people of different socioeconomic backgrounds and racial identities.[4]
There is also the idea that the IDF is by the people, for the people. The IDF allow soldiers to go home often and also allows regular communication with the “outside world.” After an initial training period, the formality commonly associated with military service dissipates, which serves as a tool to promote this ideal.[5]
One of the initial goals of the People's Army Model is to serve as an apolitical, strong force; in theory, it is the best functioning government institution.[6]
במדבר א׳:ב׳-ג׳ (ב) שְׂא֗וּ אֶת־רֹאשׁ֙ כָּל־עֲדַ֣ת בְּנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָ֖ם לְבֵ֣ית אֲבֹתָ֑ם בְּמִסְפַּ֣ר שֵׁמ֔וֹת כָּל־זָכָ֖ר לְגֻלְגְּלֹתָֽם׃ (ג) מִבֶּ֨ן עֶשְׂרִ֤ים שָׁנָה֙ וָמַ֔עְלָה **כָּל־יֹצֵ֥א צָבָ֖א** בְּיִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל תִּפְקְד֥וּ אֹתָ֛ם לְצִבְאֹתָ֖ם אַתָּ֥ה וְאַהֲרֹֽן׃
Numbers 1:2-3 (2) Take a census of the whole Israelite community by the clans of its ancestral houses, listing the names, every male, head by head. (3) You and Aaron shall record them by their groups, from the age of twenty years up, **all those in Israel who are able to bear arms**.
במדבר א׳:מ״ה-מ״ז (מה) וַיִּֽהְי֛וּ כָּל־פְּקוּדֵ֥י בְנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל לְבֵ֣ית אֲבֹתָ֑ם מִבֶּ֨ן עֶשְׂרִ֤ים שָׁנָה֙ וָמַ֔עְלָה כָּל־יֹצֵ֥א צָבָ֖א בְּיִשְׂרָאֵֽל׃ (מו) וַיִּֽהְיוּ֙ כָּל־הַפְּקֻדִ֔ים שֵׁשׁ־מֵא֥וֹת אֶ֖לֶף וּשְׁלֹ֣שֶׁת אֲלָפִ֑ים וַחֲמֵ֥שׁ מֵא֖וֹת וַחֲמִשִּֽׁים׃ (מז) **וְהַלְוִיִּ֖ם לְמַטֵּ֣ה אֲבֹתָ֑ם לֹ֥א הָתְפָּקְד֖וּ בְּתוֹכָֽם**׃ (פ)
Numbers 1:45-47 (45) All the Israelites, aged twenty years and over, enrolled by ancestral houses, all those in Israel who were able to bear arms— (46) all who were enrolled came to **603,550**. (47) **The Levites, however, were not recorded among them by their ancestral tribe.**
שמות ל״ח:כ״ה-כ״ו (כה) וְכֶ֛סֶף פְּקוּדֵ֥י הָעֵדָ֖ה מְאַ֣ת כִּכָּ֑ר וְאֶלֶף֩ וּשְׁבַ֨ע מֵא֜וֹת וַחֲמִשָּׁ֧ה וְשִׁבְעִ֛ים שֶׁ֖קֶל בְּשֶׁ֥קֶל הַקֹּֽדֶשׁ׃ (כו) בֶּ֚קַע לַגֻּלְגֹּ֔לֶת מַחֲצִ֥ית הַשֶּׁ֖קֶל בְּשֶׁ֣קֶל הַקֹּ֑דֶשׁ לְכֹ֨ל הָעֹבֵ֜ר עַל־הַפְּקֻדִ֗ים מִבֶּ֨ן עֶשְׂרִ֤ים שָׁנָה֙ וָמַ֔עְלָה לְשֵׁשׁ־מֵא֥וֹת אֶ֙לֶף֙ וּשְׁלֹ֣שֶׁת אֲלָפִ֔ים וַחֲמֵ֥שׁ מֵא֖וֹת וַחֲמִשִּֽׁים׃ Exodus 38:25-26 (25) The silver of those of the community who were recorded came to 100 talents and 1,775 shekels by the sanctuary weight: (26) a half-shekel a head, half a shekel by the sanctuary weight, for each one who was entered in the records, from the age of twenty years up, **603,550** men.
שמות י״ב:ל״ז (לז) וַיִּסְע֧וּ בְנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֛ל מֵרַעְמְסֵ֖ס סֻכֹּ֑תָה כְּשֵׁשׁ־מֵא֨וֹת אֶ֧לֶף רַגְלִ֛י הַגְּבָרִ֖ים לְבַ֥ד מִטָּֽף׃ Exodus 12:37 (37) The Israelites journeyed from Raamses to Succoth, about **600,000** men on foot, aside from children.
דברים כ׳:ד׳-ח׳ (ד) כִּ֚י ה' אֱלֹֽקֵיכֶ֔ם הַהֹלֵ֖ךְ עִמָּכֶ֑ם לְהִלָּחֵ֥ם לָכֶ֛ם עִם־אֹיְבֵיכֶ֖ם לְהוֹשִׁ֥יעַ אֶתְכֶֽם׃ (ה) וְדִבְּר֣וּ הַשֹּֽׁטְרִים֮ אֶל־הָעָ֣ם לֵאמֹר֒ **מִֽי־הָאִ֞ישׁ אֲשֶׁ֨ר בָּנָ֤ה בַֽיִת־חָדָשׁ֙ וְלֹ֣א חֲנָכ֔וֹ יֵלֵ֖ךְ וְיָשֹׁ֣ב לְבֵית֑וֹ פֶּן־יָמוּת֙ בַּמִּלְחָמָ֔ה וְאִ֥ישׁ אַחֵ֖ר יַחְנְכֶֽנּוּ**׃ (ו) וּמִֽי־הָאִ֞ישׁ אֲשֶׁר־נָטַ֥ע כֶּ֙רֶם֙ וְלֹ֣א חִלְּל֔וֹ יֵלֵ֖ךְ וְיָשֹׁ֣ב לְבֵית֑וֹ פֶּן־יָמוּת֙ בַּמִּלְחָמָ֔ה וְאִ֥ישׁ אַחֵ֖ר יְחַלְּלֶֽנּוּ׃ (ז) וּמִֽי־הָאִ֞ישׁ אֲשֶׁר־אֵרַ֤שׂ אִשָּׁה֙ וְלֹ֣א לְקָחָ֔הּ יֵלֵ֖ךְ וְיָשֹׁ֣ב לְבֵית֑וֹ פֶּן־יָמוּת֙ בַּמִּלְחָמָ֔ה וְאִ֥ישׁ אַחֵ֖ר יִקָּחֶֽנָּה׃ (ח) וְיָסְפ֣וּ הַשֹּׁטְרִים֮ לְדַבֵּ֣ר אֶל־הָעָם֒ וְאָמְר֗וּ מִי־הָאִ֤ישׁ הַיָּרֵא֙ וְרַ֣ךְ הַלֵּבָ֔ב יֵלֵ֖ךְ וְיָשֹׁ֣ב לְבֵית֑וֹ וְלֹ֥א יִמַּ֛ס אֶת־לְבַ֥ב אֶחָ֖יו כִּלְבָבֽוֹ׃
Deuteronomy 20:4-8 (4) For it is the LORD your God who marches with you to do battle for you against your enemy, to bring you victory.” (5) Then the officials shall address the troops, as follows: “**Is there anyone who has built a new house but has not dedicated it? Let him go back to his home, lest he die in battle and another dedicate it.** (6) Is there anyone who has planted a vineyard but has never harvested it? Let him go back to his home, lest he die in battle and another harvest it. (7) Is there anyone who has paid the bride-price for a wife, but who has not yet married her? Let him go back to his home, lest he die in battle and another marry her.” (8) The officials shall go on addressing the troops and say, “Is there anyone afraid and disheartened? Let him go back to his home, lest the courage of his comrades flag like his.”
בראשית מ״ט:ה׳-ז׳ (ה) שִׁמְע֥וֹן וְלֵוִ֖י אַחִ֑ים כְּלֵ֥י חָמָ֖ס מְכֵרֹתֵיהֶֽם׃ (ו) בְּסֹדָם֙ אַל־תָּבֹ֣א נַפְשִׁ֔י בִּקְהָלָ֖ם אַל־תֵּחַ֣ד כְּבֹדִ֑י כִּ֤י בְאַפָּם֙ הָ֣רְגוּ אִ֔ישׁ וּבִרְצֹנָ֖ם עִקְּרוּ־שֽׁוֹר׃ (ז) אָר֤וּר אַפָּם֙ כִּ֣י עָ֔ז וְעֶבְרָתָ֖ם כִּ֣י קָשָׁ֑תָה אֲחַלְּקֵ֣ם בְּיַעֲקֹ֔ב וַאֲפִיצֵ֖ם בְּיִשְׂרָאֵֽל׃ (ס) Genesis 49:5-7 (5) Simeon and Levi are a pair; Their weapons are tools of lawlessness. (6) Let not my person be included in their council, Let not my being be counted in their assembly. For when angry they slay men, And when pleased they maim oxen. (7) Cursed be their anger so fierce, And their wrath so relentless. I will divide them in Jacob, Scatter them in Israel. רש"י על בראשית מ״ט:ז׳:ב׳ **אחלקם ביעקב.** אַפְרִידֵם זֶה מִזֶּה שֶׁלֹּא יְהֵא לֵוִי בְּמִנְיַן הַשְּׁבָטִים, וַהֲרֵי הֵם חֲלוּקִים. דָּבָר אַחֵר אֵין לְךָ עֲנִיִּים וְסוֹפְרִים וּמְלַמְּדֵי תִינוֹקוֹת אֶלָּא מִשִּׁמְעוֹן, כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּהְיוּ נְפוֹצִים, וְשִׁבְטוֹ שֶׁל לֵוִי עֲשָׂאוֹ מְחַזֵּר עַל הַגְּרָנוֹת לַתְּרוּמוֹת וְלַמַּעַשְׂרוֹת, נָתַן לוֹ תְּפוּצָתוֹ דֶּרֶךְ כָּבוֹד: Rashi on Genesis 49:7:2 אחלקם ביעקב I WILL DIVIDE THEM IN JACOB — I shall separate them from each other inasmuch as Levi shall not be numbered among the tribes (cf. Numbers 26:62) and thus they (Simeon and Levi) will be divided (cf. Genesis Rabbah 98:5). Another interpretation is: both of these tribes will be dispersed in Israel, and this happened, for you will find that the very poor — the Scribes and elementary teachers — were all of the tribe of Simeon, and this was so in order that this tribe should be dispersed, since such poor people must wander from city to city to eke out a livelihood. As for the tribe of Levi, He made them travel round from one threshing floor to another to collect their heave offerings and tithes; thus He caused them also to be “scattered” but in a more respectable manner (Genesis Rabbah 99:6). אבן עזרא על בראשית מ״ט:ז׳:ב׳ **ועברתם.** כפול הטעם. וכן **אחלקם.** ו**אפיצם.** והטעם שהם אלה ראויים שיפרדו ולא יתחברו יחדו והנ' מצאנו כי גורל שמעון נפל בתוך נחלת בני יהודה והנ' הוא ברשות אחר, וגם עריו לא היו דבקים זו לזו. רק מפוזרות בינות גורל יהודה. גם כן לוי שהיו לו שמנה וארבעים עיר והן מפוזרות בינות השבטים: Ibn Ezra on Genesis 49:7:2 AND THEIR WRATH. A repetition in different words of *their anger*. The same is true with *I will divide them* and *And scatter them*. The meaning of *I will divide them in Jacob, And scatter them in Israel* is, Simeon and Levi deserve to be separated and disunited. And so it was. For we find that the lot of the tribe of Simeon fell within the inheritance of the tribe of Judah. Simeon was thus under Judah’s dominion. Furthermore, its cities were discontiguous and scattered throughout the boundary of Judah. Similarly the forty-eight cities of the tribe of Levi were scattered among the other tribes. במדבר ל״ה:א׳-ח׳ (א) וַיְדַבֵּ֧ר ה' אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֖ה בְּעַֽרְבֹ֣ת מוֹאָ֑ב עַל־יַרְדֵּ֥ן יְרֵח֖וֹ לֵאמֹֽר׃ (ב) צַו֮ אֶת־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵל֒ וְנָתְנ֣וּ לַלְוִיִּ֗ם מִֽנַּחֲלַ֛ת אֲחֻזָּתָ֖ם עָרִ֣ים לָשָׁ֑בֶת וּמִגְרָ֗שׁ לֶֽעָרִים֙ סְבִיבֹ֣תֵיהֶ֔ם תִּתְּנ֖וּ לַלְוִיִּֽם׃ (ג) וְהָי֧וּ הֶֽעָרִ֛ים לָהֶ֖ם לָשָׁ֑בֶת וּמִגְרְשֵׁיהֶ֗ם יִהְי֤וּ לִבְהֶמְתָּם֙ וְלִרְכֻשָׁ֔ם וּלְכֹ֖ל חַיָּתָֽם׃ (ד) וּמִגְרְשֵׁי֙ הֶֽעָרִ֔ים אֲשֶׁ֥ר תִּתְּנ֖וּ לַלְוִיִּ֑ם מִקִּ֤יר הָעִיר֙ וָח֔וּצָה אֶ֥לֶף אַמָּ֖ה סָבִֽיב׃ (ה) וּמַדֹּתֶ֞ם מִח֣וּץ לָעִ֗יר אֶת־פְּאַת־קֵ֣דְמָה אַלְפַּ֪יִם בָּֽאַמָּ֟ה וְאֶת־פְּאַת־נֶגֶב֩ אַלְפַּ֨יִם בָּאַמָּ֜ה וְאֶת־פְּאַת־יָ֣ם ׀ אַלְפַּ֣יִם בָּֽאַמָּ֗ה וְאֵ֨ת פְּאַ֥ת צָפ֛וֹן אַלְפַּ֥יִם בָּאַמָּ֖ה וְהָעִ֣יר בַּתָּ֑וֶךְ זֶ֚ה יִהְיֶ֣ה לָהֶ֔ם מִגְרְשֵׁ֖י הֶעָרִֽים׃ (ו) וְאֵ֣ת הֶֽעָרִ֗ים אֲשֶׁ֤ר תִּתְּנוּ֙ לַלְוִיִּ֔ם אֵ֚ת שֵׁשׁ־עָרֵ֣י הַמִּקְלָ֔ט אֲשֶׁ֣ר תִּתְּנ֔וּ לָנֻ֥ס שָׁ֖מָּה הָרֹצֵ֑חַ וַעֲלֵיהֶ֣ם תִּתְּנ֔וּ אַרְבָּעִ֥ים וּשְׁתַּ֖יִם עִֽיר׃ (ז) כָּל־הֶעָרִ֗ים אֲשֶׁ֤ר תִּתְּנוּ֙ לַלְוִיִּ֔ם אַרְבָּעִ֥ים וּשְׁמֹנֶ֖ה עִ֑יר אֶתְהֶ֖ן וְאֶת־מִגְרְשֵׁיהֶֽן׃ (ח) וְהֶֽעָרִ֗ים אֲשֶׁ֤ר תִּתְּנוּ֙ מֵאֲחֻזַּ֣ת בְּנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל מֵאֵ֤ת הָרַב֙ תַּרְבּ֔וּ וּמֵאֵ֥ת הַמְעַ֖ט תַּמְעִ֑יטוּ אִ֗ישׁ כְּפִ֤י נַחֲלָתוֹ֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר יִנְחָ֔לוּ יִתֵּ֥ן מֵעָרָ֖יו לַלְוִיִּֽם׃ (פ) Numbers 35:1-8 (1) The LORD spoke to Moses in the steppes of Moab at the Jordan near Jericho, saying: (2) Instruct the Israelite people to assign, out of the holdings apportioned to them, towns for the Levites to dwell in; you shall also assign to the Levites pasture land around their towns. (3) The towns shall be theirs to dwell in, and the pasture shall be for the cattle they own and all their other beasts. (4) The town pasture that you are to assign to the Levites shall extend a thousand cubits outside the town wall all around. (5) You shall measure off two thousand cubits outside the town on the east side, two thousand on the south side, two thousand on the west side, and two thousand on the north side, with the town in the center. That shall be the pasture for their towns. (6) The towns that you assign to the Levites shall comprise the six cities of refuge that you are to designate for a manslayer to flee to, to which you shall add forty-two towns. (7) Thus the total of the towns that you assign to the Levites shall be forty-eight towns, with their pasture. (8) In assigning towns from the holdings of the Israelites, take more from the larger groups and less from the smaller, so that each assigns towns to the Levites in proportion to the share it receives. שמות ל״ב:כ״ו-כ״ט (כו) וַיַּעֲמֹ֤ד מֹשֶׁה֙ בְּשַׁ֣עַר הַֽמַּחֲנֶ֔ה וַיֹּ֕אמֶר מִ֥י לַה' אֵלָ֑י וַיֵּאָסְפ֥וּ אֵלָ֖יו כָּל־בְּנֵ֥י לֵוִֽי׃ (כז) וַיֹּ֣אמֶר לָהֶ֗ם כֹּֽה־אָמַ֤ר ה' אֱלֹקֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל שִׂ֥ימוּ אִישׁ־חַרְבּ֖וֹ עַל־יְרֵכ֑וֹ עִבְר֨וּ וָשׁ֜וּבוּ מִשַּׁ֤עַר לָשַׁ֙עַר֙ בַּֽמַּחֲנֶ֔ה וְהִרְג֧וּ אִֽישׁ־אֶת־אָחִ֛יו וְאִ֥ישׁ אֶת־רֵעֵ֖הוּ וְאִ֥ישׁ אֶת־קְרֹבֽוֹ׃ (כח) וַיַּֽעֲשׂ֥וּ בְנֵֽי־לֵוִ֖י כִּדְבַ֣ר מֹשֶׁ֑ה וַיִּפֹּ֤ל מִן־הָעָם֙ בַּיּ֣וֹם הַה֔וּא כִּשְׁלֹ֥שֶׁת אַלְפֵ֖י אִֽישׁ׃ (כט) וַיֹּ֣אמֶר מֹשֶׁ֗ה מִלְא֨וּ יֶדְכֶ֤ם הַיּוֹם֙ לַֽה' כִּ֛י אִ֥ישׁ בִּבְנ֖וֹ וּבְאָחִ֑יו וְלָתֵ֧ת עֲלֵיכֶ֛ם הַיּ֖וֹם בְּרָכָֽה׃ Exodus 32:26-29 (26) Moses stood up in the gate of the camp and said, “Whoever is for the LORD, come here!” And all the Levites rallied to him. (27) He said to them, “Thus says the LORD, the God of Israel: Each of you put sword on thigh, go back and forth from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay brother, neighbor, and kin.” (28) The Levites did as Moses had bidden; and some three thousand of the people fell that day. (29) And Moses said, “Dedicate yourselves to the LORD this day—for each of you has been against son and brother—that He may bestow a blessing upon you today.” Legends of the Jews 3:4:18 (18) Moses at the census did not take into consideration the tribe of Levi, because God had not commanded him to select a prince for this tribe as for all others, hence he drew the conclusion that they were not to be counted. Naturally he was not sure of his decision in this matter, and wavered whether or not to include the Levites in the number, when God said to him: "Do not muster the tribe of Levi, nor number them among the children of Israel." At these words Moses was frightened, for he feared that his tribe was considered unworthy of being counted with the rest, and was therefore excluded by God. But God quieted him, saying: "Do not number the Levites among the children of Israel, number them separately." There was several reasons for numbering the Levites separately. God foresaw that, owing to the sin of the spies who were sent to search the land, all men who were able to go to war would perish in the wilderness, "all that were numbered of them, according to their whole number, from twenty years old and upward." Now had the Levites been included in the sum total of Israel, the Angel of Death would have held sway over them also, wherefore God excluded them from the census of all the tribes, that they might in the future be exempt from the punishment visited upon the others, and might enter the promised land. **The Levites were, furthermore, the body-guard of God, to whose care the sanctuary was entrusted-another reason for counting them separately. God in this instance conducted Himself like the king who ordered one of his officers to number his legions, but added: "Number all the legions excepting only the legion that is about me."**
**Haredi Draft Exemption**
The original reason for the arrangement was the destruction of the yeshivas in Europe during the Holocaust and the wish to prevent the closing of yeshivas in Israel due to their students being drafted to the army. Today this objective no longer exists. The yeshivas are flourishing in Israel, and there is no serious worry that the draft of yeshiva students, according to any arrangement, would bring about the disappearance of this [yeshiva] institution.
The Israeli Supreme Court Decision Invalidating the Law on Haredi Military Draft Postponement
**Shifts in the Haredi Community**
Seismic shifts are taking place in the ultra-Orthodox world here. Talk to their leaders, as our students did this week, and you will hear some of them acknowledge that they are in crisis. For decades, they have prided themselves on believing that their way of life was essential to Israel’s thriving, that though they are accused of being parasitic, they are actually a rich resource for Israel’s spiritual needs. Now, though, as one admitted to our students, after the way they comported themselves during Covid, some acknowledge that they have become “a burden” to Israeli society. For some, at least, their sense of mission, is cracking. Others focused on what happened at Mt. Meron on Lag Ba’Omer. “Because we have the political power to keep the state at bay,” they said, “we end up killing ourselves and each other. It’s not the state that has to change, it’s us.” What might that mean for Israel’s future?
Daniel Gordis - What the fires don't mean May 12, 2021
**Haredi Leftists**
Why the instinctive revulsion from leftist politics among ultra-Orthodox Jews?
Not because they reject the notions of peace and territorial compromise. Quite the contrary: The rabbinical leaders of the Haredi community have throughout the ages been known to espouse dovish views.
And not because they prefer free-market capitalism. Quite the contrary: Many members of the Haredi community, one of country’s poorest, owe their daily sustenance to generous social welfare programs provided by the state.
Rather, it’s because they perceive the Israeli left as anti-religious and a threat, in particular, to the very stringent form of Judaism they hold dear. Moshe Gafni, a veteran lawmaker from the ultra-Orthodox United Torah Judaism party, made that abundantly clear in an off-the-cuff remark at this week’s annual Haaretz Israel Conference on Peace. Asked why he insisted on aligning his party with the political right despite his dovish views, Gafni responded: “We will join the left when the left breaks its ties with the Reform movement.”
The Ultra-Orthodox Jewish Leftists in Israel Who Aren't Afraid to Admit It, Judy Maltz, June 15, 2017 Haaretz
**מטח הרקטות אל עבר אשקלון, התפרעויות בהר הבית ובמזרח ירושלים, התנגשויות אלימות בין כוחות משטרת ישראל לבין מאות צעירים פלסטינים ובינם לבין קיצוניים יהודים, פרץ הרגשות בקרב אזרחי ישראל הערבים – כל אלה מהווים עדות לפוטנציאל הנפיצות בירושלים המאיים על היציבות והביטחון גם מעבר לה.**
המסרים המודאגים מהעולם הערבי – בכלל זה מדינות אשר אך לא מכבר נרמלו יחסיהן עם ישראל – ומהעולם הרחב ממחישים את מרכזיותה של העיר ואת הרגישות לכל המתרחש בה ומחייבים מדיניות שקולה בטרם ייגרם נזק ליחסי ישראל – המדיניים, כלכליים ואף הביטחוניים – באזור ומעבר לו.
תנועת ׳מפקדים׳, על למעלה מ-300 חבריה, כולם יוצאי מערכות הביטחון בדרגים הבכירים ביותר, משוכנעת שלישראל היכולת והעוצמה הדרושים כדי להתמודד עם כל אתגר ביטחוני. עם זאת, השתלשלות האירועים מעידה הן כי לא לכל בעיה מצוי פתרון בתחום העוצמה הצבאית והן שהתנהלות מדינית נבונה יכולה למנוע הידרדרות ביטחונית.
על רקע זה, תנועה ׳מפקדים׳ קוראת לממשלה לטפל באירוע המתגלגל ברגישות ובתבונה הראויות לעיר מורכבת המקודשת על יהודים, מוסלמים ונוצרים בעולם כולו.
התנועה מברכת את בית המשפט העליון על ההחלטה הנבונה לדחות הכרעתו בסוגיית שייח ג׳ראח, לבל תנוצל ע״י קיצוניים להלהטת הרוחות ברגע עתיר סיכונים זה. באותה רוח, התנועה קוראת לממשלה להפגין אחריות, להמחיש שריבונות אינה נמדדת ביכולת ליצר פרובוקציות אלא במשילות שקולה, ולרסן מסיתים – ויהיו אשר יהיו – ולהרחיקם לאלתר מאזורי החיכוך.
היערכות נכונה של משטרת ישראל חיונית תמיד, אך כפי שהומחש גם היום, אין בכוחה למנוע חיכוך, התלקחות מקומית, וניצול הנסיבות לערעור הביטחון מעבר לתחומי העיר. נדרשת מנהיגות לאומית אחראית אשר תנחה את כוחות הביטחון ברוח זאת ובכך תתרום להרגעת הרוחות והכלת האירוע בטרם יסלים ויתבע קורבנות נוספים.
סדרת הכשלים במגוון תחומים אשר חוותה המדינה בתקופה האחרונה מחייבת בחינה יסודית של הנחות עבודה ודפוסי פעולה. כפי שמתברר שוב בשעות אלה, הדבר נכון במיוחד בתחום הביטחון.
בבוקר שאחרי האירוע תידרש ממשלת ישראל להפיק לקחים באשר לשלוש אשליות שהאירוע חשף במלוא העצמה:
- ההתפכחות מאשליית השקט היחסי בירושלים, תוך התעלמות מנפיצות היחסים בין פלסטינים לישראלים בעיר והרגישות האזורית והבינלאומית למתרחש בה, מחייבת שינוי יסודי בהתייחסות לצרכי כל הדתות והאוכלוסיות בעיר והקפדה בלתי מתפשרת על הסטטוס קוו במקומות הקדושים.
- ההתפכחות מאשליית הבידול בין יהודה ושומרון לבין רצועת עזה וביניהן למזרח ירושלים – כאילו המתרחש באחד מהם אינו משליך על האחרים – את מחירה משלמים שוב ושוב תושבי העוטף והדרום כולו, מחייבת גיבוש אסטרטגיה חלופית אשר תגייס קואליציה אזורית ובינלאומית למהלך משולב של ביסוס הפסקת האש מול הרצועה, תכנית שיקום ופיתוח נרחבת לאוכלוסייתה וחזרה מדורגת של הרשות הפלסטינית לניהולה.
- ההתפכחות מאשליית היציבות בין ישראל לפלסטינים במרחב כולו מחייבת גיבוש אסטרטגיה אשר תענה על צרכי ביטחון ישראל ותשלב מהלכים ליצירת אופק מדיני (גם אם מימושו רחוק), שיפור איכות החיים של כל החיים בשטחים שבשליטת ישראל, צמצום החיכוך בין ישראלים לפלסטינים, ובכך תתרום ליציבות בשטח ולסיכויי היפרדות עתידית בין שני העמים.
תנועת ׳מפקדים׳ גיבשה תוכניות מעשיות למרבית הסוגיות אשר נפיצותן נחשפה באירועי השבועות והימים האחרונים. התנועה מעמידה את הידע והניסיון של מאות חבריה, בכירי עבר בצה”ל, בשב”כ, במוסד ובמשטרת ישראל, לרשות הממשלה, מערכת הביטחון וגורמים ממלכתיים אחרים במאמץ החיוני לגיבוש מדיניות חלופית בכל אחת מסוגיות הביטחון הללו
The barrage of rockets at Ashkelon, riots on the Temple Mount and East Jerusalem, violent clashes between Israeli regime forces and hundreds of young Palestinians, among them Jewish extremists, the surge in sentiment among Arab citizens of Israel – all of which are a testament to the explosive potential in Jerusalem that threatens stability and security beyond it. The messages concerned about the Arab world – including countries that have recently normalized relations with Israel – and from the wider world demonstrate the centrality of the city and the sensitivity to everything that takes place there, and require a prudent policy before damage to Israel's relations – political, economic, and even security – in the region and beyond. The Commanders' Movement, with its more than 300 members, all veterans of the security establishment at the highest levels, is convinced that Israel has the capability and power necessary to deal with any security challenge. However, the chain of events indicates that not every problem has a solution in the area of military might, and that wise political conduct can prevent a security deterioration. Against this backdrop, the Commanders Movement calls on the government to handle the event that unfolds with the sensitivity and wisdom of a complex city sacred to Jews, Muslims and Christians around the world. The movement congratulates the Supreme Court on its wise decision to postpone its decision on the sheikh Jarrah issue, not to be exploited by extremists to whip up the winds at this high-risk moment. In the same spirit, the movement calls on the government to demonstrate responsibility, to demonstrate that sovereignty is not measured by the ability to generate provocations but in prudent governance, and to restrain insurers – whatever they may be – and to immediately distance them from the friction zones. Proper preparation of the Israeli police is always essential, but as has been shown today, it does not have the power to prevent friction, local flare-ups, and the exploitation of circumstances to undermine security beyond the city boundaries. Responsible national leadership is required to guide the security forces in this spirit, thereby contributing to calming the spirits and the inclusion of the event before escalating and claiming additional victims. The series of failures in a variety of areas experienced by the state in recent times requires a thorough examination of work assumptions and patterns of action. As it becomes clear again during these hours, this is especially true in the field of security. The morning after the event, the Israeli government will be required to draw lessons regarding three illusions that the event revealed in full force: The disillusionment with the illusion of relative quiet in Jerusalem, ignoring the explosive relations between Palestinians and Israelis in the city and the regional and international sensitivity to what is happening there, requires a fundamental change in the attitude regarding the needs of all religions and populations in the city and uncompromising adherence to the status quo in the holy places. The disillusionment with the illusion of differentiation between Judea and Samaria and the Gaza Strip, including East Jerusalem – as if one of them does not affect the others – has repeatedly been paid by the residents of the envelop and the entire south, requires the formulation of an alternative strategy that will enlist a regional and international coalition for a combined process of establishing a ceasefire with the Gaza Strip, a comprehensive reconstruction and development plan for its population, and a gradual return of the Palestinian Authority to its management. Disillusionment with the illusion of stability between Israel and the Palestinians throughout the region requires formulating a strategy that meets Israel's security needs and will incorporate moves to create a political horizon (even if its implementation is far away), improving the quality of life of all life in israeli-controlled territories, reducing friction between Israelis and Palestinians, and thus contributing to stability on the ground and the chances of future separation between the two peoples. The Commanders' Movement has formulated practical plans for most of the issues whose explosiveness has been exposed in recent weeks and days. The movement provides the knowledge and experience of hundreds of its members, past senior figures in the IDF, the GSS, the Mossad and the Israel Police, the government, the security establishment and state officials
Commanders for Israel's Security
Parshat Bechukotai - Judaism, along with most religions, favors consistency in practice and steadfast faith… or does it? Focusing on a single verse that has been used to support this position (Leviticus 26: 21) we argue for an alternative. Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz explore happenstance, serendipity, temporarily fealty, chance, accident, the unintentional, the unexpected, or as the King James translators have God put it ”adventures with Me”. We contrast those who acquires their share in the World-to-Come only after many years of toil, and those who do so in one moment. בשעה אחת
ויקרא כ״ו:כ״א (כא) וְאִם־תֵּֽלְכ֤וּ עִמִּי֙ קֶ֔רִי וְלֹ֥א תֹאב֖וּ לִשְׁמֹ֣עַֽ לִ֑י וְיָסַפְתִּ֤י עֲלֵיכֶם֙ מַכָּ֔ה שֶׁ֖בַע כְּחַטֹּאתֵיכֶֽם׃ Leviticus 26:21 (21) And if you remain hostile toward Me and refuse to obey Me, I will go on smiting you sevenfold for your sins. רש"י על ויקרא כ״ו:כ״א:א׳ ואם תלכו עמי קרי. רַבּוֹתֵינוּ אָמְרוּ עֲרַאי, בְּמִקְרֶה, שֶׁאֵינוֹ אֶלָּא לִפְרָקִים, כֵּן תֵּלְכוּ עֲרַאי בְּמִצְווֹת:
Rashi on Leviticus 26:21:1 ואם תלכו עמי קרי — Our Rabbis said (Sifra, Bechukotai, Chapter 5 5): this word signifies “irregularly”, “by chance” (מקרה), which is a thing that happens only occasionally; thus this means: if you will follow the commandments irregularly.
Sifra, Bechukotai, Chapter 5 5 (5) 5) (Vayikra 26:21) ("And if you walk with Me laxly and do not desire to listen to Me, then I shall smite you even more, seven-fold according to your sins.") "And if you walk with Me laxly and do not desire to listen to Me": You made My Torah "incidental" in the world — I, too, will make you "incidental" in the world. "then I shall smite you, even more, seven-fold according to your sins": You transgressed seven transgressions — come and accept seven calamities.
According to Samson Raphael Hirsch “keri” means “accident”.
“keri” derived from karah (see Commentary, Bereshis 24:12) – denotes anything that happens without intention or beyond our reckoning. Accordingly, it is a purely relative concept. Something in it self can be intentional and premeditated, yet we did not intend it or plan it; it just happened to us and came to us by chance….
Your going with Me is only keri. Your acting in accordance with My Will is not your only intention and is not the result of a decision on your part. Your foremost resolve is not to obey ME, not to do only My Will. You no longer are opposed to My Will as a matter of principle, but My Will is not important to you. Other considerations determine you way of life, and you leave it to chance whether this brings you into conflict or accord with Me. The troubles that befell Israel accomplished at least one thing; their defection ceased to be extreme opposition, directed – as a matter of principle – against God and His Torah. But heeding God is still not their first and only aim. The illusory interests of prosperity and power remain their primary concerns. Their walking with God remains incidental: they keep God’s commandments only if these happen to coincide with their own interests.
Baruch A. Levine writes in his commentary to Leviticus that the correct translation of “keri” is hostility. “Hebrew *keri*, “hostility” and the idiom *halakh ‘im … be-keri*, “to walk with … in hostility,” are unique to this chapter. Targum Onkelos translates be-kashyu, “with hardness, obstinacy” deriving keri from the root k-r-r, “to be cold.” Compare the noun form karah, “cold wave,” in Nahum 3:17, and mekerah, “cool chamber” in Judges 3:24
Shmuel David Luzzatto in his commentary to this verse, wonders why there is so much conjecture on the part of the commentators as to what keri means since, after all, Onkelos preceded them all and not only gives an obvious translation, but also clearly follows the translation that was accepted on the street, at the time. [I’m no expert in ShaDL, but he seems to take real offence at the mistranslation… he calls it a “perversion” עיוות )
שד"ל על ויקרא כ״ו:כ״א:א׳ ואם תלכו עמי קרי: נפתלי וויזל פירש אם תלכו עמי קרי, שגם במקרה הרעה הזאת שקרה לכם תלכו עמי כמו שהלכתם עמי קודם לכן; ולפירושו העיקר חסר, שהרי שיעור הכתוב לפי פירוש זה הוא "אם גם עם המקרים והמכות האלה שהבאתי עליכם עדיין תלכו עמי" ומה טעם תלכו עמי, שהיא מליצה קרובה למליצת את האלקים התהלך נח? ורמבמ"ן פירש לשון התנגדות, מגזרת לקראת, תלכו נגד רצוני, תשימו מגמת פניכם לעשות הפך רצוני; אבל לא מצאנו מלת לקראת בענין התנגדות, ובהפך מצאנו ולא הלך כפעם בפעם לקראת נחשים, שענינו ולא הלך אחרי נחשים: ומלבד זה, הנה כשהגיע אצל והלכתי עמכם בחמת קרי לא מצא ידיו ורגליו, כי מה טעם בחמת התנגדות? וכל חמה היא התנגדות, והוצרך להפריד בין הדבקים, ולתרגם בחמת קרי כאילו כתוב בחמה בקרי, **ואין זה פירוש אלא עיוות הכתוב.** ומי יתן ואדע **מה רבו כל החכמים האלה לפנות כה וכה למצוא להם דרכים צרים ודחוקים לפרש מלת בקרי**, אחרי אשר קדמם המתרגם החשוב אנקלוס ע"ה, הראשון בזמן ובמעלה בקהל המפרשים, אשר על פי הקבלה שהיתה בידו תרגם מלת בקרי במלת בקשיו, ומלות בחמת קרי במלות בתקוף רגז, והוא פירוש המתישב על פשוטו של מקרא בלי שום דוחק כלל. ואם תאמר: מאין באה למלת קרי הוראת הקושי? - אחשוב שזה נמשך ממלת קורָה, ואולם יהיה איך שיהיה, אין ספק שהיתה המלה האת ידועה לקדמונינו בקבלה מקדמוניהם, והם ידעו שהוראתה על הקושי. (בה"ע תקפ"ט עמוד 89).
Shadal on Leviticus 26:21:1 ... בראשית כ״ד:י״ב (יב) וַיֹּאמַ֓ר ׀ ה' אֱלֹקֵי֙ אֲדֹנִ֣י אַבְרָהָ֔ם **הַקְרֵה־נָ֥א** לְפָנַ֖י הַיּ֑וֹם וַעֲשֵׂה־חֶ֕סֶד עִ֖ם אֲדֹנִ֥י אַבְרָהָֽם׃
Genesis 24:12 (12) And he said, “O LORD, God of my master Abraham, grant me **good fortune** this day, and deal graciously with my master Abraham:
“Nothing is farther from the Jewish concept of “MiKreh” than the idea of “chance”, with which it is usually taken to be associated.” Samson Raphael Hirsch on the verse
There is a clear bias against happenstance, serendipity, temporarily fealty, chance, accident, the unintentional, the unexpected, or as the King James translators put it in their notes as an alternative translation of “keri-contrary.” if ye walk at all ***adventures*** with me. (Leviticus 26: 21 King James Translators’ Notes)
בראשית כ״ח:י״א (יא) וַיִּ**פְגַּ֨ע** בַּמָּק֜וֹם וַיָּ֤לֶן שָׁם֙ כִּי־בָ֣א הַשֶּׁ֔מֶשׁ וַיִּקַּח֙ מֵאַבְנֵ֣י הַמָּק֔וֹם וַיָּ֖שֶׂם מְרַֽאֲשֹׁתָ֑יו וַיִּשְׁכַּ֖ב בַּמָּק֥וֹם הַהֽוּא׃
Genesis 28:11 (11) He came upon a certain place and stopped there for the night, for the sun had set. Taking one of the stones of that place, he put it under his head and lay down in that place. ספורנו על בראשית כ״ח:י״א:א׳ **ויפגע במקום** קרה לו שהגיע אל מקום שלא כיון אליו וענין המקום הוא מקום ללון לאורחים שהי' מתוקן אז בכל עיר ועיר ברחוב העיר על הרוב ועל כל זה אמרו המלאכים ללוט כי ברחוב נלין וכן בענין פלגש בגבעה רק ברחוב אל תלן: Sforno on Genesis 28:11:1 ויפגע במקום, it happened that he came to a place he had not intended to go to at all. The meaning of the word המקום is that it was a place designed to accommodate travelers overnight. Every town had such an inn in its public square. This is also why the angels who came to Lot said (19,20) כי ברחוב נלין, “we will sleep in (the inn) in the public square. The same expression is also used in connection with the פלגש בגבעה in Judges 19,20 where we read רק ברחוב אל תלין “only do not spend the night in the public inn.” משנה אבות ב׳:י״ג (יג) רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, הֱוֵי זָהִיר בִּקְרִיאַת שְׁמַע וּבַתְּפִלָּה. וּכְשֶׁאַתָּה מִתְפַּלֵּל, אַל תַּעַשׂ תְּפִלָּתְךָ **קֶבַע**, אֶלָּא רַחֲמִים וְתַחֲנוּנִים לִפְנֵי הַמָּקוֹם בָּרוּךְ הוּא, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (יואל ב) כִּי חַנּוּן וְרַחוּם הוּא אֶרֶךְ אַפַּיִם וְרַב חֶסֶד וְנִחָם עַל הָרָעָה. וְאַל תְּהִי רָשָׁע בִּפְנֵי עַצְמְךָ:
Pirkei Avot 2:13 (13) Rabbi Shimon said: Be careful with the reading of Shema and the prayer, And when you pray, **do not make your prayer something automatic**, but a plea for compassion before God, for it is said: “for he is gracious and compassionate, slow to anger, abounding in kindness, and renouncing punishment” (Joel 2:13); And be not wicked in your own esteem.
מִקְרָא miqra: a convocation, convoking, reading
https://biblehub.com/hebrew/4744.htm
מִקְרֶה miqreh: accident, chance, fortune
https://biblehub.com/hebrew/4745.htm
ויקרא א׳:א׳ (א) וַיִּקְרָ֖א אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֑ה וַיְדַבֵּ֤ר ה' אֵלָ֔יו מֵאֹ֥הֶל מוֹעֵ֖ד לֵאמֹֽר׃ Leviticus 1:1 (1) The LORD called to Moses and spoke to him from the Tent of Meeting, saying: ויקרא כ״ג:כ״א (כא) וּקְרָאתֶ֞ם בְּעֶ֣צֶם ׀ הַיּ֣וֹם הַזֶּ֗ה מִֽקְרָא־קֹ֙דֶשׁ֙ יִהְיֶ֣ה לָכֶ֔ם כָּל־מְלֶ֥אכֶת עֲבֹדָ֖ה לֹ֣א תַעֲשׂ֑וּ חֻקַּ֥ת עוֹלָ֛ם בְּכָל־מוֹשְׁבֹ֥תֵיכֶ֖ם לְדֹרֹֽתֵיכֶֽם׃ Leviticus 23:21 (21) On that same day you shall hold a celebration; it shall be a sacred occasion for you; you shall not work at your occupations. This is a law for all time in all your settlements, throughout the ages. עבודה זרה י״ז א:ט״ז בכה רבי ואמר יש קונה עולמו בכמה שנים ויש קונה עולמו בשעה אחת ואמר רבי לא דיין לבעלי תשובה שמקבלין אותן אלא שקורין אותן רבי Avodah Zarah 17a:16 When **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi heard this story of Elazar ben Durdayya, **he wept and said: There is** one who **acquires his** share in the World-to-Come only **after many years** of toil, **and there is** one who **acquires his** share in the World-to-Come **in one moment. And Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi further **says: Not only are penitents accepted, but they are even called: Rabbi,** as the Divine Voice referred to Elazar ben Durdayya as Rabbi Elazar ben Durdayya.
Parshat Emor - When are we permitted or even obligated to update the ethical aesthetic of the Torah? If the Torah reflects a common bias of its cultural milieu such as the inferiority of the physically maimed or handicapped when and how are we to update this for an evolved perspective? Recorded live on the Madlik Friday a 4:00 Eastern Disruptive Torah Clubhouse group. Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz discuss Leviticus 21; 18-23 and the disenfranchisement of the handicapped and deformed from leadership roles in the Priestly caste.
After the Bible adjures us to be Holy…. as God is Holy and to pay the laborer on time and embrace the stranger, we can be forgiven if we are disappointed that when it comes to leadership positions, the Bible exhibits such an old world bias against the less-than-perfect. When it comes to serving God, the Bible excludes the handicapped explicitly, and women, without even the courtesy of honorable mention.
ויקרא כ״א:י״ח-כ״ג (יח) כִּ֥י כָל־אִ֛ישׁ אֲשֶׁר־בּ֥וֹ מ֖וּם לֹ֣א יִקְרָ֑ב אִ֤ישׁ עִוֵּר֙ א֣וֹ פִסֵּ֔חַ א֥וֹ חָרֻ֖ם א֥וֹ שָׂרֽוּעַ׃ (יט) א֣וֹ אִ֔ישׁ אֲשֶׁר־יִהְיֶ֥ה ב֖וֹ שֶׁ֣בֶר רָ֑גֶל א֖וֹ שֶׁ֥בֶר יָֽד׃ (כ) אֽוֹ־גִבֵּ֣ן אוֹ־דַ֔ק א֖וֹ תְּבַלֻּ֣ל בְּעֵינ֑וֹ א֤וֹ גָרָב֙ א֣וֹ יַלֶּ֔פֶת א֖וֹ מְר֥וֹחַ אָֽשֶׁךְ׃ (כא) כָּל־אִ֞ישׁ אֲשֶׁר־בּ֣וֹ מ֗וּם מִזֶּ֙רַע֙ אַהֲרֹ֣ן הַכֹּהֵ֔ן לֹ֣א יִגַּ֔שׁ לְהַקְרִ֖יב אֶת־אִשֵּׁ֣י ה' מ֣וּם בּ֔וֹ אֵ֚ת לֶ֣חֶם אֱלֹקָ֔יו לֹ֥א יִגַּ֖שׁ לְהַקְרִֽיב׃ (כב) לֶ֣חֶם אֱלֹקָ֔יו מִקָּדְשֵׁ֖י הַקֳּדָשִׁ֑ים וּמִן־הַקֳּדָשִׁ֖ים יֹאכֵֽל׃ (כג) אַ֣ךְ אֶל־הַפָּרֹ֜כֶת לֹ֣א יָבֹ֗א וְאֶל־הַמִּזְבֵּ֛חַ לֹ֥א יִגַּ֖שׁ כִּֽי־מ֣וּם בּ֑וֹ וְלֹ֤א יְחַלֵּל֙ אֶת־מִקְדָּשַׁ֔י כִּ֛י אֲנִ֥י ה' מְקַדְּשָֽׁם׃ Leviticus 21:18-23 (18) No one at all who has a defect shall be qualified: no man who is blind, or lame, or has a limb too short or too long; (19) no man who has a broken leg or a broken arm; (20) or who is a hunchback, or a dwarf, or who has a growth in his eye, or who has a boil-scar, or scurvy, or crushed testes. (21) No man among the offspring of Aaron the priest who has a defect shall be qualified to offer the LORD’s offering by fire; having a defect, he shall not be qualified to offer the food of his God. (22) He may eat of the food of his God, of the most holy as well as of the holy; (23) but he shall not enter behind the curtain or come near the altar, for he has a defect. He shall not profane these places sacred to Me, for I the LORD have sanctified them. משנה תורה, הלכות עדות ט׳:א׳ (א) עֲשָׂרָה מִינֵי פַּסְלוּת הֵם כָּל מִי שֶׁנִּמְצָא בּוֹ אֶחָד מֵהֶן הֲרֵי הוּא פָּסוּל לְעֵדוּת. וְאֵלּוּ הֵן. הַנָּשִׁים. וְהָעֲבָדִים. וְהַקְּטַנִּים. וְהַשּׁוֹטִים. וְהַחֵרְשִׁים. וְהַסּוּמִים. וְהָרְשָׁעִים. וְהַבְּזוּיִין. וְהַקְּרוֹבִין. וְהַנּוֹגְעִין בְּעֵדוּתָן. הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ עֲשָׂרָה:
Mishneh Torah, Testimony 9:1 There are ten categories of disqualifications. Any person belonging to one of them is not acceptable as a witness. They are:
a) women;
b) servants;
c) minors;
d) mentally or emotionally unstable individuals;
e) deaf-mutes;
f) the blind;
g) the wicked;
h) debased individuals;
i) relatives;
j) people who have a vested interest in the matter; a total of ten.
משנה תורה, הלכות עדות ט׳:י״א-י״ב (יא) הַחֵרֵשׁ כְּשׁוֹטֶה שֶׁאֵין דַּעְתּוֹ נְכוֹנָה וְאֵינוֹ בֶּן מִצְוֹת. וְאֶחָד חֵרֵשׁ מְדַבֵּר וְאֵינוֹ שׁוֹמֵעַ אוֹ שׁוֹמֵעַ וְאֵינוֹ מְדַבֵּר. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁרְאִיָּתוֹ רְאִיָּה מְעֻלָּה וְדַעְתּוֹ נְכוֹנָה צָרִיךְ לְהָעִיד בְּבֵית דִּין בְּפִיו. אוֹ שֶׁיִּהְיֶה רָאוּי לְהָעִיד בְּפִיו. וְיִהְיֶה רָאוּי לִשְׁמֹעַ הַדַּיָּנִים וְהָאִיּוּם שֶׁמְּאַיְּמִין עָלָיו. וְכֵן אִם נִשְׁתַּתֵּק אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנִּבְדַּק בְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁבּוֹדְקִין לְעִנְיַן גִּטִּין וְנִמְצֵאת עֵדוּתוֹ מְכֻוֶּנֶת וְהֵעִיד בְּפָנֵינוּ בִּכְתַב יָדוֹ אֵינָהּ עֵדוּת כְּלָל. חוּץ מֵעֵדוּת אִשָּׁה לְפִי שֶׁבְּעִגּוּנָהּ הֵקֵלּוּ:
(יב) הַסּוּמִים אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁמַּכִּירִין הַקּוֹל וְיָדְעוּ הָאֲנָשִׁים הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ פְּסוּלִין מִן הַתּוֹרָה. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ה א) "וְהוּא עֵד אוֹ רָאָה" מִי שֶׁהוּא רָאוּי לִרְאוֹת הוּא שֶׁמֵּעִיד. וְהַסּוּמָא בְּאַחַת מֵעֵינָיו כָּשֵׁר לְהָעִיד:
Mishneh Torah, Testimony 9:11-12 A deaf-mute is equivalent to a mentally unstable person, for he is not of sound mind and is therefore not obligated in the observance of the mitzvot. Both a deaf person who can speak and a person who can hear, but is mute is unacceptable to serve as a witness. Even though he sees excellently and his mind is sound, he must deliver testimony orally in court or be fit to deliver testimony orally and must be fit to hear the judges and the warning they administer to him.
Similarly, if a person loses the ability to speak, even though his intellectual faculties have been checked as a husband is checked with regard to a bill of divorce, he testifies in writing, and his testimony is to the point, it is not accepted at all, except with regard to releasing a women from marriage, for leniency was granted so that women will not be forced to live alone.
The blind, although they can recognize the voices of the litigants and know their identities, are not acceptable as witnesses according to Scriptural Law. This is derived from Leviticus 5:1: “And he witnessed or saw,” which implies that one who can see may serve as a witness. A person who is blind in one eye is fit to serve as a witness.
נדרים ג׳ א:ט׳ אִי כְּתַב נֶדֶר לִנְדֹּר כְּדִכְתַב נָזִיר לְהַזִּיר כִּדְקָאָמְרַתְּ לָא צָרִיךְ הֶיקֵּישָׁא הַשְׁתָּא דִּכְתִיב לִנְדֹּר נֶדֶר **דִּבְּרָה תוֹרָה כִלְשׁוֹן בְּנֵי אָדָם**
Nedarim 3a:9 The Gemara answers: **If** the Torah **had written: A vow to utter [*neder lindor*], as it wrote** with regard to a nazirite: “The vow of **a nazirite, to consecrate himself [*nazir lehazir*],”** it would be **as you said,** and **there** would be **no need for the juxtaposition. Now that it is written: “To utter a vow [*lindor neder*],”** it is possible to say that **the Torah spoke in the language of men,** and nothing can be derived from the phrase *lindor neder*, which is simply a common manner of speech. רמב"ן על בראשית ו׳:ו׳:א׳ **וינחם ה' ויתעצב אל לבו** **דבר תורה כלשון בני אדם** והענין כי מרו ועצבו את רוח קדשו בפשעיהם וענין "אל לבו" כי לא הגיד זה לנביא שלוח אליהם וכן הלשון במחושב כדרך לדבר אל לבי (בראשית כ״ד:מ״ה) וזולתו ובבראשית רבה (בראשית רבה כ״ז:ד׳) אמרו בזה ענין נכבד במשל שהביאו מן הסרסור והאדריכל והוא סוד גדול לא ניתן ליכתב והיודעו יתבונן למה אמר בכאן שם המיוחד ובכל הפרשה וענין המבול שם אלקים:
Ramban on Genesis 6:6:1 AND THE ETERNAL REPENTED… AND IT GRIEVED HIM AT HIS HEART. **The Torah speaks in the language of men.** The purport is that *they rebelled, and grieved His holy spirit*514*Isaiah 63:10.* with their sins. The sense of the expression *at His heart* is that He did not tell this to a prophet, a messenger of G-d. This expression is also found with respect to thinking, just as: *to speak to my heart*,515*Genesis 24:45.* and other similar expressions.
In Bereshith Rabbah51627:6. there is a significant matter concerning this, expressed by a parable which the Rabbis bring of an agent and an architect.517Rabbi Berachyah said: “It is like a king who had a palace built by an architect, and when he saw it, it displeased him. Against whom is he to complain? Surely against the architect.” Rabbi Assi said: “It is like one who traded through an agent and suffered a loss. Whom does he blame? The agent. Here too It grieved Him at His heart.” This constitutes a great secret which is not permitted to be written down. The one who knows it will understand why here the Tetragrammaton is written while in the whole of the rest of the chapter and the account of the flood, the name Elokim is used.
דברים ד׳:ו׳ (ו) וּשְׁמַרְתֶּם֮ וַעֲשִׂיתֶם֒ כִּ֣י הִ֤וא חָכְמַתְכֶם֙ וּבִ֣ינַתְכֶ֔ם לְעֵינֵ֖י הָעַמִּ֑ים אֲשֶׁ֣ר יִשְׁמְע֗וּן אֵ֚ת כָּל־הַחֻקִּ֣ים הָאֵ֔לֶּה וְאָמְר֗וּ רַ֚ק עַם־חָכָ֣ם וְנָב֔וֹן הַגּ֥וֹי הַגָּד֖וֹל הַזֶּֽה׃ Deuteronomy 4:6 (6) Observe them faithfully, for that will be proof of your wisdom and discernment to other peoples, who on hearing of all these laws will say, “Surely, that great nation is a wise and discerning people.” We can read this verse through its surface meaning: The mitzvot are obviously good, attractive, and compelling, such that doing them will quite evidently evoke appreciation—and even envy—from outsiders who encounter a life based on them. Moshe here is exhorting the people to recognize what a good thing they have. But one need not dig too much deeper to hear that the text here is not necessarily making just a descriptive claim here, but a prescriptive one as well. The Torah and its mitzvot are supposed to evoke this sort of admiration from outsiders. If it does not, something is wrong. It is not a far leap from here to suggest that interpretations and applications of the Torah that evoke revulsion from external observers are potentially suspect and in need of deeper thought and reevaluation. Rabbi Ethan Tucker - Ethical Norms as the Foundation of Torah
**Dor Revi’i, R. Moshe Shmuel Glasner, Hungary, 19 th 20 th c.**
when human opinion has squarely and resolutely lined up against the morality of a given activity, that is a religiously significant fact, but not because of the public relations concerns. Rather, a universally shared revulsion at something is a barometer of that thing being beyond the bounds of basic human decency. And that, in turn, should make us realize that the thing in question is regulated by the internal Torah command of תהיו קדשים ,the demand to be holy. This means that, even on a 12 desert island populated entirely by Jews, the awareness of the human consensus on this issue pushes those Jews to adopt that universally accepted standard from within, as they tap into their own basic humanity. But the strongest proof for this exegesis comes from the Torah’s self description with which we began this essay. Building on Rambam’s use of Devarim 4:6 in the intellectual realm, R. Glasner now applies it to the realm of ethics, morality and human decency. The story the Torah tells us about itself is that the way of life it prescribes for the Jewish people is meant to be the envy of the world. People are meant to encounter an observant Jew and to say, “This seems like the most fantastic and wise way of living one’s life that I can imagine.” The moment that a person’s interpretation of Torah would evoke the deep disgust of the average civilized person is the moment when the Torah’s intended story about itself has been lost. For R. Glasner, it is a bedrock principle of the Torah, a core internal principle of Jewish law, that Jews can never be perceived to be on a lower level than their Gentile neighbors. (Tucker ibid)
Acharei Mot-Kedoshim (Leviticus 16-20)
A live recording of Madlik Disruptive Torah on Clubhouse every Friday at 4:00pm. Today we have a spirited discussion with Rabbi Adam Mintz on the Bible’s first commandment to mankind that it is not good to be alone. We discuss how this relates to gender definition and gender preferences.
Link to Sefaria Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/316534
ויקרא י״ט:א׳-ב׳ (א) וַיְדַבֵּ֥ר ה' אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֥ה לֵּאמֹֽר (ב) דַּבֵּ֞ר אֶל־כָּל־עֲדַ֧ת בְּנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֛ל וְאָמַרְתָּ֥ אֲלֵהֶ֖ם קְדֹשִׁ֣ים תִּהְי֑וּ כִּ֣י קָד֔וֹשׁ אֲנִ֖י ה' אֱלֹקֵיכֶֽם׃ Leviticus 19:1-2 (1) The LORD spoke to Moses, saying: (2) Speak to the whole Israelite community and say to them: You shall be holy, for I, the LORD your God, am holy. Chapter 19 of Leviticus has been characterized as a parallel to the Ten Commandments. Rav Hiyya explained that the reason it was to be read “unto all the congregation” is because most of the essential laws of the Torah can be derived from it. (Leviticus Rabba 24).
I invite you to read it! It is in my humble opinion, far superior to the Ten Commandments. It’s lyrical in the way it seamlessly moves from the ethical to ritual. It calls the lie to anyone who would distinguish between ritual law and moral law…. As Everett Fox writes: “[It] is wide-ranging and rhetorically powerful. It extends holiness to virtually all areas of life – family, calendar, cult, business civil and criminal law, social relations, and sexuality.” (The Five Books of Moses, Everett Fox p. 600.)
What detracts from the breadth of vision, is the emphasis in the preceding and following chapters (Leviticus 18, also read at the afternoon service of Yom Kippur, and chapter 20) which seem to be fixated on sexual perversion of every kind.. and I mean every kind, including incest, bestiality and homosexuality.
I would have you consider that much of what the Torah detests about sexual deviation, has nothing to do with being puritanical and disrespectful of alternative gender definitions and preferences. To the contrary, it prescribes that every human being enter a relationship and find a help mate. Rather it is a rejection of the individual self sufficiency which belongs only to God and a rejection of the inbreeding necessary to support the autocratic rule and tribal caste system of the Canaanites and the Ancient Near East.
בראשית א׳:כ״ז (כז) וַיִּבְרָ֨א אֱלֹקִ֤ים ׀ אֶת־הָֽאָדָם֙ בְּצַלְמ֔וֹ בְּצֶ֥לֶם אֱלֹקִ֖ים בָּרָ֣א אֹת֑וֹ זָכָ֥ר וּנְקֵבָ֖ה בָּרָ֥א אֹתָֽם׃
Genesis 1:27 (27) And God created man in His image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.
בראשית ה׳:א׳-ב׳ (א) זֶ֣ה סֵ֔פֶר תּוֹלְדֹ֖ת אָדָ֑ם בְּי֗וֹם בְּרֹ֤א אֱלֹקִים֙ אָדָ֔ם בִּדְמ֥וּת אֱלֹקִ֖ים עָשָׂ֥ה אֹתֽוֹ׃ (ב) זָכָ֥ר וּנְקֵבָ֖ה בְּרָאָ֑ם וַיְבָ֣רֶךְ אֹתָ֗ם וַיִּקְרָ֤א אֶת־שְׁמָם֙ אָדָ֔ם בְּי֖וֹם הִבָּֽרְאָֽם׃ (ס) Genesis 5:1-2 (1) This is the record of Adam’s line.—When God created man, He made him in the likeness of God; (2) male and female He created them. And when they were created, He blessed them and called them Man.— בראשית ב׳:י״ח (יח) וַיֹּ֙אמֶר֙ ה' אֱלֹקִ֔ים לֹא־ט֛וֹב הֱי֥וֹת הָֽאָדָ֖ם לְבַדּ֑וֹ אֶֽעֱשֶׂהּ־לּ֥וֹ עֵ֖זֶר כְּנֶגְדּֽוֹ׃ Genesis 2:18 (18) The LORD God said, “It is not good for man to be alone; I will make a fitting helper for him.” רש"י על בראשית ב׳:י״ח:א׳ **לא טוב היות וגו'.** שֶׁלֹּא יֹאמְרוּ שְׁתֵּי רָשׁוּיוֹת הֵן, הַקָּבָּ"ה בָעֶליוֹנִים יָחִיד וְאֵין לוֹ זוּג, וְזֶה בַתַּחְתּוֹנִים וְאֵין לוֹ זוּג (בראשית רבה): Rashi on Genesis 2:18:1 'לא טוב היות וגו IT IS NOT GOOD etc. — I shall make an help meet for him in order that people may not say that there are two Deities, the Holy One, blessed be He, the only One among the celestial Beings without a mate, and this one (Adam), the only one among the terrestrial beings, without a mate (Pirkei D'Rabbi Eliezer 12). דברים ד׳:ל״ה (לה) אַתָּה֙ הָרְאֵ֣תָ לָדַ֔עַת כִּ֥י ה' ה֣וּא הָאֱלֹקִ֑ים **אֵ֥ין ע֖וֹד מִלְבַדּֽוֹ**׃
Deuteronomy 4:35 (35) It has been clearly demonstrated to you that the LORD alone is God; **there is none beside Him.**
תורה תמימה על התורה, דברים ד׳:ל״ה:ג׳ **אין עוד מלבדו.** זה הוא מלכות
Torah Temimah on Torah, Deuteronomy 4:35:3 **There is none Besides Him:** This is Kingship...
בראשית רבה ח׳:א׳ (א) וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹקִים נַעֲשֶׂה אָדָם בְּצַלְמֵנוּ כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ (בראשית א, כו), רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן פָּתַח (תהלים קלט, ה): אָחוֹר וָקֶדֶם צַרְתָּנִי וגו', אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אִם זָכָה אָדָם, אוֹכֵל שְׁנֵי עוֹלָמוֹת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: אָחוֹר וָקֶדֶם צַרְתָּנִי, וְאִם לָאו הוּא בָּא לִתֵּן דִּין וְחֶשְׁבּוֹן, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (תהלים קלט, ה): וַתָּשֶׁת עָלַי כַּפֶּכָה. אָמַר רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁבָּרָא הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא אֶת אָדָם הָרִאשׁוֹן, **אַנְדְּרוֹגִינוֹס** בְּרָאוֹ, הֲדָא הוּא דִכְתִיב (בראשית ה, ב): זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה בְּרָאָם. אָמַר רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָן, בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁבָּרָא הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא אֶת אָדָם הָרִאשׁוֹן, **דְּיוּ פַּרְצוּפִים** בְּרָאוֹ, וְנִסְּרוֹ וַעֲשָׂאוֹ גַּבִּים, גַּב לְכָאן וְגַב לְכָאן. אֲתִיבוּן לֵיהּ וְהָכְתִיב (בראשית ב, כא): וַיִּקַּח אַחַת מִצַּלְעֹתָיו, אֲמַר לְהוֹן מִתְּרֵין סִטְרוֹהִי, הֵיךְ מָה דְאַתְּ אָמַר (שמות כו, כ): וּלְצֶלַע הַמִּשְׁכָּן, דִּמְתַרְגְּמִינַן וְלִסְטַר מַשְׁכְּנָא וגו'.
Bereishit Rabbah 8:1 (1) ... Said R’ Yirmiyah ben Elazar: In the hour when the Holy One created the first human, He created him [as] an **androgyne/androginos**, as it is said, “male and female He created them”. Said R’ Shmuel bar Nachmani: In the hour when the Holy One created the first human, He created [for] him a **double-face/di-prosopon/ du-par’tsufin**, and sawed him and made him backs, a back here and a back [t]here, as it is said, “Back/achor and before/qedem You formed me” [Ps 139:5]. They objected to him: But it says, “He took one of his ribs/ts’la`ot . . . ” [Gn 2:21]! He said to them: [It means] “[one] of his sides/sit’rohi”, just as you would say, “And for the side/tsela` of the Tabernacle/ mishkan” [Ex 26:20], which they translate [in Aramaic] “for the side/seter”.
ברכות ס״א א:ה׳ אִי נָמֵי כִּדְרַבִּי יִרְמְיָה בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר. דְּאָמַר רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר: **דּוּ פַּרְצוּפִין** בָּרָא הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא בָּאָדָם הָרִאשׁוֹן, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״אָחוֹר וָקֶדֶם צַרְתָּנִי״.
Berakhot 61a:5 **Alternatively,** this duplication in the language of creation can be explained **in accordance with** the statement of **Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar, as Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar said: The Holy One, Blessed be He, *created two faces [du partzufin] on Adam the first*** *man; he was created both male and female in a single body*, **as it is stated: “You have formed me [*tzartani*] behind and before”** (Psalms 139:5); *tzartani* is derived from the word *tzura* [face]. God formed two faces on a single creation, back and front.
**The First Adam, Androgyny, and the ʿAin Ghazal Two-headed Busts in Context**
Author(s): Irit Ziffer
Source: Israel Exploration Journal , 2007, Vol. 57, No. 2 (2007), pp. 129-152
Published by: Israel Exploration Society
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/27927170
Two-headed human statues with a common torso are a known feature of the ancient Near East, beginning with the inception of monumental statuary in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic period (the first half of the seventh millennium BCE) at ‘Ain Ghazal, north-east of Amman. The following survey focuses on the two headed statues from ‘Ain Ghazal the earliest of their kind to have been discovered so far in an attempt to establish their significance.
The Sages in early Talmudic times knew the myth of the primeval androgyne and used it to account for the contradiction between the two stories of creation. In the Midrash, the first human being, the 'Adam', was androgynous, incorporating the genitals of both sexes, and the tale of the creation from the rib in Genesis 2 provides for the separation of the two sexes of the primeval body, reconstructing them as two human bodies. According to the Babylonian Talmud (Berakhot 61a; Erubin 18a), Genesis Rabba 8.1 and Leviticus Rabba 14 (fifth century), the man was created dipros?pos, 'two faced' (VDliHD-n), that is, male and female (Meeks 1974:186). 'Two faced' is a way of describing Adam, the first human being, with out the use of corporeal or sexual terms, a euphemism for the bisexual progenitor of the human race.
Historically speaking, androgyny symbolizes the perfect human being: female attributes cast into a male vessel.
In the Mesopotamian creation myths, the human body is a divine creation made of clay in which divine ingredients are mixed. It is not defined according to gender; it was produced in a single process before the existence of sex and gender, and therefore encompasses every possible gender. Only in the second creation were male and female couples created with genital organs vital for the reproduction of the species (Asher-Greve 1998: 29).
בראשית ב׳:כ״ג (כג) וַיֹּאמֶר֮ הָֽאָדָם֒ זֹ֣את הַפַּ֗עַם עֶ֚צֶם מֵֽעֲצָמַ֔י וּבָשָׂ֖ר מִבְּשָׂרִ֑י לְזֹאת֙ יִקָּרֵ֣א אִשָּׁ֔ה כִּ֥י מֵאִ֖ישׁ לֻֽקֳחָה־זֹּֽאת׃ Genesis 2:23 (23) Then the man said, “This one at last Is bone of my bones And flesh of my flesh. This one shall be called Woman, For from man was she taken.” רש"י על בראשית ב׳:כ״ג:א׳ **זאת הפעם.** מְלַמֵּד שֶׁבָּא אָדָם עַל כָּל בְּהֵמָה וְחַיָּה, וְלֹא נִתְקָרְרָה דַעְתּוֹ בָּהֶם (יבמות ס"ג): Rashi on Genesis 2:23:1 זאת הפעם THIS NOW — This teaches that Adam endeavoured to find a companion among all cattle and beasts, but found no satisfaction except in Eve (Yevamot 63a). בראשית ב׳:כ״ד (כד) עַל־כֵּן֙ יַֽעֲזָב־אִ֔ישׁ אֶת־אָבִ֖יו וְאֶת־אִמּ֑וֹ וְדָבַ֣ק בְּאִשְׁתּ֔וֹ וְהָי֖וּ לְבָשָׂ֥ר אֶחָֽד׃ Genesis 2:24 (24) Hence a man leaves his father and mother and clings to his wife, so that they become one flesh. רש"י על בראשית ב׳:כ״ד:א׳ **על כן יעזב איש.** רוּחַ הַקֹּדֶשׁ אוֹמְרָה כֵן לֶ**אֱסֹר עַל בְּנֵי נֹחַ הָעֲרָיוֹת** (סנהדרין נ"ז):
Rashi on Genesis 2:24:1 על כן יעזב איש THEREFORE A MAN LEAVETH — The Divine Spirit says this, thus prohibiting immoral relationship to the “Sons of Noah” also (Sanhedrin 57b). in other words, the source of unchaste sexual behavior (“Arayot” in Hebrew) is when a man does not leave his father and mother… sister, brother etc. but mates with them!
סנהדרין נ״ז ב:י׳-י״א אימא בת נח שזינתה לא תיהרג דכתיב (בראשית ב, כד) על כן יעזב איש ולא אשה א"ל הכי אמר רב יהודה (בראשית ב, כד) והיו לבשר אחד הדר ערבינהו קראת"ר איש מה תלמוד לומר (ויקרא יח, ו) איש איש לרבות את הכותים שמוזהרין על העריות כישראל Sanhedrin 57b:10-11 Rav Avya asked further: Why not **say** that **a female descendant of Noah who committed adultery should not be executed, as it is written: “Therefore a man shall leave** his father and his mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they shall be one flesh” (Genesis 2:24); a man, **but not a woman?** Rav Pappa **said to him: This** is what **Rav Yehuda says:** At the end of the verse it states: **“And they shall be one flesh.” The verse then combines** men and women, indicating that the same *halakha* applies to both. § **The Sages taught** in a *baraita* with regard to the verse: “No one [*ish ish*] shall approach any that is kin to him, to uncover their nakedness” (Leviticus 18:6): The verse could have stated: **One [*ish*]** shall not approach. **Why** must **the verse state “no one”?** It is **to include the gentiles, who are prohibited from** engaging in **forbidden sexual relations, as Jews** are. ויקרא כ׳:י״ז (יז) וְאִ֣ישׁ אֲשֶׁר־יִקַּ֣ח אֶת־אֲחֹת֡וֹ בַּת־אָבִ֣יו א֣וֹ בַת־אִ֠מּוֹ וְרָאָ֨ה אֶת־עֶרְוָתָ֜הּ וְהִֽיא־תִרְאֶ֤ה אֶת־עֶרְוָתוֹ֙ חֶ֣סֶד ה֔וּא וְנִ֨כְרְת֔וּ לְעֵינֵ֖י בְּנֵ֣י עַמָּ֑ם עֶרְוַ֧ת אֲחֹת֛וֹ גִּלָּ֖ה עֲוֺנ֥וֹ יִשָּֽׂא׃ Leviticus 20:17 (17) If a man marries his sister, the daughter of either his father or his mother, so that he sees her nakedness and she sees his nakedness, it is a disgrace; they shall be excommunicated in the sight of their kinsfolk. He has uncovered the nakedness of his sister, he shall bear his guilt. רש"י על ויקרא כ׳:י״ז:א׳ **חסד הוא.** לְשׁוֹן אֲרַמִּי חֶרְפָּה חִסּוּדָא; וּמִדְרָשׁוֹ אִם תֹּאמַר קַיִן נָשָׂא אֲחוֹתוֹ **חֶסֶד** עָשָׂה הַמָּקוֹם, לִבְנוֹת עוֹלָמוֹ מִמֶּנּוּ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (תהילים פ"ט), **עוֹלָם חֶסֶד יִבָּנֶה** (ספרא; סנהדרין נ"ח):
Rashi on Leviticus 20:17:1 חסד הוא IT IS A WICKED THING — It is an Aramaic expression, the Hebrew חרפה (disgrace) being in that language חסודא (cf. Onkelos on Genesis 34:14). A Midrashic explanation of it (of חסד הוא) is; If you should say, "But Cain married his sister!" then I reply, Cain's case was an exceptional one; an act of kindness (חסד) was done by the Omnipresent in order that His world might be built up through him (i. e. He made the propagation of the human race possible through this union), as it is said (Psalms 89:3) "The world was built up through חסד, loving-kindness" (Sifra, Kedoshim, Chapter 11 11; Sanhedrin 58b). The biblical premise remains… inbreeding is a rejection of God and a rejection of God’s role as man’s only ruler. Royalty wants to mix and re-mix it’s blood to protect their superior “blue” blood and to justify the subjugation of the commoner and stranger. God wants us, wherever possible, to leave our father and mother and create our bloodline with our fellow human commoners.
ויקרא י״ח:כ״ב (כב) וְאֶ֨ת־זָכָ֔ר לֹ֥א תִשְׁכַּ֖ב מִשְׁכְּבֵ֣י אִשָּׁ֑ה תּוֹעֵבָ֖ה הִֽוא׃ Leviticus 18:22 (22) Do not lie with a male as one lies with a woman; it is an abhorrence. To claim that one can have a child, without the need of the other sex, is to claim divinity…. and therefore an abomination.
Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz in conversation of Madlik Clubhouse. Recorded on the weekly 4:00pm Eastern disruptive Torah group and a continuation of re-evaluating Jewish institutions with fresh eyes after the plague of Covid-19. This week we look at the home and towards the time when we will re-open our home as we re-open our temples. We explore the relationship between the home and the temple. The Mishkan and the Mishkan Ma'at. Which came first. Which holds the secret to the perseverance of the Jewish People... and what we can do about it.
Link to Sefarioa Source Sheet: www.sefaria.org/sheets/314697
ויקרא י״ד:ל״ד-נ״ג (לד) כִּ֤י תָבֹ֙אוּ֙ אֶל־אֶ֣רֶץ כְּנַ֔עַן אֲשֶׁ֥ר אֲנִ֛י נֹתֵ֥ן לָכֶ֖ם לַאֲחֻזָּ֑ה וְנָתַתִּי֙ נֶ֣גַע צָרַ֔עַת בְּבֵ֖ית אֶ֥רֶץ אֲחֻזַּתְכֶֽם׃ (לה) וּבָא֙ אֲשֶׁר־ל֣וֹ הַבַּ֔יִת וְהִגִּ֥יד לַכֹּהֵ֖ן לֵאמֹ֑ר כְּנֶ֕גַע נִרְאָ֥ה לִ֖י בַּבָּֽיִת׃ (לו) וְצִוָּ֨ה הַכֹּהֵ֜ן וּפִנּ֣וּ אֶת־הַבַּ֗יִת בְּטֶ֨רֶם יָבֹ֤א הַכֹּהֵן֙ לִרְא֣וֹת אֶת־הַנֶּ֔גַע וְלֹ֥א יִטְמָ֖א כָּל־אֲשֶׁ֣ר בַּבָּ֑יִת וְאַ֥חַר כֵּ֛ן יָבֹ֥א הַכֹּהֵ֖ן לִרְא֥וֹת אֶת־הַבָּֽיִת׃ (לז) וְרָאָ֣ה אֶת־הַנֶּ֗גַע וְהִנֵּ֤ה הַנֶּ֙גַע֙ בְּקִירֹ֣ת הַבַּ֔יִת שְׁקַֽעֲרוּרֹת֙ יְרַקְרַקֹּ֔ת א֖וֹ אֲדַמְדַּמֹּ֑ת וּמַרְאֵיהֶ֥ן שָׁפָ֖ל מִן־הַקִּֽיר׃ (לח) וְיָצָ֧א הַכֹּהֵ֛ן מִן־הַבַּ֖יִת אֶל־פֶּ֣תַח הַבָּ֑יִת וְהִסְגִּ֥יר אֶת־הַבַּ֖יִת שִׁבְעַ֥ת יָמִֽים׃ (לט) וְשָׁ֥ב הַכֹּהֵ֖ן בַּיּ֣וֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִ֑י וְרָאָ֕ה וְהִנֵּ֛ה פָּשָׂ֥ה הַנֶּ֖גַע בְּקִירֹ֥ת הַבָּֽיִת׃ (מ) וְצִוָּה֙ הַכֹּהֵ֔ן וְחִלְּצוּ֙ אֶת־הָ֣אֲבָנִ֔ים אֲשֶׁ֥ר בָּהֵ֖ן הַנָּ֑גַע וְהִשְׁלִ֤יכוּ אֶתְהֶן֙ אֶל־מִח֣וּץ לָעִ֔יר אֶל־מָק֖וֹם טָמֵֽא׃ (מא) וְאֶת־הַבַּ֛יִת יַקְצִ֥עַ מִבַּ֖יִת סָבִ֑יב וְשָׁפְכ֗וּ אֶת־הֶֽעָפָר֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר הִקְצ֔וּ אֶל־מִח֣וּץ לָעִ֔יר אֶל־מָק֖וֹם טָמֵֽא׃ (מב) וְלָקְחוּ֙ אֲבָנִ֣ים אֲחֵר֔וֹת וְהֵבִ֖יאוּ אֶל־תַּ֣חַת הָאֲבָנִ֑ים וְעָפָ֥ר אַחֵ֛ר יִקַּ֖ח וְטָ֥ח אֶת־הַבָּֽיִת׃ (מג) וְאִם־יָשׁ֤וּב הַנֶּ֙גַע֙ וּפָרַ֣ח בַּבַּ֔יִת אַחַ֖ר חִלֵּ֣ץ אֶת־הָאֲבָנִ֑ים וְאַחֲרֵ֛י הִקְצ֥וֹת אֶת־הַבַּ֖יִת וְאַחֲרֵ֥י הִטּֽוֹחַ׃ (מד) וּבָא֙ הַכֹּהֵ֔ן וְרָאָ֕ה וְהִנֵּ֛ה פָּשָׂ֥ה הַנֶּ֖גַע בַּבָּ֑יִת צָרַ֨עַת מַמְאֶ֥רֶת הִ֛וא בַּבַּ֖יִת טָמֵ֥א הֽוּא׃ (מה) וְנָתַ֣ץ אֶת־הַבַּ֗יִת אֶת־אֲבָנָיו֙ וְאֶת־עֵצָ֔יו וְאֵ֖ת כָּל־עֲפַ֣ר הַבָּ֑יִת וְהוֹצִיא֙ אֶל־מִח֣וּץ לָעִ֔יר אֶל־מָק֖וֹם טָמֵֽא׃ (מו) וְהַבָּא֙ אֶל־הַבַּ֔יִת כָּל־יְמֵ֖י הִסְגִּ֣יר אֹת֑וֹ יִטְמָ֖א עַד־הָעָֽרֶב׃ (מז) וְהַשֹּׁכֵ֣ב בַּבַּ֔יִת יְכַבֵּ֖ס אֶת־בְּגָדָ֑יו וְהָאֹכֵ֣ל בַּבַּ֔יִת יְכַבֵּ֖ס אֶת־בְּגָדָֽיו׃ (מח) וְאִם־בֹּ֨א יָבֹ֜א הַכֹּהֵ֗ן וְרָאָה֙ וְ֠הִנֵּה לֹא־פָשָׂ֤ה הַנֶּ֙גַע֙ בַּבַּ֔יִת אַחֲרֵ֖י הִטֹּ֣חַ אֶת־הַבָּ֑יִת וְטִהַ֤ר הַכֹּהֵן֙ אֶת־הַבַּ֔יִת כִּ֥י נִרְפָּ֖א הַנָּֽגַע׃ (מט) וְלָקַ֛ח לְחַטֵּ֥א אֶת־הַבַּ֖יִת שְׁתֵּ֣י צִפֳּרִ֑ים וְעֵ֣ץ אֶ֔רֶז וּשְׁנִ֥י תוֹלַ֖עַת וְאֵזֹֽב׃ (נ) וְשָׁחַ֖ט אֶת־הַצִּפֹּ֣ר הָאֶחָ֑ת אֶל־כְּלִי־חֶ֖רֶשׂ עַל־מַ֥יִם חַיִּֽים׃ (נא) וְלָקַ֣ח אֶת־עֵֽץ־הָ֠אֶרֶז וְאֶת־הָ֨אֵזֹ֜ב וְאֵ֣ת ׀ שְׁנִ֣י הַתּוֹלַ֗עַת וְאֵת֮ הַצִּפֹּ֣ר הַֽחַיָּה֒ וְטָבַ֣ל אֹתָ֗ם בְּדַם֙ הַצִּפֹּ֣ר הַשְּׁחוּטָ֔ה וּבַמַּ֖יִם הַֽחַיִּ֑ים וְהִזָּ֥ה אֶל־הַבַּ֖יִת שֶׁ֥בַע פְּעָמִֽים׃ (נב) וְחִטֵּ֣א אֶת־הַבַּ֔יִת בְּדַם֙ הַצִּפּ֔וֹר וּבַמַּ֖יִם הַֽחַיִּ֑ים וּבַצִּפֹּ֣ר הַחַיָּ֗ה וּבְעֵ֥ץ הָאֶ֛רֶז וּבָאֵזֹ֖ב וּבִשְׁנִ֥י הַתּוֹלָֽעַת׃ (נג) וְשִׁלַּ֞ח אֶת־הַצִּפֹּ֧ר הַֽחַיָּ֛ה אֶל־מִח֥וּץ לָעִ֖יר אֶל־פְּנֵ֣י הַשָּׂדֶ֑ה וְכִפֶּ֥ר עַל־הַבַּ֖יִת וְטָהֵֽר׃
Leviticus 14:34-53 (34) When you enter the land of Canaan that I give you as a possession, and I inflict an eruptive **plague upon a house** in the land you possess, (35) the owner of the house shall come and tell the priest, saying, “Something like a plague has appeared upon my house.” (36) The priest shall **order the house cleared** before the priest enters to examine the plague, so that nothing in the house may become unclean; after that the priest shall enter to examine the house. (37) If, when he examines the plague, the plague in the walls of the house is found to consist of greenish or reddish streaks that appear to go deep into the wall, (38) the priest shall come out of the house to **the entrance of the house**, and close up the house for seven days. (39) On the seventh day the priest shall return. If he sees that the plague has spread on the walls of the house, (40) the priest shall order the stones with the plague in them to be pulled out and cast **outside the city** into an unclean place. (41) The house shall be scraped inside all around, and the coating that is scraped off shall be dumped outside the city in an unclean place. (42) They shall take other stones and replace those stones with them, and take other coating and plaster the house. (43) If the plague again breaks out in the house, after the stones have been pulled out and after the house has been scraped and replastered, (44) the priest shall come to examine: if the plague has spread in the house, it is a malignant eruption in the house; it is unclean. (45) The house shall be torn down—its stones and timber and all the coating on the house—and taken to an unclean place outside the city. (46) Whoever enters the house while it is closed up shall be unclean until evening. (47) Whoever sleeps in the house must wash his clothes, and whoever eats in the house must wash his clothes. (48) If, however, the priest comes and sees that the plague has not spread in the house after the house was replastered, the priest shall pronounce the house clean, for the plague has healed. (49) To purge the house, he shall take **two birds**, cedar wood, crimson stuff, and hyssop. (50) **He shall slaughter the one bird** over fresh water in an earthen vessel. (51) He shall take the cedar wood, the hyssop, the crimson stuff, and the live bird, and dip them in the blood of the slaughtered bird and the fresh water, and sprinkle on the house seven times. (52) Having purged the house with the blood of the bird, the fresh water, the live bird, the cedar wood, the hyssop, and the crimson stuff, (53) **he shall set the live bird free outside the city in the open country**. **Thus he shall make expiation for the house, and it shall be clean**.
שמות כ״ט:מ״ב-מ״ג (מב) עֹלַ֤ת תָּמִיד֙ לְדֹרֹ֣תֵיכֶ֔ם **פֶּ֥תַח אֹֽהֶל־מוֹעֵ֖ד לִפְנֵ֣י ה' אֲשֶׁ֨ר אִוָּעֵ֤ד לָכֶם֙ שָׁ֔מָּה לְדַבֵּ֥ר אֵלֶ֖יךָ שָֽׁם׃** **(מג) וְנֹעַדְתִּ֥י שָׁ֖מָּה לִבְנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל וְנִקְדַּ֖שׁ בִּכְבֹדִֽי**׃
Exodus 29:42-43 (42) a regular burnt offering throughout the generations, **at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting before the LORD. For there I will meet with you, and there I will speak with you,** **(43) and there I will meet with the Israelites, and it shall be sanctified by My Presence.**
ויקרא ט״ז:ח׳-י׳ (ח) וְנָתַ֧ן אַהֲרֹ֛ן עַל־שְׁנֵ֥י הַשְּׂעִירִ֖ם גּוֹרָל֑וֹת גּוֹרָ֤ל אֶחָד֙ לַה' וְגוֹרָ֥ל אֶחָ֖ד לַעֲזָאזֵֽל׃ (ט) וְהִקְרִ֤יב אַהֲרֹן֙ אֶת־הַשָּׂעִ֔יר אֲשֶׁ֨ר עָלָ֥ה עָלָ֛יו הַגּוֹרָ֖ל לַה' וְעָשָׂ֖הוּ חַטָּֽאת׃ (י) וְהַשָּׂעִ֗יר אֲשֶׁר֩ עָלָ֨ה עָלָ֤יו הַגּוֹרָל֙ לַעֲזָאזֵ֔ל יָֽעֳמַד־חַ֛י לִפְנֵ֥י ה' לְכַפֵּ֣ר עָלָ֑יו לְשַׁלַּ֥ח אֹת֛וֹ לַעֲזָאזֵ֖ל הַמִּדְבָּֽרָה׃ Leviticus 16:8-10 (8) and he shall place lots upon the two goats, one marked for the LORD and the other marked for Azazel. (9) Aaron shall bring forward the goat designated by lot for the LORD, which he is to offer as a sin offering; (10) while the goat designated by lot for Azazel shall be left standing alive before the LORD, to make expiation with it and to send it off to the wilderness for Azazel. שמות י״ב:ז׳ (ז) וְלָֽקְחוּ֙ מִן־הַדָּ֔ם וְנָֽתְנ֛וּ עַל־שְׁתֵּ֥י הַמְּזוּזֹ֖ת וְעַל־הַמַּשְׁק֑וֹף עַ֚ל הַבָּ֣תִּ֔ים אֲשֶׁר־יֹאכְל֥וּ אֹת֖וֹ בָּהֶֽם׃ Exodus 12:7 (7) They shall take some of the blood and put it on the two doorposts and the lintel of the houses in which they are to eat it. במדבר כ״ד:ה׳ (ה) מַה־טֹּ֥בוּ אֹהָלֶ֖יךָ יַעֲקֹ֑ב מִשְׁכְּנֹתֶ֖יךָ יִשְׂרָאֵֽל׃ Numbers 24:5 (5) How fair are your tents, O Jacob, Your dwellings, O Israel! רש"י על במדבר כ״ד:ה׳:א׳ **מה טבו אהליך.** עַל שֶׁרָאָה פִתְחֵיהֶם שֶׁאֵינָן מְכֻוָּנִין זֶה מוּל זֶה: Rashi on Numbers 24:5:1 מה טבו אהליך HOW GOODLY ARE THY TENTS — He said this because he saw that the entrances of their tents were not exactly facing each other (Bava Batra 60a; cf. v. 2). רש"י על במדבר כ״ד:ה׳:ב׳ **משכנתיך.** חֲנִיּוֹתֶיךָ, כְּתַרְגּוּמוֹ; דָּבָר אַחֵר, **מה טבו אהליך** — מַה טֹּבוּ אֹהֶל שִׁילֹה וּבֵית עוֹלָמִים בְּיִשּׁוּבָן, שֶׁמַּקְרִיבִין בָּהֶן קָרְבָּנוֹת לְכַפֵּר עֲלֵיכֶם: Rashi on Numbers 24:5:2 משכנתיך means thy encampments, as the Targum has it. — Another explanation — מה טבו אהליך HOW GOODLY ARE THY TENTS — How goodly are the tent of Shiloh and the Temple when these flourished, in that sacrifices were offered therein to alone for you; מגילה י״ג א:י״ד וּבְמוֹת אָבִיהָ וְאִמָּהּ לְקָחָהּ מׇרְדֳּכַי לוֹ לְבַת תָּנָא מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי מֵאִיר **אַל תִּקְרֵי לְבַת אֶלָּא לְבַיִת** וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר וְלָרָשׁ אֵין כֹּל כִּי אִם כִּבְשָׂה אַחַת קְטַנָּה אֲשֶׁר קָנָה וַיְחַיֶּהָ וַתִּגְדַּל עִמּוֹ וְעִם בָּנָיו יַחְדָּו מִפִּתּוֹ תֹאכַל וּמִכּוֹסוֹ תִשְׁתֶּה וּבְחֵיקוֹ תִשְׁכָּב וַתְּהִי לוֹ כְּבַת מִשּׁוּם דִּבְחֵיקוֹ תִשְׁכָּב הֲווֹת לֵיהּ (לְבַת) אֶלָּא (לְבַיִת) הָכִי נָמֵי לְבַיִת
Megillah 13a:14 The verse states: **“And when her father and mother were dead, Mordecai took her for his own daughter”** (Esther 2:7). A *tanna* **taught** a *baraita* **in the name of Rabbi Meir: Do not read** the verse literally as **for a daughter [*bat*],** but **rather** read it as **for a home [*bayit*].** This indicates that Mordecai took Esther to be his wife. **And so it states: “But the poor man had nothing, except one little ewe lamb, which he had bought and reared: And it grew up together with him, and with his children; it did eat of his bread, and drank of his own cup, and lay in his bosom, and was like a daughter [*kevat*] to him”** (II Samuel 12:3). The Gemara questions: **Because it lay in his bosom, it “was like a daughter to him”? Rather,** the parable in II Samuel referenced the illicit taking of another’s wife, and the phrase should be read: **Like a home [*bayit*]** to him, i.e., a wife. **So too, here,** Mordecai took her **for a home,** i.e., a wife. מלכים א י״א:ל״ח (לח) וְהָיָ֗ה אִם־תִּשְׁמַע֮ אֶת־כָּל־אֲשֶׁ֣ר אֲצַוֶּךָ֒ וְהָלַכְתָּ֣ בִדְרָכַ֗י וְעָשִׂ֨יתָ הַיָּשָׁ֤ר בְּעֵינַי֙ לִשְׁמ֤וֹר חֻקּוֹתַי֙ וּמִצְוֺתַ֔י כַּאֲשֶׁ֥ר עָשָׂ֖ה דָּוִ֣ד עַבְדִּ֑י וְהָיִ֣יתִי עִמָּ֗ךְ וּבָנִ֨יתִי לְךָ֤ **בַֽיִת־נֶאֱמָן֙** כַּאֲשֶׁ֣ר בָּנִ֣יתִי לְדָוִ֔ד וְנָתַתִּ֥י לְךָ֖ אֶת־יִשְׂרָאֵֽל׃
I Kings 11:38 (38) If you heed all that I command you, and walk in My ways, and do what is right in My sight, keeping My laws and commandments as My servant David did, then I will be with you and I will build for you a **lasting dynasty** as I did for David. I hereby give Israel to you;
שמואל א ב׳:ל״ה (לה) וַהֲקִימֹתִ֥י לִי֙ כֹּהֵ֣ן נֶאֱמָ֔ן כַּאֲשֶׁ֛ר בִּלְבָבִ֥י וּבְנַפְשִׁ֖י יַעֲשֶׂ֑ה וּבָנִ֤יתִי לוֹ֙ **בַּ֣יִת נֶאֱמָ֔ן** וְהִתְהַלֵּ֥ךְ לִפְנֵֽי־מְשִׁיחִ֖י כָּל־הַיָּמִֽים׃
I Samuel 2:35 (35) And I will raise up for Myself a faithful priest, who will act in accordance with My wishes and My purposes. I will build for him an **enduring house**, and he shall walk before My anointed evermore.
Baruch Schwartz, at the Department of Bible, Hebrew University of Jerusalem explains that the word ne’eman, today used to mean faithful, trustworthy, is used frequently in the Bible to mean “lasting, enduring” (in addition to its frequent use in the sense of “unfailing, reliable” which is quite similar. One can see that the modern meaning too is derived from this but is slightly different.) Not “faithful”, but enduring, abiding, stable, constant. That’s what we are wishing the newlyweds: that they establish a “house”, i.e. a line of descendants, that endures and continues to be a part of the “house” of Israel.
כתובות ח׳ א:ג׳ ואשר יצר את האדם בצלמו בצלם דמות תבניתו והתקין לו ממנו **בנין עדי עד** ברוך אתה ה' יוצר האדם
Ketubot 8a:3 **And** the third blessing is: Blessed are You…**Who made humanity in His image, in the image of the likeness of His form, and out of His very self formed a building** (see Genesis 2:22) **for eternity. Blessed are You, Lord, Creator of mankind.**
רש"י על כתובות ח׳ א:ג׳:ב׳ בנין עדי עד - בנין נוהג לדורות וחוה קרי לה בנין על שם ויבן את הצלע (בראשית ב): Rashi on Ketubot 8a:3:2 **a building for eternity** - A building that lasts for generations and Eve was called a building by virtue of being built from the rib (Genesis 2)
ויקרא י׳:א׳-ב׳ (א) וַיִּקְח֣וּ בְנֵֽי־אַ֠הֲרֹן נָדָ֨ב וַאֲבִיה֜וּא אִ֣ישׁ מַחְתָּת֗וֹ וַיִּתְּנ֤וּ בָהֵן֙ אֵ֔שׁ וַיָּשִׂ֥ימוּ עָלֶ֖יהָ קְטֹ֑רֶת וַיַּקְרִ֜בוּ לִפְנֵ֤י ה' אֵ֣שׁ זָרָ֔ה אֲשֶׁ֧ר לֹ֦א צִוָּ֖ה אֹתָֽם׃ (ב) וַתֵּ֥צֵא אֵ֛שׁ מִלִּפְנֵ֥י ה' וַתֹּ֣אכַל אוֹתָ֑ם וַיָּמֻ֖תוּ לִפְנֵ֥י ה'׃ Leviticus 10:1-2 (1) Now Aaron’s sons Nadab and Abihu each took his fire pan, put fire in it, and laid incense on it; and they offered before the LORD alien fire, which He had not enjoined upon them. (2) And fire came forth from the LORD and consumed them; thus they died at the instance of the LORD. ויקרא י׳:ג׳ (ג) וַיֹּ֨אמֶר מֹשֶׁ֜ה אֶֽל־אַהֲרֹ֗ן הוּא֩ אֲשֶׁר־דִּבֶּ֨ר ה' ׀ לֵאמֹר֙ בִּקְרֹבַ֣י אֶקָּדֵ֔שׁ וְעַל־פְּנֵ֥י כָל־הָעָ֖ם אֶכָּבֵ֑ד וַיִּדֹּ֖ם אַהֲרֹֽן׃
Leviticus 10:3 (3) Then Moses said to Aaron, “This is what the LORD meant when He said: Through those near to Me I show Myself holy, And gain glory before all the people.” And Aaron was **silent.**
On Rosh Hashanah morning, the Rabbi noticed little Adam was staring up at the large plaque that hung in the foyer of the synagogue. It was covered with names, and small American flags were mounted on either side of it. The seven-year old had been staring at the plaque for some time, so the Rabbi walked up, stood beside the boy, and said quietly, "Good morning, Adam." "Good morning, Rabbi," replied the young man, still focused on the plaque. "Rabbi Resnick, what is this?" Adam asked. "Well, it's a memorial to all the young men and women who died in the service." Soberly, they stood together, staring at the large plaque. Little Adam's voice was barely audible when he asked: "Which service? Rosh Hashanah or Yom Kippur?" source
יומא ס״ח ב מַתְנִי׳ בָּא לוֹ כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל לִקְרוֹת ... חַזַּן הַכְּנֶסֶת נוֹטֵל סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה וְנוֹתְנוֹ לְרֹאשׁ הַכְּנֶסֶת וְרֹאשׁ הַכְּנֶסֶת נוֹתְנוֹ לַסְּגָן וְהַסְּגָן נוֹתְנוֹ לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל וְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל עוֹמֵד וּמְקַבֵּל וְקוֹרֵא בְּאַחֲרֵי מוֹת וְאַךְ בֶּעָשׂוֹר וְגוֹלֵל סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה וּמַנִּיחוֹ בְּחֵיקוֹ וְאוֹמֵר יוֹתֵר מִמַּה שֶּׁקָּרָאתִי לִפְנֵיכֶם כָּתוּב כָּאן וּבֶעָשׂוֹר שֶׁבְּחוֹמֶשׁ הַפְּקוּדִים קוֹרֵא עַל פֶּה
Yoma 68b **MISHNA:** **The High Priest came to read** the Torah. **...** **The synagogue attendant takes a Torah scroll and gives it to the head of the synagogue** that stood on the Temple Mount; **and the head of the synagogue gives it to the deputy** High Priest, **and the Deputy gives it to the High Priest, and the High Priest stands and receives** the scroll from his hands. **And he reads** from the scroll the Torah portion beginning with the verse: **“After the death”** (Leviticus 16:1) **and** the portion beginning with the verse: **“But on the tenth”** (Leviticus 23:26), **and furls the Torah scroll and places it on his bosom and says: More than what I have read before you is written here.** The Torah portion beginning with the verse: **“And on the tenth,” from the book of Numbers** (29:7), **he** then **reads by heart.**
יומא ע׳ א:ג׳ וּבֶעָשׂוֹר שֶׁל חוֹמֶשׁ הַפְּקוּדִים קוֹרֵא עַל פֶּה אַמַּאי נִגְלוֹל וְנִיקְרֵי אָמַר רַב הוּנָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אָמַר רַב שֵׁשֶׁת לְפִי שֶׁאֵין גּוֹלְלִין סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה בְּצִיבּוּר מִפְּנֵי **כְּבוֹד צִיבּוּר**
Yoma 70a:3 § It was further taught in the mishna: The Torah portion beginning with the verse: **“And on the tenth,” from the book of Numbers** (29:7), **he reads by heart.** The Gemara asks: **Why** does he read it by heart? **Let him furl** the scroll to that portion **and read it** from the text. **Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, said** that **Rav Sheshet said:** It is **because one may not furl a Torah scroll in public, out of respect for the community.** It is inappropriate to make the community wait until they have reached the next section. רש"י על יומא ע׳ א:ג׳:א׳ מפני כבוד ציבור - שיהו מצפין ודוממין לכך: Rashi on Yoma 70a:3:1 On account of the congregation’s honor - For they would have to wait in passive silence [while the Torah was rolled]. משנה תורה, הלכות תפילה וברכת כהנים י״ב:כ״ג (כג) אֵין קוֹרְאִין בְּחֻמָּשִׁין בְּבָתֵּי כְּנֵסִיּוֹת מִשּׁוּם **כְּבוֹד צִבּוּר**. וְאֵין גּוֹלְלִין סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה בְּצִבּוּר מִפְּנֵי **טֹרַח הַצִּבּוּר** שֶׁלֹּא יַטְרִיחַ עֲלֵיהֶם לִהְיוֹתָן עוֹמְדִין עַד שֶׁיִּגְלל סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה. לְפִיכָךְ אִם יִצְטָרְכוּ לִקְרוֹת שְׁנֵי עִנְיָנִים מוֹצִיאִין שְׁנֵי סִפְרֵי תּוֹרָה. וְלֹא יִקְרָא אִישׁ אֶחָד עִנְיָן אֶחָד בִּשְׁתֵּי תּוֹרוֹת שֶׁמָּא יֹאמְרוּ סֵפֶר רִאשׁוֹן פָּגוּם הָיָה וּלְפִיכָךְ קוֹרֵא בַּשֵּׁנִי:
Mishneh Torah, Prayer and the Priestly Blessing 12:23 (23) Scrolls of single books of the Pentateuch are not used for reading at services in synagogues, out of **respect to the congregation**. Nor is the scroll of the Law rolled**To the right place for the reading.* at a public service, out of regard to **the convenience of the congregants** so that they should not have the trouble of standing while the scroll is being rolled. Hence, if two sections in different parts of the text are to be read, two scrolls are taken out. One person must not read one section in two scrolls, lest it will be said that the first scroll was defective and therefore he read out of the second.
סוטה ל״ט ב:ז׳ ואמר רבי תנחום אמר רבי יהושע בן לוי אין שליח צבור רשאי להפשיט את התיבה בצבור מפני כבוד צבור Sotah 39b:7 **And Rabbi Tanḥum says** that **Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: The prayer leader is not permitted to uncover** the decorative covering of **the ark in public, out of respect for the congregation.** It is inappropriate to have the congregation wait while doing this.
ברכות ל״ג ב:כ״א-כ״ב הַהוּא דִּנְחֵית קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי חֲנִינָא, אֲמַר ״הָאֵל הַגָּדוֹל הַגִּבּוֹר וְהַנּוֹרָא וְהָאַדִּיר וְהָעִזּוּז וְהַיָּראוּי, הֶחָזָק וְהָאַמִּיץ וְהַוַּדַּאי וְהַנִּכְבָּד״.הִמְתִּין לוֹ עַד דְּסַיֵּים. כִּי סַיֵּים אֲמַר לֵיהּ: סַיֵּימְתִּינְהוּ לְכוּלְּהוּ שִׁבְחֵי דְמָרָךְ?! לְמָה לִי כּוּלֵּי הַאי? אֲנַן, הָנֵי תְּלָת דְּאָמְרִינַן אִי לָאו דְּאַמְרִינְהוּ מֹשֶׁה רַבֵּנוּ בְּאוֹרָיְיתָא, וַאֲתוֹ אַנְשֵׁי כְּנֶסֶת הַגְּדוֹלָה וְתַקְּנִינְהוּ בִּתְפִלָּה — לָא הֲוֵינַן יְכוֹלִין לְמֵימַר לְהוּ, וְאַתְּ אָמְרַתְּ כּוּלֵּי הַאי וְאָזְלַתְּ! מָשָׁל לְמֶלֶךְ בָּשָׂר וָדָם שֶׁהָיוּ לוֹ אֶלֶף אֲלָפִים דִּינְרֵי זָהָב, וְהָיוּ מְקַלְּסִין אוֹתוֹ בְּשֶׁל כֶּסֶף. וַהֲלֹא גְּנַאי הוּא לוֹ! Berakhot 33b:21-22 With regard to additions to prayers formulated by the Sages, The Gemara relates that **a particular** individual **descended before the ark** as prayer leader **in the presence of Rabbi Ḥanina.** He extended his prayer and **said: God, the great, mighty, awesome, powerful, mighty, awe-inspiring, strong, fearless, steadfast and honored.** Rabbi Ḥanina **waited for him until he completed** his prayer. **When he finished,** Rabbi Ḥanina **asked him: Have you concluded all of the praises of your Master? Why do I need all of this** superfluous praise? **Even these three** praises **that we recite:** The great, mighty and awesome, **had Moses our teacher not said them in the Torah and had the members of the Great Assembly not come and incorporated them into the** *Amida* prayer, **we would not be permitted to recite them. And you went on and recited all of these. It is comparable to a king who possessed many thousands of golden dinars, yet they were praising him for silver** ones. **Isn’t that deprecatory?** All of the praises we could possibly lavish upon the Lord are nothing but a few silver dinars relative to many thousands of gold dinars. Reciting a litany of praise does not enhance God’s honor. מורה נבוכים, חלק א' נ״ט והמפולג שנאמר בזה הענין - אמרו ב'תלים' "**לך דומיה תהילה**" - פרושו השתיקה אצלך היא השבח. וזה המרצת דברים עצומה מאוד בזה הענין - שאנחנו כל דבר שנאמר אותו שנכון בו הגדלה ושבח - נמצא בו מעמס אחד בחוקו ית' ונשקיף בו קצת חסרון; אם כן השתיקה יותר ראויה וההסתפקות בהשגת השכלים כמו שצוו השלמים ואמרו "אמרו בלבבכם על משכבכם ודומו סלה": וכבר ידעת אמרתם המפורסמת (אשר מי יתן והיה כל המאמרים כמותה!) ואני אזכרה לך בלשונה (ואף על פי שהיא ידועה) להעירך על עניניה. אמרו "ההוא דנחת קמיה דר' חנינה אמר האל הגדול הגיבור והנורא האדיר והחזק היראוי והעזוז אמר ליה סימתינהו לכולהו שבחי דמרך? השתא אנן תלת קמיתא אלמלא דאמרינהו משה רבינו באורייתא ואתו אנשי כנסת הגדולה ותקיננהו בתפילה אנן לא יכילנן למימרנהו - ואנת אמרת ואזלת כולי האי? משל למה הדבר דומה? למלך בשר ודם שהיו לו אלף אלפים דינרי זהב ומקלסין אותו בשל כסף - והלא גנאי הוא לו" - עד הנה הגיע מאמר זה החסיד: והסתכל תחילה שתקו ומאסו רבוי תארי החיוב. והתבונן איך הראה כי התארים אילו הונחו לשכלינו לבד לא אמרנום לעולם ולא דברנו בדבר מהם; ואמנם כאשר הצריך הכרח הדיבור לבני אדם במה שיתקים להם מעט ציור - כמו שאמרו 'דברה תורה כלשון בני אדם' - שיתואר להם האלוק בשלמיותיהם תכליתנו - שנעמוד על המאמרים ההם ולא נקרא שמו בהם אלא בקראנו אותם ב'תורה' לבד; אמנם כאשר באו גם 'אנשי כנסת הגדולה' - והם הנביאים - וסדרו זכרם בתפלה תכליתנו - שנאמרם לבד. ועיקר זה המאמר - בארו ששני הכרחים נזדמנו בהתפללנו בהם האחד - מפני שבאו ב'תורה' והשני - סדר הנביאים התפלה בהם; ולולא ההכרח הראשון - לא זכרנום ולולא ההכרח השני לא הסירונום ממקומם ולא התפללנו בהם - ואתה מרבה בתארים: הנה כבר התבאר לך גם כן מאלו הדברים שאין כל מה שתמצאהו מן התארים המיוחסים לאלוק בספרי הנביאים ראוי לנו שנתפלל בהם ונאמרם - שהוא לא אמר 'אלמלא דאמרנהו משה רבנו לא יכילנן למימרנהו' אלא תנאי אחר 'ואתו אנשי כנסת הגדולה ותקנינהו בתפלה' - ואז מותר לנו להתפלל בהם ולא כמו שעשו הפתאים באמת אשר המריצו בשבחים והאריכו והרבו דברים בתפילות חיברום ומליצות קבצום להתקרב בהם לאלוק לפי מחשבתם יתארו בהם האלוק בתארים אילו יתואר בהם אחד מבני אדם היה זה חסרון בחוקו; שהם לא הבינו אלו הענינים הגדולים והחשובים הזרים משכלי ההמון ולקחו האלוק ית' מדרס ללשונותם ותארוהו וסיפרוהו בכל מה שיחשבוהו ראוי וימריצו לשבח בזה עד שיעוררוהו להפעל במחשבתם; וכל שכן אם ימצאו כתוב בדברי נביא בזה יהיה הענין מותר להם שיבואו לכתובים (שצריך לפרשם על כל פנים) וישיבום לפשוטיהם ויגזרו מהם ויעשו להם סעיפים ויבנו עליהם מאמרים. וירבה התר זה אצל המשוררים והמליצים ואצל מי שיחשוב שהוא עושה שיר עד שחוברו דברים קצתם - כפירה גמורה וקצתם - יש בהם מן השטות והפסד הדמיון מה שראוי לאדם שישחק עליו לפי טבעו כשמעו ויבכהו עם ההתבוננות איך נאמרו הדברים ההם בחוק האלוק ית'! ולולא חמלתי על חסרון האומרים הייתי מגיד מהם מעט עד שתתעורר על מקום החטא בהם אלא שהם מאמרים חסרונם נראה מאד למי שיבין:
Guide for the Perplexed, Part 1 59 The idea is best expressed in the book of Psalms, "**Silence is praise to Thee**" (lxv. 2). It is a very expressive remark on this subject; for whatever we utter with the intention of extolling and of praising Him, contains something that cannot be applied to God, and includes derogatory expressions; it is therefore more becoming to be silent, and to be content with intellectual reflection, as has been recommended by men of the highest culture, in the words "Commune with your own heart upon your bed, and be still" (Ps. 4:4). You must surely know the following celebrated passage in the Talmud--would that all passages in the Talmud were like that!--although it is known to you, I quote it literally, as I wish to point out to you the ideas contained in it: "A certain person, reading prayers in the presence of Rabbi Haninah, ...was this not really dispraise to him?"
Thus far the opinion of the pious rabbi. Consider, first, how repulsive and annoying the accumulation of all these positive attributes was to him; next, how he showed that, if we had only to follow our reason, we should never have composed these prayers, and we should not have uttered any of them. ..
Were it not for the first reason, we should never have uttered them; and were it not for the second reason, we should not have copied them from the Pentateuch to recite them in our prayers; how then could we approve of the use of those numerous attributes! You also learn from this that we ought not to mention and employ ill our prayers all the attributes we find applied to God in the books of the Prophets; for he does not say, "Were it not that Moses, our Teacher, said them, we should not have been able to use them"; but he adds another condition--"and had not the men of the Great Synagogue come forward and established their use in the prayer," because only for that reason are we allowed to use them in our prayers. We cannot approve of what those foolish persons do who are extravagant in praise, fluent and prolix in the prayers they compose, and in the hymns they make in the desire to approach the Creator. They describe God in attributes which would be an offence if applied to a human being; for those persons have no knowledge of these great and important principles, which are not accessible to the ordinary intelligence of man. Treating the Creator as a familiar object, they describe Him and speak of Him in any expressions they think proper; they eloquently continue to praise Him in that manner, and believe that they can thereby influence Him and produce an effect on Him. If they find some phrase suited to their object in the words of the Prophets they are still more inclined to consider that they are free to make use of such texts--which should at least be explained--to employ them in their literal sense, to derive new expressions from them, to form from them numerous variations, and to found whole compositions on them. This license is frequently met with in the compositions of the singers, preachers, and others who imagine themselves to be able to compose a poem. Such authors write things which partly are real heresy, partly contain such folly and absurdity that they naturally cause those who hear them to laugh, but also to feel grieved at the thought that such things can be uttered in reference to God. Were it not that I pitied the authors for their defects. and did not wish to injure them, I should have cited some passages to show you their mistakes; besides, the fault of their compositions is obvious to all intelligent persons. You must consider it, and think thus: If slander and libel is a great sin, how much greater is the sin of those who speak with looseness of tongue in reference to God, and describe Him by attributes which are far below Him; and I declare that they not only commit an ordinary sin, but unconsciously at least incur the guilt of profanity and blasphemy. This applies both to the multitude that listens to such prayers, and to the foolish man that recites them.
For more sources see: The Halachic Principles of Tircha De-Tzibura
See also: WHAT HAPPENED TO SHORT PRAYERS? by Woolf Abrahams
It is curious that Kavod is linked directly with “silence”. In the Talmud with the bored silence of the congregation as the Priest, Rabbi or Torah reader fiddles and extends the survice and in the account of Nadab and Abihu, with the silence of their father, Aaron וַיִּדֹּם, אַהֲרֹן.
משנה תורה, הלכות תפילה וברכת כהנים ד׳:ט״ז (טז) כֵּיצַד הִיא הַכַּוָּנָה. שֶׁיְּפַנֶּה אֶת לִבּוֹ מִכָּל הַמַּחֲשָׁבוֹת וְיִרְאֶה עַצְמוֹ כְּאִלּוּ הוּא עוֹמֵד לִפְנֵי הַשְּׁכִינָה. לְפִיכָךְ צָרִיךְ לֵישֵׁב מְעַט קֹדֶם הַתְּפִלָּה כְּדֵי לְכַוֵּן אֶת לִבּוֹ וְאַחַר כָּךְ יִתְפַּלֵּל בְּנַחַת וּבְתַחֲנוּנִים וְלֹא יַעֲשֶׂה תְּפִלָּתוֹ כְּמִי שֶׁהָיָה נוֹשֵׂא מַשּׂאוֹי וּמַשְׁלִיכוֹ וְהוֹלֵךְ לוֹ. לְפִיכָךְ צָרִיךְ לֵישֵׁב מְעַט אַחַר הַתְּפִלָּה וְאַחַר כָּךְ יִפָּטֵר. חֲסִידִים הָרִאשׁוֹנִים הָיוּ שׁוֹהִין שָׁעָה אַחַת קֹדֶם תְּפִלָּה וְשָׁעָה אַחַת לְאַחַר תְּפִלָּה וּמַאֲרִיכִין בִּתְפִלָּה שָׁעָה:
Mishneh Torah, Prayer and the Priestly Blessing 4:16 (16) What is to be understood by concentration of the mind? The mind should be freed from all extraneous thoughts and the one who prays should realize that he is standing before the Divine Presence. He should therefore sit awhile before beginning his prayers, so as to concentrate his mind, and then pray in gentle tones, beseechingly, and not regard the service as a burden which he is carrying and which he will cast off and proceed on his way. He should, accordingly, also sit awhile, after concluding the prayers, and then leave. The ancient saints were wont to pause and meditate one hour before the service, one hour after the service and take one hour in its recital.
If our prayers are modeled on the Sacrifices then maybe we should offer prayers in distinct classes (think yoga classes, with sign-up....
Sin offering
Peace offering
Musaf (extra Shefa) offering
Pesach (transition) offering
Thanks Offering
Compare to
Pseukei de'zimra - Song / Praise
morning / mid-day. end of day
Torah Reading - Study
Kavanh - Meditation
Join Geoffrey Stern and Rabbi Adam Mintz as we discuss: “You shall not oppress a stranger, … having yourselves been strangers in the land of Egypt” and wonder why the motif of loving the stranger is not found in the Haggadah. Along with other members of the Madlik family we discuss whether this is a valid question or not and we also explore where in the Haggadah a discussion of loving the stranger is appropriate. Finally, we follow the advise of the Mishnah and read the parsha of Bikurim until the end… and discover that the Stranger is actually the punch line of the Magid section and that loving the stranger is the Praise and being a stranger is the shame, of which the mishnah speaks.
Let the Sun Shine
Source Sheet by Geoffrey Stern
| Bereishit Rabbah 11 (2) "And Elokim blessed the seventh day and sanctified it"- .... R' Elazar says: "He blessed it" with a candle and this occurred to me, one time I lit a candle on the eve of Shabbat and I came and I found it [still] lit at the end of Shabbat and it wasn't diminished at all. "He blessed it" with the light of the face of man, "He sanctified it" with the light of of the face of man. The light of man's face throughout the week isn't comparable to [his face] on Shabbat. "He blessed it" with luminaries, R' Shimon son of Yehuda the man of Acco says in the name of R' Shimon: even though the luminaries were cursed from the Shabbat eve they were not smitten until the termination of the Sabbath. This agrees with the Rabbis but not with R. Assi who maintained: Adam's glory did not abide the night with him. What is the proof? But Adam passeth not the night in glory (Ps XLIX, 13). The Rabbis maintain: His glory abode with him, but at the termination of Sabbath He deprived him of his splendor and expelled him from the Garden of Eden, as it is written, Thou changest his countenance, and sendest him away (Job XIV, 20) As soon as the sun set on the night of the Sabbath, the Holy One Blessed be He wished to hide the light, but He showed honor to the Sabbath; hence it is written, AND GOD BLESSED THE SEVETNTH DAY: whereupon did He bless it? With light. When the sun set on the night of the Sabbath, the light continued to function [the primeval light] whereupon all began praising, as it is written Under the whole heaven they sing praises to Him (ibid XXXVII, 3); wherefore? Because His light [reaches] unto the ends of the earth (ibid). ... Rabbi Levi said in the name of Rabbi Z’eira: That light served for thirty-six hours - twelve hours on the eve of Shabbat, twelve hours of the night of Shabbat, and the twelve hours of Shabbat [day]. Once the sun set on Saturday night, the darkness began to settle in. Adam was terrified, [thinking] Surely indeed the darkness shall bruise [E.V. 'envelop'] me (Ps, CXXXIX, 11): shall he of whom it is written, He shall bruise they head (Gen. III, 15), now come to attack me! [under the cover of darkness] What did the Lord do for him? He made him find two flints which he struck against each other; light came forth and he uttered a blessing over it; hence it is written, But the night was light unto me - ba'adeni ( PS. loc. cit.), i.e. the night was light in my Eden (be'edni'). This agree with Samuel, for Samuel said: Why do we recite a blessing over a lamp [fire] at the termination of the Sabbath? Because it was then created for the first time [artificial light]. .... | בראשית רבה י״א (ב) וַיְבָרֶךְ אֱלֹהִים אֶת יוֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִי וגו',... רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר בֵּרְכוֹ בְּנֵר, וּבִי הָיָה הַמַּעֲשֶׂה, פַּעַם אַחַת הִדְלַקְתִּי אֶת הַנֵּר בְּלֵילֵי שַׁבָּת וּבָאתִי וּמָצָאתִי אוֹתוֹ בְּמוֹצָאֵי שַׁבָּת דָּלוּק וְלֹא חָסַר כְּלוּם. בֵּרְכוֹ בְּאוֹר פָּנָיו שֶׁל אָדָם, קִדְּשׁוֹ בְּאוֹר פָּנָיו שֶׁל אָדָם. לֹא דוֹמֶה אוֹר פָּנָיו שֶׁל אָדָם כָּל יְמוֹת הַשַּׁבָּת, כְּמוֹ שֶׁהוּא דּוֹמֶה בְּשַׁבָּת. בֵּרְכוֹ בַּמְּאוֹרוֹת, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בַּר יְהוּדָה אִישׁ כְּפַר עַכּוֹ אוֹמֵר מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנִּתְקַלְּלוּ הַמְּאוֹרוֹת מֵעֶרֶב שַׁבָּת, אֲבָל לֹא לָקוּ עַד מוֹצָאֵי שַׁבָּת, אַתְיָא כְּרַבָּנָן וְלָא אַתְיָא כִּדְרַבִּי אַמֵּי, דְּאָמַר רַבִּי אַמֵּי אָדָם הָרִאשׁוֹן לֹא לָן כְּבוֹדוֹ עִמּוֹ, מַה טַּעַם (תהלים מט, יג): וְאָדָם בִּיקָר בַּל יָלִין נִמְשַׁל כַּבְּהֵמוֹת נִדְּמוּ. וְרַבָּנָן אָמְרֵי, לָן כְּבוֹדוֹ עִמּוֹ, וּמוֹצָאֵי שַׁבָּת נִטַּל מִמֶּנּוּ זִיווֹ וּטְרָדוֹ מִגַּן עֵדֶן, הֲדָא הוּא דִכְתִיב (איוב יד, כ): מְשַׁנֶּה פָנָיו וַתְּשַׁלְּחֵהוּ. כֵּיוָן שֶׁשָּׁקְעָה חַמָּה בְּלֵילֵי שַׁבָּת, בִּקֵּשׁ הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לִגְנֹז אֶת הָאוֹרָה, וְחָלַק כָּבוֹד לַשַּׁבָּת. הֲדָא הוּא דִכְתִיב: וַיְבָרֶךְ אֱלֹהִים אֶת יוֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִי וַיְקַדֵּשׁ אוֹתוֹ, בֵּרְכוֹ בְּאוֹרָה, כֵּיוָן שֶׁשָּׁקְעָה הַחַמָּה בְּלֵילֵי הַשַּׁבָּת הִתְחִילָה הָאוֹרָה וְהָיְתָה מְשַׁמֶּשֶׁת, הִתְחִילוּ הַכֹּל מְקַלְּסִין, הֲדָא הוּא דִכְתִיב (איוב לז, ג): תַּחַת כָּל הַשָּׁמַיִם יִשְׁרֵהוּ וְאוֹרוֹ עַל כַּנְפוֹת הָאָרֶץ,... בִּי לֵוִי בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי זְעֵירָא אָמַר, ל"ו שָׁעוֹת שִׁמְשָׁה אוֹתָהּ הָאוֹרָה, שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר שֶׁל עֶרֶב שַׁבָּת, וּשְׁנֵים עָשָׂר שֶׁל לֵילֵי שַׁבָּת, וּשְׁנֵים עָשָׂר שֶׁל שַׁבָּת. כֵּיוָן שֶׁשָּׁקְעָה הַחַמָּה בְּמוֹצָאֵי שַׁבָּת הִתְחִיל הַחשֶׁךְ מְמַשְׁמֵשׁ וּבָא וְנִתְיָרֵא אָדָם הָרִאשׁוֹן, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (תהלים קלט, יא): וָאֹמַר אַךְ חשֶׁךְ יְשׁוּפֵנִי וְלַיְלָה אוֹר בַּעֲדֵנִי, אוֹתוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב בּוֹ (בראשית ג, טו): הוּא יְשׁוּפְךָ רֹאשׁ וְאַתָּה תְּשׁוּפֶנּוּ עָקֵב, בָּא לְהִזְדַּוֵּג לִי, מֶה עָשָׂה הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא, זִמֵּן לוֹ שְׁנֵי רְעָפִים וְהֵקִישָׁן זֶה לָזֶה וְיָצָא מֵהֶן אוֹר וּבֵרַךְ עָלֶיהָ, הֲדָא הוּא דִכְתִיב: וְלַיְלָה אוֹר בַּעֲדֵנִי. מַה בֵּרַךְ עָלֶיהָ, בּוֹרֵא מְאוֹרֵי הָאֵשׁ. אַתְיָא כִּשְׁמוּאֵל, דְּאָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל מִפְּנֵי מָה מְבָרְכִין עַל הָאוֹר בְּמוֹצָאֵי שַׁבָּת, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהִיא תְּחִלַּת בְּרִיָּתָהּ. |
See also Bereshit Rabba 12:6 and here.
| Avodah Zarah 8a The Sages taught: On the day that Adam the first man was created, when the sun set upon him he said: Woe is me, as because I sinned, the world is becoming dark around me, and the world will return to the primordial state of chaos and disorder. And this is the death that was sentenced upon me from Heaven. He spent all night fasting and crying, and Eve was crying opposite him. Once dawn broke, he said: Evidently, the sun sets and night arrives, and this is the order of the world. | עבודה זרה ח׳ א ת"ר יום שנברא בו אדם הראשון כיון ששקעה עליו חמה אמר אוי לי שבשביל שסרחתי עולם חשוך בעדי ויחזור עולם לתוהו ובוהו וזו היא מיתה שנקנסה עלי מן השמים היה יושב בתענית ובוכה כל הלילה וחוה בוכה כנגדו כיון שעלה עמוד השחר אמר מנהגו של עולם הוא |
| Avodah Zarah 8a the Sages taught: When Adam the first man saw that the day was progressively diminishing, as the days become shorter from the autumnal equinox until the winter solstice, he did not yet know that this is a normal phenomenon, and therefore he said: Woe is me; perhaps because I sinned the world is becoming dark around me and will ultimately return to the primordial state of chaos and disorder. And this is the death that was sentenced upon me from Heaven, as it is written: “And to dust shall you return” (Genesis 3:19). He arose and spent eight days in fasting and in prayer. Once he saw that the season of Tevet, i.e., the winter solstice, had arrived, and saw that the day was progressively lengthening after the solstice, he said: Clearly, the days become shorter and then longer, and this is the order of the world. He went and observed a festival for eight days. Upon the next year, he observed both these eight days on which he had fasted on the previous year, and these eight days of his celebration, as days of festivities. He, Adam, established these festivals for the sake of Heaven, but they, the gentiles of later generations, established them for the sake of idol worship. | עבודה זרה ח׳ א ת"ר לפי שראה אדם הראשון יום שמתמעט והולך אמר אוי לי שמא בשביל שסרחתי עולם חשוך בעדי וחוזר לתוהו ובוהו וזו היא מיתה שנקנסה עלי מן השמים עמד וישב ח' ימים בתענית [ובתפלה] כיון שראה תקופת טבת וראה יום שמאריך והולך אמר מנהגו של עולם הוא הלך ועשה שמונה ימים טובים לשנה האחרת עשאן לאלו ולאלו ימים טובים הוא קבעם לשם שמים והם קבעום לשם עבודת כוכבים |
| Shabbat 21b The Gemara asks: What is Hanukkah, and why are lights kindled on Hanukkah? The Gemara answers: The Sages taught in Megillat Ta’anit: On the twenty-fifth of Kislev, the days of Hanukkah are eight. One may not eulogize on them and one may not fast on them. What is the reason? When the Greeks entered the Sanctuary, they defiled all the oils that were in the Sanctuary by touching them. And when the Hasmonean monarchy overcame them and emerged victorious over them, they searched and found only one cruse of oil that was placed with the seal of the High Priest, undisturbed by the Greeks. And there was sufficient oil there to light the candelabrum for only one day. A miracle occurred and they lit the candelabrum from it eight days. The next year the Sages instituted those days and made them holidays with recitation of hallel and special thanksgiving in prayer and blessings. | שבת כ״א ב מַאי חֲנוּכָּה? דְּתָנוּ רַבָּנַן: בְּכ״ה בְּכִסְלֵיו יוֹמֵי דַחֲנוּכָּה תְּמָנְיָא אִינּוּן דְּלָא לְמִסְפַּד בְּהוֹן וּדְלָא לְהִתְעַנּוֹת בְּהוֹן. שֶׁכְּשֶׁנִּכְנְסוּ יְווֹנִים לַהֵיכָל טִמְּאוּ כׇּל הַשְּׁמָנִים שֶׁבַּהֵיכָל. וּכְשֶׁגָּבְרָה מַלְכוּת בֵּית חַשְׁמוֹנַאי וְנִצְּחוּם, בָּדְקוּ וְלֹא מָצְאוּ אֶלָּא פַּךְ אֶחָד שֶׁל שֶׁמֶן שֶׁהָיָה מוּנָּח בְּחוֹתָמוֹ שֶׁל כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל, וְלֹא הָיָה בּוֹ אֶלָּא לְהַדְלִיק יוֹם אֶחָד. נַעֲשָׂה בּוֹ נֵס וְהִדְלִיקוּ מִמֶּנּוּ שְׁמוֹנָה יָמִים. לְשָׁנָה אַחֶרֶת קְבָעוּם וַעֲשָׂאוּם יָמִים טוֹבִים בְּהַלֵּל וְהוֹדָאָה. |
| Shabbat 21b Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel disagree as to the nature of that adjustment. Beit Shammai say: On the first day one kindles eight lights and, from there on, gradually decreases the number of lights until, on the last day of Hanukkah, he kindles one light. And Beit Hillel say: On the first day one kindles one light, and from there on, gradually increases the number of lights until, on the last day, he kindles eight lights. | שבת כ״א ב בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים: יוֹם רִאשׁוֹן מַדְלִיק שְׁמֹנָה, מִכָּאן וְאֵילָךְ פּוֹחֵת וְהוֹלֵךְ. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים: יוֹם רִאשׁוֹן מַדְלִיק אַחַת, מִכָּאן וְאֵילָךְ מוֹסִיף וְהוֹלֵךְ. |
Source Sheet created on Sefaria by Geoffrey Stern
Link To Source Sheet on Sefaria: www.sefaria.org/sheets/227396
Passover at a time of Corona: What the biblical provision for celebrating a second Passover teaches us about celebrating Passover under extenuating circumstances.
2.
| Numbers 9:2-13 (2) Let the Israelite people offer the passover sacrifice at its set time: (3) you shall offer it on the fourteenth day of this month, at twilight, at its set time; you shall offer it in accordance with all its rules and rites. (4) Moses instructed the Israelites to offer the passover sacrifice; (5) and they offered the passover sacrifice in the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month, at twilight, in the wilderness of Sinai. Just as the LORD had commanded Moses, so the Israelites did. (6) But there were some men who were unclean by reason of a corpse and could not offer the passover sacrifice on that day. Appearing that same day before Moses and Aaron, (7) those men said to them, “Unclean though we are by reason of a corpse, why must we be deprived [diminished, restrained, withdrawn, hindered, let down] from presenting the LORD’s offering at its set time with the rest of the Israelites?” (8) Moses said to them, “Stand by, and let me hear what instructions the LORD gives about you.” (9) And the LORD spoke to Moses, saying: (10) Speak to the Israelite people, saying: When any of you or of your posterity who are defiled by a corpse or are on a long journey would offer a passover sacrifice to the LORD, (11) they shall offer it in the second month, on the fourteenth day of the month, at twilight. They shall eat it with unleavened bread and bitter herbs, (12) and they shall not leave any of it over until morning. They shall not break a bone of it. They shall offer it in strict accord with the law of the passover sacrifice. (13) But if a man who is clean and not on a journey refrains from offering the passover sacrifice, that person shall be cut off from his kin, for he did not present the LORD’s offering at its set time; that man shall bear his guilt. | במדבר ט׳:ב׳-י״ג (ב) וְיַעֲשׂ֧וּ בְנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֛ל אֶת־הַפָּ֖סַח בְּמוֹעֲדֽוֹ׃ (ג) בְּאַרְבָּעָ֣ה עָשָֽׂר־י֠וֹם בַּחֹ֨דֶשׁ הַזֶּ֜ה בֵּ֧ין הָֽעֲרְבַּ֛יִם תַּעֲשׂ֥וּ אֹת֖וֹ בְּמוֹעֲד֑וֹ כְּכָל־חֻקֹּתָ֥יו וּכְכָל־מִשְׁפָּטָ֖יו תַּעֲשׂ֥וּ אֹתֽוֹ׃ (ד) וַיְדַבֵּ֥ר מֹשֶׁ֛ה אֶל־בְּנֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל לַעֲשֹׂ֥ת הַפָּֽסַח׃ (ה) וַיַּעֲשׂ֣וּ אֶת־הַפֶּ֡סַח בָּרִאשׁ֡וֹן בְּאַרְבָּעָה֩ עָשָׂ֨ר י֥וֹם לַחֹ֛דֶשׁ בֵּ֥ין הָעַרְבַּ֖יִם בְּמִדְבַּ֣ר סִינָ֑י כְּ֠כֹל אֲשֶׁ֨ר צִוָּ֤ה ה' אֶת־מֹשֶׁ֔ה כֵּ֥ן עָשׂ֖וּ בְּנֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵֽל׃ (ו) וַיְהִ֣י אֲנָשִׁ֗ים אֲשֶׁ֨ר הָי֤וּ טְמֵאִים֙ לְנֶ֣פֶשׁ אָדָ֔ם וְלֹא־יָכְל֥וּ לַעֲשֹׂת־הַפֶּ֖סַח בַּיּ֣וֹם הַה֑וּא וַֽיִּקְרְב֞וּ לִפְנֵ֥י מֹשֶׁ֛ה וְלִפְנֵ֥י אַהֲרֹ֖ן בַּיּ֥וֹם הַהֽוּא׃ (ז) וַ֠יֹּאמְרוּ הָאֲנָשִׁ֤ים הָהֵ֙מָּה֙ אֵלָ֔יו אֲנַ֥חְנוּ טְמֵאִ֖ים לְנֶ֣פֶשׁ אָדָ֑ם לָ֣מָּה נִגָּרַ֗ע לְבִלְתִּ֨י הַקְרִ֜ב אֶת־קָרְבַּ֤ן ה' בְּמֹ֣עֲד֔וֹ בְּת֖וֹךְ בְּנֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵֽל׃ (ח) וַיֹּ֥אמֶר אֲלֵהֶ֖ם מֹשֶׁ֑ה עִמְד֣וּ וְאֶשְׁמְעָ֔ה מַה־יְצַוֶּ֥ה ה' לָכֶֽם׃ (פ) (ט) וַיְדַבֵּ֥ר ה' אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֥ה לֵּאמֹֽר׃ (י) דַּבֵּ֛ר אֶל־בְּנֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל לֵאמֹ֑ר אִ֣ישׁ אִ֣ישׁ כִּי־יִהְיֶֽה־טָמֵ֣א ׀ לָנֶ֡פֶשׁ אוֹ֩ בְדֶ֨רֶךְ רְחֹקָ֜הׄ לָכֶ֗ם א֚וֹ לְדֹרֹ֣תֵיכֶ֔ם וְעָ֥שָׂה פֶ֖סַח לַה'׃ (יא) בַּחֹ֨דֶשׁ הַשֵּׁנִ֜י בְּאַרְבָּעָ֨ה עָשָׂ֥ר י֛וֹם בֵּ֥ין הָעַרְבַּ֖יִם יַעֲשׂ֣וּ אֹת֑וֹ עַל־מַצּ֥וֹת וּמְרֹרִ֖ים יֹאכְלֻֽהוּ׃ (יב) לֹֽא־יַשְׁאִ֤ירוּ מִמֶּ֙נּוּ֙ עַד־בֹּ֔קֶר וְעֶ֖צֶם לֹ֣א יִשְׁבְּרוּ־ב֑וֹ כְּכָל־חֻקַּ֥ת הַפֶּ֖סַח יַעֲשׂ֥וּ אֹתֽוֹ׃ (יג) וְהָאִישׁ֩ אֲשֶׁר־ה֨וּא טָה֜וֹר וּבְדֶ֣רֶךְ לֹא־הָיָ֗ה וְחָדַל֙ לַעֲשׂ֣וֹת הַפֶּ֔סַח וְנִכְרְתָ֛ה הַנֶּ֥פֶשׁ הַהִ֖וא מֵֽעַמֶּ֑יהָ כִּ֣י ׀ קָרְבַּ֣ן ה' לֹ֤א הִקְרִיב֙ בְּמֹ֣עֲד֔וֹ חֶטְא֥וֹ יִשָּׂ֖א הָאִ֥ישׁ הַהֽוּא׃ |
3.
| Pesach Haggadah, Magid, Rabban Gamliel's Three Things In each and every generation, a person is obligated to see himself as if he left Egypt, as it is stated (Exodus 13:8); "And you shall explain to your son on that day: For the sake of this, did the Lord do [this] for me in my going out of Egypt." Not only our ancestors did the Holy One, blessed be He, redeem, but rather also us [together] with them did He redeem, as it is stated (Deuteronomy 6:23); "And He took us out from there, in order to bring us in, to give us the land which He swore unto our fathers." | הגדה של פסח, מגיד, פסח מצה ומרור בְּכָל־דּוֹר וָדוֹר חַיָּב אָדָם לִרְאוֹת אֶת־עַצְמוֹ כְּאִלּוּ הוּא יָצָא מִמִּצְרַיִם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: וְהִגַּדְתָּ לְבִנְךָ בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא לֵאמֹר, בַּעֲבוּר זֶה עָשָׂה ה' לִי בְּצֵאתִי מִמִּצְרַיִם. לֹא אֶת־אֲבוֹתֵינוּ בִּלְבָד גָּאַל הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא, אֶלָּא אַף אוֹתָנוּ גָּאַל עִמָּהֶם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: וְאוֹתָנוּ הוֹצִיא מִשָּׁם, לְמַעַן הָבִיא אוֹתָנוּ, לָתֶת לָנוּ אֶת־הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר נִשָׁבַּע לַאֲבֹתֵינוּ. |
4. The Marranos of Belmonte Portugal
Despite being forcibly converted to Christianity in 1497 many of the Jews of Portugal continued to practice Judaism in secret. Today, residents of the village of Belmonte practice an amalgam of Christian and Jewish rituals.
Lighting Shabbat candles in secret closet. © Frédéric Brenner
Belmonte Marranos Celebrate Passover in Secret © Frédéric Brenner
The day of the Lord - the Day of the Great Forgiveness - (O Dia do Senhor) and the Holy Feast - the Easter - (A santa Festa) are the great holy days that remain; some still light the Sabbath lamp. Passover, the most important and most elegant holiday about a month after its actual date in the Jewish calendar, a memory of the Inquisition. The box of unleavened bread is the main ritual, which is performed in secret, at home. We see him here for the first time. Dressed in white, the participants sanctify the piece by throwing water and purging prayers of purification. They invoke God's protection from various evils, don't torture. During the Holy Feast they consume no meat or coffee and eat no bread other than unleavened bread. Then the Marrranes leave the city, in groups, and will pick bitter herbs (maror in The Jewish tradition); men and women whip the river with plants abseiling from the Red Sea crossing by Moses during the Egyptian Exodus. These ceremonies are preserved thanks to the photographs of Frederic Brenner for the first and perhaps the last time.
Prof. Yosef Haim Yerushalmi Introduction to Marranes (H.COL.BEAUX ART) (French Edition) (French) Paperback – 1992 by Frédéric Brenner (Author) p42
For once these Marranos of Belmonte expose themselves, a historic moment and a turning point in their becoming; they overexpose themselves to the camera. They make of their secret an archived invisible visibility. They are the only ones, in this series of photograms, to keep the secret that they exhibit and to sign their belonging without belonging. More than for all the others, I ask myself “who” they are and what they are thinking, in their for intérieur, as we say in French—that is, in their “heart of hearts.” (What is their for intérieur? What do they finally know of their secret, of the secret that keeps them before they keep it?) What do they think of what is happening to them, including the forgiveness asked by Mário Soares (“In the name of Portugal, I ask forgiveness of the Jews for the persecutions they suffered in our country”)? The film The Last Marranos bears witness to the fact that those named in the title are undergoing the loss of their secret. They are forgetting it, paradoxically, in the very movement and moment in which they are reappropriating their memory in an “authentic,” assumed, “normal” Judaism: another “normalization” on the agenda, after the avowal, or rather let us say the confession, and then, finally, the repentance of the guilty ones.
— JACQUES DERRIDA Diaspora: Homelands in Exile (2 Volume Set) Hardcover – September 30, 2003
by Frederic Brenner Vol 2 Voices, p65
Please see Video: The Last Marranos on YouTube here and here at point where they describe previous practice of Pesach Sheni.
9.
| Sukkah 25b they were unnamed people who were engaged in tending to a corpse whose burial is a mitzva, i.e., which has no one else available to bury it, and their seventh day of impurity occurred precisely on the eve of Passover, as it is stated: “And they could not observe the Pesaḥ on that day” (Numbers 9:6). The Gemara infers: On that day they could not observe it; on the next day they could observe it. Although they would be purified at nightfall and would then be eligible to partake of the Paschal lamb, at the time of the slaughter and the sprinkling of the blood they were not yet pure. They asked whether the Paschal lamb could be slaughtered on their behalf. Apparently, they were obligated to perform the mitzva of burial of the corpse although it prevented them from fulfilling the mitzva of sacrificing the Paschal lamb, which is a stringent mitzva. | סוכה כ״ה ב אלא עוסקין במת מצוה היו שחל שביעי שלהן להיות בערב פסח שנאמר (במדבר ט, ו) ולא יכלו לעשות הפסח ביום ההוא ביום ההוא אין יכולין לעשות הא למחר יכולין לעשות |
10.
| Mishnah Pesachim 9:2 (2) What is “a far-off journey”?From Modi’im and beyond, and the same distance on all sides [of Jerusalem], the words of Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Eliezer says: from the threshold of the Temple court and beyond. Rabbi Yose said to him: for that reason the heh has a dot on it in order to say, not because it is really far-off, but [even when one is] from the threshold of the Temple court and beyond. | משנה פסחים ט׳:ב׳ (ב) אֵיזוֹ הִיא דֶרֶךְ רְחוֹקָה, מִן הַמּוֹדִיעִים וְלַחוּץ, וּכְמִדָּתָהּ לְכָל רוּחַ, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, מֵאַסְקֻפַּת הָעֲזָרָה וְלַחוּץ. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, לְפִיכָךְ נָקוּד עַל ה', לוֹמַר, לֹא מִפְּנֵי שֶׁרְחוֹקָה וַדַּאי, אֶלָּא מֵאִסְקֻפַּת הָעֲזָרָה וְלַחוּץ: |
11.
12.
הגדה של פסח, נערך ע'י הרב יוסף קישוטים וציורים מאת ברורית אונה ,אומנות' ירושלם
14.
| Pesachim 93a:12 And all three of them expounded the same verse to derive their opinions: “But the man who is ritually pure, and is not on a journey, and refrains from offering the Paschal lamb, that soul shall be cut off from his people; because [ki] he did not bring the offering of the Lord in its appointed season, that man shall bear his sin” (Numbers 9:13). Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi holds that the verse should be understood as follows: The phrase: “And refrains from offering the Paschal lamb, that soul shall be cut off,” means that he did not participate in the offering on the first Pesaḥ. In the continuation of the verse, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi understands the word ki to mean: If, as the word ki has various meanings, one of which is: If. Therefore, the verse can be interpreted in the following manner: If he also “did not bring the offering of the Lord in its appointed season,” with regard to the second Pesaḥ, “that man shall bear his sin.” | פסחים צ״ג א:י״ב ושלשתן מקרא אחד דרשו והאיש אשר הוא טהור ובדרך לא היה רבי סבר וחדל לעשות הפסח ונכרתה דלא עבד בראשון אי נמי קרבן ה׳ לא הקריב במועדו בשני |
15. Deprived: From the fact that they nevertheless did demand, “Why should we be deprived” we learn a wonderful lesson. When a Jew feels that he is missing something in Torah and mitzvos, some aspect of fear of Heaven, he relies on no one — not on Moshe Rabbeinu and not even on G‑d (so to speak). Instead, he cries out and demands, “Why should we be deprived!”
Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson Pesach Sheni 1984
The Audacity of Torah GS by Geoffrey Stern An exploration of the fine line between expressions of piety in the service of the Divine and the seduction of self-pride. Using biblical, Talmudic, liturgical and Maimonidian texts and anecdotes from the Novardok school of Mussar we come to a surprising conclusion. The Torah not so much commands us to worship the Lord as it does give us permission or license. We call this the audacity of Torah.
-----
Link to Source Sheet on Sefaria here
1. There is a popular Jewish joke about the former Novardok Yeshiva, founded by Rabbi Yosef Yozel Horowitz known as the Alter of Novardok (1847–1919). Novardok was one of the more extreme exemplars of the mussar movement that developed in Lithuania in the latter part of the 19th century. This yeshiva placed great emphasis on “the negation of the ego and the physical world”. Students wore tattered clothing and engaged in deliberately humiliating activities to achieve that end. The joke goes as follows:
Chaim, a new student, arrived at the Novardok Yeshiva. Being a novice and not knowing exactly what was expected of him, he simply observed what the other students were doing and copied them. When it was time for davening, observing his fellow yeshiva students engaged in fervent prayer and shokeling back and forth with great intensity, he did the same. During the period for Talmud study, he mimicked the others with their sing-song chants and exaggerated hand gestures. Finally, it was time for mussar self-examination, when each student retreated to a private corner, beat his fist remorsefully against his chest and repeated the refrain in Yiddish: “Ish bin a gor nisht! Ish bin a gor nisht!” (“I am a complete nothing!”) Observing the behaviour of these students, Chaim sat down and, pounding his fist against his chest, likewise repeated the same mantra: “Ish bin a gor nisht! Ish bin a gor nisht!” One of the veteran students seated nearby observed Chaim disdainfully, turned to another old-timer and commented, “Look at this one! He’s been here just one day, and he already thinks he’s a gor nisht!” source
2. סידור אשכנז, שבת, שחרית, ברכות קריאת שמע, יוצר אור ח׳ (ח) אֶת שֵׁם הָאֵ-ל, הַמֶּלֶךְ הַגָּדול הַגִּבּור וְהַנּורָא קָדושׁ הוּא.
וְכֻלָּם מְקַבְּלִים עֲלֵיהֶם על מַלְכוּת שָׁמַיִם זֶה מִזֶּה.
וְנותְנִים רְשׁוּת זֶה לָזֶה לְהַקְדִּישׁ לְיוצְרָם בְּנַחַת רוּחַ. בְּשפָה בְרוּרָה וּבִנְעִימָה.
קְדֻשָׁה כֻּלָּם כְּאֶחָד. עונִים וְאומְרִים בְּיִרְאָה:
קָדושׁ קָדושׁ קָדושׁ ה' צְבָאות. מְלא כָל הָאָרֶץ כְּבודו:
Siddur Ashkenaz, Shabbat, Shacharit, Blessings of the Shema, First Blessing before Shema 8 the name of the Almighty, the king, **the great, the mighty, the awesome One**; holy is He. And they take upon themselves the yoke of sovereignty one from the other
and give permission one to another to sanctify their Creator in a spirit of serenity
with clear speech and sweet harmony They proclaim [His] holiness in unison and reverently proclaim: "Holy, holy, holy is Adonoy of Hosts the fullness of all the earth is his glory."
3. רש"י על ישעיהו ו׳:ג׳ (א) וקרא זה אל זה. נוטלין רשות זה מזה שלא יקדים האחד ויתחיל ויתחייב שריפה אלא אם כן פתחו כולם כאחד וזהו שיסד ביוצר אור קדושה כולם כאחד עונים כו' ומדרש אגדה מעשה מרכבה הוא וכן תירגם קדוש קדוש קדוש ג' פעמים כתרגומו: Rashi on Isaiah 6:3 They would take permission from one another so that one would not precede [the others] and be guilty of [a sin punishable by] burning; rather, they all commenced simultaneously. This is the basis for what is said in the K'dushah d'Yotzeir Or: "all, as one, respond [and proclaim God's holiness...]"...
4. האם בני אדם יכולים להידמות למלאכים? מיכאל גרץ פוסטים23/02/2020 ר' חיים בן שלמה טיירר מצ'רנוביץ' (נולד ב1816) מסביר את הפסוק והתפילה כך:
"…כי באמת כבר כתבנו במקום אחר שמי שאוהב את ה' יתברך לא אהבת עצמו בשום אופן, אין חילוק לפניו כלל וכלל בעשיית המצוות אם הוא עשאה או אחרים עושים ויבוא הטוב מכל מקום".
אסור שתתקיים "תחרות" על עשיית מצוות. יהודי שעושה רק מצווה אחת ביום, עשייה זאת משמחת את הקב"ה. ואין לאדם אחר רשות לבקר אותו שזה רק מצווה אחת. והוא ממשיך:
"וזה הוא עיקר עבודתו לעשות נחת רוח לפניו, ומה לו אם יגיענו נחת רוח ממנו או מחבירו. … האוהב את בוראו אהבת אמת שמשתוקק שיגיע נחת רוח לבורא עולם, לא ישתדל כלל לחטוף המצוה מזולתו שהוא יעשנה"
אין אפוטרופסות על המצוות! אסור שחוג זה או אחר יטען שרק הם יודעים איך לקיים את המצוות, ולכן כל מצווה שיהודי אחר עושה פסול מלכתחילה. גישה כזאת גורמת צער לה' במקום שמחה.
"ועל כן אומרים בקדושה של יוצר אצל קדושת המלאכים וכולם מקבלים עליהם וגו' ונותנים באהבה 'רשות זה לזה' להקדיש ליוצרם בנחת רוח וגו', …
ולא יחפוץ אחד להיות גדול מחבירו אף בעיני המקום, ועל כן נותנים באהבה רבה רשות זה לזה להקדיש וכו' כי כל כוונתם שיגיע הנאה לבורא עולם יהיה ממי שיהיה מאתו או מזולתו…" (ספר באר מים חיים פרשת תצוה – פרק כח)
**4.** Rabbi Michael Gertz: Can Humans Resemble Angels 2/23/2020
Rabbi Chaim Ben Shlomo Tierer of Czernowitz (born 1816) explains the verse and prayer as follows:
"… Because we have already written elsewhere that whoever loves God will not act selfishly under any circumstance, there is no difference in him at all in doing the commandments whether he did or others do and the good comes from everywhere.
Ganze: There must be no "competition" for the observance. A Jew who does only one mitzvah a day does so pleasing the Almighty. And no one else has permission to criticize him that is only one mitzvah. And he continues:
"And that is the crux of his work please the Lord, and what if this Divine pleasure comes from him or from his friend. ... Who loves his Creator A true love that longs for a spirit of Creator will never endeavor to snatch the mitzvah from others.
Ganz; There is no guardianship of the commandments! One or the other circle must not claim that only they know how to keep the commandments, and therefore every commandment that another Jew makes is wrong in the first place. Such an attitude causes God sorrow instead of joy.
And so they say with regard to the Kedusha: and everyone accepts them And lovingly give 'each other's permission' to sanctify their creator in divine pleasure ... ' And no one wants to be bigger than his friend even in the eyes of the God, and therefore, with great love, give each other permission to dedicate, etc. that all their intentions that come to give pleasure to the Creator of the world whether it comes from them or their fellow.
ברכות ל״ב א וְאָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: מֹשֶׁה הֵטִיחַ דְּבָרִים כְּלַפֵּי מַעְלָה. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וַיִּתְפַּלֵּל מֹשֶׁה אֶל ה׳״ אַל תִּקְרֵי ״אֶל ה׳״, אֶלָּא ״עַל ה׳״. שֶׁכֵּן דְּבֵי רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב קוֹרִין לָאַלְפִין עַיְינִין, וְלָעַיְינִין אַלְפִין.
דבֵי רַבִּי יַנַּאי אָמְרִי, מֵהָכָא: ״וְדִי זָהָב״. מַאי ״וְדִי זָהָב״? אָמְרִי דְּבֵי רַבִּי יַנַּאי: כָּךְ אָמַר מֹשֶׁה לִפְנֵי הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא: רִבּוֹנוֹ שֶׁל עוֹלָם, בִּשְׁבִיל כֶּסֶף וְזָהָב שֶׁהִשְׁפַּעְתָּ לָהֶם לְיִשְׂרָאֵל, עַד שֶׁאָמְרוּ ״דַּי״ — הוּא גָּרַם שֶׁעָשׂוּ אֶת הָעֵגֶל. אָמְרִי דְּבֵי רַבִּי יַנַּאי: אֵין אֲרִי נוֹהֵם מִתּוֹךְ קוּפָּה שֶׁל תֶּבֶן אֶלָּא מִתּוֹךְ קוּפָּה שֶׁל בָּשָׂר. אָמַר רַבִּי אוֹשַׁעְיָא: מָשָׁל לְאָדָם שֶׁהָיְתָה לוֹ פָּרָה כְּחוּשָׁה וּבַעֲלַת אֵבָרִים, הֶאֱכִילָהּ כַּרְשִׁינִין וְהָיְתָה מְבַעֶטֶת בּוֹ. אָמַר לָהּ: מִי גָּרַם לִיךְ שֶׁתְּהֵא מְבַעֶטֶת בִּי — אֶלָּא כַּרְשִׁינִין שֶׁהֶאֱכַלְתִּיךְ. אָמַר רַבִּי חִיָּיא בַּר אַבָּא אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: מָשָׁל לְאָדָם אֶחָד שֶׁהָיָה לוֹ בֵּן. הִרְחִיצוֹ וְסָכוֹ, וְהֶאֱכִילוֹ וְהִשְׁקָהוּ, וְתָלָה לוֹ כִּיס עַל צַוָּארוֹ, וְהוֹשִׁיבוֹ עַל פֶּתַח שֶׁל זוֹנוֹת. מַה יַּעֲשֶׂה אוֹתוֹ הַבֵּן שֶׁלֹּא יֶחֱטָא?! אָמַר רַב אַחָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב הוּנָא אָמַר רַב שֵׁשֶׁת: הַיְינוּ דְּאָמְרִי אִינָשֵׁי: מְלֵי כְּרֵסֵיהּ זְנֵי בִּישֵׁי. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״כְּמַרְעִיתָם וַיִּשְׂבָּעוּ שָׂבְעוּ וַיָּרׇם לִבָּם עַל כֵּן שְׁכֵחוּנִי״. רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר: מֵהָכָא: ״וְרָם לְבָבֶךָ וְשָׁכַחְתָּ אֶת ה׳״. וְרַבָּנַן אָמְרִי, מֵהָכָא: ״וְאָכַל וְשָׂבַע וְדָשֵׁן וּפָנָה״. וְאִי בָּעֵית אֵימָא מֵהָכָא: ״וַיִּשְׁמַן יְשׁוּרוּן וַיִּבְעָט״. אָמַר רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָנִי אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹנָתָן: מִנַּיִן שֶׁחָזַר הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא וְהוֹדָה לוֹ לְמֹשֶׁה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְכֶסֶף הִרְבֵּיתִי לָהֶם וְזָהָב עָשׂוּ לַבָּעַל״. ״וַיְדַבֵּר ה׳ אֶל מֹשֶׁה לֶךְ רֵד״. מַאי ״לֶךְ רֵד״? אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: אָמַר לוֹ הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לְמֹשֶׁה: מֹשֶׁה, רֵד מִגְּדוּלָּתְךָ! כְּלוּם נָתַתִּי לְךָ גְּדוּלָּה אֶלָּא בִּשְׁבִיל יִשְׂרָאֵל. וְעַכְשָׁיו יִשְׂרָאֵל חָטְאוּ — אַתָּה לָמָּה לִי? מִיָּד תָּשַׁשׁ כּוֹחוֹ שֶׁל מֹשֶׁה, וְלֹא הָיָה לוֹ כֹּחַ לְדַבֵּר. וְכֵיוָן שֶׁאָמַר ״הֶרֶף מִמֶּנִּי וְאַשְׁמִידֵם״, אָמַר מֹשֶׁה: דָּבָר זֶה תָּלוּי בִּי! מִיָּד עָמַד וְנִתְחַזֵּק בִּתְפִלָּה, וּבִקֵּשׁ רַחֲמִים. מָשָׁל לְמֶלֶךְ שֶׁכָּעַס עַל בְּנוֹ, וְהָיָה מַכֵּהוּ מַכָּה גְּדוֹלָה. וְהָיָה אוֹהֲבוֹ יוֹשֵׁב לְפָנָיו, וּמִתְיָרֵא לוֹמַר לוֹ דָּבָר. אָמַר הַמֶּלֶךְ: אִלְמָלֵא אוֹהֲבִי זֶה שֶׁיּוֹשֵׁב לְפָנַי — הֲרַגְתִּיךָ. אָמַר: דָּבָר זֶה תָּלוּי בִּי. מִיָּד עָמַד וְהִצִּילוֹ. ״וְעַתָּה הַנִּיחָה לִּי וְיִחַר אַפִּי בָהֶם וַאֲכַלֵּם וְאֶעֱשֶׂה אוֹתְךָ לְגוֹי גָּדוֹל וְגוֹ׳״.
אָמַר רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ: אִלְמָלֵא מִקְרָא כָּתוּב, אִי אֶפְשָׁר לְאוֹמְרוֹ.
Berakhot 32a **And Rabbi Elazar said: Moses** also **spoke impertinently toward** God **on High, as it is stated** in the verse following the sin of those who murmured against God in the desert: **“And Moses prayed to the Lord** and the fire subsided” (Numbers 11:2), and this verse is interpreted homiletically: **Do not read to [*el*] the Lord,** but rather **onto [*al*] the Lord,** which indicates that he spoke impertinently....
The Sages of the school of Rabbi Yannai, however, say proof that Moses spoke impertinently toward God on High is derived from here, Moses’ rebuke at the beginning of Deuteronomy: “And Di Zahav” (Deuteronomy 1:1). ...The Sages of the school of Rabbi Yannai said that Moses said the following before the Holy One, Blessed be He, to atone for Israel after the sin of the Golden Calf: Master of the Universe, because of the gold and silver that you lavished upon Israel during the exodus from Egypt until they said enough [dai]; it was this wealth that caused Israel to make the Golden Calf. ...
Rabbi Oshaya said: This is comparable to a person who had a lean, but large-limbed cow. At one point, he fed it lupines, a choice food, and soon thereafter the cow was kicking him. He said to the cow: Who caused you to begin kicking me if not the lupines I fed you? Here, too, the sin was caused by an abundance of good. The Gemara offers another analogy: Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: This is comparable to a person who had a son; he bathed him and anointed him with oil, fed him and gave him drink, and hung a purse of money around his neck. Then, he brought his son to the entrance of a brothel. What could the son do to avoid sinning? ....
Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said that Rabbi Yonatan said: From where in the Torah is it derived that the Holy One, Blessed be He, ultimately conceded to Moses that the reason for the sin of the Golden Calf was indeed the riches lavished upon Israel? As it is stated: “And I gave them an abundance of silver and gold, which they used for the Ba’al” (Hosea 2:10). ...
In an additional aspect of the sin of the Golden Calf, God told Moses: “Now leave Me be, that My wrath will be enraged against them and I will consume them; and I will make of you a great nation” (Exodus 32:10). Explaining this verse,
Rabbi Abbahu said: Were the verse not written in this manner, it would be impossible to utter it, in deference to God.
**5.** מורה נבוכים, חלק א' נ״ט
הנה כבר התבאר לך כי כל אשר התבאר לך במופת שלילת דבר אחד ממנו - תהיה יותר שלם וכל אשר תחיב לו דבר מוסף - תהיה מדמה ותרחק מידיעת אמיתתו. ...
וכאשר הרגיש כל אדם שאי אפשר להגיע אל השגת מה שבכוחנו שנשיג כי אם בשלילה והשלילה לא תודיע דבר מאמיתת הענין אשר נשלל ממנו הדבר אשר נשללהו - בארו בני אדם כולם העוברים והבאים שהאלוה ית' לא ישיגוהו השכלים ולא ישיג מה הוא אלא הוא ושהשגתו היא הלאות מתכלית השגתו. וכל הפילוסופים אומרים נצחנו בנעימותו ונעלם ממנו לחוזק הראותו כמו שיעלם השמש מן העינים החלושים להשיגו. וכבר האריכו בזה במה שאין תועלת לשנותו הנה. והמפולג שנאמר בזה הענין - אמרו ב'תלים' "לך דומיה תהילה" - פרושו השתיקה אצלך היא השבח. וזה המרצת דברים עצומה מאוד בזה הענין - שאנחנו כל דבר שנאמר אותו שנכון בו הגדלה ושבח - נמצא בו מעמס אחד בחוקו ית' ונשקיף בו קצת חסרון; אם כן השתיקה יותר ראויה וההסתפקות בהשגת השכלים כמו שצוו השלמים ואמרו "אמרו בלבבכם על משכבכם ודומו סלה":
וכבר ידעת אמרתם המפורסמת (אשר מי יתן והיה כל המאמרים כמותה!) ואני אזכרה לך בלשונה (ואף על פי שהיא ידועה) להעירך על עניניה.
הַהוּא דִּנְחֵית קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי חֲנִינָא, אֲמַר ״הָאֵל הַגָּדוֹל הַגִּבּוֹר וְהַנּוֹרָא וְהָאַדִּיר וְהָעִזּוּז וְהַיָּראוּי, הֶחָזָק וְהָאַמִּיץ וְהַוַּדַּאי וְהַנִּכְבָּד״.
הִמְתִּין לוֹ עַד דְּסַיֵּים. כִּי סַיֵּים אֲמַר לֵיהּ: סַיֵּימְתִּינְהוּ לְכוּלְּהוּ שִׁבְחֵי דְמָרָךְ?! לְמָה לִי כּוּלֵּי הַאי? אֲנַן, הָנֵי תְּלָת דְּאָמְרִינַן אִי לָאו דְּאַמְרִינְהוּ מֹשֶׁה רַבֵּנוּ בְּאוֹרָיְיתָא, וַאֲתוֹ אַנְשֵׁי כְּנֶסֶת הַגְּדוֹלָה וְתַקְּנִינְהוּ בִּתְפִלָּה — לָא הֲוֵינַן יְכוֹלִין לְמֵימַר לְהוּ, וְאַתְּ אָמְרַתְּ כּוּלֵּי הַאי וְאָזְלַתְּ! מָשָׁל לְמֶלֶךְ בָּשָׂר וָדָם שֶׁהָיוּ לוֹ אֶלֶף אֲלָפִים דִּינְרֵי זָהָב, וְהָיוּ מְקַלְּסִין אוֹתוֹ בְּשֶׁל כֶּסֶף. וַהֲלֹא גְּנַאי הוּא לוֹ! ברכות ל״ג ב
- עד הנה הגיע מאמר זה החסיד:
והסתכל תחילה שתקו ומאסו רבוי תארי החיוב. והתבונן איך הראה כי התארים אילו הונחו לשכלינו לבד לא אמרנום לעולם ולא דברנו בדבר מהם; ואמנם כאשר הצריך הכרח הדיבור לבני אדם במה שיתקים להם מעט ציור - כמו שאמרו 'דברה תורה כלשון בני אדם' - שיתואר להם האלוק בשלמיותיהם תכליתנו - שנעמוד על המאמרים ההם ולא נקרא שמו בהם אלא בקראנו אותם ב'תורה' לבד;
וכבר הישירנו שלמה לזה הענין במה שבו די ואמר "כי האלוקים בשמים ואתה על הארץ על כן יהיו דבריך מעטים"
5. Guide for the Perplexed, Part 1 59
It will now be clear to you, that every time you establish by proof the negation of a thing in reference to God, you become more perfect, while with every additional positive assertion you follow your imagination and recede from the true knowledge of God. ...
Since it is a well-known fact that even that knowledge of God which is accessible to man cannot be attained except by negations, and that negations do not convey a true idea of the being to which they refer, all people, both of past and present generations, declared that God cannot be the object of human comprehension, that none but Himself comprehends what He is, and that our knowledge consists in knowing that we are unable truly to comprehend Him. All philosophers say, "He has overpowered us by His grace, and is invisible to us through the intensity of His light," like the sun which cannot be perceived by eyes which are too weak to bear its rays. Much more has been said on this topic, but it is useless to repeat it here. The idea is best expressed in the book of Psalms, "Silence is praise to Thee" (lxv. 2). It is a very expressive remark on this subject; for whatever we utter with the intention of extolling and of praising Him, contains something that cannot be applied to God, and includes derogatory expressions; it is therefore more becoming to be silent, and to be content with intellectual reflection, as has been recommended by men of the highest culture, in the words "Commune with your own heart upon your bed, and be still" (Ps. 4:4).
You must surely know the following celebrated passage in the Talmud (Berakhot 33b) --would that all passages in the Talmud were like that!--although it is known to you, I quote it literally, as I wish to point out to you the ideas contained in it: "A certain person, reading prayers in the presence of Rabbi Haninah, said, 'God, the great, the valiant and the tremendous, the powerful, the strong, and the mighty.'--The rabbi said to him, Have you finished all the praises of your Master? The three epithets, 'God, the great, the valiant and the tremendous,' we should not have applied to God, had Moses not mentioned them in the Law, and had not the men of the Great Synagogue come forward subsequently and established their use in the prayer; and you say all this! Let this be illustrated by a parable. There was once an earthly king, possessing millions of gold coin; he was praised for owning millions of silver coin; was this not really dispraise to him?" Thus far the opinion of the pious rabbi.
Consider, first, how repulsive and annoying the accumulation of all these positive attributes was to him; next, how he showed that, if we had only to follow our reason, we should never have composed these prayers, and we should not have uttered any of them. It has, however, become necessary to address men in words that should leave some idea in their minds, and, in accordance with the saying of our Sages, "The Torah speaks in the language of men," the Creator has been described to us in terms of our own perfections; but we should not on that account have uttered any other than the three above-mentioned attributes, and we should not have used them as names of God except when meeting with them in reading the Law.
Solomon has already given us sufficient instruction on this subject by saying, "For God is in heaven, and thou upon earth; therefore let thy words be few" (Eccles. 5:2).
**6.** מורה נבוכים, חלק ג' ל״ב אי אפשר לפי טבע האדם שיניח כל מה שהרגיל בו פתאום. וכאשר שלח האלוק 'משה רבנו' לתתנו "ממלכת כהנים וגוי קדוש" בידיעתו ית' - כמו שבאר ואמר "אתה הראת לדעת וגו'" וידעת היום והשבות אל לבבך וגו'" ולהנתן לעבודתו - כמו שאמר "ולעבדו בכל לבבכם" ואמר "ועבדתם את ה' אלוקיכם" ואמר "ואותו תעבודו" - והיה המנהג המפורסם בעולם כולו שהיו אז רגילים בו והעבודה הכוללת אשר גדלו עליה - להקריב מיני בעלי חיים בהיכלות ההם אשר היו מעמידים בהם הצלמים ולהשתחוות להם ולקטר לפניהם והעבודים והפרושים היו אז האנשים הנתונים לעבודת ההיכלות ההם העשויים לכוכבים (כמו שבארנו) - לא גזרה חכמתו ית' ותחבולתו המבוארת בכל בריאותיו שיצונו להניח מיני העבודות ההם כולם ולעזבם ולבטלם כי אז היה זה מה שלא יעלה בלב לקבלו כפי טבע האדם שהוא נוטה תמיד למורגל; והיה דומה אז כאילו יבוא נביא בזמננו זה שיקרא לעבודת האלוק ויאמר האלוק צוה אתכם שלא תתפללו אליו ולא תצומו ולא תבקשו תשועתו בעת צרה אבל תהיה עבודתכם מחשבה מבלתי מעשה: ומפני זה השאיר ית' מיני העבודות ההם והעתיקם מהיותם לנבראים ולענינים דמיוניים שאין אמיתות להם - לשמו ית' וצונו לעשותם לו ית'. וצוונו לבנות היכל לו "ועשו לי מקדש" ושיהיה המזבח לשמו "מזבח אדמה תעשה לי" ושיהיה הקרבן לו "אדם כי יקריב מכם קרבן לה'" ושישתחוו לו ושיקטירוהו לפניו. והזהיר מעשות דבר מאלו המעשים לזולתו "זובח לאלוקים יחרם וגו'" "כי לא תשתחוה לאל אחר". והפריש 'כהנים' לבית ה'מקדש' ואמר "וכהנו לי" וחיב שייוחדו להם מתנות על כל פנים שיספיקו להם מפני שהם עסוקים בבית ובקרבנותיו והם מתנות ה'לוים וה'כהנים'. והגיע בזאת הערמה האלוקית שנמחוה זכר 'עבודה זרה' והתקימה הפינה הגדולה האמיתית באמונתו והיא מציאות האלוק ואחדותו; ולא יברחו הנפשות וישתוממו בבטל העבודות אשר הורגלו ולא נודעו עבודתו זולתם: ואני יודע שנפשך תברח מזה הענין בהכרח בתחילת מחשבה ויכבד עליך ותשאלני בלבך ותאמר לי איך יבואו מצוות ואזהרות ופעולות עצומות ומבוארות מאד והושם להם זמנים והם כולם בלתי מכוונות לעצמם אבל הם מפני דבר אחר כאילו הם תחבולה שעשה העלוה לנו להגיע אל כונתו הראשונה? ואי זה מונע היה אצלו ית' לצוות לנו כונתו הראשונה ויתן בנו יכולת לקבלה ולא היה צורך לאלו אשר חשבת שהם על צד הכונה השניה? - שמע תשובתי אשר תסיר מלבך זה החלי ותגלה לך אמיתת מה שעוררתיך עליו. והוא שכבר בא ב'תורה' כמו זה הענין בשוה - והוא אמרו "ולא נחם אלוקים דרך ארץ פלישתים כי קרוב הוא וגו' ויסב אלוקים את העם דרך המדבר ים סוף". וכמו שהסב האלוק אותם מן הדרך הישרה אשר היתה מכוונת תחלה מפני יראת מה שלא היו גופותם יכולים לסבלו לפי הטבע אל דרך אחרת עד שתגיע הכונה הראשונה - כן צוה בזאת המצוה אשר זכרנו מפני יראת מה שאין יכולת לנפש לקבלו לפי הטבע שתגיע הכונה הראשונה והיא - השגתו ית' והנחת 'עבודה זרה'. כי כמו שאין בטבע האדם שיגדל על מלאכת עבדות בחומר ובלבנים והדומה להם ואחר כן ירחץ ידיו לשעתו מלכלוכם וילחם עם 'ילידי הענק' פתאום כן אין בטבעו שיגדל על מינים רביםמן העבודות ומעשים מורגלים שכבר נטו אליהם הנפשות עד ששבו כמושכל ראשון ויניחם כולם פתאום. וכמו שהיה מחכמת האלוק להסב אותם במדבר עד שילמדו גבורה - כמו שנודע שההליכה במדבר ומעוט הנאות הגוף מרחיצה וסיכה וכיוצא בהם יולידו הגבורה והפכם יוליד רוך לב - ונולדו גם כן אנשים שלא הרגילו בשפלות ובעבדות וכל זה היה במצות אלוקיות על ידי משה רבינו' "על פי ה' יחנו ועל פי ה' יסעו - את משמרת ה' שמרו על פי ה' ביד משה" - כן בא זה החלק מן התורה בתחבולה אלוקית עד שישארו עם מין המעשה המורגל כדי שתעלה בידם האמונה אשר היא הכונה הראשונה. ושאלתך "אי זה מונע היה לאלוק מצוותנו כונתו הראשונה ויתן לנו יכולת לקבלה?" תחיב זאת השאלה השנית ויאמר לך ואי זה מונע היה לאלוק שינחם 'דרך ארץ פלישתים' ויתן להם יכולת להלחם ולא היה צריך לזה הסיבוב ב"עמוד הענן יומם ועמוד האש לילה"? וכן תחיב שאלה שלישית - על סיבת היעודים הטובים אשר יעד על שמירת המצוות והיעודים הרעים אשר יעד על העברות ויאמר לך אחר שכונת האלוק הראשונה ורצונו היה שנאמין זאת התורה ונעשה ככל הכתוב בה למה לא נתן לנו יכולת לקבלה ולעשותה תמיד ולא היה עושה לנו תחבולה להיטיב לנו אם נעבדהו ולהנקם ממנו אם נמרהו? ולעשות הטובות ההם כולם והנקמות ההם כולם? - כי זאת גם כן תחבולה שעשה האלוק לנו עד שיגיע ממנו אל כונתו הראשונה - ואי זה מונע היה אצלו לתת רצון במעשי העבודה אשר רצה וריחוק העברות אשר מאסם טבע מוטבע בנו?: והתשובה על אלו השאלות השלש וכל מה שהוא ממינם - תשובה אחת כוללת והיא שהאותות כולם אף על פי שהם שינוי טבע איש אחד מאישי הנמצאות אך טבע בני אדם לא ישנהו האלוק כלל על צד המופת. ומפני זה השורש הגדול אמר "מי יתן והיה לבבם זה להם וגו'" ומפני זה באה המצוה והאזהרה והגמול והעונש. וכבר בארנו זאת הפינה במופתיה במקומות רבים מחיבורינו. ולא אמרתי זה מפני שאני מאמין ששינוי טבע כל אחד מבני אדם קשה עליו ית' אך הוא אפשר ונופל תחת היכולת אלא שהוא לא רצה כלל לעשות זה ולא ירצהו לעולם כפי הפינות התוריות; ואילו היה מרצונו לשנות טבע כל איש מבני אדם למה שירצהו ית' מן האיש ההוא היה בטל שליחות הנביאים ונתינת התורה כולה:
(ג) ואשוב אל כונתי ואומר כי כאשר היה זה המין מן העבודה - רצוני לומר ה'קרבנות' - על צד הכונה השניה והצעקה והתפלה וכיוצא בהם ממעשי העבודות יותר קרובות אל הכונה הראשונה והכרחיות בהגיע אליה - שם בין שני המינים הפרש גדול והוא שזה המין מן העבודה - רצוני לומר הקרבת הקרבנות - אף על פי שהוא לשמו ית' לא חויב עלינו כמו שהיה בתחלה - רצוני לומר שנקריב בכל מקום ובכל זמן ולא שנעשה היכל באשר יזדמן ושיקריב מי שיזדמן "החפץ ימלא ידו" אבל נאסר כל זה עלינו והושם בית אחד "אל המקום אשר יבחר ה'" ואין מקריבים בזולתו "פן תעלה עולותיך בכל מקום אשר תראה" ולא יהיה 'כהן' אלא זרע מיוחד - כל זה הענין - למעט זה המין מן העבודות ושלא יהיה ממנו אלא מה שלא גזרה חכמתו להניחו לגמרי. אבל התפילה והתחינה היא מותרת בכל מקום וכל מי שיזדמן. וכן ה'ציצית' וה'מזוזה' וה'תפילין' וזולתם מן העבודות הדומות להם:
(ד) ובעבור זה הענין אשר גיליתי לך נמצא הרבה בספרי הנביאים שמוכיחים בני אדם על רוב השתדלותם והתחזקם להביא הקרבנות ובואר לכם שאינם מכוונים לעצמם כונה צריכה מאד ושהאלוה אינו צריך להם - אמר שמואל "החפץ לה' בעולות וזבחים כשמוע בקול יי? וגו'"; ואמר ישעיה "למה לי רוב זבחיכם? - יאמר ה' וגו'"; ואמר ירמיה "כי לא דברתי את אבותיכם ולא צויתים ביום הוציאי אותם מארץ מצרים על דברי עולה וזבח - כי אם את הדבר הזה צויתי אותם לאמר שמעו בקולי והייתי לכם לאלוקים ואתם תהיו לי לעם". וכבר הוקשה זה המאמר בעיני כל מי שראיתי דברים או שמעתים ואמר איך יאמר ירמיה על האלוק שלא צוונו ב'דברי עולה וזבח' - ורוב ה'מצוות' באו בזה? אמנם כונת המאמר הוא מה שבארתי לך וזה שהוא אמר שהכונה הראשונה אמנם היא - שתשיגוני ולא תעבדו זולתי 'והייתי לכם לאלוקים ואתם תהיו לי לעם'; וזאת המצוה בהקרבה וכיון אל הבית אמנם היתה בעבור שתעלה בידיכם זאת הפינה ובעבורה העתקתי אלו העבודות לשמי עד שימחה שם 'עבודה זרה' ותתקים פנת יחודי; ובאתם אתם ובטלתם התכלית ההיא והתחזקתם במה שנעשה בעבודה והוא - שאתם ספקתם במציאותי "כחשו בה' ויאמרו "לא הוא" ועבדתם 'עבודה זרה' "וקטר לבעל הלוך אחרי אלוקים אחרים... ובאתם אתם ובטלתם התכלית ההיא והתחזקתם כמה שנעשה בעבורה והוא - שאתם ספקתם במציאותי "כחשו בה' ויאמרו "לוא הוא" ועבדתם 'עבודה זרה' "וקטר לבעל והלוך אחרי אלוקים אחרים... ובאתם אל הבית וגו'" - ונשארתם מכונים אל 'היכל ה'' ומקריבים הקרבנות אשר לא היו מכוונים אל 'היכל ה'' ומקריבים הקרבנות אשר לא היו מכוונים כמה ראשונה: ולי בפרוש זה 'הפסוק' פנים אחרים והוא מביא הענין בעצמו אשר זכרנוהו והוא שכבר התבאר בכתוב ובקבלה יחד שתחילת מצוה שנצטוינו בה לא היו בה 'דברי עולה וזבח' כלל ואין צריך שתטריד כלל שכלך ב'פסח מצרים' כי היא היתה לסיבה מבוארת גלויה - כמו שאני עתיד לבאר; ועוד שהמצוה היתה ב'ארץ מצרים' והמצוה הרמוז אליה בזה ה'פסוק' ואמר 'ביום הוציאי אותם מארץ מצרים' - כי תחלת 'צווי' שבא אחר יציאת מצרים' הוא מה שנצטוינו בו במרה - והוא אמרו לנו שם "אם שמעו תשמע לקול ה' אלוקיך וגו' "שם שם לו חוק ומשפט חוגו'" ובאה הקבלה האמיתית "שבת ודינין במרה אפקוד" - וה'חוק' הרמוז אליו הוא ה'שבת' וה'משפט' הוא ה'דינים' והוא הסרת העול. וזאת היא הכונה הראשונה כמו שבארנו - רצוני לומר אמונת הדעות האמיתיות והוא חידוש העולם. וכבר ידעת שעיקר מצות שבת אמנם היא - לחזק זאת הפינה ולקימה - כמו שבארנו בזה המאמר. והכונה עוד עם אמיתת הדעות - להסיר העול מבני אדם. הנה כבר התבאר לך שהמצוה הראשונה לא היו בה 'דברי עולה וזבח' - אחר שהם על צד הכונה השנית כמו שזכרנו: וזה הענין בעצמו אשר אמרו ירמיה הוא אשר נאמר בתהילים על צד ההוכחה לאומה כולה בסכלה אז הכונה הראשונה ולא היתה מבדלת בינה ובין הכונה השנית. - אמר "שמעה עמי ואדברה ישראל ואעידה בך אלוקים אלוקיך אנוכי לא על זבחיך אוכיחך ועולותיך לנגדי תמיד לא אקח מביתך פר ממכלאותיך - עתודים". וכל מקום שנכפל זה הענין - זאת היא הכונה בו. והבינהו מאד והסתכל בו:
6. Guide for the Perplexed, Part 3 32
**a.** It is, namely, impossible to go suddenly from one extreme to the other: it is therefore according to the nature of man impossible for him suddenly to discontinue everything to which he has been accustomed. Now God sent Moses to make [the Israelites] a kingdom of priests and a holy nation (Exod. 19:6) by means of the knowledge of God. Comp. "Unto thee it was showed that thou mightest know that the Lord is God (Deut. 4:35); "Know therefore this day, and consider it in thine heart, that the Lord is God" (ibid. 5:39). The Israelites were commanded to devote themselves to His service; comp. "and to serve him with all your heart" (ibid. 11:13); "and you shall serve the Lord your God" (Exod. 23:25); "and ye shall serve him" (Deut. 13:5).
b. But the custom which was in those days general among all men, and the general mode of worship in which the Israelites were brought up, consisted in sacrificing animals in those temples which contained certain images, to bow down to those images, and to burn incense before them; religious and ascetic persons were in those days the persons that were devoted to the service in the temples erected to the stars, as has been explained by us. It was in accordance with the wisdom and plan of God, as displayed in the whole Creation, that He did not command us to give up and to discontinue all these manners of service; for to obey such a commandment it would have been contrary to the nature of man, who generally cleaves to that to which he is used;
c. it would in those days have made the same impression as a prophet would make at present if he called us to the service of God and told us in His name, that we should not pray to Him, not fast, not seek His help in time of trouble; that we should serve Him in thought, and not by any action. For this reason God allowed these kinds of service to continue; He transferred to His service that which had formerly served as a worship of created beings, and of things imaginary and unreal, and commanded us to serve Him in the same manner; viz., to build unto Him a temple; comp. "And they shall make unto me a sanctuary" (Exod. 25:8); to have the altar erected to His name; comp. "An altar of earth thou shalt make unto me" (ibid. 20:21); to offer the sacrifices to Him; comp. "If any man of you bring an offering unto the Lord" (Lev. 1:2), to bow down to Him and to burn incense before Him. He has forbidden to do any of these things to any other being; comp. "He who sacrificeth unto any God, save the Lord only, he shall be utterly destroyed" (Exod. 22:19); "For thou shalt bow down to no other God" (ibid. 34:14). He selected priests for the service in the temple; comp. "And they shall minister unto me in the priest's office" (ibid. 28:41). He made it obligatory that certain gifts, called the gifts of the Levites and the priests, should be assigned to them for their maintenance while they are engaged in the service of the temple and its sacrifices. By this Divine plan it was effected that the traces of idolatry were blotted out, and the truly great principle of our faith, the Existence and Unity of God, was firmly established; this result was thus obtained without deterring or confusing the minds of the people by the abolition of the service to which they were accustomed and which alone was familiar to them.
d. I know that you will at first thought reject this idea and find it strange; you will put the following question to me in your heart: How can we suppose that Divine commandments, prohibitions, and important acts, which are fully explained, and for which certain seasons are fixed, should not have been commanded for their own sake, but only for the sake of some other thing: as if they were only the means which He employed for His primary object? What prevented Him from making His primary object a direct commandment to us, and to give us the capacity of obeying it? Those precepts which in your opinion are only the means and not the object would then have been unnecessary.
e. Hear my answer, which win cure your heart of this disease and will show you the truth of that which I have pointed out to you. There occurs in the Law a passage which contains exactly the same idea; it is the following: "God led them not through the way of the land of the Philistines, although that was near; for God said, Lest peradventure the people repent when they see war, and they return to Egypt; but God led the people about, through the way of the wilderness of the Red Sea," etc. (Exod. 13:17). Here God led the people about, away from the direct road which He originally intended, because He feared they might meet on that way with hardships too great for their ordinary strength; He took them by another road in order to obtain thereby His original object. In the same manner God refrained from prescribing what the people by their natural disposition would be incapable of obeying, and gave the above-mentioned commandments as a means of securing His chief object, viz., to spread a knowledge of Him [among the people], and to cause them to reject idolatry. It is contrary to man's nature that he should suddenly abandon all the different kinds of Divine service and the different customs in which he has been brought up, and which have been so general, that they were considered as a matter of course; it would be just as if a person trained to work as a slave with mortar and bricks, or similar things, should interrupt his work, clean his hands, and at once fight with real giants. It was the result of God's wisdom that the Israelites were led about in the wilderness till they acquired courage.
f. For it is a well-known fact that travelling in the wilderness, and privation of bodily enjoyments, such as bathing, produce courage, whilst the reverse is the source of faint-heartedness: besides, another generation rose during the wanderings that had not been accustomed to degradation and slavery. All the travelling in the wilderness was regulated by Divine commands through Moses; comp. "At the commandment of the Lord they rested, and at the commandment of the Lord they journeyed; they kept the charge of the Lord and the commandment of the Lord by the hand of Moses" (Num. 9:23). In the same way the portion of the Law under discussion is the result of divine wisdom, according to which people are allowed to continue the kind of worship to which they have been accustomed, in order that they might acquire the true faith, which is the chief object [of God's commandments]. You ask, What could have prevented God from commanding us directly, that which is the chief object, and from giving us the capacity of obeying it? This would lead to a second question, What prevented God from leading the Israelites through the way of the land of the Philistines, and endowing them with strength for fighting? The leading about by a pillar of cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night would then not have been necessary. A third question would then be asked in reference to the good promised as reward for the keeping of the commandments, and the evil foretold as a punishment for sins. It is the following question: As it is the chief object and purpose of God that we should believe in the Law, and act according to that which is written therein, why has He not given us the capacity of continually believing in it, and following its guidance, instead of holding out to us reward for obedience, and punishment for disobedience, or of actually giving all the predicted reward and punishment? For [the promises and the threats] are but the means of leading to this chief object. What prevented Him from giving us, as part of our nature, the will to do that which He desires us to do, and to abandon the kind of worship which He rejects? There is one general answer to these three questions, and to all questions of the same character: it is this: Although in every one of the signs [related in Scripture] the natural property of some individual being is changed, the nature of man is never changed by God by way of miracle. It is in accordance with this important principle that God said, "O that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear me," etc. (Deut. 5:26). It is also for this reason that He distinctly stated the commandments and the prohibitions, the reward and the punishment. This principle as regards miracles has been frequently explained by us in our works: I do not say this because I believe that it is difficult for God to change the nature of every individual person; on the contrary, it is possible, and it is in His power, according to the principles taught in Scripture; but it has never been His will to do it, and it never will be. If it were part of His will to change [at His desire] the nature of any person, the mission of prophets and the giving of the Law would have been altogether superfluous.
g. I now return to my theme. As the sacrificial service is not the primary object [of the commandments about sacrifice], whilst supplications, prayers, and similar kinds of worship are nearer to the primary object, and indispensable for obtaining it, a great difference was made in the Law between these two kinds of service. The one kind, which consists in offering sacrifices, although the sacrifices are offered to the name of God, has not been made obligatory for us to the same extent as it had been before. We were not commanded to sacrifice in every place, and in every time, or to build a temple in every place, or to permit any one who desires to become priest and to sacrifice. On the contrary, all this is prohibited unto us. Only one temple has been appointed, "in the place which the Lord shall choose" (Deut. 12:26); in no other place is it allowed to sacrifice: comp. "Take heed to thyself, that thou offer not thy burnt-offerings in every place that thou seest" (ibid. 5:13); and only the members of a particular family were allowed to officiate as priests. All these restrictions served to limit this kind of worship, and keep it within those bounds within which God did not think it necessary to abolish sacrificial service altogether. But prayer and supplication can be offered everywhere and by every person. The same is the case with the commandment of ẓiẓit (Num. 15:38); mezuzah (Deut. 6:9; 11:20); tefillin (Exod. 13:9, 16); and similar kinds of divine service.
(4) Because of this principle which I explained to you, the Prophets in their books are frequently found to rebuke their fellow-men for being over-zealous and exerting themselves too much in bringing sacrifices: the prophets thus distinctly declared that the object of the sacrifices is not very essential, and that God does not require them. Samuel therefore said, "Hath the Lord as great delight in burnt-offerings and sacrifices as in obeying the voice of the Lord" (1 Sam. 15:22)? Isaiah exclaimed, "To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith the Lord" (Isa. 1:11); Jeremiah declared: "For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt-offering or sacrifices. But this thing commanded I them, saying, Obey my, voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people" (Jer. 7:22, 23). This passage has been found difficult in the opinion of all those whose words I read or heard; they ask, How can Jeremiah say that God did not command us about burnt-offering and sacrifice, seeing so many precepts refer to sacrifice? The sense of the passage agrees with what I explained to you. Jeremiah says [in the name of God] the primary object of the precepts is this, Know me, and serve no other being; "I will be your God, and ye shall be my people" (Lev. 26:12). But the commandment that sacrifices shall be brought and that the temple shall be visited has for its object the success of that principle among you; and for its sake I have transferred these modes of worship to my name; idolatry shall thereby be utterly destroyed, and Jewish faith firmly established. You, however, have ignored this object, and taken hold of that which is only the means of obtaining it; you have doubted my existence, "ye have denied the Lord, and said he is not" (Jer. 5:12); ye served idols; "burnt incense unto Baal, and walked after other gods whom ye know not. And come and stand before me in this house" (ibid. 7:9-10); i.e., you do not go beyond attending the temple of the Lord, and offering sacrifices: but this is not the chief object.--I have another way of explaining this passage with exactly the same result. For it is distinctly stated in Scripture, and handed down by tradition, that the first commandments communicated to us did not include any law at an about burnt-offering and sacrifice. You must not see any difficulty in the Passover which was commanded in Egypt; there was a particular and evident reason for that, as will be explained by me (chap. xlvi.). Besides it was revealed in the land of Egypt; whilst the laws to which Jeremiah alludes in the above passage are those which were revealed after the departure from Egypt. For this reason it is distinctly added, "in the day that I brought them out from the land of Egypt." The first commandment after the departure from Egypt was given at Marah, in the following words, "If thou wilt diligently hearken to the voice of the Lord thy God, and wilt do that which is right in His sight, and wilt give ear to His commandments" (Exod. 15:26)." There he made for them a statute and an ordinance, and there he proved them" (ibid. ver. 25). According to the true traditional explanation, Sabbath and civil laws were revealed at Marah: "statute" alludes to Sabbath, and "ordinance" to civil laws, which are the means of removing injustice. The chief object of the Law, as has been shown by us, is the teaching of truths; to which the truth of the creatio ex nihilo belongs. It is known that the object of the law of Sabbath is to confirm and to establish this principle, as we have shown in this treatise (Part. II. chap. xxxi.). In addition to the teaching of truths the Law aims at the removal of injustice from mankind. We have thus proved that the first laws do not refer to burnt-offering and sacrifice, which are of secondary importance. The same idea which is contained in the above passage from Jeremiah is also expressed in the Psalms, where the people are rebuked that they ignore the chief object, and make no distinction between chief and subsidiary lessons. The Psalmist says: "Hear, O my people, and I will speak; O Israel, and I will testify against thee: I am God, even thy God. I will not reprove thee for thy sacrifices or thy burnt-offerings, they have been continually before me. I will take no bullock out of thy house, nor he-goats out of thy folds" (Ps. 50:29).--Wherever this subject is mentioned, this is its meaning. Consider it well, and reflect on it.
----------- Footnote on "If it Were Not a Written Verse it Could Not be Said /אלמלא מקרא כתוב אי אפשר לאמרו
see
משה הלברטל and Moshe Halbertal Tarbiẕ /תרביץ כרך סח, חוברת א (תשרי-כסלו תשנ"ט), pp. 39-59 (21 pages) here
Abstract
The formula 'If it were not a written verse it could not bee said' is a sentence that introduces few statements in the Midrash. This rare formula serves as a conscious expression that something daring is about to be said, and that without the shield of a written verse it could not be said. The analysis of the occasions in which the 'If it were not' formula occurs is thus a key for our understanding of rabbinic religious sensitivities. The study of midrashim that are introduced with the formula yields the following conclusions: (1) in most cases the idea expressed by the midrash is actually not written in the verse in its straightforward meaning. The formula reveals therefore a circular nature: the interpreter creatively rereads the text, and then he states that if his interpretation weren't already in the text he would not have dared to offer his reading; (2) in answer to the problem what is considered daring in the Midrash the following pattern is manifested: most of the midrashim that are introduced by such formula represent God in anthropomorphic metaphors in which God's role is reversed and transformed. Anthropomorphic metaphors are usually drawn from hierarchical human structures, such as king and slaves, father and son, husband and wife, etc. God is always represented as the figure which is superior in the analogous social relationship; He is the husband, the king, the father, and so on. In midrashim that are introduced by the formula 'If it were not', God is represented as the inferior partner in the analogy — he is a slave, a student, a wife and a defendant in a trial. In these metaphors or parables Israel or the righteous are represented as the superior figure. Another form in which hierarchical metaphors are reversed is exhibited in the Midrashim that use metaphors from non-hierarchical relationship such as friends and twins. The last part of the essay is devoted to uncover the same pattern in other midrashim that are not introduced by the 'If it were not' formula, and to a discussion of the significance of this phenomenon in rabbinic religious thought.
See also: Torah min Hashamayim Ba-aspaklaria shel Hadorot (Theology of Ancient Judaism) Vols. 1-2, vol. 3 by Abraham Joshua Heschel; pages 191- 198 and in English Translation: Heavenly Torah as Refracted through the Generations by Gordon Tucker pp 223 - 235
Link to Music on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOif3\_LF-a0
| Sanhedrin 63b: § Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: The Jewish people knew that idol worship is of no substance; they did not actually believe in it. And they worshipped idols only in order to permit themselves to engage in forbidden sexual relations in public, since most rituals of idol worship would include public displays of forbidden sexual intercourse. Rav Mesharshiyya raises an objection to this statement from the following verse: “Like the memory of their sons are their altars, and their Asherim are by the leafy trees, upon the high hills” (Jeremiah 17:2). And Rabbi Elazar says that this means that the Jewish people would recall their idol worship like a person who misses his child. This interpretation indicates that they were truly attached to idol worship. The Gemara continues to relate the story of the prayer in the days of Nehemiah: The people fasted for three days and prayed for mercy. In response to their prayer a note fell for them from the heavens in which was written: Truth, indicating that God accepted their request. The form of a fiery lion cub came forth from the chamber of the Holy of Holies. Zechariah, the prophet, said to the Jewish people: This is the evil inclination for idol worship. When they caught hold of it one of its hairs fell out, and it let out a shriek of pain that was heard for four hundred parasangs [parsei]. They said: What should we do to kill it? Perhaps Heaven will have mercy upon it if we attempt to kill it, as it will certainly scream even more. The prophet said to them: Throw it into a container made of lead and cover it with lead, as lead absorbs sound. As it is written: “And he said: This is the evil one. And he cast it down into the midst of the measure, and he cast a stone of lead upon its opening” (Zechariah 5:8). They followed this advice and were freed of the evil inclination for idol worship | סנהדרין ס״ג ב:י״ט אמר רב יהודה אמר רב יודעין היו ישראל בעבודת כוכבים שאין בה ממש ולא עבדו עבודת כוכבים אלא להתיר להם עריות בפרהסיא מתיב רב משרשיא (ירמיהו יז, ב) כזכור בניהם מזבחותם וגו' וא"ר אלעזר כאדם שיש לו געגועין על בנו יתבו תלתא יומא בתעניתא בעו רחמי נפל להו פיתקא מרקיעא דהוה כתיב בה אמת נפק כגוריא דנורא מבית קדשי הקדשים אמר להו נביא לישראל היינו יצרא דע"ז בהדי דקתפסי ליה אישתמיט ביניתא מיניה ואזל קליה בארבע מאה פרסי אמרו היכי ניעבד דילמא משמיא מרחמי עליה א"ל נביא שדיוהו בדודא דאברא וכסיוה באברא דשייף קליה דכתיב (זכריה ה, ח) ויאמר זאת הרשעה וישלך אותה אל תוך האיפה וישלך את האבן העופרת אל פיה |
Unity and Incorporeality
|
| 2. |
|
The question of the emergence of Israelite religion is a sui generis problem in the history of the human spirit first of all because of the popular character of Israelite monotheism. To our way of thinking, the idea of God’s unity is one of the most abstract ideas in human thought. We regard this idea as bound up with abstraction (hafshatah) from the multitude of phenomena manifested in our world and with grounding all reality on an invisible unity beyond our comprehension.
The one God is the cause of causes, eternal substance, the being of all beings, transcending everything sensible and conceivable, beyond all conception of time and space, a supreme idea. The question is: How could such a faith come into being in ancient Israel? Israelite culture was a culture of shepherds and farmers. Moreover, even in a later period the creative genius of the Israelite people did not find embodiment in the creation of a conceptual culture (nor, for that matter, in the creation of a technological culture). Israel did not create conceptual science, logic, philosophy, or natural science. Its strength was in poetry, narrative, ethics, religious vision, and the like, far from theoretical abstraction. Nor was its language rich in abstract concepts. The Hebrew of the biblical period was a pictorial and poetic language, unfitted for expressing philosophical views. How, then, was the monotheistic idea conceived in ancient Israel within such a cultural rubric? Moreover, biblical monotheism did not arrive at abstract expression. The Bible innocently resorts to tangible descriptions of God. It does not sense any defect in depicting God through imagery.
At any rate, there would be place here for gropings and hesitations. However, in the prophetic books there are no gropings or hesitations. Monotheism is visibly present and self-evident, and there is no hint that it is a new idea.
The General Character of Israelite Religion, Yehezkel KAUFMANN in Toledot ha-emunah ha-yisre’elit, translated by Lenny Levin
Where Israelite Religion differed
|
| 3. |
|
- Israelite monotheism could not comprehend idolatry or magic. At best, idols and various forms of polytheistic worship were treated as fetishes, things used in rituals that were not associated with any meaningful mythology or theology. On a popular worship of objects that was not genuinely polytheistic (because it is unrelated to any specific foreign deity) but was “a magical, fetishistic, non-mythological worship of images”, a worship that was fundamentally unfamiliar with the realities of polytheistic worship and the icons that played a role therein: “Worship of ‘dumb idols’ is, in the biblical view, arrant, sinful foolishness”, for the idols, unlike the lower ranking gods, are not real; they have no power, not even the derivative power that, say, Chemosh or Marduk enjoy in the view of biblical monotheism.
- The ancient lore knows of no war between YHWH and other divine powers,
- No mythology surrounds God. He is not born; he does not die; he is not sexed; he is not part of the natural world. This God has no “genealogy,” no lust, no birth, no progeny, no growing up, no death, and so forth. Israelite lore does not know how to tell anything about the life of this God, the events (This is very different from many known ancient Near Eastern stories about gods.)
- Israelite Religion was exoteric. The bible reflects common, public, shared knowledge. Moreover, all teaching is official and authoritative. Priests are the public educators. The popular belief conceived of this God the same way. This means that the basic idea of Israelite religion was bound up from its inception in a radical division between God and the world.
- “Fate” has no power over him.
- Sanctity is not “natural” closeness to divinity or belonging to the divine in a property relation ... It knows of no material object that is sacred in its own right. ..it does not know of any category of holy objects in nature. It concentrated all sanctity in God, who rules the world, in the God who transcends the cosmos. Objects can only possess “historical” sanctity by virtue of God’s will or as a result of God’s deeds and commandment.
No mythological drama in Ancient Israel
|
| 4. |
|
The basic idea of Israelite religion—the supremacy of the divine will, raising God over every nature and fate—left no room for the tension of divine forces fighting each other, for a divine mythological drama. Is there any place for drama, for activity, for striving for living embodiment where there is one supreme decisive will?
Israelite religion transferred the divine world drama from the domain of nature and its forces to the domain of the human will. The divine will rules over all. But it has one “limitation”: the will of the human, to whom God has granted free choice and the power to sin. By human sin, the supreme divine will has become, as it were, impaired. This is the opening for evil in the world. Opposite the divine will is set the human will; in place of the mythological tension between divine forces comes the moral tension between God’s will and man’s will. This is the special sphere of the divine drama in Israelite religion. To the absolute will belongs an aspiration that remains to be fulfilled. God commands, and the human can either fulfill God’s command or disobey Him. In place of mythological tension comes historical tension. This religion was interested not in the events of the god and his life, his desires, his wars, and his victories among the other gods but in the events of God’s commandment, His teaching, His activity among human beings. Human society, human history, man’s religious and ethical dedication—these were the campaigns of the “war” of the supreme God.
[Conversely] He was not a restful and serene God of the heights (such as the contemplating God of Aristotle/Maimonides. There is no Nirvana here), happy in self-satisfaction, who had nothing to do with the lower worlds and with human fate. He was a “zealous God,” commanding and demanding, keeping track of sins and performing kindnesses, a redeeming God, doing good and creating evil. He was close to man’s life and destiny. This faith was intrinsically connected with revelation and prophecy.
Prohibition against Fetish Worship
|
| 5. |
|
The Bible never specifically addresses the worship of representations of YHWH but lumps it together with idol worship in general. The Bible never distinguishes between graven images of YHWH and graven images of pagan gods but includes them all in the category of “other gods.”
The Bible does not at all conceive of the graven images as representations of divinity but as fetishes.
Neither the Torah nor the prophets devote one kind of utterance against graven images of YHWH and another against graven images of other gods. In the classic prohibition of graven images in the Ten Commandments (in both versions), graven images and pictures are forbidden after the prohibition of other gods (Exod. 20:3–4, Deut. 5:7–8). The text does not say, “I am YHWH your God… Do not make for Me any graven image or picture… Do not have any other gods… Do not make a graven image or picture of them, etc.” ... they chastise the people for worshipping graven images in general and only give one reason to this prohibition: it is the ignorant worship of “wood and stone.”
Unity of God
|
| 6. |
|
In both the song of Deborah and the creation legends, YHWH rules the world alone, and there is no other god with him (or against him!). God’s unity is the primal idea, not God’s ethical character or historical activity. In biblical monotheism, the cosmic element is fundamental.
Anthropomorphism
|
| 7. |
|
For we should not think that the concrete depictions of God (anthropomorphisms) in the Bible are only remnants of folk legend or poetic figures of speech with only a symbolic intention, as later philosophers interpreted them. The entire biblical literature, without distinction of source or stratum, envisages a visage of God and does not regard this as a defect. The Bible has no abstract God-concept, nor does it have any drive to abstraction. Moreover, one can say that throughout Jewish literature, up to the point that Greek influence started to operate in it, there is no sense of defect in envisaging a visage of God.
Israelite religion vanquished the corporeal depiction of God in [only] one basic and decisive respect: it depicted God as outside every connection with the
material of the world. ... Moreover, it depicted Him as above all connection to the laws of the world, to nature, to the stars, to fate. This is the point of departure between Israelite religion and paganism; from this point, it ascended to its own unique
sphere. Its God is above mythology and above nature; that is its fundamental
idea. ... this idea is imprinted in the entire being of Israelite religion and woven into its entire tapestry.
God was regarded as sublime but not incorporeal.
The question of the divine image was in fact raised only in the border zone
where Judaism came into contact with Greek thought. .... the whole problem of whether God has a visible form is outside the purview of original Judaism.
Faith
|
| 8. |
|
Israelite faith thus originated not from one or another historical event, not from sealing a national covenant, not from political prosperity, not from the trauma of destruction, and so forth, but from the revelation of a new religious-metaphysical idea. In the course of the generations this idea would generate an entire worldview and life regimen, even though at the time it came into the world enveloped in a national garb and intertwined with the events of the day.
It was steeped in transcendence unequalled since in the world. But it could be grasped in vision and likeness. It was born through visionary intuition and could be grasped through symbols. Therefore, it could be made into a popular faith. A God whose rule knew no bounds, who was all-capable, from whom everything originated, who was holy, sublime, zealous, ruling over good and evil, sending the word of His rule by way of prophets, one with no equal—all these could be grasped by popular religious feeling. This idea could be born among the people of the desert and could arouse passion among the people of the desert. A similar idea aroused passion at a later time among the Arab tribes at the time of Mohammed.[i]
Paradigm Shift - Incommensurability - Thomas Kuhn
|
| 9. |
|
Paradigm Shift - "This is the idea that, in the course of a revolution and paradigm shift, the new ideas and assertions cannot be strictly compared to the old ones. Even if the same words are in use, their very meaning has changed. That in turn led to the idea that a new theory was not chosen to replace an old one, because it was true but more because of a change in world view”
Incommensurability. - "This is the idea that, in the course of a revolution and paradigm shift, the new ideas and assertions cannot be strictly compared to the old ones. Even if the same words are in use, their very meaning has changed. That in turn led to the idea that a new theory was not chosen to replace an old one, because it was true but more because of a change in world view”
— The Structure of Scientific Revolutions: 50th Anniversary Edition by Thomas S. Kuhn
When a paradigm shift occurs, in some sense the world changes. Or to put it another way, scientists working under different paradigms are studying different worlds.
For example, if Aristotle watched a stone swinging like a pendulum on the end of a rope, he would see the stone trying to reach its natural state: at rest, on the ground. But Newton wouldn’t see this; he’d see a stone obeying the laws of gravity and energy transference. Or to take another example: Before Darwin, anyone comparing a human face and a monkey’s face would be struck by the differences; after Darwin, they would be struck by the similarities.
A consequence of Kuhn’s theory of paradigm shifts is that science does not progress in an even way, gradually accumulating knowledge and deepening its explanations. Rather, disciplines alternate between periods of normal science conducted within a dominant paradigm, and periods of revolutionary science when an emerging crisis requires a new paradigm.
That is what "paradigm shift" originally meant, and what it still means in the philosophy of science. When used outside philosophy, though, it often just means a significant change in theory or practice. So events like the introduction of high definition TVs, or the acceptance of gay marriage, might be described as involving a paradigm shift.
see here
Source Sheet created on Sefaria by Geoffrey Stern
[i] Aharon Kaminka says that the Bible’s war on paganism is “a riddle still seeking a solution.” Apparently, he did not find in my words even an attempt to solve this riddle. But in truth, I did propose a solution, and I do not see the possibility of any other solution. The solution is this: the decisive battle with paganism in ancient Israel occurred at the beginning of the dawn of the new idea, in Moses’s day. The battle was short. Israelite paganism was smashed to smithereens, and the new faith was implanted in the Israelite nation. Something like this battle also occurred in Arabia in the days of Muhammad. Paganism disappeared once and for all from the horizon of the Arab nation, and was perceived as from behind a cloud. Only fossilized remnants of paganism remained among the Arab people. Likewise, the influence of foreign paganism on ancient Israel was fossilized from that time on and consisted of worship of idols. The cultural legacy that Israel received from paganism—legends, laws, poems—was the legacy of Israel’s pagan past, which in the previous period had been connected to the pagan cultural world. There is nothing in that legacy to compel us to assume contact in the later period. For this reason, the entire Bible perceives paganism through a cloud and conceives it to consist only of idol worship. We should recall that paganism was forgotten by the writers of Islam, too, in a relatively short time, and they knew it as little more than idol worship. Yehezkel Kaufman, THE SECRET OF NATIONAL CREATIVITY
If the rejection of idolatry is the essence of the Biblical project, why does it not appear in the Genesis account of the founders?
**But Didn't Abraham destroy his father's idols?**
בראשית רבה ל״ח (יג) וַיָּמָת הָרָן עַל פְּנֵי תֶּרַח אָבִיו (בראשית יא, כח), רַבִּי חִיָּא בַּר בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב אַדָא דְּיָפוֹ, תֶּרַח **עוֹבֵד צְלָמִים** הָיָה, חַד זְמַן נְפֵיק לַאֲתַר, הוֹשִׁיב לְאַבְרָהָם מוֹכֵר תַּחְתָּיו. הֲוָה אָתֵי בַּר אֵינַשׁ בָּעֵי דְּיִזְבַּן, וַהֲוָה אֲמַר לֵהּ בַּר כַּמָּה שְׁנִין אַתְּ, וַהֲוָה אֲמַר לֵיהּ בַּר חַמְשִׁין אוֹ שִׁתִּין, וַהֲוָה אֲמַר לֵיהּ וַי לֵיהּ לְהַהוּא גַבְרָא דַּהֲוָה בַּר שִׁתִּין וּבָעֵי לְמִסְגַּד לְבַר יוֹמֵי, וַהֲוָה מִתְבַּיֵּשׁ וְהוֹלֵךְ לוֹ. חַד זְמַן אֲתָא חַד אִתְּתָא טְעִינָא בִּידָהּ חָדָא פִּינָךְ דְּסֹלֶת, אֲמָרָהּ לֵיהּ הֵא לָךְ קָרֵב קֳדָמֵיהוֹן, קָם נְסֵיב בּוּקְלָסָא בִּידֵיהּ, וְתַבְרִינוּן לְכָלְהוֹן פְּסִילַיָא, וִיהַב בּוּקְלָסָא בִּידָא דְּרַבָּה דַּהֲוָה בֵּינֵיהוֹן. כֵּיוָן דַּאֲתָא אֲבוּהָ אֲמַר לֵיהּ מַאן עָבֵיד לְהוֹן כְּדֵין, אֲמַר לֵיהּ מַה נִּכְפּוּר מִינָךְ אֲתַת חָדָא אִתְּתָא טְעִינָא לָהּ חָדָא פִּינָךְ דְּסֹוֹלֶת, וַאֲמַרַת לִי הֵא לָךְ קָרֵיב קֳדָמֵיהון, קָרֵיבְתְּ לָקֳדָמֵיהוֹן הֲוָה דֵּין אֲמַר אֲנָא אֵיכוֹל קַדְמָאי, וְדֵין אֲמַר אֲנָא אֵיכוֹל קַדְמָאי, קָם הָדֵין רַבָּה דַּהֲוָה בֵּינֵיהוֹן נְסַב בּוּקְלָסָא וְתַבַּרִינוֹן. אֲמַר לֵיהּ מָה אַתָּה מַפְלֶה בִּי, וְיָדְעִין אִינוּן. אֲמַר לֵיהּ וְלֹא יִשְׁמְעוּ אָזְנֶיךָ מַה שֶּׁפִּיךָ אוֹמֵר.
Bereishit Rabbah 38 (13) "And Haran died in the presence of his father Terah" (Gen. 11:28). Rabbi Hiyya the grandson of Rabbi Adda of Yaffo [said]: Terah was a **worshipper of idols**. One time he had to travel to a place, and he left Abraham in charge of his store. When a man would come in to buy [idols], Abraham would ask: How old are you? They would reply: fifty or sixty. Abraham would then respond: Woe to him who is sixty years old and worships something made today - the customer would be embarrassed, and would leave. A woman entered carrying a dish full of flour. She said to him: this is for you, offer it before them. Abraham took a club in his hands and broke all of the idols, and placed the club in the hands of the biggest idol. When his father returned, he asked: who did all of this? Abraham replied: I can't hide it from you - a woman came carrying a dish of flour and told me to offer it before them. I did, and one of them said 'I will eat it first,' and another said 'I will eat it first.' The biggest one rose, took a club, and smashed the rest of them. Terah said: what, do you think you can trick me? They don't have cognition! Abraham said: Do your ears hear what your mouth is saying?
But Didn't Rachel steal her father's idols?
בראשית ל״א:י״ט (יט) וְלָבָ֣ן הָלַ֔ךְ לִגְזֹ֖ז אֶת־צֹאנ֑וֹ וַתִּגְנֹ֣ב רָחֵ֔ל אֶת־הַתְּרָפִ֖ים אֲשֶׁ֥ר לְאָבִֽיהָ׃
Genesis 31:19 (19) Meanwhile Laban had gone to shear his sheep, and Rachel stole her father’s household idols.
**תגנב רחל את התרפים.** לְהַפְרִישׁ אֶת אָבִיהָ מֵעֲ"זָ נִתְכַּוְּנָה (בראשית רבה):
AND RACHEL STOLE THE TERAPHIM — her intention was to wean her father from idol-worship (Genesis Rabbah 74:5). quoted by Rashi
בראשית ל״א:ל״ב-ל״ה (לב) עִ֠ם אֲשֶׁ֨ר תִּמְצָ֣א אֶת־אֱלֹקֶיךָ֮ **לֹ֣א יִֽחְיֶה֒** נֶ֣גֶד אַחֵ֧ינוּ הַֽכֶּר־לְךָ֛ מָ֥ה עִמָּדִ֖י וְקַֽח־לָ֑ךְ וְלֹֽא־יָדַ֣ע יַעֲקֹ֔ב כִּ֥י רָחֵ֖ל גְּנָבָֽתַם׃
Genesis 31:32-35 (32) But anyone with whom you find your gods **shall not remain alive**! In the presence of our kinsmen, point out what I have of yours and take it.” Jacob, of course, did not know that Rachel had stolen them.
**לא יחיה.** וּמֵאוֹתָהּ קְלָלָה מֵתָה רָחֵל בַּדֶּרֶךְ (בראשית רבה)
LET HIM NOT LIVE — In consequence of this curse Rachel died on the journey (Genesis Rabbah 74:9). quoted by Rashi
Rather the only reference to a rejection of false images, is a positive reference to the Image of God - Imago Dei
בראשית א׳:כ״ו-כ״ח (כו) וַיֹּ֣אמֶר אֱלֹקִ֔ים נַֽעֲשֶׂ֥ה אָדָ֛ם **בְּצַלְמֵ֖נוּ כִּדְמוּתֵ֑נוּ** וְיִרְדּוּ֩ בִדְגַ֨ת הַיָּ֜ם וּבְע֣וֹף הַשָּׁמַ֗יִם וּבַבְּהֵמָה֙ וּבְכָל־הָאָ֔רֶץ וּבְכָל־הָרֶ֖מֶשׂ הָֽרֹמֵ֥שׂ עַל־הָאָֽרֶץ׃ (כז) וַיִּבְרָ֨א אֱלֹקִ֤ים ׀ אֶת־הָֽאָדָם֙ בְּ**צַלְמ֔**וֹ **בְּצֶ֥לֶם** אֱלֹקִ֖ים בָּרָ֣א אֹת֑וֹ זָכָ֥ר וּנְקֵבָ֖ה בָּרָ֥א אֹתָֽם׃ (כח) וַיְבָ֣רֶךְ אֹתָם֮ אֱלֹקִים֒ וַיֹּ֨אמֶר לָהֶ֜ם אֱלֹקִ֗ים פְּר֥וּ וּרְב֛וּ וּמִלְא֥וּ אֶת־הָאָ֖רֶץ וְכִבְשֻׁ֑הָ וּרְד֞וּ בִּדְגַ֤ת הַיָּם֙ וּבְע֣וֹף הַשָּׁמַ֔יִם וּבְכָל־חַיָּ֖ה הָֽרֹמֶ֥שֶׂת עַל־הָאָֽרֶץ׃
Genesis 1:26-28 (26) And God said, “Let us make man in **our** **image**, after **our likeness**. They shall rule the fish of the sea, the birds of the sky, the cattle, the whole earth, and all the creeping things that creep on earth.” (27) And God created man in **His image**, in the **image of God** He created him; male and female He created them. (28) God blessed them and God said to them, “Be fertile and increase, fill the earth and master it; and rule the fish of the sea, the birds of the sky, and all the living things that creep on earth.”
בראשית ה׳:א׳ (א) זֶ֣ה סֵ֔פֶר תּוֹלְדֹ֖ת אָדָ֑ם בְּי֗וֹם בְּרֹ֤א אֱלֹקִים֙ אָדָ֔ם **בִּדְמ֥וּת אֱלֹקִ֖ים** עָשָׂ֥ה אֹתֽוֹ׃
Genesis 5:1 (1) This is the record of Adam’s line.—When God created man, He made him in the **likeness of God**;
בראשית ט׳:ו׳ (ו) שֹׁפֵךְ֙ דַּ֣ם הָֽאָדָ֔ם בָּֽאָדָ֖ם דָּמ֣וֹ יִשָּׁפֵ֑ךְ כִּ֚י **בְּצֶ֣לֶם אֱלֹקִ֔ים** עָשָׂ֖ה אֶת־הָאָדָֽם׃
Genesis 9:6 (6) Whoever sheds the blood of man, By man shall his blood be shed; For in **His image** Did God make man.
במדבר ל״ג:נ״ב (נב) וְה֨וֹרַשְׁתֶּ֜ם אֶת־כָּל־יֹשְׁבֵ֤י הָאָ֙רֶץ֙ מִפְּנֵיכֶ֔ם וְאִ֨בַּדְתֶּ֔ם אֵ֖ת כָּל־מַשְׂכִּיֹּתָ֑ם וְאֵ֨ת כָּל־**צַלְמֵ֤**י מַסֵּֽכֹתָם֙ תְּאַבֵּ֔דוּ וְאֵ֥ת כָּל־בָּמֹתָ֖ם תַּשְׁמִֽידוּ׃
Numbers 33:52 (52) you shall dispossess all the inhabitants of the land; you shall destroy all their figured objects; you shall destroy all their molten **images**, and you shall demolish all their cult places.
"any Old Testament scholar worth her salt will tell you that the semantic range of tselem, the Hebrew word for "image" in Genesis 1, typically includes "idol," which in the common theology of the ancient Near East is precisely a localized, visible, corporeal representation of the divine. A simple word study would thus lead to the preliminary observation that visibility and bodiliness are minimally a necessary condition of being tselem elohim or imago Dei. Based on this usage Walter Kaiser Jr. translates tselem as "carved or hewn statue or copy." The Liberating Image? Interpreting the Imago Dei in Context By J. Richard Middleton Christian Scholars Review 24.1 (1994) 8-25
מלכים ב י״א:י״ח (יח) וַיָּבֹ֣אוּ כָל־עַם֩ הָאָ֨רֶץ בֵּית־הַבַּ֜עַל וַֽיִּתְּצֻ֗הוּ אֶת־מזבחתו [מִזְבְּחֹתָ֤יו] וְאֶת־**צְלָמָיו֙** שִׁבְּר֣וּ הֵיטֵ֔ב וְאֵ֗ת מַתָּן֙ כֹּהֵ֣ן הַבַּ֔עַל הָרְג֖וּ לִפְנֵ֣י הַֽמִּזְבְּח֑וֹת וַיָּ֧שֶׂם הַכֹּהֵ֛ן פְּקֻדּ֖וֹת עַל־בֵּ֥ית ה'׃
II Kings 11:18 (18) Thereupon all the people of the land went to the temple of Baal. They tore it down and smashed its altars and **images** to bits, and they slew Mattan, the priest of Baal, in front of the altars. [Jehoiada] the priest then placed guards over the House of the LORD.
דברי הימים ב כ״ג:י״ז (יז) וַיָּבֹ֨אוּ כָל־הָעָ֤ם בֵּית־הַבַּ֙עַל֙ וַֽיִּתְּצֻ֔הוּ וְאֶת־מִזְבְּחֹתָ֥יו וְאֶת־**צְלָמָ֖יו** שִׁבֵּ֑רוּ וְאֵ֗ת מַתָּן֙ כֹּהֵ֣ן הַבַּ֔עַל הָרְג֖וּ לִפְנֵ֥י הַֽמִּזְבְּחֽוֹת׃
II Chronicles 23:17 (17) All the people then went to the temple of Baal; they tore it down and smashed its altars and **images** to bits, and they slew Mattan, the priest of Baal, in front of the altars.
יחזקאל ז׳:כ׳ (כ) וּצְבִ֤י עֶדְיוֹ֙ לְגָא֣וֹן שָׂמָ֔הוּ וְ**צַלְמֵ֧**י תוֹעֲבֹתָ֛ם שִׁקּוּצֵיהֶ֖ם עָ֣שׂוּ ב֑וֹ עַל־כֵּ֛ן נְתַתִּ֥יו לָהֶ֖ם לְנִדָּֽה׃
Ezekiel 7:20 (20) for out of their beautiful adornments, in which they took pride, they made their **images** and their detestable abominations—therefore I will make them an unclean thing to them.
עמוס ה׳:כ״ו (כו) וּנְשָׂאתֶ֗ם אֵ֚ת סִכּ֣וּת מַלְכְּכֶ֔ם וְאֵ֖ת כִּיּ֣וּן **צַלְמֵיכֶ֑ם** כּוֹכַב֙ אֱלֹ֣קֵיכֶ֔ם אֲשֶׁ֥ר עֲשִׂיתֶ֖ם לָכֶֽם׃
Amos 5:26 (26) And you shall carry off your “king”— Sikkuth and Kiyyun, The **images** you have made for yourselves Of your astral deity—
דניאל ג׳:א׳ (א) נְבוּכַדְנֶצַּ֣ר מַלְכָּ֗א עֲבַד֙ **צְלֵ֣ם** דִּֽי־דְהַ֔ב רוּמֵהּ֙ אַמִּ֣ין שִׁתִּ֔ין פְּתָיֵ֖הּ אַמִּ֣ין שִׁ֑ת אֲקִימֵהּ֙ בְּבִקְעַ֣ת דּוּרָ֔א בִּמְדִינַ֖ת בָּבֶֽל׃
Daniel 3:1 (1) King Nebuchadnezzar made a **statue** of gold sixty cubits high and six cubits broad. He set it up in the plain of Dura in the province of Babylon.
The case for demut ("likeness") is more complicated. Although biblical scholars have often suggested that the physical, concrete connotation of tselem is intentionally modified by the more abstract demut, this latter term is sometimes used within Scripture for concrete, visible representations. [Middleton ibid.]
Tselem and demut are also used with reference to resemblance:
בראשית ה׳:ג׳ (ג) וַֽיְחִ֣י אָדָ֗ם שְׁלֹשִׁ֤ים וּמְאַת֙ שָׁנָ֔ה וַיּ֥וֹלֶד בִּ**דְמוּת֖**וֹ כְּ**צַלְמ֑**וֹ וַיִּקְרָ֥א אֶת־שְׁמ֖וֹ שֵֽׁת׃
Genesis 5:3 (3) When Adam had lived 130 years, he begot a son in his **likeness** after his **image**, and he named him Seth.
"a recent (1979) excavation at Tell Fekheriyeh in Syria unearthed a 9th century statue with a bilingual inscription containing the cognate equivalents of both tselem and demut in Assyrian and Aramaic as parallel terms designating the statue." [Middleton ibid.]
The statue is referred to by two Aramaic words, both with Hebrew cognates. The initial word of the inscription introduces it as dmwt', "the image." At the start the second part the word used in the Aramaic is slm "statue," in the Assyrian its cognate salmu. This is not a means of distinguishing the two parts of the inscription, for dmwt' reappears three lines later. These two words in their Hebrew dress are the famous "image" and "likeness" in God's creation of man in Gen 1:26; cf. 5:3. Their clear application to this stone statue, the only ancient occurrence of the words as a pair outside the OT, provides fuel for the debate over the meaning of the clause in Genesis 1 [STATUE FROM SYRIA WITH ASSYRIAN AND ARAMAIC INSCRIPTIONS A. R. Millard and P. Bordreuil, BIBLICAL ARCHEOLOGIST/SUMMER 1982]
Among Bible scholars one of the most common interpretations is that being created in the image of God means being given the special role of “representing . . . God’s rule in the world.” The Torah’s view is that people are God’s “vice-regents” and “earthly delegates,” appointed by God to rule over the world. One traditional Jewish commentator, R. Saadia Gaon (882–942), anticipated this understanding of Genesis, arguing that being created in the image of God means being assigned to rule over creation (Saadia Gaon, commentary to Gen. 1:26). בְּצַלְמֵנוּ כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ **שליט**
The ancient Near Eastern context sheds remarkable light on the audacity of the Torah’s message. In the ancient world, various kings (and sometimes priests) were described as the images of a god. It is the king who is God’s representative or intermediary intermediary on earth, and it is he who mediates God’s blessings to the world. In dramatic contrast to this, the Torah asserts that ordinary human beings—not just kings, but each and every one of us—are mediators of divine blessing. “The entire race collectively stands vis-à-vis God in the same relationship of chosenness and protection that characterizes the god-king relationship in the more ancient civilizations of the Near East.” Genesis 1 thus represents a radical democratization of ancient Near Eastern royal ideology. We are, the Torah insists, all kings and queens.
Shai Held. The Heart of Torah, Volume 1: Essays on the Weekly Torah Portion: Genesis and Exodus . The Jewish Publication Society.
**Feminist Objection to the Royal Interpretation of "In the Image of God"**
Such a picture, claims McFague, is derived from a patriarchal model of man ruling over woman and serves to enforce and legitimate such rule by its association of male dominance with God's transcendence. [Sallie McFague, Models of God: Theology for an Ecological, Nuclear Age (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987), pp. 63-69.]
**The Environmental Objection to the Royal Interpretation of "In the Image of God"**
Some environmentalists have placed the blame for the modern West’s despoliation of the earth squarely at the Bible’s feet. Thus, for example, one influential writer charges that according to Christian (and by implication, Jewish) thinking, “God planned all of this explicitly for man’s benefit and rule: No item in the physical creation had any purpose save to serve man’s purposes.” The environmental crisis, he insists, was rooted in religious “arrogance towards nature” and the only solution, therefore, lay in moving beyond these patently damaging and outdated ideas. [Held, Shai. The Heart of Torah, Volume 1: Essays on the Weekly Torah Portion: Genesis and Exodus . The Jewish Publication Society.]
"ancient Near Eastern society, whether Mesopotamian (that is, Sumerian, Babylonian or Assyrian), West Semitic (that is, Canaanite), or Egyptian, was hierarchically ordered.... Standing between the human realm, on the one hand, and the gods, on the other, was the king, universally viewed in the ancient Near East as the mediator of both social harmony and cosmic fertility from the gods. To contrast the two cultures we know most about, whereas in Egypt the Pharaoh is viewed as the eternally begotten son of the gods, in Mesopotamia the king was but an adopted son. **Both, however, are referred to as the image of this or that particular god**, whether Re, Amon, Marduk, 'Shamash or Enlil. [Middleton ibid.]
פסיקתא דרב כהנא כ״ג (א) פסקא כג אות א ראש השנה: (א) לעולם י"י דברך נצב בשמים (תהלים קיט פט) תני ר' אליע' בעשרים וחמשה באלול נברא העולם ואתיא דרב כהדא דתני ר' אליע' דתניא בתקיעתא דרב זה היום תחילת מעשיך זכרון ליום ראשון וגו' כי חק לישראל הוא משפט וג' (שם פא ה) על המדינות בו יאמר איזו לחרב ואיזו לשלום איזו לרעב ואיזו לשובע איזו למות ואיזו לחיים וביריות בו יפקדו להזכירם חיים ומות נמצאת אומ' **בראש השנה נברא אדם הראשון** בשעה ראשונה עלה במחשבה בשנייה נמלך במלאכי השרת בשלישית כינס עפרו ברביעית גיבלו בחמישית ריקמו בשישית העמידו גולם על רגליו בשביעי' זרק בו נשמה בשמינית הכניסו לגן עדן בתשיעית ציוהו בעשירית עבר על ציוהו באחת עשרה נידון בשתים עשרה יצא בדימוס מלפני הק"ב א' לו הקב"ה אדם זה סימן לבניך כשם שנכנסתה לפניי בדין ביום הזה ויצאתה בדימוס כך עתידין בניך להיות נכנסין לפניי בדין ביום הזה ויוצאין בדימוס אימתי בחדש השביעי באחד לחדש (ויקרא כג כד
Pesikta D'Rav Kahanna 23 A. Rosh Hashanah. Your word stands firm in heaven (Psalms 119; 89) R. Eliya learnt: On the 25th of Elul the world was created and he cited R. Kehada who learnt that R. Eliya learnt during the blowings of Rav "This is the day, the beginning of your works, is in remembrance of the first day etc. For it is a law for Israel, a ruling of the God of Jacob; etc. (psalms 81:5) on the Nations it was written, who for the sword, who for peace, who for famine who for plenty, who for death, and who for life and with shots he will be selected deserving of life and death as they say On Rosh Hashanah Adam (the first Man) was created.
In the first hour it came into His mind. In the second (hour) he ruled among the heavenly host. In the third he gathered the dirt. In the fourth He kneaded. In the fifth he formed him. In the sixth he raised the Golem onto his feet. In the seventh he threw into him a soul. In the eighth he brought him into the garden of Eden. In the ninth he commanded him (not to eat of the Tree of Knowledge). In the tenth he (Adam) transgressed His command. In the eleventh he was judged. In the twelfth hour he was pardoned by the Holy One Blessed be He. Said to him, God: "Adam, this is a sign for your children. Just as you came in judgement before me on this day and went out pardoned so also in the future your children will come before me in judgement on this day and leave pardoned. When? On the seventh month on the first (day) of the month (Leviticus 23:24)
The Torah’s assertion that every human being is created in the image of God is a repudiation of the idea, so common in the ancient world, that some people are simply meant to rule over others. If everyone is royalty, then on some level, when it comes to the interpersonal and political spheres, no one is.
Assigned the role of God’s delegates, human beings are told to “be fertile and increase, fill the earth and master it . . . rule the fish of the sea, the birds of the sky, and all the living things that creep on the earth” (Gen. 1:28).
What’s more, Genesis 1 repeatedly emphasizes and seems to revel in the fact that God created both vegetation and creatures “of every kind.” ... then, the biblical . . . creation story is like a hymn to biodiversity, which is seen as unambiguously good in its own right.
If Genesis 1 teaches that human beings are meant to be kings and queens over creation, ...“The task of a king is to care for those over whom he rules, especially for the weakest and most helpless. . . . This means that humans are expected to care for the earth and its creatures. Such is the responsibility of royalty.” What we find in Genesis 1, then, is not a license to abuse and exploit but a summons to nurture and protect.
The problem with the notion of human stewardship over creation is not that it authorizes human exploitation of the earth and abuse of the animal kingdom—which, as we have seen, it emphatically does not. The problem is, rather, that we have not really taken it seriously enough to try it. In modern times, amid an almost manic need to produce and consume more and more, we have all too often lost sight of what has been entrusted to us. What we need is not to abandon Genesis 1 but to return to it and to rediscover there what we have forgotten or failed to see altogether. We are created in the image of God and are thus mandated to rule over creation; this is a call to exercise power in the way Tanakh imagines the ideal ruler would, “in obedience to the reign of God and for the sake of all the other creatures whom [our] power affects." [Held, Shai. ibid]
**"Obedience to God is also the negation of submission to man."**
You Shall be as Gods - A Radical Interpretation of the Old Testament and its Tradition, Erich Fromm 1966 p73
In this Mother's Day episode of the Madlik Podcast we explore the emergence and stature of matrilineal descent within Judaism, an otherwise male dominated and patrilineal religion and legal society.
Recorded live at TCS, The Conservative Synagogue of Westport Connecticut we come to the surprising conclusion that the introduction of matrilineal descent might have more to do with removing any stigma attached to a captured and redeemed single-mother and less to do with the status of the child.
Featured Links:
Yael Deckelbaum / Prayer of the Mothers - Official video https://youtu.be/YyFM-pWdqrY
Three Part Series by Rabbi Ethan Tucker of Hadar Institute on
MATRILINEALITY AND PATRILINEALITY IN JEWISH LAW AND COMMUNITY, PARTS 1-3
https://www.hadar.org/torah-resource/matrilineality-and-patrilineality-jewish-law-and-community-part-1
https://www.hadar.org/torah-resource/matrilineality-and-patrilineality-jewish-law-and-community-part-2
https://www.hadar.org/torah-resource/matrilineality-and-patrilineality-jewish-law-and-community-part-3
Source texts below:
- Breaking News
As part of the historic handover of Japan’s imperial throne on Wednesday, the incoming emperor, Naruhito, will receive a sword, a jewel and official seals in a sacred ceremony that dates back thousands of years.
But the new empress, Masako, Naruhito’s wife of 26 years, will not be allowed to attend — another illustration of the diminished status of women in the imperial family, and of the challenges women face more broadly in Japanese society.
Under the Imperial Household Law, which governs the line of succession as well as most matters of protocol related to Japan’s monarchy, women in the royal family are not permitted to be in the room when the new emperor receives the sacred regalia signifying his rightful succession to the world’s oldest monarchy.
But the prohibitions go much further. Women are not allowed to reign. In fact, women born into the royal family must officially leave it once they marry, and none of their children can be in line to the throne. NY Times April 29, 2019
- In the Torah
You shall not intermarry with them: do not give your daughters to their sons or take their daughters for your sons. For they will turn your children away from Me to worship other gods, and the LORD’s anger will blaze forth against you and He will promptly wipe you out.
Deuteronomy 7: 3- 4
וְלֹ֥א תִתְחַתֵּ֖ן בָּ֑ם בִּתְּךָ֙ לֹא־תִתֵּ֣ן לִבְנ֔וֹ וּבִתּ֖וֹ לֹא־תִקַּ֥ח לִבְנֶֽךָ
כִּֽי־יָסִ֤יר אֶת־בִּנְךָ֙ מֵֽאַחֲרַ֔י וְעָבְד֖וּ אֱלֹהִ֣ים אֲחֵרִ֑ים וְחָרָ֤ה אַף־יְהוָה֙ בָּכֶ֔ם וְהִשְׁמִידְךָ֖ מַהֵֽר
- In Tanach
Now then, let us make a covenant with our God to expel all these women and those who have been born to them, in accordance with the bidding of the Lord and of all who are concerned over the commandment of our God, and let the Teaching be obeyed.
Ezra 10: 3
וְעַתָּ֣ה נִֽכְרָת־בְּרִ֣ית לֵ֠א-לֹהֵינוּ לְהוֹצִ֨יא כָל־נָשִׁ֜ים וְהַנּוֹלָ֤ד מֵהֶם֙ בַּעֲצַ֣ת אֲדֹנָ֔י וְהַחֲרֵדִ֖ים בְּמִצְוַ֣ת אֱ-לֹהֵ֑ינוּ וְכַתּוֹרָ֖ה יֵעָשֶֽׂה
- In Rabbinic Judaism
Wherever there is [a valid] betrothal and no sin, the child follows the male [with regard to familial status].
Which is this? This is a Kohenet, a Levite woman, or an Israelite woman who married a Kohen, a Levite or an Israelite.
Wherever there is [a valid] betrothal and there is a sin, the child follows the defective one.
Which is this? This is a widow married to the Kohen Gadol [High Priest], a divorcee or a chalutzah [the widow of a childless man released from the obligation of levirate marriage by a ceremony performed by her brother-in-law] [married] to an ordinary Kohen, a mamzeret [the female offspring of certain prohibited relationships who may not marry into the general Jewish population] or a Netina [female Gibeonite] to an Israelite, a female Israelite to a mamzer or Netina.
[With] any [woman] for whom there is no betrothal to him, but there is betrothal to others, the child is a mamzer.
Which is this? This is one who has sexual intercourse with any one of the forbidden sexual relations [mentioned] in the Torah.
Any [woman] for whom there is no betrothal either to him or to others, the child is like her.
Which is this? This is the child of a [non-Jewish] maidservant or a non-Jewish woman.
Mishna Kiddushin 3: 12
כָּל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ קִדּוּשִׁין וְאֵין עֲבֵרָה, הַוָּלָד הוֹלֵךְ אַחַר הַזָּכָר
וְאֵיזֶה, זוֹ כֹהֶנֶת, לְוִיָּה וְיִשְׂרְאֵלִית שֶׁנִּשְּׂאוּ לְכֹהֵן וּלְלֵוִי וּלְיִשְׂרָאֵל.
וְכָל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ קִדּוּשִׁין וְיֵשׁ עֲבֵרָה, הַוָּלָד הוֹלֵךְ אַחַר הַפָּגוּם.
וְאֵיזוֹ, זוֹ אַלְמָנָה לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל, גְּרוּשָׁה וַחֲלוּצָה לְכֹהֵן הֶדְיוֹט, מַמְזֶרֶת וּנְתִינָה לְיִשְׂרָאֵל, בַּת יִשְׂרָאֵל לְמַמְזֵר וּלְנָתִין.
וְכָל מִי שֶׁאֵין לָהּ עָלָיו קִדּוּשִׁין אֲבָל יֶשׁ לָהּ עַל אֲחֵרִים קִדּוּשִׁין, הַוָּלָד מַמְזֵר.
וְאֵיזֶה, זֶה הַבָּא עַל אַחַת מִכָּל הָעֲרָיוֹת שֶׁבַּתּוֹרָה.
וְכָל מִי שֶׁאֵין לָהּ לֹא עָלָיו וְלֹא עַל אֲחֵרִים קִדּוּשִׁין, הַוָּלָד כְּמוֹתָהּ.
וְאֵיזֶה, זֶה וְלַד שִׁפְחָה וְנָכְרִית
- Rabbinic Judaism (more)
- Aha Sar HaBirah and R. Tanhum bdR Hiyya from K’far Akko redeemed captive women… one of whom had been impregnated by a Gentile. They came to R. Ami, who said to them: R. Yohanan, R. Elazar, R. Hanina all say: When a Gentile or a slave has intercourse with a Jewish woman, the child is a mamzer. Said R. Yosef: Is it a great trick to mention many names? Rav and Shmuel in Bavel, and R. Yehoshua b. Levi and Bar Kappara in Eretz Yisrael… all say that when a Gentile or a slave has intercourse with a Jewish woman, the child is kasher! … When a Gentile or a slave has intercourse with a Jewish woman, the child is a mamzer. R. Yehoshua b. Levi says the child is mekulkal. Abaye said to him: Why do you rely on R. Dimi [to establish that Rabbi [Yehudah HaNasi]’s position was that the child is a mamzer], rely on Rabin! For when Rabin came, he said: R. Natan and R. Yehudah HaNasi rule permissively… Babylonian Talmud Yevamot 44b45b[i]
- Reform Responsa
The concept of paternity as the determining factor in progeny being considered as having Jewish descent is a constant in the Hebrew Bible, as the authors of the Report elaborated: "both the Biblical and the Rabbinical traditions take for granted that ordinarily the paternal line is decisive in the tracing of descent within the Jewish people." Numerous examples in the Hebrew Bible determine a child's status by the father's tribe. The Report further asserts, "in the Rabbinic tradition, this tradition remains in force," citing as prooftexts examples of Priestly status--"the child of an Israelite who marries a Kohenet is an Israelite" and the Talmudic precept, "the most important parental responsibility to teach Torah rested with the father (Kiddushin 29a; df. Shulchan Aruch, Yoredeah 245.1)." Only in the case where "the marriage was considered not to be licit, the child of that marriage followed the status of the mother (Mishna Kiddushin 3.12, havalad kemotah)." The Report offers a sociological interpretation of the reason for matrilineal descent in illicit unions: "the woman with her child had no recourse but to return to her own people.[ii]
- In Contemporary Israel – The Problem
Lev Paschov, an Israeli soldier who immigrated to Israel under the Law of Return from the Former Soviet Union, was killed while on active duty in Southern Lebanon in 1993, and buried twice. He was first interred in a regular Israeli military cemetery, but after it was discovered that his mother was not Jewish, his body was exhumed, and Paschov was buried a second time, in a cemetery for non-Jews.
For many Israelis, the macabre end of Paschov’s brief life journey was deeply disturbing. How was it possible that someone could be welcomed to Israel under the Law of Return, serve the Jewish state’s army, and die defending his adopted homeland, and still not be considered Jewish enough to be buried alongside his comrades?[iii]
- Return to Patrilineal descent in Israel
Responsa of Rabbi BenZion Meir Hai Uziel, the chief rabbi of Israel in the 1940s and 1950
...From here we learn,that a patrilineal Jew brought by his father for a conversion should be accepted by the beit din. Even though this child is called the child of the Gentile woman, he is still considered zera yisrael (of Jewish stock)... everyone agrees that children of a Jewish man born to a Gentile woman are called zera yisrael, therefore, when the father brings him to convert, the child reverts to his original lineage. Responsa Piskei Uzziel BeShe’eilot Hazeman #64[iv]
...מכאן אנו לומדים במכל שכן כשגוי זה הוא בן ישראל מנכרית ואביו מביאו להתגייר שבי"ד נזקקים לגרותו משום דאע"ג שהוא נקרא בנה של הנכרית אינו יוצא מכלל זרע ישראל... הלכך כשאביו הביאו להתגייר חוזר הילד לעיקר זרעו, … הא למדת דבן הבא מן הנכרית נקרא זרעו של ישראל ועובר עליו משום ומזרעך לא תתן להעביר למולך, הלכך אם בא לגיירו מצוה עלינו להזדקק לגרותו כדי לכפר עון האב מאחרי הגרות ולבל ידח ממנו נדח. ואין לחוש שמא יגרר אחרי אמו דאדרבא אם דוחים אותו ועוקרים אותו ממקור חייו וזרעו שהוא אביו ודאי שיטמע בין הגויים ויכפור באלהי ישראל, וישנא תכלית שנאה את היהדות ותורתה...
- Feminist Response - Irony
I hope it is not impertinent, for someone writing thousands of miles distant from the great country in which the women’s liberation movement has made such rapid strides, to express astonishment that the clamor to change an ancient law which makes Jewish status depend on the mother should have originated in that very country.
There is no problem of Descent, Lous Jacobs[v]
-
Feminist Response - The Jewish Community’s “Need” to Punish Men Who Intermarry Judith Hauptmann, a Talmud scholar widely known for her work in advancing feminist scholarship of Judaism. … proceeds to argue that the modern Jewish community should not rescind matrilineal descent because doing so would have the effect of removing a punishment against Jewish men who intermarry.[vi]
-
Matrilineal descent Redux
Hence a man leaves his father and mother and clings to his wife, so that they become one flesh Genesis 2: 24
עַל־כֵּן֙ יַֽעֲזָב־אִ֔ישׁ אֶת־אָבִ֖יו וְאֶת־אִמּ֑וֹ וְדָבַ֣ק בְּאִשְׁתּ֔וֹ וְהָי֖וּ לְבָשָׂ֥ר אֶחָֽד׃
Rashi ONE FLESH — Both parents are united in the child.
לבשר אחד. הַוָּלָד נוֹצָר עַל יְדֵי שְׁנֵיהֶם וְשָׁם נַעֲשֶׁה בְשָׂרָם אֶחָד
Genesis 17: 21
וְאֶת־בְּרִיתִ֖י אָקִ֣ים אֶת־יִצְחָ֑ק אֲשֶׁר֩ תֵּלֵ֨ד לְךָ֤ שָׂרָה֙ לַמּוֹעֵ֣ד הַזֶּ֔ה בַּשָּׁנָ֖ה הָאַחֶֽרֶת׃
But My covenant I will maintain with Isaac, whom Sarah shall bear to you at this season next year.”
A certain man of the house of Levi went and married a Levite woman[vii]. Exodus 2: 1
וַיֵּ֥לֶךְ אִ֖ישׁ מִבֵּ֣ית לֵוִ֑י וַיִּקַּ֖ח אֶת־בַּת־לֵוִֽי
[i] MATRILINEALITY AND PATRILINEALITY IN JEWISH LAW AND COMMUNITY, PART 1 Rabbi Ethan Tucker
[ii] 1 "Reform Movement's Resolution on Patrilineal Descent," Report of the Committee on Patrilineal Descent, adopted on March 15, 1983. Can be accessed at http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/source/Judaism/patrilineal1.html
[iii] WHAT, NOT WHO, IS A JEW? Daniel Gordis March 1, 2011
[iv] MATRILINEALITY AND PATRILINEALITY IN JEWISH LAW AND COMMUNITY, PART 2, Rabbi Ethan Tucker
[v] Originally published in Judaism 34.1 (Winter 1985), 55-59.
[vi] Patrilineal Descent–an Examination of Non-Lineal Descent.” Judaism, Winter 1985, pp. 46-50.
[vii] Laws regarding a Bat Levi as relates to the redemption of the first born son: If the father is a kohen or a levi, or if the mother is the daughter of a cohen or a levi, there is no mitzvah of pidyon haben (Shulchan Aruch 305:18).
If a boy is born from a non-Jewish father and a bas levi, there is also no mitzvah of pidyon haben since his mother is the daughter of a levi. However, if a boy is born from a non-Jewish father and a bas kohen, a pidyon haben is performed. Since the daughter of the kohen has violated her kedusha by having relations with a gentile, she loses her hallachic status as a bas kohen (Shulchan Aruch 305:18). Similarly, if a bas yisroel has a child with a non-Jew, a pidyon haben is performed. The Aruch Hashulchan comments that in this scenario it is difficult to ascertain who is obligated to perform the pidyon haben. The father, who is not Jewish, is obviously not obligated to perform this or any mitzvah. The mother is exempt as well, as this mitzvah is never the obligation of the mother (as we shall explain). Rather, in this case the child should perform his own pidyon when he reached the age of thirteen. Other poskim disagree and feel that the beis din should perform the pidyon right away- see Igros Moshe Y.D. 195 and Sheilas Yeshurun page 140.
The mishna taught that Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said: There were no days as happy for the Jewish people as the fifteenth of Av and as Yom Kippur.
However, what is the special joy of the fifteenth of Av? Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: This was the day on which the members of different tribes were permitted to enter one another’s tribe, by intermarriage. It was initially prohibited to intermarry between tribes, so as to keep each plot of land within the portion of the tribe that originally inherited it. This halakha was instituted by the Torah in the wake of a complaint by the relatives of the daughters of Zelophehad, who were worried that if these women married men from other tribes, the inheritance of Zelophehad would be lost from his tribe (see Numbers 36:1–12).
What did they expound, in support of their conclusion that this halakha was no longer in effect? The verse states: “This is the matter that the Lord has commanded concerning the daughters of Zelophehad, saying: Let them marry whom they think best; only into the family of the tribe of their father shall they marry” (Numbers 36:5). They derived from the verse that this matter shall be practiced only in this generation, when Eretz Yisrael was divided among the tribes, but afterward members of different tribes were permitted to marry. On the day this barrier separating the tribes was removed, the Sages established a permanent day of rejoicing.
א"ר שמעון ב"ג לא היו ימים טובים לישראל כחמשה עשר באב וכיוה"כ: בשלמא יום הכפורים משום דאית ביה סליחה ומחילה יום שניתנו בו לוחות האחרונות
אלא ט"ו באב מאי היא אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל יום שהותרו שבטים לבוא זה בזה
מאי דרוש (במדבר לו, ו) זה הדבר אשר צוה ה' לבנות צלפחד וגו' דבר זה לא יהא נוהג אלא בדור זה
Sinning for God
Esther
Esther sent a message to Mordecai: “Go, gather together all the Jews who are present in Shushan, and fast for me, and neither eat nor drink for three days, night and day; I also and my maidens will fast likewise, and so will I go in to the king, not according to the custom” (Esther 4:16). Rabbi Abba said: It will not be according to my usual custom, for every day until now when I submitted myself to Ahasuerus it was under compulsion, but now I will be submitting myself to him of my own free will. And Esther further said: “And if I perish, I perish” (Esther 4:16). What she meant was: Just as I was lost to my father’s house ever since I was brought here, so too, shall I be lost to you, for after voluntarily having relations with Ahasuerus, I shall be forever forbidden to you. (Babylonian Talmud Megillah 15a)[i][ii]
לך כנוס את־כל־היהודים הנמצאים בשושן וצומו עלי ואל־תאכלו ואל־תשתו שלשת ימים לילה ויום גם־אני ונערתי אצום כן ובכן אבוא אל־המלך אשר לא־כדת וכאשר אבדתי אבדתי עד אשר לא כדת אמר רבי אבא שלא כדת היה שבכל יום ויום עד עכשיו באונס ועכשיו ברצון וכאשר אבדתי אבדתי כשם שאבדתי מבית אבא כך אובד ממך
Tamar
Ulla said: Tamar engaged in licentious sexual intercourse [with her father-in-law, Judah (see Genesis, chapter 38),] and Zimri ben Salu also engaged in licentious sexual intercourse [with a Midianite woman (see Numbers, chapter 25).] Tamar engaged in licentious sexual intercourse and merited that kings descended from her and she also merited to be the ancestor of prophets [e.g., Isaiah, who was related to the royal family]. Conversely, with regard to Zimri, several multitudes of Israel fell due to him.
Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: Greater is a transgression committed for its own sake, i.e., for the sake of Heaven, than a mitzva performed not for its own sake.
The Gemara questions this comparison: But didn’t Rav Yehuda say that Rav said: A person should always occupy himself with Torah and mitzvot even not for their own sake, as it is through acts performed not for their own sake that good deeds for their own sake come about? How, then, can any transgression be considered greater than a mitzva not for the sake of Heaven?
אמר עולא תמר זינתה זמרי זינה
תמר זינתה יצאו ממנה מלכים ונביאים זמרי זינה נפלו עליו כמה רבבות מישראל
אמר ר"נ בר יצחק גדולה עבירה לשמה ממצוה שלא לשמה והאמר רב יהודה אמר רב לעולם יעסוק אדם בתורה ובמצות אפי' שלא לשמן שמתוך שלא לשמן בא לשמן
Yael
Rather say: A transgression for the sake of Heaven is equivalent to a mitzva not for its own sake. The proof is as it is written: “Blessed above women shall Yael be, the wife of Hever the Kenite, above women in the tent she shall be blessed” (Judges 5:24 Etz Hayim p 425), and it is taught: Who are these “women in the tent?” They are Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel, and Leah. Yael’s forbidden intercourse with Sisera for the sake of Heaven is compared to the sexual intercourse in which the Matriarchs engaged.[iii]
Rabbi Yoḥanan said: That wicked one, Sisera, engaged in seven acts of sexual intercourse with Yael at that time, as it is stated: “Between her feet he sunk, he fell, he lay; between her feet he sunk, he fell; where he sunk, there he fell down dead” (Judges 5:27). Each mention of falling is referring to another act of intercourse.
אלא אימא כמצוה שלא לשמה דכתיב (שופטים ה, כד) תבורך מנשים יעל אשת חבר הקני מנשים באהל תבורך מאן נשים שבאהל שרה רבקה רחל ולאה
א"ר יוחנן שבע בעילות בעל אותו רשע באותה שעה שנאמר (שופטים ה, כז) בין רגליה כרע נפל שכב בין רגליה כרע נפל באשר כרע שם נפל שדוד
Lots Daughters Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Avin said that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa said: A
person should always come first with regard to a matter of a mitzva, as in reward of the one night that the elder daughter of Lot preceded the younger for the sake of a mitzva, she merited to precede the younger daughter by four generations to the monarchy of the Jewish people. The descendants of Ruth the Moabite ruled over the Jewish people for four generations: Obed, Yishai, David, and Solomon, before the reign of Solomon’s son Rehoboam, whose mother was Naamah the Ammonite. (Babylonian Talmud Tractate Nazir 23:b)
א"ר חייא בר אבין א"ר יהושע בן קרחה לעולם יקדים אדם לדבר מצוה שבשכר לילה אחת שקדמתה בכירה לצעירה
זכתה וקדמה ארבעה דורות בישראל למלכו'
Eve
Starting with Eve and that damned apple, women have been depicted (and mostly condemned) as the willful and wily seducers of men: …Even the daughter of the patriarch Jacob, a woman who is the apparent victim of rape, is blamed by some of the more misogynistic rabbinical sages for provoking her rapist. And a minority tradition in the rabbinical literature reaches a similar conclusion about Lot’s daughters: “Lot is a warning example to men to avoid being alone with women, lest [they] should entice them to sin, as did Lot’s daughters.”
However, “an open-eyed reading of the Bible reveals that women play a crucial and dynamic role in the destiny of humankind, in both Jewish and Christian tradition. Inevitably, a woman figures decisively in the recurring theme of “the birth of the chosen one,” starting with the matriarchs of the Hebrew Bible and culminating with the Virgin Mary in the Christian Bible. As we have already seen, Lot’s daughters and Judah’s daughter-in-law are examples of how the bearer of the “chosen one” is not passively impregnated with the seed of a patriarch; rather, these women take it upon themselves to defy the will of powerful men and sometimes God himself in order to bring about the crucial birth. Indeed, the Bible frequently singles out “the woman as initiator of events,” as Ramras-Rauch puts it. “From Eve through Sarah and Esther, women have shaped sacred history through word and deed.””[iv]
Contemporary Feminist Interpretations of the “Sin” of Eve [v]
Mieke Bal[vi] does not see the action of eating the fruit as sin. Rather, Bal views the woman’s choice to eat as a way to gain the wisdom that will make her like God. Ironically, her choice also fulfills God’s intention of humanity made in the divine image (Gen. 1:27). By choosing to eat and gain knowledge, including sexual knowledge, the woman makes the continuance of the species possible, even though the individual will not be immortal. Her choice is a choice for reality. Her choice puts an end to the fantasy of individual immortality. It opens up reality as we know it.
Lyn Bechtel asks, why, if humans were created immortal, were they also created sexual? If they were created immortal, why were they made of finite clay? Why after eating the fruit do the humans fear their nakedness rather than death? Why is it considered punishment for Adam to be sent into the world to be a farmer, when Genesis 2:5 tells us that humans were intended to cultivate the ground? Bechtel interprets the Adam and Eve story as the story of human maturation…. Thus it is better to interpret this to mean that those who eat will become aware of the reality of death. That is what gradually happens as we mature. … After the humans mature, they are ready to enter the world where they will take up their life’s work, the work God intended them to do from the beginning. Although Bechtel sees the story as androcentric, she does not believe it is sexist. In addition, her reading has the advantage of placing life in the real world in a positive light. It is not a punishment for sin, but the world God created for mature men and women to share as partners.
Dutch scholar Ellen van Wolde discusses this problem in her treatment of the Adam and Eve story, which is similar to Bechtel’s. She sees the clue to the whole story in Genesis 2:24: “Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and clings to his wife, and they become one flesh.” She writes: As man leaves his father and mother to become independent, so man, male and female, leaves YHWH God by means of his transgression of the prohibition in 3:1–7 to become independent. . . . The realization that verse 2:24 presents man’s process of development in a nutshell and the realization that a similar behavior can be observed in man’s attitude towards YHWH God, makes the reader aware of the fact that Gen 2–3 is really one extensive description of this growth. Van Wolde sees the transgression as a necessary disobedience, because freedom is the one thing that God could not build directly into the universe. Freedom cannot be conferred. It can only be grasped.
Carol Meyers, one of the most important recent interpreters of the Adam and Eve story, treats Genesis 2–3 as a narrative of human origins, as a story that explains why certain human conditions are as they are, and as a parable or wisdom tale. … The prominent role of the female rather than the male in the wisdom aspects of the Eden tale is a little-noticed feature of the narrative. It is the woman, and not the man, who perceives the desirability of procuring wisdom. The woman, again not the man, is the articulate member of the first pair who engages in dialogue even before the benefits of the wisdom tree have been produced. This association between the female and the qualities of wisdom may have a mythic background, with the features of a Semitic wisdom goddess underlying the intellectual prominence of the woman of Eden.
[i] See also Tosefot Ketubot 3b “Lidrosh”
[ii] According to Rabbinic tradition, Esther was married to Mordechai: The verse states: “And when her father and mother were dead, Mordecai took her for his own daughter” (Esther 2:7). A tanna taught a baraita in the name of Rabbi Meir: Do not read the verse literally as for a daughter [bat], but rather read it as for a home [bayit]. This indicates that Mordecai took Esther to be his wife. (Babylonian Talmud Megilla 13a)
ובמות אביה ואמה לקחה מרדכי לו לבת תנא משום ר"מ אל תקרי לבת אלא לבית
[iii] Alternative reading in Babylonian Talmud Tractate Horayot 10b: Who are these “women in the tent”? They are Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel, and Leah, and Yael is more blessed than they are. Apparently, a mitzva performed not for its own sake is a negative phenomenon.
אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק גדולה עבירה לשמה ממצוה שלא לשמה שנאמר (שופטים ה, כד) תבורך מנשים יעל אשת חבר הקיני מנשים באהל תבורך מאן נינהו נשים באהל שרה רבקה רחל ולאה
[iv] Kirsch, Jonathan. The Harlot by the Side of the Road (pp. 58 and 251-252). Random House Publishing Group.
[v] See: Helpmates, Harlots, and Heroes - Women’s Stories in the Hebrew Bible by Alice Ogden Bellis, 2007 chapter 2 The Story of Eve
The Tisha B’Av Syndrome[i] - Podcast notes
- Humor
“the Frenchman, the German and the Jew who are walking in the desert. They trudge in the heat for days, gasping for a drink. The Frenchman says: "I am hot, I am tired, and I am thirsty. I must have some French wine." The German pipes up: "I am hot, I am tired, and I am thirsty. I must have some German beer." The Jew says: "Oy! Am I tired! Am I thirsty! I must have diabetes."
Howard Jacobson's Booker-prize winning novel, The Finkler Question
- Josephus[ii]
Why the Almighty Caused Jerusalem and His Temple to be Destroyed -
The burning of Jerusalem and its Temple in 70 CE/AD created a profound dilemma for faithful Jews of the time. Hadn't religious observance throughout the land reached new heights in the years preceding the war? Wasn't the revolt against Rome directly the result of zealous people vowing to have "no master except the Lord?" (Ant. 18.1.6 23). Then why did the Lord allow the Romans to crush the revolt and destroy his Temple?
Josephus offered a variety of solutions to this problem. His overall goal was to defend the Jews against the accusation that their Lord had deserted them. A further goal, which he only hinted at, was to pave the way for approval by the Roman authorities, at some future time, for the rebuilding of the Temple.
a. “I should not be wrong in saying that the capture of the city began with the assassination of Ananus [the High Priest by the Zealots]”
b. “I cannot but think that it was because God had doomed this city to destruction, as a polluted city, and was resolved to purge his sanctuary by fire”
c. “Certain of these robbers went up to the city, as if they were going to worship God, while they had daggers under their garments; and, by thus mingling themselves among the multitude, they slew Jonathan [the high priest]; and as this murder was never avenged, ….. And this seems to me to have been the reason why God, out of his hatred to these men's wickedness, rejected our city; and as for the Temple, he no longer esteemed it sufficiently pure for him to inhabit therein, but brought the Romans upon us, and threw a fire upon the city to purge it; and brought upon us, our wives, and children, slavery - as desirous to make us wiser by our calamities.
d. The Slaughter of the Guards – by Zealots
e. Oh most wretched city, what misery so great as this didst thou suffer from the Romans, when they came to purify thee from thy internal pollutions! For thou couldst be no longer a place fit for God, nor couldst thou longer survive, after thou hadst been a tomb for the bodies of thine own people, and hast made the Holy House itself a burying-place in this civil war of thine. Yet mayst thou again grow better, if perchance thou wilt hereafter appease the anger of that God who is the author of thy destruction.
f. Jesus in 63CE cursed the Temple and foretold its destruction. (War 6.5.3 288-309)
- Ruth Wisse
“Is it not curious that the destruction of the Second Jewish Commonwealth came to be known from the perspective of a Jew determined to vindicate its destroyer? Josephus became an esteemed emissary to the Gentiles, the interpreter of the Jews to others as well as to themselves. Jews not only lost the war against Rome, but they supplied the historian who held them responsible for their downfall. By the middle of the sixteenth century, Josephus had been translated into every major western European language. Gentiles and Christians among whom the Jews resided learned from him that the Jews had deserved their ruin.”
Ruth R. Wisse. Jews and Power Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group.
- Israel Jacob Yuval
“Jesus already prophesied the Destruction of Jerusalem: “For the days shall come upon you, when your enemies will cast up a bank about you and surround you, and hem you in on every side, and dash you to the ground, you and your children within you, and they will not leave one stone upon another in you; because you did not know the time of your visitation” (Luke 19:43-44). The Destruction is described as the vengeance of; God: “For these are days of vengeance, to fulfill all that is written” (Luke 21:22). From the fourth century on and throughout the Middle Ages, these verses were included in the pericope (the weekly reading from the Gospel) read at Mass on the eleventh Sunday after Pentecost, that is, during the week, of Tisha b’Av, thereby clearly paralleling the Jewish day of mourning for the Destruction of their Temple.”
Two Nations in Your Womb: Perceptions of Jews and Christians in Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages by Israel Jacob Yuval, p.39
-
Anti-Zionists – exile as release
Intellectuals:
“Herman Cohen, the main spokesman for liberal Judaism in Germany in the early years of the twentieth century, held that Jews had been able to develop a universal ideal of messianic redemption because they had been freed of the burdens of a state. In his view, Jewish religion alone was the driving force of modern Jewish life, having become more ethically advanced because it was freed of nationalism and a state apparatus.”[iii]
Similarly, Franz Rosenzweig writes that a return to Israel would embroil the Jews into a worldly history they should eschew. In his pre-Holocaust book ‘The Star of Redemption he expressed his belief that a return to Israel would embroil the Jews into a worldly history they should shun. He viewed Judaism as a “supra-historical entity” whose importance lies in the fact that it is not political but presents a “spiritual ideal” only. He saw the creation of a nation-state as a blow to the Jewish ideal of an apolitical spiritual life… -
Pietists:
If I forget you, O Jerusalem,
let my right hand wither;
let my tongue stick to my palate
if I cease to think of you,
if I do not keep Jerusalem in memory
even at my happiest hour.
Psalm 137
“Yet for all its rhetorical severity, Psalm 137 does not exhort Jews to take up arms on their own behalf. Assuming full moral responsibility for the violence that war requires, it calls on the Lord to avenge the Jews' defeat and on other nations to repay Babylon “in kind.” This reflects the historical record: It was the Persians, not the Jews, who defeated the Babylonians, and King Cyrus who allowed the Jews to return to Jerusalem and to rebuild their Temple, thereby inspiring Isaiah's reference to him as “the Lord's anointed,” the messenger of God's will. God's hand, not the soldiering of Israel, is credited with the Jews' political recovery, for had the Persians not prevailed and acted magnanimously, who knows how much longer it would have taken the Jews to return to their home?” (Ruth Wisse)
R. Yossi ben R. Chanina: What are these Three Oaths?
One, that Israel should not storm the wall [Rashi interprets: forcefully].
Two, the Holy One adjured Israel not to rebel against the nations of the world.
Three, the Holy One adjured the nations that they would not oppress Israel too much.
Babylonian Talmud, Ketuobot 111a[iv]
- Yitz Greenberg – The Third Era of Judaism
“Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely, but absolute powerlessness corrupts the most.”[v]
The destruction of the Second Temple and the extended exile caused an even greater crisis of faith. Some Jews despaired and gave up, some Jews (such as Christian Jews) concluded the covenant was finished, and left. The fundamental answer of the Jewish people was the rabbinic one. God had self-limited in order to call humanity to greater responsibility in the covenant. For the first time, in rabbinic literature, we get the term “partnership” between God and man. ….[vi]
In our lifetime, we are living through another major transformation of the covenant. The crisis of the greatest destruction of all time -- the Holocaust-- raises the question of the credibility of the covenant altogether, and whether God exists or cares…. In effect, the Jewish people has concluded that God has even further self-limited in order to call the human being – in this case, the Jews – to greater responsibility…
From the beginning~ of Jewish history the conflict of power and its limits, particularly the covenant, was a source of difficulty…. The Rabbis came to leadership in the second era of Jewish history. In that era, exile and dispersion left the Jews relatively powerless in a world which was hostile. The rabbinic tradition proceeded to develop a sort of ‘ethic of powerlessness’. This ranged from the assurance that God is with the people in exile and there is no need to revolt, to the conscious suppression of hostility. In later centuries, the concept of the Jewish people doing its work through a sort of cosmic mysticism developed. Meticulous observance and the expanded list of observances would eventually evoke the messianic redeemer to come and restore life and faith to its wholeness. …
The ethic of powerlessness is relatively pure ethically, because it is unchecked by the needs of power politics or daily political reality. That, too, became part of the Jeish ethic, side by side with a focus on passivity. This period came to its tragic reduction ad absurdum in the catastrophic Jewish powerlessness of the Holocaust. …
The primary challenge of this era is the acquisition and exercise of power. Costs of acquiring that power have been enormous, -- thousands of Israeli lives, tens of thousands of wounded, months of reserve duty and personal…. A moral army causes as few innocent casualties as possible, but it is impossible that it never cause innocent suffering….
- Rav Kook
“All who mourn [the destruction of] Jerusalem will merit to see it in its joy.” (Ta’anit 30b)
“There are some Jews for whom international recognition of the Jewish people’s right to its land fails to inspire joy. This is because the primary focus of their mourning is the spiritual destruction of Jerusalem and Eretz Yisrael. The bitter humiliation of the Land of Israel being subjected to foreign rule does not trouble them.
But for those who always felt a deep sorrow, not only for the destruction of Jerusalem and the desolation of the Land, but for the absence of Jewish sovereignty in our land... the international declaration that the Land of Israel must return to the people of Israel is a source of joy. These individuals merit ‘to see Jerusalem in its joy.
The nation’s jubilation over sparks of redemption will rebuild that which baseless crying destroyed.”
“Baseless crying” — bechiyah shel chinam — refers to the spies sent by Moses who spoke against the Land of Israel, causing the people to despair and weep in vain. What is the tikun for this sin? How do we correct their cries of despair?
We repair the sin of the spies, Rav Kook explained, with teshuvat ha-mishkal, with a good that counterbalances the evil. We must show excitement and joy as the Land of Israel is rebuilt, stone by stone.[vii]
In messianic time Tisha B’av (and all other fast days related to the loss of Jewish sovereignty will become holidays.
Thus saith the LORD of hosts: The fast of the fourth month (Seventeenth of Tammuz), and the fast of the fifth (9th of Av), and the fast of the seventh Fast of Gedaliah), and the fast of the tenth (10th of Tevet), shall be to the house of Judah joy and gladness, and cheerful seasons; therefore love ye truth and peace. Zechariah 8:19
We know from Berl Katznelson. Leader of the Social Zionists until his death in 1944 who came in 1909 from Russia, that his party’s youth movement held celebratory campfires on Tisha B’Av. [viii]
- May 2018 – Gaza – The parallel Universe of Israeli Liberals and non-Israeli Liberals
FaceBook Post May 17, 2018
"Is there anyone on the political left who sees -- and has the courage to say -- that Israel is truly defending ourselves right now? Hating Israel is super cool, I know. Can I have someone, anyone on the left, speak out about Israel not killing for fun on the Gaza border right now? Or are the consequences too great for your lefty credentials? Dear Lord. This is a modern day blood libel. PS Stick to my particular question."
Susan Silverman is a Reform Rabbi living in Israel. She has been a vocal supporter of the African asylum seekers, Founding Director of Second Nurture which advocates adoption of children in need of a home, she is a supporter of Women of the Wall and an egalitarian prayer space… she also has a son in the IDF. Listen to the Promised Podcast discuss this post here: https://s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/patreon-posts/YI459NgAAByjq5VEIpDQbdr2oEKIk1VfMGy2Prd8lXr35Zq__Kxe2ELvaaIvvkXs.mp3 here is a link to her FB post and comments: https://www.facebook.com/susan.silverman.927/posts/10214732140511432
- Josephus redux
Last reason given by Josephus: It was ordained: “Now, although any one would lament the destruction of such a work as this was, since it was the most admirable of all the works that we have seen or heard of, both for its curious structure and its magnitude, and also for the glorious reputation it had for its holiness; yet might such a one comfort himself with this thought, that it was fate that decreed it so to be, which is inevitable, both as to living creatures and as to works and places also.
However, one cannot but wonder at the accuracy of this period thereto relating; for the same month and day were not observed, as I said before, wherein the Holy House was burnt formerly by the Babylonians.
[i] The term “Tisha B’Av Syndrome“ was coined by Isaac Herzog (leader of the Opposition and grandson of the 2nd Chief Rabbi of Israel) in 2015 when he accused Prime Minister Netanyahu of leading with a politics of fear and despair see: https://www.timesofisrael.com/herzog-netanyahu-suffering-from-tisha-bav-syndrome/
[ii] See: http://www.josephus.org/causeofDestruct.htm
[iii] Wisse, Ruth R.. Jews and Power (Jewish Encounters Series) (Kindle Locations 138-143). Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.
[iv] See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Oaths
[v] See: http://jewishweek.timesofisrael.com/the-embattled-voice-of-modern-orthodoxy/ hear: http://www.judaismunbound.com/podcast/2018/1/4/judaism-unbound-episode-100-the-third-era-yitz-greenberg-2
[vi] Israel Jacob Yuval understands this “partnership” as a nefarious linkage between the suffering and martyrdom of the Jews forcing the hand of God to bring the redemption and associated retribution. Cf. the last stanza of Maoz Tzur: Bare Your holy arm and hasten the final salvation, Avenge the vegenance of Your servants’ blood from the wicked nation… see Two Nations p106-7
[vii] (Adapted from Mo'adei HaRe’iyah, pp. 567-568) http://www.ravkooktorah.org/TISHA58.htm
[viii] See: https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/secular-zionism/
An analysis of the Curse Formula Pour Out Thy Wrath upon the Nations recited at the climax of the Passover Seder and suggested alternative texts including the questionable text of "Pour out your Love" discovered by Chayyim Bloch and a stylistically similar piyut of R. Shimon b. Yitzhak which curses the evil inclination instead of the Nations.
Complete notes are available at http://madlik.com/2018/03/25/pour-out-your-wrath-on-my-hametz
- An exploration of the prayers and visions of redemption expressed at the climax of the Seder
- A Night of Watchings ליל שמרים
Exodus 12: 42
ליל שמרים הוא לה' להוציאם מארץ מצרים הוא־הלילה הזה לה' שמרים לכל־בני ישראל לדרתם That was for the LORD a night of watchings (Shemarim) to bring them out of the land of Egypt; that same night is the LORD’s, one of watchings for all the children of Israel throughout the ages.
‘R. Joshua says, In Nisan they were delivered, [and] in Nisan they will be delivered in the time to come’. Whence do we know this? — Scripture calls [the Passover] ‘a night of watchings’, [twice - which means], a night which has been continuously watched for from the six days of the creation. (Rosh HaShana 11b) [i]
- The Four Cups - The Four stages of Redemption 1. "I will bring you out from the suffering of Egypt וְהוֹצֵאתִ֣י אֶתְכֶ֗ם מִתַּ֙חַת֙ סִבְלֹ֣ת מִצְרַ֔יִם 2. and I will save you from enslavement
וְהִצַּלְתִּ֥י אֶתְכֶ֖ם מֵעֲבֹדָתָ֑ם 3. I will redeem you with an outstretched arm and through extraordinary chastisements
Exodus 6: 6 וְגָאַלְתִּ֤י אֶתְכֶם֙ בִּזְר֣וֹעַ נְטוּיָ֔ה וּבִשְׁפָטִ֖ים גְּדֹלִֽים 4. and I will take you for me as a Nation, and I will be for you, the Lord"
Exodus 6: 7 וְלָקַחְתִּ֨י אֶתְכֶ֥ם לִי֙ לְעָ֔ם וְהָיִ֥יתִי לָכֶ֖ם לֵֽא-לֹהִ֑ים 3 The Climax of the Seder – Opening the Door for Elijah Bless and drink the third cup of wine..
Pour the fourth cup of wine and pour the cup of Eliyahu and open the door.
שְׁפֹךְ חֲמָתְךָ אֶל־הַגּוֹיִם אֲשֶׁר לֹא יְדָעוּךָ וְעַל־מַמְלָכוֹת אֲשֶׁר בְּשִׁמְךָ לֹא קָרָאוּ. כִּי אָכַל אֶת־יַעֲקֹב וְאֶת־נָוֵהוּ הֵשַׁמּוּ. שְׁפָךְ־עֲלֵיהֶם זַעֲמֶךָ וַחֲרוֹן אַפְּךָ יַשִּׂיגֵם. תִּרְדֹף בְּאַף וְתַשְׁמִידֵם מִתַּחַת שְׁמֵי ה' Pour your wrath upon the nations that did not know You and upon the kingdoms that did not call upon Your Name! Since they have consumed Ya'akov and laid waste his habitation (Psalms 79:6-7). Pour out Your fury upon them and the fierceness of Your anger shall reach them (Psalms 69:25)! You shall pursue them with anger and eradicate them from under the skies of the Lord (Lamentations 3:66).
First found in Mchzor Vitry compiled by a pupil of Rashi in the 11th century.
- Pour Out Your Love - Alternative reading
|
| Pour out Your love on the nations that know You And on the kingdoms that call upon Your Name For the loving-kindness that they perform with Jacob And their defense of the People of Israel In the face of those that would devour them. May they be privileged to see The Succah of peace spread for Your chosen ones And rejoice in the joy of Your nations. |
|
שְׁפֹךְ אַהֲבָתְךָ עַל הַגּוֹיִים אֲשֶׁר יְדָעוּךָ וְעַל מַמְלָכוֹת אֲשֶׁר בְּשִׁמְךָ קוֹרְאִים בִּגְלַל חֲסָדִים שֶׁהֵם עוֹשִׂים עִם יַעֲקֹב וּמְגִנִּים עַל עַמְּךָ יִשְׂרָאֵל מִפְּנֵי אוֹכְלֵיהֶם. יִזְכּוּ לִרְאוֹת בְּסֻכַּת בְּחִירֶיךָ וְלִשְׂמֹחַ בְּשִׂמְחַת גּוֹיֶיךָ. “Chayyim Bloch (1881-1973) reported that he found an unusual version of this prayer in a manuscript haggadah that had been compiled in 1521. He states that this manuscript, which included other poems that are not found in standard haggadot and differing versions of the text, had disappeared during the Holocaust without a trace. Fortunately, he claims, he retained some notes with this prayer… …. Chayyim Bloch has a reputation for presenting new texts as ancient documents.” The JPS Commentary on the Haggadah, Joseph Tabory, 2008 Jewish Publication Society p55
- Earlier alternative tradition - SIMEON BAR-ISAAC c950[ii]
[caption id="attachment_2321" align="alignnone" width="1591"] From: The Authorised Selichot for the Whole Year by Abraham Rosenfeld 1978 p150 Selichot for the Eve of the New Year.[/caption]
- two views of Redemption – inner/outer – personal/national
The considerations I would like to set forth in what follows concern the special tensions in the Messianic idea and their understanding in rabbinic Judaism. These tensions manifest themselves within a fixed tradition which we shall try to understand. But even where it is not stated explicitly, we shall often enough find as well a polemical side-glance, or an allusion, albeit concealed, to the claims of Christian Messianism.
Judaism, in all of its forms and manifestations, has always maintained a concept of redemption as an event which takes place publicly, on the stage of history and within the community. It is an occurrence which takes place in the visible world and which cannot be conceived apart from such a visible appearance.
Christianity conceives of redemption as an event in the spiritual and unseen realm, an event which is reflected in the soul, in the private world of each individual, and which effects an inner transformation which need not correspond to anything outside.
But it remains peculiar that this question concerning the inner aspect of the redemption should emerge so late in Judaism—though it finally does emerge with great vehemence.[iii]
- The leaven in the bread – The original Passover Purge
Jewish
a.
שִׁבְעַ֤ת יָמִים֙ מַצּ֣וֹת תֹּאכֵ֔לוּ אַ֚ךְ בַּיּ֣וֹם הָרִאשׁ֔וֹן תַּשְׁבִּ֥יתוּ שְּׂאֹ֖ר מִבָּתֵּיכֶ֑ם כִּ֣י ׀ כָּל־אֹכֵ֣ל חָמֵ֗ץ וְנִכְרְתָ֞ה הַנֶּ֤פֶשׁ הַהִוא֙ מִיִּשְׂרָאֵ֔ל מִיּ֥וֹם הָרִאשֹׁ֖ן עַד־י֥וֹם הַשְּׁבִעִֽי
Seven days you shall eat unleavened bread; on the very first day you shall remove leaven from your houses, for whoever eats leavened bread from the first day to the seventh day, that person shall be cut off from Israel. Exodus 12: 15
b.
“Sovereign of the Universe, it is well known to You that it is our will to do Your will. Who prevents us from doing so? The leavening agent in the dough (the evil inclination within us) and our subservience to the nations. May it be Your will to save us from these so that we can return to fulfilling Your commandments wholeheartedly.” Prayer of Rabbi Alexandrai
c.
May it be Your will, Lord, our G-d and G-d of our fathers, that just as I remove the chametz from my house and from my possession, so shall You remove all the extraneous forces. Remove the spirit of impurity from the earth, remove our evil inclination from us, and grant us a heart of flesh to serve You in truth. Make all the sitra achara (evil inclination), all the kelipot (barriers), and all wickedness be consumed in smoke, and remove the dominion of evil from the earth. Remove with a spirit of destruction and a spirit of judgment all that distress the Shechina, just as You destroyed Egypt and its idols in those days, at this time. Amen, Selah. (kabalistic kavanah recited before the bedikat HaChametz (searching for the Leaven).
Christian
Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened [bread] of sincerity and truth. [Corinthians 5:8]
“the leaven of the Pharisees,” which is “hypocrisy” (Luke 12:1; d. Mark 8:15).
- You’re both right
Jewish history speaks to our generation in the voice of two biblical commands to remember. The first voice commands us to remember that we were strangers in the land of Egypt, and the message of that command is: “Don’t be brutal.” The second voice commands us to remember how the tribe of Amalek attacked us without provocation while we were wandering in the desert, and the message of that command is: “Don’t be naive.”
The first command is the voice of Passover, of liberation; the second is the voice of Purim, commemorating our victory over the genocidal threat of Haman, a descendant of Amalek.
“Passover Jews” are motivated by empathy with the oppressed; “Purim Jews” are motivated by alertness to threat.
Both are essential; one without the other creates an unbalanced Jewish personality, a distortion of Jewish history and values.
Yossi Klein Halevi, CJN, March 11, 2013
[i] See also Megillah 6b: Where Rabbi Gamaliel argues that in a leap year, Purim is celebrated on the 2nd Adar: “R. Simon b. Gamaliel again reasoned: Just as in most years [we think of] Adar as adjoining Nisan, so here [we keep the precepts] in the Adar which adjoins Nisan. …. The reason of R. Simon b. Gamaliel is that more weight is to be attached to bringing one period of redemption close to another.” Purim and Passover are times of future redemption.
See also: “It is customary not to close the door at all in the house in which we are sitting … and when we go to greet Elijah we do so without any (closed door) obstructing our way.
בספר "מעשה רוקח" מובא: "מצאתי במגילת סתרים, ראיתי מרבנא אלוף אבא - לא היה סוגר דלתי הבית אשר אנו יושבין בו כלל. מעידנא ועד עתה כך מנהגנו, ודלתות הבית פתוחות, וכשיבוא אליהו נצא לקראתו במהרה בלא עיכוב. ואמרינן: בפסח עתידין ליגאל, שנאמר: ליל שימורים הוא לה' - ליל המשומר ובא מששת ימי בראשית" [ii] Paytan
Born after c. 950
Born in Mainz, Germany. An important scholar of his time. As a paytan he composed yozerot, kerovot, selihot, hymns, and rashuyyot le-hatanim. It is probable that he sang his piyutim himself. His piyutim bare traces of the language found in early piyutim, and they are marked by the pain of the persecutions of the Jews in Bar-Isaacs' lifetime. Birth: after circa 970 Mainz, Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany Death: 1020
[iii] Scholem not only distinguishes between an inner and outer, personal and nationistic view of messinaism, but also distinguishes between catastrophic and utopian trends in messianism: “I spoke of the catastrophic nature of redemption as a decisive characteristic of every such apocalypticism, which is then complemented by the utopian view of the content of realized redemption. Apocalyptic thinking always contains the elements of dread and consolation intertwined. The dread and peril of the End form an element of shock and of the shocking which induces extravagance. The terrors of the real historical experiences of the Jewish people are joined with images drawn from the heritage of myth or mythical fantasy.
The apocalyptists have always cherished a pessimistic view of the world. Their optimism, their hope, is not directed to what history will bring forth, but to that which will arise in its ruin, free at last and undisguised.
This catastrophic character of the redemption, which is essential to the apocalyptic conception, is pictured in all of these texts and traditions in glaring images. It finds manifold expression: in world wars and revolutions, in epidemics, famine, and economic catastrophe; but to an equal degree in apostasy and the desecration of God’s name, in forgetting of the Torah and the upsetting of all moral order to the point of dissolving the laws of nature.
Little wonder that in one such context the Talmud cites the bald statement of three famous teachers of the third and fourth centuries: “May he come, but I do not want to see him.”
This utopianism seizes upon all the restorative hopes turned toward the past and describes an arc from the re-establishment of Israel and of the Davidic kingdom as a kingdom of God on earth to the re-establishment of the condition of Paradise as it is foreseen by many old Midrashim, but above all by the thought of Jewish mystics, for whom the analogy of First Days and Last Days possess living reality. But it does more than that. For already in the Messianic utopianism of Isaiah we find the Last Days conceived immeasurably more richly than any beginning. The condition of the world, wherein the earth will be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea (Isa. 11:9), does not repeat anything that has ever been, but presents something new. The world of tikkun , the re-establishment of the harmonious condition of the world, which in the Lurianic Kabbalah is the Messianic world, still contains a strictly utopian impulse.
But it always retains that fascinating vitality to which no historical reality can do justice and which in times of darkness and persecution counterpoises the fulfilled image of wholeness to the piecemeal, wretched reality which was available to the Jew. Thus the images of the New Jerusalem that float before the eyes of the apocalyptists always contain more than was ever present in the old one, and the renewal of the world is simply more than its restoration.”
Gershom Scholem, The Messianic Idea in Judaism
An exploration of the meaning of Choseness in the Hebrew Bible, Rabbinc and Christian texts.
Notes
Intro
the Sefer ha-Chinuch was published anonymously in 13th century Spain and was written by a father to his son, upon reaching the age of Bar Mitzvah. See
| כג כִּי נֵר מִצְוָה, וְתוֹרָה אוֹר; וְדֶרֶךְ חַיִּים, תּוֹכְחוֹת מוּסָר. | 23 For the commandment is a lamp, and the teaching is light, and reproofs of instruction are the way of life; (Proverbs 6: 23)
| כז נֵר ה’, נִשְׁמַת אָדָם | 27 The spirit of man is the lamp of the LORD (Proverbs 20: 27) |
|
The only word that comes close to the netherworld is Shaol [Strongs H7585] which translates as “grave”, “pit”, or “abode of the dead”. It first appears in with regard to Jacob in
And all his sons and all his daughters rose up to comfort him; but he refused to be comforted; and he said: 'Nay, but I will go down to the grave to my son mourning.' And his father wept for him. Genesis 37: 35
וַיָּקֻמוּ כָל-בָּנָיו וְכָל-בְּנֹתָיו לְנַחֲמוֹ, וַיְמָאֵן לְהִתְנַחֵם, וַיֹּאמֶר, כִּי-אֵרֵד אֶל-בְּנִי אָבֵל שְׁאֹלָה; וַיֵּבְךְּ אֹתוֹ, אָבִיו
And he said: 'My son shall not go down with you; for his brother is dead, and he only is left; if harm befall him by the way in which ye go, then will ye bring down my gray hairs with sorrow to the grave. (Genesis 42: 38)
יֹּאמֶר, לֹא-יֵרֵד בְּנִי עִמָּכֶם: כִּי-אָחִיו מֵת וְהוּא לְבַדּוֹ נִשְׁאָר, וּקְרָאָהוּ אָסוֹן בַּדֶּרֶךְ אֲשֶׁר תֵּלְכוּ-בָהּ, וְהוֹרַדְתֶּם אֶת-שֵׂיבָתִי בְּיָגוֹן, שְׁאוֹלָה
In the field of biblical studies, renowned for its deficit of basic agreement and the depth of its controversies, one cannot but be impressed by the longevity and breadth of the consensus about the early Israelite notion of life after death. The consensus, to be brief, is that there was none, that "everyone who dies goes to Sheol," as Johannes Pedersen put it about eighty years ago,
| Genesis 49: 33 And Jacob concluded commanding his sons, and he drew his legs [up] into the bed, and expired and was brought in to his people. | וַיְכַ֤ל יַֽעֲקֹב֙ לְצַוֹּ֣ת אֶת־בָּנָ֔יו וַיֶּֽאֱסֹ֥ף רַגְלָ֖יו אֶל־הַמִּטָּ֑ה וַיִּגְוַ֖ע וַיֵּאָ֥סֶף אֶל־עַמָּֽיו: | | and he drew his legs: Heb. וַיֶאֱסֹף רַגְלָיו, he drew in his legs. | ויאסף רגליו: הכניס רגליו: | | and expired and was brought in: But no mention is made of death in his regard, and our Rabbis of blessed memory said: Our father Jacob did not die. — [From Ta’anith 5b] | ויגוע ויאסף: ומיתה לא נאמרה בו, ואמרו רבותינו ז"ל יעקב אבינו לא מת: |
Our forefather Jacob did not die. He said to him: Was it for not that he was eulogized, embalmed and buried? He said to him: I expound a verse as it is written (Jeremiah 30:10) "Do not fear, my servant Jacob, said Adonai, and do not be dismayed O Israel. For I will save you from afar and your seed from the land of captivity. The verse likens him (Jacob) to his seed (Israel); as his seed will then be alive so he too will be alive.
הכי אמר רבי יוחנן: יעקב אבינו לא מת. - אמר ליה: וכי בכדי ספדו ספדניא וחנטו חנטייא וקברו קברייא? - אמר ליה: מקרא אני דורש, שנאמר (ירמיהו ל') ואתה אל תירא עבדי יעקב נאם ה' ואל תחת ישראל כי הנני מושיעך מרחוק ואת זרעך מארץ שבים, מקיש הוא לזרעו, מה זרעו בחיים - אף הוא בחיים..
A major focus of that favor - especially important, as we are about to see, in the case of Abraham and job - is family, particularly the continuation of one's lineage through descendants alive at one's death. Many expressions, some of them idiomatic, communicate this essential mode of divine favor. The idiom "He was gathered to his kin" or "to his fathers" (wayye'asep 'el-`ammayw / 'abotayw),
Professor Jon D. Levenson. Resurrection and the Restoration of Israel: The Ultimate Victory of the God of Life (Kindle Location 1198). Kindle Edition.
Professor Jon D. Levenson. Resurrection and the Restoration of Israel: The Ultimate Victory of the God of Life (Kindle Locations 1196-1198). Kindle Edition.
Eternal Life – Immortality
Daniel 12:2
And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to reproaches and everlasting abhorrence.
וְרַבִּים, מִיְּשֵׁנֵי אַדְמַת-עָפָר יָקִיצוּ; אֵלֶּה לְחַיֵּי עוֹלָם, וְאֵלֶּה לַחֲרָפוֹת לְדִרְאוֹן עוֹלָם
“One element that truly is novel in Dan 11z:11 -3 is, however, signaled by an expression that, for all its frequency in later Jewish literature, occurs nowhere else in the Hebrew Bible, hayye `olam, "eternal life"”
Death, Children, draught
There are three things that are never satisfied… The grave; and the barren womb; the earth that is not satisfied with water Proverbs 30: 15-16
שְׁאוֹל, וְעֹצֶר-רָחַם: אֶרֶץ, לֹא-שָׂבְעָה מַּיִם
Famine, miraculous birth, Heaven on earth … return to land
Slavery
To these must be added slavery, of course, which often appears in connection with them, especially with death. Thus, it is revealing, as we have observed,13 that Joseph's brothers, seething with resentment over their father's rank favoritism, resolve first to kill the boy and then, having given that nefarious plan up, sell him into slavery instead (Gen 37:118- z8). This parallels and adumbrates (in reverse order) Pharaoh's efforts to control the rapid growth of Israel's population, which begin with enslavement and graduate to genocide (Exod 11:8-22). It also parallels, and perhaps distantly reflects, the Canaanite tale of the god Baal, who miraculously overcomes comes the daunting challenges of enslavement to Yamm (Sea) and annihilation by Mot (Death).14 That Israel, fleeing Pharaoh's enslavement, escapes death by a miraculous passage through the sea (Exod 114:11-115:211) is thus no coincidence and anything but an arbitrary concatenation of unrelated items.15 It is, rather, a manifestation in narrative of the deep inner connection between slavery and death that we have been exploring in another genre, the poetic oracles of prophets.”
Moses on the Mountain top – national redemption
Could it be clearer that the Mosaic promises center on the lineage of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, that is, the whole Israelite nation, and not on Moses' own progeny? Thus, when "the LORD showed him the whole land" (Dent 34:1) just before Moses died and the Israelites began to take possession of it, the scene is remarkably reminiscent of Jacob's, Joseph's, and job's viewing several generations of descendants just before their own deaths. In the Deuteronomic theology, the fulfillment of Moses' life continues and remains real, visible, and powerful after his death. It takes the form of Israel's dwelling in the promised land and living in deliberate obedience to the Torah book he bequeathed them, for all their generations (e.g., Dent 31:9-z3; Josh z:6-8). In Deuteronomy, all Israel has become, in a sense, the progeny of Moses.
Untimely death
Thus, Jacob, having (so far as he knows) lost to the jaws of a wild beast his beloved Joseph, the son of his old age, "refused to be comforted, saying, `No, I will go down mourning to my son in Sheol"' (Gen 3735)• It would be a capital error to interpret either Joseph's or Jacob's anticipated presence in Sheol as punitive. Joseph's is owing to his having died a violent and premature death that is not followed by a proper burial or mitigated by the continuation that comes from having children. Each of these conditions alone could bring him to Sheol.
transformation
restoration of the people Israel itself,
recovery from humiliation and defeat,
a reconstitution
Professor Jon D. Levenson. Resurrection and the Restoration of Israel: The Ultimate Victory of the God of Life (Kindle Locations 3286-3287). Kindle Edition.
Just as a person is commanded to honor his father and hold him in awe, so, too, is he obligated to honor his teacher and hold him in awe. [Indeed, the measure of honor and awe] due one's teacher exceeds that due one's father. His father brings him into the life of this world, while his teacher, who teaches him wisdom, brings him into the life of the world to come. Mishnah Torah, Talmud Torah - Chapter Four: 1
כשם שאדם מצווה בכבוד אביו ויראתו כך הוא חייב בכבוד רבו ויראתו יתר מאביו שאביו מביאו לחיי העולם הזה ורבו שלמדו חכמה מביאו לחיי העולם הבא
See: Bava Metzia 33a Keritot 28a states a different reason: "He and his father are both obligated to honor his teacher." The Rambam quotes this in Sefer HaMitzvot (Positive Mitzvah 209).
When his teacher dies, he should rend all his garments until he reveals his heart. He should never mend them. Mishnah Torah, Talmud Torah - Chapter Four: 9
וכשימות רבו קורע כל בגדיו עד שהוא מגלה את לבו ואינו מאחה לעולם
When his teacher dies, he should rend all his garments until he reveals his heart. - With regard to the rending of one's garments until one's heart is revealed, see Hilchot Eivel 8:3, 9:2 and Mo'ed Katan 22a.
He should never mend them. - Mo'ed Katan 26a equates garments torn over a teacher's passing with those torn over a father's passing, with regard to the latter law. On this basis, the Rambam concludes that the same principle applies regarding the extent one rends his garments.
Kadish DeRabanan
Magnified and sanctified — may God’s Great
Name fill the world God created. May God’s
splendor be seen in the world In your life, in your
days, in the life of all Israel, quickly and soon.
And let us say, Amen.
Forever may the Great Name be blessed.
Blessed and praised, splendid and supreme —
May the holy Name, bless God, be praised
beyond all the blessings and songs that can be
uttered in this world. And let us say, Amen.
For Israel and for our teachers, our students,
and generations of teachers and students to
come, for all who study Torah here and
everywhere, for them and for you, may there
be fullness of peace, grace, kindness and
compassion, long life, ample nourishment and
salvation from our Source who is in heaven
and on earth. And let us say, Amen.
עַל יִשְׂרָאֵל וְעַל רַבָּנָן. וְעַל תַּלְמִידֵיהוֹן וְעַל כָּל תַּלְמִידֵי תַלְמִידֵיהוֹן. וְעַל כָּל מַאן דְּעָסְקִין בְּאוֹרַיְתָא. דִּי בְאַתְרָא קַדִּישָׁא הָדֵין וְדִי בְכָל אֲתַר וַאֲתַר. יְהֵא לְהוֹן וּלְכוֹן שְׁלָמָא רַבָּא חִנָּא וְחִסְדָּא וְרַחֲמִין וְחַיִּין אֲרִיכִין וּמְזוֹנֵי רְוִיחֵי וּפֻרְקָנָא מִן קֳדָם אֲבוּהוֹן דְּבִשְׁמַיָּא וְאַרְעָא וְאִמְרוּ אָמֵן
May there be great peace and good life from
heaven above for us and all Israel. And let us say,
Amen. May the One who makes peace in the
high heavens compassionately bring peace upon
us all and all Israel. And let us say, Amen.
יתגדל ויתקדש שמיה רבא דעתיר לחדתא עלמא ולאחייא מתייא ולמיפרק עמיה ולמיבני קרתא דירושלים ולשכללא היכלא קדישא ולמיעקר פולחנא נוכראה מן ארעא ולאתבא פולחנא דשמיא לאתריה בזיויה ויחודיה, וימליך מלכותיה... ונחמתא דאמירן בעלמא ואמרו אמן. על רבנן ועל תלמידיהון ועל תלמידי תלמידיהון דעסקין באורייתא די באתרא הדין ודי בכל אתר ואתר, יהא להון ולכון חינא וחסדא ורחמי וסייעתא ורווחא מקדם אבוהון דבשמיא ואמרו אמן. יהא שלמא... וכו' (רמב"ם הלכות תפילה)
בָּרוּךְ אַתָּה אֲדֹנָ-י אֱלֹהֵינוּ מֶלֶךְ הָעוֹלָם אֲשֶׁר נָתַן לָנוּ תּוֹרַת אֱמֶת וְחַיֵּי עוֹלָם נָטַע בְּתוֹכֵנוּ, בָּרוּךְ אַתָּה אֲדֹנָ-י נוֹתֵן הַתּוֹרָה
The Hanukah Dilemma – The Birth of Judaism
How the Rabbis stole Hanukah and gave Judaism a new life
notes
They celebrated it for eight days with gladness like Sukkot and recalled how a little while before, during Sukkot they had been wandering in the mountains and caverns like wild animals. So carrying lulavs [palm branches waved on Sukkot]…they offered hymns of praise (perhaps, the Hallel prayer) to God who had brought to pass the purification of his own place. (II Maccabees 10:6-7)
Babylonian Talmud 21b What is the reason for Hanukkah? For our rabbis taught: On the twentyfifth of Kislev begin the days of Hanukkah [which are eight] on which a lamentation for the dead and fasting are forbidden. For when the Greeks entered the Temple, they defiled all the oils therein, and when the Hasmonean dynasty prevailed against and defeated them, they searched and found only one jug of oil which lay with the seal of the kohen gadol, but which contained enough for one day's lighting only; yet a miracle occurred and they lit the lamp for eight days. The following year these days were appointed a festival with the recitation of hallel and thanksgiving.
מאי חנוכה דתנו רבנן בכ"ה בכסליו יומי דחנוכה תמניא אינון דלא למספד בהון ודלא להתענות בהון שכשנכנסו יוונים להיכל טמאו כל השמנים שבהיכל וכשגברה מלכות בית חשמונאי ונצחום בדקו ולא מצאו אלא פך אחד של שמן שהיה מונח בחותמו של כהן גדול ולא היה בו אלא להדליק יום אחד נעשה בו נס והדליקו ממנו שמונה ימים לשנה אחרת קבעום ועשאום ימים טובים בהלל והודאה
Who were the Maccabees and/or the Hasmoneans?
- The revolt begins, in fact, when the patriarch of the Maccabees (as the family that led the campaign came to be known) kills a fellow Jew who was in the act of obeying the king's decree to perform a sacrifice forbidden in the Torah. The Maccabean hero also kills the king's officer and tears down the illicit altar. These were blows struck for Jewish traditionalism, and arguably for Jewish survival and authenticity, but not for religious freedom.
The Meaning of Hanukkah - A celebration of religious freedom, the holiday fits well with the American political tradition. By JON D. LEVENSON December 16, 2011
- In a fascinating book written by Harvard scholar Shaye J.D. Cohen; From the Maccabees to the Mishnah, the author follows the emergence of Jewish sects starting from the Maccabees and culminating with the emergence of the Pharisees (Rabbinic Judaism), Essenes, Samaritans, Christians, Sicarii and zealots . He writes:
The Maccabean period lasted a century, from the victory of 164 B.C.E. to the entrance of the Romans into Jerusalem in 63 B.C.E. During their tenure, the Maccabees gradually increased their power and prestige, They began as rebels against the Seleucid empire, but less than ten years after Judah’s death his brother was appointed high priest by a relation of Antiochus Epiphanes! By the 140s and 130s B.C.E. the Seleucids had little choice but to accept the independence of the Maccabean state. The rise of the Maccabees within the Jewish polity was just as phenomenal. They began as insignificant country priests and became high priests and kings, the rulers of an independent state. They pursued an aggressive foreign policy, seeking alliance with Rome against the Seleucids and carving out for themselves a kingdom larger than that of David and Solomon. Their fall from power was caused by both internal and external enemies….
Their fall from power was caused by both internal and external enemies. During the reigns of John Hyrcanus (135-104 B.C.E.) and Alexander Jannaeus (103-76 B.C.E.), many Jews opposed Maccabean rule. These opponents were not “Hellenizers” and “law- less” Jews who supported Antiochus’ attempt to destroy Judaism, but loyal Jews who had had enough of the Maccabees’ autocratic ways. [p15]
The Hasmonean dynasty was not itself a sect; it was the corrupt ruling power under whose rule it became clear that the Jewish Commonwealth and Temple were doomed. The sects were a natural response… the emergence of a plan for a new age. The Hasmoneans left little more than a trail of blood. They took power, land and made treaties with foreigners when it served their purpose. Their dynasty ended when the wicked Herod was appointed Governor.. they had prepared the way.
Of interest: “The opponents of Herod the Great called him a “half-Jew” because he was a decedent of the Idumeans, who had been forcibly converted to Judaism by the Maccabees.” [p.54]
- In the Talmud (Kiddushin 66a) there is an account of a Hasmonean King named Yannai:
It happened that King Yannai went to Kochalis in the desert and conquered 60 cities. Upon his return he was exceedingly happy and so he invited all the sages of Israel to a celebration…they served delicacies on gold tables and they feasted. …. There was there a certain elder named Yehudah ben Gedidyah. He said to Yannai: “King Yannai! Be satisifed with the crown of kingship; leave the crown of Kehunah for the descendants of Aaron.” Yannai removed the sages from the feast. Eliezer ben Poira said to King Yannai: “King Yannai! If an ordinary Jew were treated in this way it would be his lot, but you are a King AND Kohen Gadol, is this your lot?” … immediately Yannai executed all the sages of Israel and the world was bereft of Torah knowledge until Shimon ben Shetach came and returned the Torah to its former standing.
מעשה בינאי המלך שהלך לכוחלית שבמדבר וכיבש שם ששים כרכים ובחזרתו היה שמח שמחה גדולה וקרא לכל חכמי ישראל אמר להם אבותינו היו אוכלים מלוחים בזמן שהיו עסוקים בבנין בית המקדש אף אנו נאכל מלוחים זכר לאבותינו והעלו מלוחים על שולחנות של זהב ואכלו והיה שם אחד איש לץ לב רע ובליעל ואלעזר בן פועירה שמו ויאמר אלעזר בן פועירה לינאי המלך ינאי המלך לבם של פרושים עליך ומה אעשה הקם להם בציץ שבין עיניך הקים להם בציץ שבין עיניו היה שם זקן אחד ויהודה בן גדידיה שמו ויאמר יהודה בן גדידיה לינאי המלך ינאי המלך רב לך כתר מלכות הנח כתר כהונה לזרעו של אהרן שהיו אומרים אמו נשבית במודיעים ויבוקש הדבר ולא נמצא ויבדלו חכמי ישראל בזעם ויאמר אלעזר בן פועירה לינאי המלך ינאי המלך הדיוט שבישראל כך הוא דינו ואתה מלך וכהן גדול כך הוא דינך ומה אעשה אם אתה שומע לעצתי רומסם ותורה מה תהא עליה הרי כרוכה ומונחת בקרן זוית כל הרוצה ללמוד יבוא וילמוד אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק מיד נזרקה בו אפיקורסות דהוה ליה למימר תינח תורה שבכתב תורה שבעל פה מאי מיד ותוצץ הרעה על ידי אלעזר בן פועירה ויהרגו כל חכמי ישראל והיה העולם משתומם עד שבא שמעון בן שטח והחזיר את התורה ליושנה
The Hasmanoim destroyed the historical division of power between the king and the priest, Temple and State.
King Yannai
Alexander Yannai was a son of Yochanan Hyrkanos, son of Simeon, a son of Mattathias (Matisyohu), the son of Yochanan the High Priest. Thus, Alexander Yannai was a great-grandson of the first Hasmonean, who, together with his heroic sons, fought against the Greek King Antiochus. Their self sacrifice for the Torah and for the Jewish people, resulted in the truly delightful and inspiring holiday of Chanukah.
Yannai inherited the royal crown at the age of 23, after the early death of his older brother Yehudah Aristobulus. Yehudah Aristabulus was the first of the Hasmoneans who was not satisfied merely with the title "Nasi" (Prince) and had himself crowned as "king."
- The Talmud (Babylonian Talmud Rosh Hashanah 18b) recounts:
Once in the city of Lod they decreed a fast on the holiday of Hanukah. In response, Rabbi Eliezer went to a bathhouse and took a bath and Rabbi Yehoshua went to a barber in Lod and had his haircut. These two rabbis said to the people of Lod who had fasted: “Go out and make another fast on account of the fact that you fasted on Chanukah.”
We learn from this that the Holiday of Hanukah was controversial, even then… clearly some Jews did not believe that the re-packaging of Hanukah as a festival of lights had done the job. Their hatred for the Hasmanoim was so great that they actually fasted on Hanukah.
- The Talmud in Rosh HaShana continues:
“On the Third of Tishrei, the superfluous mention of God’s name was removed from secular documents. For the Greek kingdom had decreed that God’s name not be mentioned, and when the Hasmoneans took power they decreed that people should mention God’s name EVEN in secular documents. And so they would write, ‘In the year so and so to Yochanan who is the Kohen Gadol to the Supreme God (kohen gadol le-el elyon).’ When the sages heard about this matter they were displeased, for they said: ‘Tomorrow this person will repay his debt and the unneeded document will be found lying in a garbage heap.’ And so they nullified the Hasmonean decree. That day they made into a festival.”
What makes this story remarkable is that the Third of Tishrei is also a fast day… it is the Fast of Gedaliah… the first instance of Jew-on-Jew assassination that occurred in the time of Jeremiah where the governor that Jeremiah supported was killed as a Babylonian collaborator by a zeolot.
It would seem that even though the 3rd of Tishrei was a fast day (Tzom Gedlaiah) which is observed by Orthodox Jews till today on the day after Rosh HaShanah, the Rabbis saw no contradiction in celebrating the nullification of a Hasmonean decree. It would appear that the Rabbis made a connection between the Jew-on-Jew violence of the zealots in Jeremiah’s generation with the similar action of the Hasmoneans in their own. Nullifying a Hasmonean decree was an act in the spirit of the fast of Gedalya.
- The blessing:
And [we thank You] for the miracles, for the redemption, for the mighty deeds, for the saving acts, and for the wonders which You have wrought for our ancestors in those days, at this time—
In the days of Matityahu, the son of Yochanan the High Priest, the Hasmonean and his sons, when the wicked Hellenic government rose up against Your people Israel to make them forget Your Torah and violate the decrees of Your will. But You, in Your abounding mercies, stood by them in the time of their distress. You waged their battles, defended their rights, and avenged the wrong done to them. You delivered the mighty into the hands of the weak, the many into the hands of the few, the impure into the hands of the pure, the wicked into the hands of the righteous, and the wanton sinners into the hands of those who occupy themselves with Your Torah. You made a great and holy name for Yourself in Your world, and effected a great deliverance and redemption for Your people Israel to this very day. Then Your children entered the shrine of Your House, cleansed Your Temple, purified Your Sanctuary, kindled lights in Your holy courtyards, and instituted these eight days of Hanukah to give thanks and praise to Your great Name.
עַל הַנִּסִּים וְעַל הַפֻּרְקָן וְעַל הַגְּבוּרוֹת וְעַל הַתְּשׁוּעוֹת וְעַל הַנִּפְלָאוֹת וְעַל הַנֶּחָמוֹת שֶׁעָשִׂיתָ לַאֲבוֹתֵינוּ בַּיָּמִים הָהֵם בַּזְּמַן הַזֶּה.
בִּימֵי מַתִּתְיָהו בֶן יוֹחָנָן כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל חַשְׁמוֹנָאִי וּבָנָיו כְּשֶׁעָמְדָה מַלְכוּת יָוָן הָרְשָׁעָה עַל עַמְּךָ יִשְׂרָאֵל לְהשַׁכִּיחָם תּוֹרָתָךְ וּלְהַעֲבִירָם מֵחֻקֵּי רְצוֹנָךְ וְאַתָּה, בְּרַחֲמֶיךָ הָרַבִּים, עָמַדְתָּ לָהֶם בְּעֵת צָרָתָם: רַבְתָּ אֶת רִיבָם דַּנְתָּ אֶת דִּינָם נָקַמְתָּ אֶת נִקְמָתָם מָסַרְתָּ גִבּוֹרִים בְּיַד חַלָּשִׁים וְרַבִּים בְּיַד מְעַטִּים וּטְמֵאִים בְּיַד טְהוֹרִים וּרְשָׁעִים בְּיַד צַדִּיקִים וְזֵדִים בְּיַד עוֹסְקֵי תוֹרָתֶךָ וּלְךָ עָשִׂיתָ שֵׁם גָּדוֹל וְקָדוֹשׁ בְּעוֹלָמָךְ וּלְעַמְּךָ יִשְׂרָאֵל עָשִׂיתָ תְּשׁוּעָה גְדוֹלָה וּפֻרְקָן כְּהַיּוֹם הַזֶּה וְאַחַר כֵּן, בָּאוּ בָנֶיךָ לִדְבִיר בֵּיתֶךָ וּפִנּוּ אֶת הֵיכָלֶךָ וְטִהֲרוּ אֶת-מִקְדָּשֶׁךָ וְהִדְלִיקוּ נֵרוֹת בְּחַצְרוֹת קָדְשֶׁךָ וְקָבְעוּ שְׁמוֹנַת יְמֵי חֲנֻכָּה אֵלּוּ לְהוֹדוֹת וּלְהַלֵּל לְשִׁמְךָ הַגָּדוֹל.
The schoolmen propounded a question: Should the 'Hanukah incident be mentioned in the benediction after meals? Shall we assume that because it is rabbinical it is unnecessary? or, for the sake of the proclamation of the miracle, it should? Said Rabba in the name of R. S'haura, quoting R. Huna: "It is not necessary; however, if one wishes to do it, he should incorporate it in the thanksgiving part. R. Huna b. Judah chanced to visit Raba's academy [and] thought to mention it [Hanukkah] in [the benediction] ‘he will rebuild Jerusalem.’ Said R. Shesheth to them [the scholars], It is as the Prayer: (the Amidah – 18 Benedictions] just as [it is inserted in] the Prayer in the [benediction of] ‘Thanks,[Modi’im anachnu Lach and not Shma Kolaein – hear our prayer] so [is it inserted in] grace after meals in the [benediction of] ‘Thanks' ." Babylonian Talmud Sabbath 24a
איבעיא להו מהו להזכיר של חנוכה בברכת המזון כיון דמדרבנן הוא לא מדכרינן או דילמא משום פרסומי ניסא מדכרינן אמר רבא אמר רב סחורה אמר רב הונא אינו מזכיר ואם בא להזכיר מזכיר בהודאה רב הונא בר יהודה איקלע לבי רבא סבר לאדכורי בבונה ירושלים אמר להו רב ששת כתפלה מה תפלה בהודאה אף ברכת המזון בהודאה
- The purified temple – a failed model
But the newfound importance of the temple could not hide several difficult problems. Built by a Davidic king, authorized by a prophet, and authenticated through the miraculous manifestation of God (a cloud of smoke and, according to Chronicles, fire from heaven), the first temple was the splendid achievement of a splendid reign. The second temple, by contrast, although authorized by the prophets Haggai and Zechariah, was built by a gentile king and was never authenticated by an overt sign of divine favor. Second Isaiah, in his prophecy announcing God’s selection of Cyrus the Great to be his “anointed one” to free the Jews from the Babylonian captivity and to build the temple, is aware that some Jews do not approve of God’s plan …. The old men who had seen the first temple in its glory cried at the dedication of the second (Ezra 3:12) - apparently tears of sadness, as they contemplated the puny temple that was before them. In the second century B.C.E., the temple’s problematic status was revealed to all. The high priests were corrupted and the temple was profaned by a gentile monarch. Even after it was regained and purified by pious Jews, there was no prophet to approve their work and no miracle to assure them that the temple was once again the abode of God. The Maccabees installed themselves as high priests although they were not of the high priestly line. When the Romans conquered Jerusalem in 63 B.C.E. they entered the sacred precincts, polluting them with their presence. Herod the Great rebuilt the temple magnificently, but his detractors Viewed him as a “half-Jew.” He completely debased the high priesthood, appointing men who had even less claim than the Maccabees to be the legitimate successors of Aaron. [pp131-2]
The desecration of the temple and the persecution of Judaism by Epiphanes, the overt corruption of the high priesthood, the Maccabean revolt and the reclamation of the temple through force of arms, and the usurpation of the high priesthood by jonathan the Hasmonean, all these highlighted the problematic status of the temple. Was it legitimate? Was it the real house of God? Even if the temple had been legitimate before, how could one be sure that its purification was efficacious in the eyes of God? The dissonance between the real and the perceived was greater now than before. Through vigorous propaganda the Maccabees sought to legitimate both themselves and the temple they had regained, but many Jews were not convinced. Those who were least convinced formed sects. [161]
An exploration of traditional Jewish sources regarding weddings held on or before the Sabbath and how they might guide us as we recreate Jewish wedding rituals for contemporary times and culture.
Sources:
לא חולצין ולא מיבמין ואין כונסין ולא מקדישין ולא מעריכין ולא מחרימין ולא מפרישין תרומות ומעשרות ואין פודין הבן ואין מגרשין אלא אם כן הוא גט שכיב מרע {{רמ"א|(דתקיף ליה עלמא)}}. וכולם אם נעשו שוגגין או מזידין או מוטעין מה שעשוי עשוי
שולחן ערוך אורח חיים שלט
The following is a responsum of the Remah, explaining his decision to perform a wedding late on Friday night long after Shabbat had begun. Although he rules that marriages should not take place on Shabbat, he holds that there are a few exceptional authorities such as Rabbeinu Tam and Rabbi Moshe of Coucy who permitted. “Although it is not the law that we may hold marriages on Shabbat we have these two exceptional opinions to rely upon in times of emergency; for great is the principle of protecting the honor of human beings, and at times the parties are unable to agree on the dowry until Friday night and the wedding is then held.”
וגדול כבוד הבריות שדוחה לא תעשה דלא תסור מכל הדברים אשר יורוך
and shalt not turn aside from any of the words which I command you this day, to the right hand, or to the left, to go after other gods to serve them. Deuteronomy 24:18
“I heard behind me the sound of a great noise. Voices passed through the camp saying, Look at that man Moshe (Exodus 33:8).”
After the Golden Calf when Moses separated himself from the people…..
It concerned the action taken by me recently when I arranged a wedding in the usual way. All knew the state of the bride as she entered under the wedding canopy. It was in the dark of night on Friday evening, an hour and a half after night had fallen. The circumstances which impelled me to this action are clear. It is known to all who live in our city and this is what happened:
There was a poor man in our land who had betrothed his elder daughter to a suitable mate. During the period of the betrothal, which was of considerable duration, the father went to his world and left life to all of Israel. The daughter was left bereaved, without father and mother, except for relatives who lived far from her. They shut their eyes to her plight, all except one relative, the brother of her mother, who brought her into his house, for she had no relatives closer than he.
Then, when the time came for her marriage and it was time to prepare for the feast and the requirements of the wedding canopy, she did not see anything of the dowry and the other needs which the relatives had promised her. But she was told to take her ritual bath and prepare herself for the marriage, and that the dowry would be forthcoming. This maiden then did as the women neighbors commanded her. They deck her with the veil on the sixth day, as virgins are decked. When the shadows of the evening began to fall and Shabbat was approaching, her relatives who were to give the dowry closed their fists and refused to give a sufficient amount, so that at least a third of the dowry was still lacking. Then the groom absolutely refused to marry her. He paid no attention to the pleas of the leaders of the city that he refrain from putting a daughter of Israel to shame for the sake of mere money. He refused to listen to them, “as a deaf serpent does not hear the voice of a charmer (Psalms 58:5).” Nor did the voice of the Rabbi move him.
Because of these quarrels, time drew on; as the saying goes, “There is no marriage settlement without dispute,” and the work of Satan prompted them until the time mentioned above came. Then they finally agreed and the groom consented to enter under the wedding canopy and no longer to shame a worthy daughter of Israel. Thereupon I arose and conducted the marriage at that hour.
Now, since people are complaining against me, I have come now to remove their complaints from me and to bring the proof and the reasons upon which I relied in this matter, saying: In this way beholden and sanctified.
Thus says Moshe, the son of my father and teacher, Israel of blessed memory, the one called
Moshe Isserles of Krakow (Translation Rabbi Simcha Weinberg See)
For Hebrew text and discussion of The Orphan Bride see: קידושין בשבת הרב אביעד ברטוב -
בטעם האיסור דאין מקדשין וכונסין אשה בשבת
שולחן ערוך אורח חיים שלט ד
משנה ברורה על אורח חיים שלט
Under the Chuppah: Rabbinic Officiation and Intermarriage
Rabbeinu Tam
Moses Isserles
------------
Musical Selection: Avi Perets - Boi Kallah - An Aaron Teitelbaum Production - אבי פרץ - בואי כלה
Mixed Marriages – In or out?
Join us as we imagine how Jewish Law and accepted practice could adjust to the alarmingly high rate of intermarriage in the USA and the subsequent loss of households identifying with the Jewish people.
Notes
-
The Pew Survey Reanalyzed: More Bad News, but a Glimmer of Hope – by JACK WERTHEIMER AND STEVEN M. COHEN
-
It's time to allow Conservative rabbis to officiate at interfaith weddings By Seymour Rosenbloom April 4, 2016
-
Jethro
נָבֹל תִּבֹּל גַּם אַתָּה גַּם הָעָם הַזֶּה אֲשֶׁר עִמָּךְ כִּי כָבֵד מִמְּךָ הַדָּבָר לֹא תוּכַל עֲשׂהוּ לְבַדֶּךָ
You will surely wear yourself out both you and these people who are with you for the matter is too heavy for you; you cannot do it alone. Exodus 18: 18
- Daughters of Zelophechad
לָמָּה יִגָּרַע שֵׁם אָבִינוּ מִתּוֹךְ מִשְׁפַּחְתּוֹ כִּי אֵין לוֹ בֵּן תְּנָה לָּנוּ אֲחֻזָּה בְּתוֹךְ אֲחֵי אָבִינוּ
Why should our father's name be eliminated from his family because he had no son? Give us a portion along with our father's brothers. Numbers 36
Rashi: because he had no son:But if he had a son, they would have made no claim at all. This teaches us that they were intelligent women. — [Sifrei Pinchas 15, Sifrei Pinchas 13]
- Usury
Exodus 22:24 (25)—If thou lend money to any of My people, even to the poor with thee, thou shalt not be to him as a creditor; neither shall ye lay upon him interest.
אִם-כֶּסֶף תַּלְוֶה אֶת-עַמִּי, אֶת-הֶעָנִי עִמָּךְ--לֹא-תִהְיֶה לוֹ, כְּנֹשֶׁה; לֹא-תְשִׂימוּן עָלָיו, נֶשֶׁךְ
Deuteronomy 23:21 (20)—Unto a foreigner thou mayest lend upon interest; but unto thy brother thou shalt not lend upon interest; that the LORD thy God may bless thee in all that thou puttest thy hand unto, in the land whither thou goest in to possess it.
לַנָּכְרִי תַשִּׁיךְ, וּלְאָחִיךָ לֹא תַשִּׁיךְ--לְמַעַן יְבָרֶכְךָ יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ, בְּכֹל מִשְׁלַח יָדֶךָ, עַל-הָאָרֶץ, אֲשֶׁר-אַתָּה בָא-שָׁמָּה לְרִשְׁתָּהּ
Heter Isaka see How Does a Heter Iska Work? By Rabbi Yirmiyohu Kaganoff
- Heter Mechira, In the modern era, as Jews started to return to the land of Israel, the struggling farmers trying against all odds to eke out a marginal existence were confronted with the biblical law of shemita.. the requirement to let the land lie fallow every 7 years. In 1888 a bunch of the most esteemed Europeanrabbis (and the Chief Rabbi of Jaffa) came up with an innovative idea which has become known as the heter mechira (literally: permission to sell). They proposed, that just as on Passover we sell our Hametz to a non-Jew, for the Sabattical year of rest, the entire land of Israel may be sold to a gentile, so that the Jews could work the land. …By the time the next shmita cycle came around in 1895-1896, the rabbinic authorities had joined a united front permitting the sale of the land for that sabbatical year. The rabbis concluded that reality dictated a need for such action because the people could not observe the laws of shmita. In the years of 1910 and 1911, Rav Kook allowed for the sale of the land as well, reaffirming that although it was not ideal, it served an important purpose. …In the years that followed, the decision to sell the land was reevaluated before the arrival of each shmita cycle. Once the State of Israel was established, the Rabbanut (Chief Rabbinate) accepted the sale of the land every year until as recently as 2007-2008. (SeeWhose Land is it Anyway? By: Nava Billetpublished in the Yeshiva University Student Newspaper).
- Gathering pace, rogue Israeli conversion court racks up new Jews
- Assimilation is here’ says Tzohar chairman Rabbi Stav
- Rabbi: Conversion Panel to Prevent Intermarriage
- Ger Katan in the Talmud: see Hebrew and here in English
- Tircha DeTzibut – טורח ציבור Undo Duress to the community
אין גוזרין יותר משלש עשרה תעניות על הצבור לפי שאין מטריחין את הצבור יותר מדאי דברי רבי
Taanit 14b
- A decree that a majority of the community can live with
גזירה
אין גוזרין גזירה על הצבור, אלא אם כן רוב הצבור יכולין לעמוד בה. קודם הנהגת תקנות וגזירות, על בית דין לבדוק אם רוב הציבור יכול לעמוד בה. עבודה זרה לו, א
When a court sees it necessary to issue a decree, institute an edict, or establish a custom, they must first contemplate the matter and see whether or not the majority of the community can uphold the practice. We never issue a decree on the community unless the majority of the community can uphold the practice.
See Maimonides Code Mishne Torah Mamrim - Chapter 2 especially laws 5 - 9
- On Status and Identity
See: Pledges of Jewish Allegiance: Conversion, Law, and Policymaking in Nineteenth- and Twentieth-Century Orthodox Responsa 2012 by David Ellenson and Daniel Gordis
See: On Proving Jewish Identity Oct. 2011 by Rabbi Reuven Hammer
The Rambam in Isurei Biah 19:17 cites the rule in Kiddushin 76b above and states:
All familes stand in the presumption of fitness and may enter into marriage from the very beginning.
What if the Hebrew Bible was just a dream? What happens if not only the narrative elements, but even the development of the law is taken as a dream sequence…. An unending imaginative visitation with ideas, concepts and laws that continue to challenge us? How would that change its meaning and relevance? Would we study it differently? Let's take our ques from the great Maimonides and the Rabbis of the Talmud....
Notes:
Guide for the Perplexed 48 http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/gfp/gfp129.htm
Book II CHAPTER XLII
WE have already shown that the appearance or speech of an angel mentioned in Scripture took place in a vision or dream; it makes no difference whether this is expressly stated or not, as we have explained above. This is a point of considerable importance. In some cases the account begins by stating that the prophet saw an angel; in others, the account apparently introduces a human being, who ultimately is shown to be an angel; but it makes no difference, for if the fact that an angel has been heard is only mentioned at the end, you may rest satisfied that the whole account from the beginning describes a prophetic vision. In such visions, a prophet either sees God who speaks to him, as will be explained by us, or he sees an angel who speaks to him, or he hears some one speaking to him without seeing the speaker, or he sees a man who speaks to him, and learns afterwards that the speaker was an angel. In this latter kind of prophecies, the prophet relates that he saw a man who was doing or saying something, and that he learnt afterwards that it was an angel.
This important principle was adopted by one of our Sages, one of the most distinguished among them, R. Ḥiya the Great (Bereshit Rabba, xlviii 48.), in the exposition of the Scriptural passage commencing, "And the Lord appeared unto him in the plain of Mamre" (Gen. xviii.). The general statement that the Lord appeared to Abraham is followed by the description in what manner that appearance of the Lord took place; namely, Abraham saw first three men; he ran and spoke to them. R. Hiya, the author of the explanation, holds that the words of Abraham, "My Lord, if now I have found grace in thy sight, do not, I pray thee, pass from thy servant," were spoken by him in a prophetic vision to one of the men; for he says that Abraham addressed these words to the chief of these men. Note this well, for it is one of the great mysteries [of the Law]. The same, I hold, is the case when it is said in reference to Jacob, "And a man wrestled with him" (Gen. xxxii. 25); this took place in a prophetic vision, since it is expressly stated in the end (ver. 31) that it was an angel. The circumstances are here exactly the same as those in the vision of Abraham, where the general statement, "And the Lord appeared to him," etc., is followed by a detailed description. Similarly the account of the vision of Jacob begins, "And the angels of God met him" (Gen. xxxii. 2); then follows a detailed description how it came to pass that they met him; namely, Jacob sent messengers, and after having prepared and done certain things, "he was left alone," etc., "and a man wrestled with him" (ibid. ver. 24). By this term "man" [one of] the angels of God is meant, mentioned in the phrase, "And angels of God met him"; the wrestling and speaking was entirely a prophetic vision. That which happened to Balaam on the way, and the speaking of the ass, took place in a prophetic vision, since further on, in the same account, an angel of God is introduced as speaking to Balaam. I also think that what Joshua perceived, when "he lifted up his eyes and saw, and behold a man stood before him" (Josh. v. 13) was a prophetic vision, since it is stated afterwards (ver. 14) that it was "the prince of the host of the Lord." But in the passages, "And an angel of the Lord came up from Gilgal" (Judges ii. 1); "And it came to pass that the angel of the Lord spake these words to all Israel" (ibid. ver. 2); the "angel" is, according to the explanation of our Sages, Phineas. They say, The angel is Phineas, for, when the Divine Glory rested upon him, he was "like an angel." We have already shown (chap. vi.) that the term "angel" is homonymous, and denotes also "prophet," as is the case in the following passages:--"And He sent an angel, and He hath brought us up out of Egypt" (Num. xx. 16); "Then spake Haggai, the angel of the Lord, in the Lords message" (Hagg. i. 13); "But they mocked the angels of [paragraph continues] God" (2 Chron. xxxvi. 16). Comp. also the words of Daniel, "And the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision at the beginning, being caused to fly swiftly, touched me about the time of the evening oblation" (Dan. ix. 11). All this passed in a prophetic vision. Do not imagine that an angel is seen or his word heard otherwise than in a prophetic vision or prophetic dream, according to the principle laid down:--"I make myself known unto him in a vision, and speak unto him in a dream" (Num. xii. 6). The instances quoted may serve as an illustration of those passages which I do not mention. From the rule laid down by us that prophecy requires preparation, and from our interpretation of the homonym "angel," you will infer that Hagar, the Egyptian woman, was not a prophetess; also Manoah and his wife were no prophets: for the speech they heard, or imagined they heard, was like the bat-kol (prophetic echo), which is so frequently mentioned by our Sages, and is something that may be experienced by men not prepared for prophecy. The homonymity of the word "angel" misleads in this matter. This is the principal method by which most of the difficult passages in the Bible can be explained. Consider the words, "And an angel of the Lord found her by the well of water" (Gen. xvi. 7), which are similar to the words referring to Joseph--"And a man found him, and behold, he was erring in the field" (ibid. xxxvii. 15). All the Midrashim assume that by man in this passage an angel is meant.
Previous CHAPTER XLI
I NEED not explain what a dream is, but I will explain the meaning of the term mareh, "vision," which occurs in the passage: "In a vision (be-mareh) do I make myself known unto him" (Num. xii. 6). The term signifies that which is also called mareh ha-nebuah, "prophetic vision," yad ha-shem, "the hand of God," and maḥazeh, "a vision." It is something terrible and fearful which the prophet feels while awake, as is distinctly stated by
Daniel: "And I saw this great vision, and there remained no strength in me, for my comeliness was turned in me into corruption, and I retained no strength" (Dan, x. 8). He afterwards continues, "Thus was I in deep sleep on my face, and my face toward the ground" (ibid. ver. 9). But it was in a prophetic vision that the angel spoke to him and "set him upon his knees." Under such circumstances the senses cease to act, and the [Active Intellect] influences the rational faculties, and through them the imaginative faculties, which become perfect and active. Sometimes the prophecy begins with a prophetic vision, the prophet greatly trembles, and is much affected in consequence of the perfect action of the imaginative faculty: and after that the prophecy follows. This was the case with Abraham. The commencement of the prophecy is, "The word of the Lord came to Abraham in a vision" (Gen. xv. 1); after this, "a deep sleep fell upon Abraham"; and at last, "he said unto Abraham," etc. When prophets speak of the fact that they received a prophecy, they say that they received it from an angel, or from God; but even in the latter case it was likewise received through an angel. Our Sages, therefore, explain the words, "And the Lord said unto her" that He spake through an angel. You must know that whenever Scripture relates that the Lord or an angel spoke to a person, this took place in a dream or in a prophetic vision.
Following Chapter: Book II CHAPTER XLIII WE have already shown in our work that the prophets sometimes prophesy in allegories; they use a term allegorically, and in the same prophecy the meaning of the allegory is given. In our dreams, we sometimes believe that we are awake, and relate a dream to another person, who explains the meaning, and all this goes on while we dream. Our Sages call this "a dream interpreted in a dream." Babylonian Talmud, Berakot 55b …
Book I CHAPTER II I must premise that every Hebrew knows that the term Elohim is a homonym, and denotes God, angels, judges, and the rulers of countries, and that Onkelos the proselyte explained it in the true and correct manner by taking Elohim in the sentence, "and ye shall be like Elohim" (Gen. iii. 5) in the last-mentioned meaning, and rendering the sentence "and ye shall be like princes."
Babylonian Talmud 55b
אמר רב חסדא
Rab Hisda said :
כל חלום ולא טוות
[There is no reality in] any dream without a fast.
ואמר רב חסדא
Rab Hisda also said :
חלמא דלא מפשר כאגרתא דלא מקריא
An uninterpreted dream is like an unread letter.
ואמר רב חסדא
Rab Hisda also said :
לא חלמא טבא מקיים כוליה ולא חלמא בישא מקיים כוליה
Neither a good nor a bad dream is fulfilled in every detail.
ואמר רב חסדא
Rab Hisda also said :
חלמא בישא עדיף מחלמא טבא
A bad dream is preferable to a good dream.
וא"ר חסדא
Rab Hisda also said :
חלמא בישא עציבותיה מסתייה חלמא טבא חדויה מסתייה
When a dream is bad, the pain it causes is sufficient [to prevent its fulfilment], and when the dream is good, the joy it brings is sufficient.
אמר רב יוסף
Rab Joseph said :
חלמא טבא אפילו לדידי בדיחותיה מפכחא ליה
As for a good dream, even in my own case, its cheerfulness frustrates it [so that it is not realised].
ואמר רב חסדא
Rab Hisda also said :
חלמא בישא קשה מנגדא שנאמר (קהלת ג, יד) והאלהים עשה שייראו מלפניו ואמר רבה בר בר חנה א"ר יוחנן
A bad dream is worse than scourging ; as it is said, "God hath so made it that men should fear before Him" (Eccles. 3:14), and Rabbah b. Bar Hannah said in the name of R. Johanan :
זה חלום רע
This refers to a bad dream.
(ירמיהו כג, כח) הנביא אשר אתו חלום יספר חלום ואשר דברי אתו ידבר דברי אמת מה לתבן את הבר נאם ה' וכי מה ענין בר ותבן אצל חלום
"The prophet that hath a dream, let him tell a dream ; and he that hath My word, let him speak My word faithfully. What hath the straw to do with the wheat ? saith the Lord" (Jer. 23:28). What connection has "straw and wheat" with a dream ?
אלא אמר ר' יוחנן משום ר' שמעון בן יוחי
But said R. Johanan in the name of R. Simeon b. Johai :
כשם שאי אפשר לבר בלא תבן כך אי אפשר לחלום בלא דברים בטלים
Just as one cannot have wheat without straw, similarly it is impossible for a dream to be without something that is vain.
אמר ר' ברכיה
- Berekiah said :
חלום אף על פי שמקצתו מתקיים כולו אינו מתקיים מנא לן מיוסף דכתיב (בראשית לז, ט) והנה השמש והירח וגו'
A dream, though it be fulfilled in part, is never completely realised. Whence is this learnt? From Joseph; for it is written, "And behold the sun and the moon and eleven stars bowed down to me" (Gen. 37:9);
אמר רב הונא
Rab Huna said :
לאדם טוב אין מראין לו חלום טוב ולאדם רע אין מראין לו חלום רע
A good man is not shown a good dream and a bad man is not shown a bad dream.
תניא נמי הכיThere is a teaching to the same effect:
כל שנותיו של דוד לא ראה חלום טוב וכל שנותיו של אחיתופל לא ראה חלום רע
Throughout David's lifetime he never saw a good dream, and throughout Ahitophel's lifetime he did not see a bad dream.
אלא
Nay;
איהו לא חזי ליה אחריני חזו ליה
the good man sees no evil dream, but others dream about him.
וכי לא חזא איהו מעליותא הוא
And since he sees no [dream] himself, is that an advantage ?
והאמר ר' זעירא
For lo, R. Ze'ira said :
כל הלן שבעה ימים בלא חלום נקרא רע שנאמר (משלי יט, כג) ושבע ילין בל יפקד רע אל תקרי שבע אלא שבע
Whoever abides seven days without a dream is called evil ; as it is said, "He shall abide satisfied, he shall not be visited by evil" (Prov. xix. 23). Read not sabea' "satisfied" but sheba' "seven."!
אלא הכי קאמר
Nay, this is what he means to say :
דחזא ולא ידע מאי חזא
The good man sees a dream but [the next morning] he does not know what he has seen.
אמר רב הונא בר אמי אמר ר' פדת א"ר יוחנן
Rab Huna b. Ammi stated that R. Pedat said in the name of R. Johanan :
הרואה חלום ונפשו עגומה ילך ויפתרנו בפני שלשהHe who sees a dream and his soul is depressed should go and have it interpreted in the presence of three.
יפתרנו
He should have it interpreted !
והאמר רב חסדא
But Rab Hisda has said :
חלמא דלא מפשר כאגרתא דלא מקריא
An uninterpreted dream is like an unread letter !
האי מאן דחזא חלמא ולא ידע מאי חזא ליקום קמי כהני בעידנא דפרסי ידייהו ולימא הכי
He who has seen a dream and knows not what he has seen, let him stand before the Kohanim at the time that they spread their hands [to pronounce the priestly benediction] and utter the following :
רבש"ע אני שלך וחלומותי שלך חלום חלמתי ואיני יודע מה הוא בין שחלמתי אני לעצמי ובין שחלמו לי חבירי ובין שחלמתי על אחרים אם טובים הם חזקם ואמצם כחלומותיו של יוסף ואם צריכים רפואה רפאם כמי מרה על ידי משה רבינו וכמרים מצרעתה וכחזקיהו מחליו וכמי יריחו על ידי אלישע וכשם שהפכת קללת בלעם הרשע לברכה כן הפוך כל חלומותי עלי לטובה ומסיים בהדי כהני דעני צבורא אמן
"Lord of the universe ! I am Thine and my dreams are Thine ; a dream have I dreamed and I know not what it is. Whether I dreamed concerning myself, or my fellows dreamed concerning me, or I dreamed concerning others, if they be good dreams, strengthen and fortify them [and may they be fulfilled] like the dreams of Joseph ; but if they require to be remedied, heal them as the waters of Marah [were healed] by the hands of Moses our teacher, as Miriam [was healed] from her leprosy, as Hezekiah from his illness, and like the waters of Jericho [sweetened] by the hands of Elisha. And as Thou didst turn the curse of the wicked Balaam into a blessing, so do Thou turn all my dreams for me into good." He should conclude [his prayer] simultaneously with the Kohanim, so that the Congregation responds "Amen."
-------------------- Musical selection: Neshama Carlebach singing her father’s Beshaim Hashem
https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/haneshama-shel-shlomo/id475868578
Lost in Translation - Parsha Toldot
Notes
"Reading the Bible in translation is like kissing your new bride through a veil." famously quipped Haim Nachman Bialik.
I would love to see this quote from Bialik as published or documented verbatim and in the original Hebrew. I'm suspicious that what I find attributed to Bialik as it may just be a translation or paraphrase:
תרגום דומה לנשיקה מבעד לצעיף
I’m sure that reading Bialik in translation is a similarly less-than sensual experience. Did he say bride or girl, did he mean just a kiss or was he suggesting something more intimate and finally was it a veil or the proverbial sheet? In any case, I do agree with Bialik that learning Torah can be like sex and in this regard it should not be practiced safely with an interfering translation… it should be done … in the original Hebrew.
While we’re on the subject of kosher sex, let’s consider one of the best examples of lost-in-translation in the Bible.
Genesis 26 sets the stage wherein Isaac fibs about his wife and tells Abimelech that Rebecca is his sister.
8 And it came to pass, when he had been there a long time, that Abimelech king of the Philistines looked out at a window, and saw, and, behold, Isaac was sporting with Rebekah his wife.
וַיְהִי, כִּי אָרְכוּ-לוֹ שָׁם הַיָּמִים, וַיַּשְׁקֵף אֲבִימֶלֶךְ מֶלֶךְ פְּלִשְׁתִּים, בְּעַד הַחַלּוֹן; וַיַּרְא, וְהִנֵּה יִצְחָק מְצַחֵק, אֵת, רִבְקָה אִשְׁתּוֹ.
The Hebrew word that the text uses for “sporting” is metzahek which comes from the same Hebrew root as does Isaac’s name: listen: “Yitzhak metzahek”. It is clear that the biblical writer, along with Isaac, was having some fun here. This is the only place[i] in the Bible that metzahek is used to imply sexual activity…. Unless, of course, we now re-read the texts associated with the original association of Yitzhak’s name with the laughter of Sarah and Abraham ….. and realize that his parents laughed at the thought of procreating a child…. (see Gen 17:17, 18:12,13 and 15 and 21:6). So maybe Yitzchak’s “sporting” makes us realize that there was always sexual innuendo in the glee, gaiety, and amazement with a-touch-of-self-mockery that his parents, he and maybe we feel at the joy of sex. Hey.. It’s not me… it’s the Hebrew talking.
The modern day scholar who focuses most closely on the original Hebrew sounds of the biblical text is Everett Fox, who has written a translation of the Torah following on the heels of Martin Buber and Franz Rosenzweig. Fox takes the Bible, if not as an oral document, certainly as an aural one. Fox believes that using echoes, allusions, and powerful inner structures of sound, the text of the Bible is often able to convey ideas in a manner that vocabulary alone cannot do. Fox argues that virtually every major (usually male) character in Genesis has his name explained by a play on words many time hinting at an eventual fate or character trait.
Let’s listen to the story of Jacob in Genesis 25:26
26 And after that came forth his brother, and his hand had hold on Esau's heel; and his name was called Jacob. And Isaac was threescore years old when she bore them.
וְאַחֲרֵי-כֵן יָצָא אָחִיו, וְיָדוֹ אֹחֶזֶת בַּעֲקֵב עֵשָׂו, וַיִּקְרָא שְׁמוֹ, יַעֲקֹב; וְיִצְחָק בֶּן-שִׁשִּׁים שָׁנָה, בְּלֶדֶת אֹתָם
The association of Jacob – Yaakov with a heel is strange. Jacob is not the only mythical hero with a famous heel, but in Achilles case, he was the owner of the heel. Jacob’s relationship with his brother’s heel is vicarious. If the biblical author, let alone his parents, want to be flattering, they do a lousy job. Jacob is to be known, at best, as a “hanger on”. Fox’s translation: "Heel-Holder"
Even if we choose to think of Jacob as a bootstrapper, we can’t forget that he pulls himself up by a bootstrap attached to his brothers heal. And let’s not forget that Esau’s heal, like Achilles, is his most vulnerable body part. Metaphorically, the heel[ii] is the exposed rear of an army (see Joshua 8:13 and Genesis 49:19). When God curses the snake for tempting Eve, it is on the snake's metaphorical heel that man shall forever stamp (Genesis 3:15). Attacking an enemy’s heel is an insult to both the attacker and the victim.
Our unflattering association is echoed by Esau himself latter in the story. After Jacob steals the birthright, Esau taunts (Genesis 27:36):
And he said: 'Is not he rightly named Jacob? for he hath supplanted me these two times: he took away my birthright; and, behold, now he hath taken away my blessing.' And he said: 'Hast thou not reserved a blessing for me?'
וַיֹּאמֶר הֲכִי קָרָא שְׁמוֹ יַעֲקֹב, וַיַּעְקְבֵנִי זֶה פַעֲמַיִם--אֶת-בְּכֹרָתִי לָקָח, וְהִנֵּה עַתָּה לָקַח בִּרְכָתִי; וַיֹּאמַר, הֲלֹא-אָצַלְתָּ לִּי בְּרָכָה.
Here Ekev-heel is used in the sense of “to throw one down, to trip one up, to supplant, to circumvent, to defraud.[iii] Fox’s translation: "Heel-Sneak". Check out Jeremiah 9:3
Take ye heed every one of his neighbour, and trust ye not in any brother; for every brother acteth subtly, and every neighbour goeth about with slanders.
אִישׁ מֵרֵעֵהוּ הִשָּׁמֵרוּ, וְעַל-כָּל-אָח אַל-תִּבְטָחוּ: כִּי כָל-אָח עָקוֹביַעְקֹב, וְכָל-רֵעַ רָכִיל יַהֲלֹךְ
Jeremiah is pulling no punches, he uses “ekov Yaakov” the “heel of Jacob” as a synonym for acting subtly.
What kind of parents would the biblical author have Isaac and Rebecca be? Who gives a child such a name?
Clearly, Jacob is in need of a name change… and in fact, this is what happens after he wrestles with the Angel at the River Jabbok (literally: wrestling river).
There is nothing flattering that one can say about Yaakov’s name. His name can only portend a change. A change from a swindler, a scrapper, a kniver… someone who by choice or circumstance is forced to steal his blessings and eke out a living and a life. Yaakov is the outsider, the Ghetto Jew, but his name portends another name, where he crosses the river into his homeland and can stand on his own feet and pull himself up from his own bootstraps ... attached to his own heel. This is what hopefully lies ahead for him in his future name and this is what presumably is up for grabs in the blessing that he steals.
So far in the text, you don’t have to listen to the Hebrew words of the text, you can look the words up in a dictionary or Biblical Lexicon… but when it comes to the patrimony and blessing that Jacob coveted… you have to listen: (Genesis 26: 3-5)
3 Sojourn in this land, and I will be with thee, and will bless thee; for unto thee, and unto thy seed, I will give all these lands, and I will establish the oath which I swore unto Abraham thy father;
4 and I will multiply thy seed as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these lands; and by thy seed shall all the nations of the earth bless themselves;
5 because that Abraham hearkened to My voice, and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws.'
גּוּר בָּאָרֶץ הַזֹּאת, וְאֶהְיֶה עִמְּךָ וַאֲבָרְכֶךָּ: כִּי-לְךָ וּלְזַרְעֲךָ, אֶתֵּן אֶת-כָּל-הָאֲרָצֹת הָאֵל, וַהֲקִמֹתִי אֶת-הַשְּׁבֻעָה, אֲשֶׁר נִשְׁבַּעְתִּי לְאַבְרָהָם אָבִיךָ.
וְהִרְבֵּיתִי אֶת-זַרְעֲךָ, כְּכוֹכְבֵי הַשָּׁמַיִם, וְנָתַתִּי לְזַרְעֲךָ, אֵת כָּל-הָאֲרָצֹת הָאֵל; וְהִתְבָּרְכוּ בְזַרְעֲךָ, כֹּל גּוֹיֵי הָאָרֶץ.
עֵקֶב, אֲשֶׁר-שָׁמַע אַבְרָהָם בְּקֹלִי; וַיִּשְׁמֹר, מִשְׁמַרְתִּי, מִצְוֹתַי, חֻקּוֹתַי וְתוֹרֹתָי.
The word translated as “because” is our old friend “ekev”[iv]. Used in this fairly rare sense, it has the sense of “as a consequence, a gain, a reward, end”. It is that which results from a long, tedious, painful, tortuous and circuitous journey. A pilgrimage full of blisters and maybe a touch of plantar fasciitis. Esau, might have been, like Achilles, the golden boy and favorite son and Yaakov, the parasite, but Yaakov struggled with what little he had. Esau may have been well heeled, but Yaakov had the fortitude and faith in a God of history to grab steadfastly for a better future[v]. He deserved the blessing… it had his name on it.
Listening to the lyricism of the words in the original Hebrew and opening our ears to the playful and suggestive way the writer weaves one word; ekev into the narrative, we can do what Fox[vi] suggests we do; move explanation and commentary from the footnotes, back to the body of the text and in so doing.. we can finally… kiss the bride.
[i] See Strongs Biblical lexicon tsachaq H6711
Lexicon :: Strong's H6711 - tsachaq
[ii] See Strongs Biblical lexicon aqeb H6119
Lexicon :: Strong's H6119 - `aqeb
[iii] See Stongs Biblical Lexicon aqab H6117
Lexicon :: Strong's H6117 - `aqab
[iv] See Strongs Biblical Lexicon 86118
Lexicon :: Strong's H6118 - `eqeb
[v] It is no surprise that this last sense of Ekev, came to represent the promise of the future and messianic times. The bad times and trial preceding the coming of the messiah were referred to as the “footsteps [heel steps] of the messiah” Sotah 49a-b
R. ELIEZER THE GREAT SAYS: FROM THE DAY THE TEMPLE WAS DESTROYED, …. THERE WAS NONE TO ASK, NONE TO INQUIRE. UPON WHOM IS IT FOR US TO RELY? UPON OUR FATHER WHO IS IN HEAVEN. IN THE FOOTSTEPS OF THE MESSIAH עקבות המשיח INSOLENCE WILL INCREASE AND HONOUR DWINDLE; … THE GOVERNMENT WILL TURN TO HERESY AND THERE WILL BE NONE [TO OFFER THEM] REPROOF; THE MEETING-PLACE [OF SCHOLARS] WILL BE USED FOR IMMORALITY; …. THE WISDOM OF THE LEARNED6 WILL DEGENERATE, FEARERS OF SIN WILL BE DESPISED, AND THE TRUTH WILL BE LACKING; YOUTHS WILL PUT OLD MEN TO SHAME, THE OLD WILL STAND UP IN THE PRESENCE OF THE YOUNG, A SON WILL REVILE HIS FATHER, A DAUGHTER WILL RISE AGAINST HER MOTHER, A DAUGHTER-IN-LAW AGAINST HER MOTHER-IN-LAW, AND A MAN'S ENEMIES WILL BE THE MEMBERS OF HIS HOUSEHOLD; THE FACE OF THE GENERATION WILL BE LIKE THE FACE OF A DOG, A SON WILL NOT FEEL ASHAMED BEFORE HIS FATHER. SO UPON WHOM IS IT FOR US TO RELY? UPON OUR FATHER WHO IS IN HEAVEN.
[vi] Although I must admit that Fox does not pick up on the ekev of the blessing, possibly because it does not appear directly in the blessing, but in the patrimony preceding and in the narrative. I would argue that it is nonetheless intentionally placed in the literary piece.
Music
lyrucs: http://www.hebrewsongs.com/song-eliezerbenyehuda.htm
Zeh hab'chor, ekra lo Ben Yehuda, Itamar'
Shemiyankut v'ad k'mila,
Miyom bo'o bivrit mila
v'ad moto –
K'ruta lo brit im ha'ivrit,
From the day of his entering the covenant
(brit-milah) until his death
Will have a covenant, with Hebrew
A Thanksgiving Meal – סעודת הודיה
This week in the US we will be sitting down to a Thanksgiving meal, so what better opportunity to explore the sources and traditions of a Seuda Hodaah – סעודת הודיה a thanksgiving meal in the Jewish tradition… and survey a collection of Thanksgiving sermons…. We’ll even explain why turkey is called Hodu… which means “thanks” in Hebrew…
If you like the madlik podcast please subscribe at iTunes. And for your Andoids, the podcast is now available on Google PlayMusic and Stitcher. For easy links go to madlik.com
In the Bible: After the battle of the five kings: Genesis 14: 18
| יח וּמַלְכִּי-צֶדֶק מֶלֶךְ שָׁלֵם, הוֹצִיא לֶחֶם וָיָיִן; וְהוּא כֹהֵן, לְאֵל עֶלְיוֹן. | 18 And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine; and he was priest of God the Most High. | | יט וַיְבָרְכֵהוּ, וַיֹּאמַר: בָּרוּךְ אַבְרָם לְאֵל עֶלְיוֹן, קֹנֵה שָׁמַיִם וָאָרֶץ. | 19 And he blessed him, and said: 'Blessed be Abram of God Most High, Maker of heaven and earth; | | כ וּבָרוּךְ אֵל עֶלְיוֹן, אֲשֶׁר-מִגֵּן צָרֶיךָ בְּיָדֶךָ; וַיִּתֶּן-לוֹ מַעֲשֵׂר, מִכֹּל. | 20 and blessed be God the Most High, who hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand.' And he gave him a tenth of all. | | כא וַיֹּאמֶר מֶלֶךְ-סְדֹם, אֶל-אַבְרָם: תֶּן-לִי הַנֶּפֶשׁ, וְהָרְכֻשׁ קַח-לָךְ. | 21 And the king of Sodom said unto Abram: 'Give me the persons, and take the goods to thyself.' | | כב וַיֹּאמֶר אַבְרָם, אֶל-מֶלֶךְ סְדֹם: הֲרִמֹתִי יָדִי אֶל-יְהוָה אֵל עֶלְיוֹן, קֹנֵה שָׁמַיִם וָאָרֶץ. | 22 And Abram said to the king of Sodom: 'I have lifted up my hand unto the LORD, God Most High, Maker of heaven and earth, | | כג אִם-מִחוּט וְעַד שְׂרוֹךְ-נַעַל, וְאִם-אֶקַּח מִכָּל-אֲשֶׁר-לָךְ; וְלֹא תֹאמַר, אֲנִי הֶעֱשַׁרְתִּי אֶת-אַבְרָם. | 23 that I will not take a thread nor a shoe-latchet nor aught that is thine, lest thou shouldest say: I have made Abram rich; | | כד בִּלְעָדַי, רַק אֲשֶׁר אָכְלוּ הַנְּעָרִים, וְחֵלֶק הָאֲנָשִׁים, אֲשֶׁר הָלְכוּ אִתִּי: עָנֵר אֶשְׁכֹּל וּמַמְרֵא, הֵם יִקְחוּ חֶלְקָם. {ס} | 24 save only that which the young men have eaten, and the portion of the men which went with me, Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre, let them take their portion.' {S} |
RASHI:
| And Malchizedek: The Midrash Aggadah (Targum Jonathan, Ned. 32b, Mid. Ps. 76:3) states that he was Shem, the son of Noah. | ומלכי צדק: מדרש אגדה הוא שם בן נח: |
The weaning of Isaac:
Genesis 21: 8
8 And the child grew and was weaned, and Abraham made a great feast on the day that Isaac was weaned.
חוַיִּגְדַּ֥ל הַיֶּ֖לֶד וַיִּגָּמַ֑ל וַיַּ֤עַשׂ אַבְרָהָם֙ מִשְׁתֶּ֣ה גָד֔וֹל בְּי֖וֹם הִגָּמֵ֥ל אֶת־יִצְחָֽק:
RASHI: and was weaned: At the end of twenty-four months. — [from Gen. Rabbah 53:10, Keth. 60a]
ויגמל: לסוף עשרים וארבע חדש:
a great feast: for all the prominent people of the generation were there: Shem, Eber, and Abimelech. — [from Tan. Buber, Vayishlach 23] Cf. Gen. Rabbah 53:10.
משתה גדול: שהיו שם גדולי הדור, שם ועבר ואבימלך:
חיי אדם כלל קנ”ה סעיף מ”א ומשנה ברורה סי’ תר”ע סק”ט בשם המהרש”ל
The Thanksgiving Sacrifice: Leviticus
| יב אִם עַל-תּוֹדָה, יַקְרִיבֶנּוּ--וְהִקְרִיב עַל-זֶבַח הַתּוֹדָה חַלּוֹת מַצּוֹת בְּלוּלֹת בַּשֶּׁמֶן, וּרְקִיקֵי מַצּוֹת מְשֻׁחִים בַּשָּׁמֶן; וְסֹלֶת מֻרְבֶּכֶת, חַלֹּת בְּלוּלֹת בַּשָּׁמֶן. | 12 If he offer it for a thanksgiving, then he shall offer with the sacrifice of thanksgiving unleavened cakes mingled with oil, and unleavened wafers spread with oil, and cakes mingled with oil, of fine flour soaked. |
Vayikra Rabbah 9:7
ר' אלעזר ור' יוסי בר חנינא ר' אלעזר אמר: שלמים הקריבו בני נח. רבי יוסי בר חנינא אמר עולות הקריבו בני נח ... מתיב ר' אלעזר לרבי יוסי בר חנינא (שם יח): ויקח יתרו חותן משה עולה וזבחים לאלהים. דא מה עבד לה רבי יוסי בר חנינא? עבד כמאן דאמר לאחר מתן תורה נתגייר יתרו. איפלגו רבי חייא בר אבא ורבי ינאי חד אמר: לאחר מתן תורה נתגייר יתרו. וחד אמר: קודם מתן תורה נתגייר יתרו. אמר רבי הונא: ולא פליגי. מאן דאמר קודם מתן תורה נתגייר יתרו, כמאן דאמר, שלמים הקריבו בני נח.חת
Rabbi Pinchas, Rabbi Levi and Rabbi Yochanan [said] in the name of Rabbi Menachem from Gallia: In the time to come, all sacrifices will be annulled - but the sacrifice of thanksgiving will not be annulled. All prayers will be annulled, but the prayer of gratitude will not be annulled. This accords with what is written [Jeremiah 33:11]: "The voice of joy and the voice of gladness, the voice of the groom and the voice of the bride, the voice of those who say 'Give thanks to the LORD of hosts' etc." - this is the prayer of gratitude. "Those who bring [the sacrifice of] thanksgiving to the House of the LORD": this is the sacrifice of thanksgiving. Thus David said: "I owe You vows and will offer you thanksgivings" [Psalms 56:13] - not "thanksgiving," but "thanksgivings," [indicating both] the thanksgiving prayer and the prayer of gratitude.
In the Talmud: Tractate Berakoth 46a
- Zera once was ill. R. Abbahu went to visit him, and made a vow, saying, If the little one with scorched legs1 recovers, I will make a feast for the Rabbis. He did recover, and he made a feast for all the Rabbis.
Modern Times:
Chabad Hasidim celebrate the 19th of Kislev to commemorate the release of the first Lubavitcher Rebbe; Schneur Zalman from jail…. also considered to be the Rosh Hashana of Chassidus. Also the day the Rebbe walked out of his room for the first time since his heart attack on shemini atzeret (1978)..for the Chassidim this was huge and still is for them as they feel that this day is hodoo of his recovery and hence his subsequent relationship to the hasidim. Also 12 tammuz the previous Rebbe release from prison in Russia. (all events that allowed the next frame to occur which leads to today )
The 30th day of Nissan
See a reference in a luach (הלכה יומית) here to the custom to have a on the anniversary of the UN Vote for the partition of Palestine and the resulting birth of Israel:
א‘ ל‘ ניסן. מה משמעותו של יום העצמאות
יום היום בו הוכרזה המדינה בשנת תש“ח, הינו יום שמחה ותודה לבורא עולם, על הנס הגדול שעשה לנו בהקמת המדינה. אף על פי שאויבנו לא רצו בהקמת המדינה היהודית, הכריזה המועצה הזמנית על הקמת המדינה היהודית, ונחתמה מגילת העצמאות
יש לקיים סעודת הודיה ביום זה, ולברך את ה‘ על כך
Prayers:
See Alan Brill’s: The Book of Doctrines and Opinions: notes on Jewish theology and spirituality.
Service for Thanksgiving Day 1905- In Commemoration of 250 Years of Jews in the US.
by Rev H. Pereira Mendes of the Spanish- Portuguese synagogue of NY offered in 1905 at a special convocation to commemorate the 250th anniversary of the settlement of Jews in the United States. 2005 was 350 years….
Throughout the past ages Thou hast carried Israel as on eagles' wings. From the bondage of Egypt, through the trials of the wilderness, ….From nation to nation Thou didst lead us, until the hand of the oppressor was weakened and the day of human rights began to dawn
Thou hast opened unto us this blessed haven of our beloved land. we lift up our hearts in gratitude to Thee, in that two hundred and fifty years ago Thou didst guide a little band of Israel’s children who, . seeking freedom to worship Thee, found it in a land which, with Thy blessing, became a refuge of freedom and justice for the oppressed of all peoples.
O Lord, look down from Thy holy habitation from heaven and bless this Republic. Preserve it in the liberty which has been proclaimed in the land, and in the righteousness which is its foundation. Bless it with prosperity and peace. May it advance from strength to strength and continue to be a refuge for all who seek its shelter. Imbue all its citizens with a spirit of loyalty to its ideals. May they be ever mindful that the blessings of liberty are safeguarded by obedience to law, and that the prosperity of the nation rests upon trust in Thy goodness and reverence for Thy commandments.
Bless the President and his counselors, the judges, lawgivers, and executives of our county. Put forth upon them the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and the spirit of might, the spirit of knowledge and the fear of the Lord. May America become a light to all peoples, teaching the world that righteousness exalteth a nation.
Our Father in Heaven, Who lovest all nations, all men are Thy children. Thou dost apportion tasks to peoples according to their gifts of mind and heart. But all, are revealing Thy marvelous plans for mankind. May the day speedily dawn when Thy kingdom will be established on earth, when nations shall learn war no more, when peace shall be the crowning reward of a world redeemed by justice, and all men shall know Thee, from the greatest unto the least.
Service for Thanksgiving Day 1940 – Rabbi Joseph Lookstein at Kehilath Jeshurun in New York
We thank Thee for the beauty and utility of Thy creations, for the flowers which are the stars of the earth even as the stars are the flowers of heaven; for the fertility of the soil and the abundance of its products; for the food that is borne within its bosom and the waters that flow from its deep and inner fountains; for the air that surrounds all creatures and that holds within its invisible self the secret and power • of life.
Almighty God, we pray that we may remain true to the destiny for which we were created. We pray that the dignity of human personality may be preserved and the reverence of man for man may continue. We pray that the beautiful heavens that Thou didst spread over our heads may not be darkened by the clouds of hate and that the magic carpet which is earth may not be disturbed by the tramp of hostile feet. We pray that man’s inhumanity to man may forever end and that human genius may continue to strive for greater perfection and for nobler fulfillment. Let man come to understand that he is closest to God when he is nearer to man, that he worships at Thy holy throne when he serves Thy creatures and that he is within Thy holy shrine when he is at one with his fellow-beings.
We pray sincerely for America and the ideals of democracy and freedom that are here enshrined. May she be strong to withstand all the currents that assail her and all the forces of evil that would invade her sacred precincts. A tower of light to her own citizenry, may she cast a steady beam and light up all the dark areas of the world and show to a perplexed and straying humanity the path of freedom, of life and of peace.
Rabbi and Congregation.
May the words of our mouths and the meditations of our hearts be acceptable to Thee, oh Lord, our rock and our redeemer. Amen.
Cf Leonard Cohen “if it be your will”
1951 The Faith of America: Readings, Songs and Prayers for the Celebration of American Holidays by Mordecai Kaplan; Williams, J. Paul; Kohn, Eugene Kaplan
Intro
THANKSGIVING DAY: a day devoted to a grateful awareness of the blessings of American life. A blessing not appreciated is easily lost. If we take for granted the blessings that we enjoy by virtue of our living in a land of almost boundless opportunities and take no thought to the moral foundation on which the welfare of our people rests, those blessings will sooner or later be lost. Thanksgiving should be used to make us aware of those moral foundations, of our dependence on divine justice and love for the continued enjoyment of the blessings of American life.
Prayer
The Significance of the Day
OUR GOD AND FATHER, it is good to give thanks to Thee and to acknowledge Thy blessings. Only thus
can we savor them to the full. In the hurried pace of our lives and in our preoccupation with the petty and the trivial, we are prone to take Thy gifts for granted. Oblivious of thy bounties, we sinfully waste the opportunities they afford us for living the good life. Therefore, do we set aside this day for thanksgiving.
We thank Thee for the land and for its fruits by which we live. We thank thee for the vigor of body and mind that enables us to exploit the fertility of our country’s fields and forests and the buried treasures of its mineral wealth. We thank Thee for the varied beauty of its landscape, for the grandeur of its mountains, the hospitality of its plains and prairies, and the gleaming vistas of ocean from its coasts.
We thank Thee for the inspiration of our country’s history—for the courage and hardihood that sustained its explorers and pioneers, for the heroism that inspires its fighters for freedom and equality, for the enterprise that builds its teeming cities, for the arts that express the beauty and meaning of its way of life, for the just laws and free institutions that enable its people to work together in peace and harmony.
Grant, O God, in Thy grace, that we may perfect our national life to the measure of Thy bounty. Grateful
for the gifts Thou hast bestowed upon us, may we use them to extend the area of freedom, justice, and good-will among men. May our use of Thy, gifts bear. Witness to mankind that life is good when lived according to Thy benign will, O gracious Giver of all good. AMEN.
George Washington – Thanksgiving Proclamation Issued on October 3, 1789
And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations, and beseech Him to pardon our national and other transgressions; to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually; to render our National Government a blessing to all the people by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed; to protect and guide all sovereigns and nations (especially such as have shown kindness to us)
In hard times
A THOUGHTFUL MIND will perceive propriety in a service of thanksgiving on the ground, not only of any exceptional benefit, but of the continuance of those ordinary blessings which give its gladness and beauty to life. The preservation of our life itself from casualty or from disease, which might have fallen upon it, is no less a sign of God’s goodness than a narrow escape from what seemed certain death. And so, though any given year may not have been marked by what we should call conspicuous blessings, it is right and proper that we should meet to give thanks for that bounty of heaven which has not failed, for our personal life, and health, and happiness, for the undisturbed serenity and tranquility of our homes, for the maintenance of public order, content and liberty, for the peaceful progress of industry, for the regular and beneficent operations of nature. The hand of God is in all this, as well as in the events which more strikingly exhibit His goodness and His power . . .
The year that is ending has not been what we commonly call a “good” year. It has been rather a bad year in the history of other nations, in business and in politics within our own borders.
How then shall we meet the call which invites us to give thanks today to God for His goodness. We might try to banish from our minds these gloomy facts….
And yet it is more likely to be useful to look at the facts as they are and to ask whether, if we should judge them aright, we should not find, not in spite of them, but in them, traces and tokens of God’s goodness and occasions for praise. We mourn, for example, the decline of our material Prosperity, but it is a shallow view of things which regards material prosperity as an unmixed good for a man or for a nation. The psalmist who said, “It is good for me that I have been afflicted,” uttered a truth which finds abundant confirmation in national as well as in personal history. Look at your neighbor whom you knew as a poor boy and who now is worth his millions. . . . He used to be considerate of others, helpful to those who needed help, nobly generous with what little he had to give. Now he seems to think that poverty is a crime, and it is easier to get a flame out of an iceberg than a dollar out of his purse. Once he judged men by their moral character. Now he speaks of them as “worth” whatever their property would sell for in the market. . . . What has made the change in him? Nothing but his success. . . .
And the same thing is equally true of a nation. The unparalleled development of the material resources of the American people in recent years has astonished the world, but it has also awakened the gravest solicitude of thoughtful minds. The ever rising tide of wealth, the vast increase and wide diffusion of luxury, the reckless extravagance and waste which have been common, the senseless rivalry in vulgar display, the growing tyranny of money in the hands of rich men and rich corporations, the wild fever of speculation, the prostitution of public office to an unrestrained desire of wealth, the increased inequality, and, in consequence of this, the deepening animosity of the classes of which society is composed, the swift and shameless spread of corruption in politics, the intrusion into the place of legitimate and honest business of the methods and morals of the gambling room, the growing frequency of gross violations of trust—all these things . . . have come as the direct and inevitable fruit of the era of prosperity which now—for a time at least, is ended. . . .
As you try to gather up your reasons for thanksgiving, do not turn your thoughts away from the things which at first seem dark. . . . Look at them, rather, frankly . . . and see if the goodness and the mercy of God are not manifest in them. So may your sorrows be turned into joy, and your sore disappointment into confident hope. So may you gain the height of adoring trust whereon he stood who long ago declared: “I will bless the Lord at all time: His praise shall continually be in my mouth.”
- Edward B. Coe
Turkey
The guinea fowl bears some resemblance to the then-recently found American bird. Though it is native to eastern Africa, the guinea fowl was imported to Europe through the Ottoman Empire and came to be called the turkey-cock or turkey-hen. When settlers in the New World began to send similar-looking fowl back to Europe, they were mistakenly called turkeys.
Every language seems to have radically different names for this bird. The Turkish word is hindi, which literally means “Indian.” The original word in French, coq d’Inde, meant rooster of India, and has since shortened to dinde. These names likely derive from the common misconception that India and the New World were one and the same. In Portuguese, it’s literally a “Peru bird,” and in Malay, it’s called a “Dutch chicken.”
Hodu – India
הֹדוּ Hôdûw, ho'-doo; of foreign origin; Hodu (i.e. Hindustan):—India.
India = "flee away" or " give ye thanks" Strongs Lexicon H1912
Why did God grow weary of Sodom and what solace and instruction can we take from the Jewish texts that deal with Abraham; this edifying biblical social activist. What can we learn from the Talmudic notion of Midat Sodom מִדַּת סְדוֹם - the character of Sodom and Melech Sadomit - the salt of Sodom. What can we learn from the traditional contrast between Noah, a Tzadik in Peltz (a fur coat) and Abraham who walked in front of God? How can we pull ourselves together and move forward?
A journey through Freud, the Hebrew Bible, the classical commentators and modern Near Eastern linguistic scholarship to discover the meaning of the radical Hebrew message of destiny and people-hood.... with a tribute to Leonard Cohen.
Jewish Boats - Noah
A dialog with dramatist, playwright and philosopher Michael Posnick on the motif of a ship, a place and a time of refuge in the Hebrew Bible, in the poetry and songs of Yehuda Halevi and in the Yiddish poetry of Asher Penn.
Notes:
The ark-teva as the first temple
Rav sacks:
In one other place in the Torah there is the same emphasis on precise dimensions, namely, Noah’s ark: “So make yourself an ark of cypress wood. Make rooms in it and coat it with pitch inside and out. This is how you are to build it: The ark is to be three hundred cubits long, fifty cubits wide and thirty cubits high. Make a roof for it, leaving below the roof an opening one cubit high all around” (Gen. 6: 14-16). The reason is similar to that in the case of the tabernacle. Noah’s ark symbolised the world in its Divinely-constructed order, the order humans had ruined by their violence and corruption. God was about to destroy that world, leaving only Noah, the ark and what it contained as symbols of the vestige of order that remained, on the basis of which God would fashion a new order.
See: http://chiefrabbi.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Terumah-5772.pdf and https://madlik.com/2015/10/17/of-noahs-ark-cathedrals-in-time-and-jewish-ships-parshat-noach/
Menucha temple sanctuary
| ט כִּי לֹא-בָאתֶם, עַד-עָתָּה--אֶל-הַמְּנוּחָה, וְאֶל-הַנַּחֲלָה, אֲשֶׁר-יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ, נֹתֵן לָךְ. | 9 for ye are not as yet come to the rest and to the inheritance, which the LORD your God giveth thee. | | י וַעֲבַרְתֶּם, אֶת-הַיַּרְדֵּן, וִישַׁבְתֶּם בָּאָרֶץ, אֲשֶׁר-יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם מַנְחִיל אֶתְכֶם; וְהֵנִיחַ לָכֶם מִכָּל-אֹיְבֵיכֶם מִסָּבִיב, וִישַׁבְתֶּם-בֶּטַח. | 10 But when ye go over the Jordan, and dwell in the land which the LORD your God causeth you to inherit, and He giveth you rest from all your enemies round about, so that ye dwell in safety; | | יא וְהָיָה הַמָּקוֹם, אֲשֶׁר-יִבְחַר יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם בּוֹ לְשַׁכֵּן שְׁמוֹ שָׁם--שָׁמָּה תָבִיאוּ, אֵת כָּל-אֲשֶׁר אָנֹכִי מְצַוֶּה אֶתְכֶם: עוֹלֹתֵיכֶם וְזִבְחֵיכֶם, מַעְשְׂרֹתֵיכֶם וּתְרֻמַת יֶדְכֶם, וְכֹל מִבְחַר נִדְרֵיכֶם, אֲשֶׁר תִּדְּרוּ לַיהוָה. | 11 then it shall come to pass that the place which the LORD your God shall choose to cause His name to dwell there, thither shall ye bring all that I command you: your burnt-offerings, and your sacrifices, your tithes, and the offering of your hand, and all your choice vows which ye vow unto the LORD. |
See: http://otzma1.blogspot.com/2011/10/blog-post_25.html
Ark and tabernacle
…. Regarding similarities in the Genesis 1 account of Creation, the Exodus 25ff. account of the building of the Tabernacle, and the account of the building of the ark, Sailhamer writes (J. H. Sailhamer, Genesis, p. 82, see also table on p. 84): Each account has a discernible pattern: God speaks (wayyo’mer/wayedabber), an action is commanded (imperative/jussive), and the command is carried out (wayya’as) according to God’s will (wayehi ken/kaaser siwwah ‘elohim). The key to these similarities lies in the observation that each narrative concludes with a divine blessing (wayebarek, Genesis 1:28, 9:1; Exodus 39:43) and, in the case of the Tabernacle and Noah’s Ark, a divinely ordained covenant (Genesis 6:8; Exodus 34:27; in this regard it is of some importance that later biblical tradition also associated the events of Genesis 1-3 with the making of a divine covenant; cf. Hosea 6:7). Noah, like Moses, followed closely the commands of God and in so doing found salvation and blessing in his covenant.
See: The Ark and the Tent: Temple Symbolism in the Story of Noah[especially notes 134-]
Fortunately, there are those like me, who have Shabbat on the mind and who read the story of Noah’s Ark (Genesis 8) and found Shabbat:
| ח וַיְשַׁלַּח אֶת-הַיּוֹנָה, מֵאִתּוֹ–לִרְאוֹת הֲקַלּוּ הַמַּיִם, מֵעַל פְּנֵי הָאֲדָמָה. | 8 And he sent forth a dove from him, to see if the waters were abated from off the face of the ground. | | ט וְלֹא-מָצְאָה הַיּוֹנָה מָנוֹחַלְכַף-רַגְלָהּ, וַתָּשָׁב אֵלָיו אֶל-הַתֵּבָה–כִּי-מַיִם, עַל-פְּנֵי כָל-הָאָרֶץ; וַיִּשְׁלַח יָדוֹ וַיִּקָּחֶהָ, וַיָּבֵא אֹתָהּ אֵלָיו אֶל-הַתֵּבָה. | 9 But the dove found no rest for the sole of her foot, and she returned unto him to the ark, for the waters were on the face of the whole earth; and he put forth his hand, and took her, and brought her in unto him into the ark. | | י וַיָּחֶל עוֹד, שִׁבְעַת יָמִים אֲחֵרִים; וַיֹּסֶף שַׁלַּח אֶת-הַיּוֹנָה, מִן-הַתֵּבָה. | 10 And he stayed yet other seven days; and again he sent forth the dove out of the ark. | | יא וַתָּבֹא אֵלָיו הַיּוֹנָה לְעֵת עֶרֶב, וְהִנֵּה עֲלֵה-זַיִת טָרָף בְּפִיהָ; וַיֵּדַע נֹחַ, כִּי-קַלּוּ הַמַּיִם מֵעַל הָאָרֶץ. | 11 And the dove came in to him at eventide; and lo in her mouth an olive-leaf freshly plucked; so Noah knew that the waters were abated from off the earth. | | יב וַיִּיָּחֶל עוֹד, שִׁבְעַת יָמִיםאֲחֵרִים; וַיְשַׁלַּח, אֶת-הַיּוֹנָה, וְלֹא-יָסְפָה שׁוּב-אֵלָיו, עוֹד. | 12 And he stayed yet other seven days; and sent forth the dove; and she returned not again unto him any more. |
The Kuzari - In Defense of the Despised Faith
| Yom Shabbaton יוֹם שַבָּתוֹן | | | יוֹם שַׁבָּתוֹן אֵין לִשְׁכּֽוֹחַ, זִכְרוֹ כְּרֵֽיחַ הַנִּיחֹֽחַ, יוֹנָה מָצְאָה בוֹ מָנֽוֹחַ, וְשָׁם יָנֽוּחוּ יְגִֽיעֵי כֹֽחַ. היוֹם נִכְבָּד לִבְנֵי אֱמוּנִים, זְהִירִים לְשָׁמְרוֹ אָבוֹת וּבָנִים, חָקוּק בִּשְׁנֵי לֻחוֹת אֲבָנִים, מֵרֹב אוֹנִים וְאַמִּיץ כֹּֽחַ. יוֹנָה מָצְאָה בוֹ מָנֽוֹחַ, וְשָׁם יָנֽוּחוּ יְגִֽיעֵי כֹֽחַ. וּבָֽאוּ כֻלָּם בִּבְרִית יַֽחַד, נַעֲשֶׂה וְנִשְׁמָע אָמְרוּ כְּאֶחָד, וּפָתְחוּ וְעָנוּ יְיָ אֶחָד, בָּרוּךְ הַנּוֹתֵן לַיָּעֵף כֹּֽח. יוֹנָה מָצְאָה בוֹ מָנֽוֹחַ, וְשָׁם יָנֽוּחוּ יְגִֽיעֵי כֹֽחַ. דִּבֶּר בְּקָדְשׁוֹ בְּהַר הַמּוֹר, יוֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִי זָכוֹר וְשָׁמוֹר, וְכָל פִּקּוּדָיו יַֽחַד לִגְמוֹר, חַזֵּק מָתְנַֽיִם וְאַמֵּץ כֹּֽח. יוֹנָה מָצְאָה בוֹ מָנֽוֹחַ, וְשָׁם יָנֽוּחוּ יְגִֽיעֵי כֹֽחַ. הָעָם אֲשֶׁר נָע כַּצֹּאן תָּעָה, יִזְכּוֹר לְפָקְדוֹ בְּרִית וּשְׁבוּעָה, לְבַל יַעֲבָר בָּם מִקְרֵה רָעָה, כַּאֲשֶׁר נִשְׁבַּֽעְתָּ עַל מֵי נֹֽחַ. יוֹנָה מָצְאָה בוֹ מָנֽוֹחַ, וְשָׁם יָנֽוּחוּ יְגִֽיעֵי כֹֽחַ. | | Translation: Fragrant thy memories, O sweet Sabbath day, Fragrant as incense, never to fade away; The wandering dove doth find her nest In thee, the toilers cease their weary quest. Deep in thy children's hearts enshrined lies thy fame. Sires and sons faithful, linked, thy love proclaim, Linked thy love proclaim. Strong, in ne'er-waning might, He graved thy name; Graved on twin tablets, still stands His sure behest. The wandering dove doth find her nest In thee, the toilers cease their weary quest. Then to His covenant, abiding in stone, 'We will swear fealty' answered they all as one, Answered they all as one. 'He is our Lord' they cried, 'eternal His throne,' Peace to all care-worn He granteth, His name be blest. The wandering dove doth find her nest In thee, the toilers cease their weary quest. Once on Moriah's peak He bade His folk heed; 'Keep ye my Sabbaths, hallowed in word and deed, Hallowed in word and deed. Sacred her precepts all, for you, for your seed, Strengthen the feeble, comfort my folk oppressed.' The wandering dove doth find her nest In thee, the toilers cease their weary quest. We are Thy chosen flock, remember us still. Long have we wandered, O soon Thine oath fulfil, O soon Thine oath fulfil. Thou who did'st calm the flood, preserve us from ill, Safe in green pastures, safe by the brooks to rest. The wandering dove doth find her nest In thee, the toilers cease their weary quest. Translation by Herbert Loewe, Mediaeval Hebrew Minstrelsy, Songs for the Bride Queen's Feast, published 1926. See: http://www.zemirotdatabase.org/view_song.php?id=55 |
Di yiddishe shif
Ich hob gelerent tzu shifn, tsu tsaich’nen
Shifn far kreig un far frid’n.
Di tzeit iz shoyn raif
Efshr toizenter yor’n
Tzu boyen a shif
Far farvoglte idin.
A shif gor bazunder
A plan gor a nayer
Loit der letzter technik un modern,
A shif, vos zol shvimen tif unter’n vaser
Un zol kenen oich fliyen
Heit iber di shter’n
A shif gor a naiye
Far a folk gor an alten
Vos hot shoyn nit einmol
In yam zich getrinken,
Getrib’n gevor’n fun alerlay breg’n
Vi kretzike shtoshures
Gevor’n gezinken
A shif vel ich boyen
Far eich, meine brider
Ir vogler fun “shturme” un fun “st louis”.
Vos oif ayere kep
Iz gefal’n der tzor’n
Fun alle vampir’n
Un chayus royus.
A shif vel ich shaf’n
A flot gor a gantz’n,
Tif oif dem opgrunt
Vel ich im bahalt’n
Er vet kum’n aich dinen
Ven er vet derher’n
Dem ruf fun dem idish’n vogler
Der alten.
I learned how to design ships
Warships and pleasure ships.
Now after thousands of years
It is time to build a ship for the wandering Jews.
A wondrous ship, with a brand new design
With all the latest modern technology
A ship that can swim deep under water
And soar over the stars.
A new ship for a very old people
Who have more than once been swallowed by the sea,
Hounded from shore to shore
And drowned like scab-ridden rats.
I will build you a ship, my brothers,
Refugees from the Shturme and the St Louis
Upon whose heads has fallen the rage
Of all the vampires and wild beasts
I will build you a ship,
An entire fleet,
And I will hide it deep in the depths of the sea;
It will come to save you,
When it hears the cry of the ancient wandering Jews.
Asher Penn - 1943
Di yiddishe shif (tango)
Am
5/4 Ich hob gelerent zich shifn, tsu tsaich’--- / 2/4 nen. Shifn far/
B7 E7
2/4 kreig un far /4/4 frid’n. Di /
Am
4/4 tzeit iz shoyn raif efshr toizenter / yo----r’n. Tzu /
B7 Adim
boyen a shif Far farvoglte /
E7
4/4 i---din./ A/
Am
5/4 shif gor bazunder, a plan gor a na------/ 2/4 yer. Loit der /
B7 E7
3/4 letzter technik un mo --/2/4 dern, A
Am
5/4 A shif, vos zol shvimen tif unter’n va------/ 2/4 ser, un zol /
B7
4/4 kenen oich fliyen heit iber di
E7
4/4 shter’n A /
CHORUS
Am A7 Dm
4/4 shif gor a naiye far a /folk gor an al----/ 2/4 ten. Vos /
E7 Am
4/4 hot shoyn nit einmol in / yam zich getrin--/ 2/4 ken, ge
A7 Dm
4/4 trib’n gevor’n fun alerlay bre----/ 2/4 g’n, vi
B7 E7
4/4 kretzike shtoshures gevor’n gezin----/ ken A /
Am
5/4 shif vel ich boyen far eich, meine bri-----/ 2/4/der. Ir
A7 D7
3/4 vogler fun “shturme” un fun “st / 4/4 louis”. Vos /
Am
5/4 oif ayere kep iz gefal’n der tzo-----/ 2/4 r’n fun
B7 Adim E7
4/4 alle vampir’n Un chayus / royus. A/
CHORUS II
Am A7 Dm
4/4 shif vel ich shaf’n, a / flot gor a gan----- / 2/4 tz’n, /
E7
4/4 Tif oif dem opgrunt vel ich im bahal --/ 2/4 t’n. Ehr vet /
G7 Dm
4/4 kum’n aich dinen ven er vet derhe--/ 2/4 r’n dem /
B7 E7
4/4 ruf fun dem idish’n vogler A /
Am A7 Dm
4/4 shif vel ich shaf’n, a flot gor a gan----/ 2/4 tz’n, /
E7 Gm
4/4 Tif oif dem opgrunt vel ich im bahal --/ 2/4 t’n Ehr vet /
G7 Dm
4/4 kum’n aich dinen ven er vet derhe--/ 2/4 r’n dem /
B7
4/4 ruf fun dem idish’n / 4/4 vogler, dem
D7 Gm
4/4 al---------------- / 4/4 ten. /
Usher Penn
1943
Genesis is the narrative of our origins. How do we moderns read it? How do we approach the past and how do we approach our elders?
מעשה אבות סימן לבנים
The stories of our patriarchs are signs for their children.
הפתגם מבוסס כנראה על דברי חז"ל בבראשית רבה: "אמר לו הקב"ה (לאברהם): שב, אתה סימן לבניך
In Bereshit Rabba 48: As he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day. Rabbi Berekhiah said in Rabbi Levi’s name: It is written: he sat. He wished to rise, but God said to him: Sit—you are a symbol to your children. As you sit while the Shekhinah (God’s Presence) is standing, so will your children sit and the Shekhinah stand. When Israel enters synagogues and study halls and recites the Shema’, they sit in My honor, and I will stand over them.
והוא יושב פתח האהל כחום היום רבי ברכיה משום ר' לוי אמר ישב כתיב בקש לעמוד א"ל הקדוש ברוך הוא שב אתה סימן לבניך מה אתה יושב ושכינה עומדת כך בניך יושבין ושכינה עומדת על גבן כשישראל נכנסים לבתי כנסיות ולבתי מדרשות וקורין קריאת שמע והן יושבים לכבודי ואני על גבן שנאמר (תהלים פב) אלהים נצב בעדת אל
http://bit.ly/2e6JQTJ
it all started when two rebbes sat in a sukkah ....
Source Notes
a cathedral in time – a tabernacle in space
1.
Judaism is a religion of time aiming at the sanctification of time. Unlike the spaceminded man to whom time is unvaried, iterative, homogeneous, to whom all hours are alike, qualityless, empty shells, the Bible senses the diversified character of time. There are no two hours alike. Every hour is unique and the only one given at the moment, exclusive and endlessly precious.
Judaism teaches us to be attached to holiness in time, to be attached to sacred events, to learn how to consecrate sanctuaries that emerge from the magnificent stream of a year. The Sabbaths are our great cathedrals; and our Holy of Holies is a shrine that neither the Romans nor the Germans were able to burn; a shrine that even apostasy cannot easily obliterate: the Day of Atonement. According to the ancient rabbis, it is not the observance of the Day of Atonement, but the Day itself, the “essence of the Day,” which, with man’s repentance, atones for the sins of man.
Note: Maimonides, Laws of Repentance 1:3
The essence of Yom Kippur brings attonement for thos who repent as it says: “For on this day shall atonement be made for you, to cleanse you; from all your sins shall ye be clean before the LORD. Leviticus 16:30
""כי ביום הזה יכפר עליכם עצמו של יום הכיפורים מכפר לשבים שנאמר
Jewish ritual may be characterized as the art of significant forms in time, as architecture of time. Most of its observances–the Sabbath, the New Moon, the festivals, the Sabbatical and the Jubilee year–depend on a certain hour of the day or season of the year. It is, for example, the evening, morning, or afternoon that brings with it the call to prayer. The main themes of faith lie in the realm of time. We remember the day of the exodus from Egypt, the day when Israel stood at Sinai; and our Messianic hope is the expectation of a day, of the end of days.
Moed – Holiday
Ohel Moed – Ten of Meeting
In the Bible, words are employed with exquisite care, particularly those which, like pillars of fire, lead the way in the far flung system of the biblical world of meaning. One of the most distinguished words in the Bible is the word kadosh, holy; a word which more than any other is representative of the mystery and majesty of the divine. Now what was the first holy object in the history of the world? Was it a mountain? Was it an altar? It is, indeed, a unique occasion at which the distinguished word kadosh is used for the first time: in the Book of Genesis at the end of the story of creation. How extremely significant is the fact that it is applied to time: “And God blessed the seventh day and made it holy.” There is no reference in the record of creation to any object in space that would be endowed with the quality of holiness.
This is a radical departure from accustomed religious thinking. The mythical mind would expect that, after heaven and earth have been established, God would create a holy place–a holy mountain or a holy spring–whereupon a sanctuary is to be established. Yet it seems as if to the Bible it is holiness in time, the Sabbath, which comes first. When history began, there was only one holiness in the world, holiness in time. When at Sinai the word of God was about to be voiced, a call for holiness in man was proclaimed: “Thou shalt be unto me a holy people.” It was only after the people had succumbed to the temptation of worshipping a thing, a golden calf, that the erection of a Tabernacle, of holiness in space, was commanded.
The sanctity of time came first, the sanctity of man came second, and the sanctity of space last. Time was hallowed by God; space, the Tabernacle, was consecrated by Moses. While the festivals celebrate events that happened in time, the date of the month assigned for each festival in the calendar is determined by the life in nature. Passover and the Feast of Booths [Sukkot], for example, coincide with the full moon, and the date of all festivals is a day in the month, and the month is a reflection of what goes on periodically in the realm of nature, since the Jewish month begins with the new moon, with the reappearance of the lunar crescent in the evening sky. In contrast, the Sabbath is entirely independent of the month and unrelated to the moon. Its date is not determined by any event in nature, such as the new moon, but by the act of creation. Thus the essence of the Sabbath is completely detached from the world of space. The meaning of the Sabbath is to celebrate time rather than space. Six days a week we live under the tyranny of things of space; on the Sabbath we try to become attuned to holiness in time. It is a day on which we are called upon to share in what is eternal in time, to turn from the results of creation to the mystery of creation, from the world of creation to the creation of the world.
The Sabbath (FSG Classics) Paperback – July 28, 2005 by Abraham Joshua Heschel
2.
After the destruction of the Second Temple there … was no High Priest, no sacrifice, no divine fire, no Levites singing praises or crowds thronging the precincts of Jerusalem and filling the Temple Mount. Above all there was no Yom Kippur ritual through which the people could find forgiveness.
It was then that a transformation took place that must constitute one of the great creative responses to tragedy in history. Tradition has cast Rabbi Akiva in the role of the savior of hope. The Mishna in Yoma, the tractate dedicated to Yom Kippur, tells us in effect that Rabbi Akiva could see a new possibility of atonement even in the absence of a High Priest and a Temple. God Himself would purify His people without the need for an intermediary. Even ordinary Jews could, as it were, come face to face with the Shekhina, the Divine Presence. They needed no one else to apologize for them. The drama that once took place in the Temple could now take place in the human heart. Yom Kippur was saved. It is not too much to say that Jewish faith was saved.
Every synagogue became a fragment of the Temple. Every prayer became a sacrifice. Every Jew became a kind of priest, offering God not an animal but instead the gathered shards of a broken heart. For if God was the God of everywhere, He could be encountered anywhere. And if there were places from which He seemed distant, then time could substitute for place. “Seek God where He is' to be found, call on Him' where He is close” (Is. 55:6) -— this, said the sages, refers to the Ten Days of Repentance from Rosh HaShana to Yom Kippur (Yevamot 105a). Holy days became the surrogate for holy spaces. Yom Kippur became the Jerusalem of time, the holy city of the Jewish soul.
Koren Sacks Yom Kippur Mahzor (Hebrew and English) Hardcover – August 15, 2012 by Rabbi Jonathan Sacks pp xv-xvi
During Sukkot, we add a prayer: “May the All Merciful establish (raise) for us the fallen Sukkah of David”
הרחמן הוא יקים לנו את סוכת דוד הנופלת The notion of the “fallen Sukkah” come from the prophet Amos (9:11)
In that day will I raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen, and close up the breaches thereof, and I will raise up his ruins, and I will build it as in the days of old;
בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא, אָקִים אֶת-סֻכַּת דָּוִיד הַנֹּפֶלֶת; וְגָדַרְתִּי אֶת-פִּרְצֵיהֶן, וַהֲרִסֹתָיו אָקִים, וּבְנִיתִיהָ, כִּימֵי עוֹלָם From the first day of Elul until the last day of Sukkot we read Psalm 27 every day.
One thing have I asked of the LORD, that will I seek after:
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 visit early in His temple. or He concealeth me in His pavilion (lit. Sukkah) in the day of evil;
He hideth me in the covert of His tent; He lifteth me up upon a rock.
אַחַת, שָׁאַלְתִּי מֵאֵת-ה'-- אוֹתָהּ אֲבַקֵּשׁ שִׁבְתִּי בְּבֵית-ה', כָּל-יְמֵי חַיַּי; לַחֲזוֹת בְּנֹעַם-ה', וּלְבַקֵּר בְּהֵיכָלו כִּי יִצְפְּנֵנִי, בְּסֻכֹּה-- בְּיוֹם רָעָה: יַסְתִּרֵנִי, בְּסֵתֶר אָהֳלוֹ; בְּצוּר, יְרוֹמְמֵנִי Musical notes:
Achat Sha’alti mei’eit Adonai otah avakeish (2x)
Shivti b’veit Adonai kol y’mei chayai
Lachazot b’no’am, b'no'am Adonai ul’vakeir b’heichalo (2x)
This melody, written by Israel Katz. See The Chazzan’s Tisch here and Velveteen Rabbi here for an Hebrew/English version and some background into Israel Katz the composer. Here’s the track I play on the podcast 1:10 seconds in and available on iTunes here
Cho Rachman (Rebuilt) composed and sung by Shlomo Carlebach on his 4th LP, In The Palace Of The King (Vanguard, 1965) and available on Amazon here.
Source Notes
1.
The Messiah will come only in an age which is either totally pure or totally guilty and corrupt.
אין בן-דוד בא אלא בדור שכולו זכאי או כולו חייב
סנהדרין צח,א
2.
The Messianic Idea in Judaism by Gershom Scholem 1971 pp 10 -17.
Apocalyptic Jewish Messianism
The elements of the catastrophic and the visions of doom are present in peculiar fashion in the Messianic vision. On the one hand, they are applied to the transition or destruction in which the Messianic redemption is born—hence the ascription of the Jewish concept of “birth pangs of the Messiah” חבלו של משיח to this period. But, on the other hand, it is also applied to the terrors of the Last Judgment which in many of these descriptions concludes the Messianic period instead of accompanying its beginnings….
This catastrophic character of the redemption, which is essential to the apocalyptic conception, is pictured in all of these texts and traditions in glaring images. It finds manifold expression: in world wars and revolutions, in epidemics, famine, and economic catastrophe; but to an equal degree in apostasy and the desecration of God’s name,…
The pages of the Talmud tractate Sanhedrin which deal with the Messianic age are full of most extravagant formulations of this kind. They drive toward the point that the Messiah will come only in an age which is either totally pure or totally guilty and corrupt.
Little wonder that in one such context the Talmud cites the bald statement of three famous teachers the third and fourth centuries: “May he come, but I do not want to see him.” Sanhedrin 98b.
Attempts to eliminate apocalypticism completely from the realm of rabbinic Judaism have not been lacking since the Middle Ages…
this denial of apocalypticism set out to suppress exceedingly vital elements in the realm of Judaism, elements filled with historical dynamism even if they combined destructive with constructive forces.
Apocalyptic thinking always contains the elements of dread and consolation intertwined. The dread and peril of the End form an element of shock and of the shocking which induces extravagance. The terrors of the real historical experiences of the Jewish people are joined with images drawn from the heritage of myth or mythical fantasy. This is expressed with particular forcefulness in the concept of the birth pangs of the Messiah which in this case means the Messianic age. The paradoxical nature of this conception exists in the fact that the redemption which is born here is in no causal sense a result of previous history. It is precisely the lack of transition between history and the redemption which is always stressed by the prophets and apocalyptists. The Bible and the apocalyptic writers know of no progress in history leading to the redemption. The redemption is not the product of immanent developments such as we find it in modern Western reinterpretations of Messianism since the Enlightenment where, secularized as the belief in progress, Messianism still displayed unbroken and immense vigor. It is rather transcendence breaking in upon history, an intrusion in which history itself perishes, transformed in its ruin because it is struck by a beam of light shining into it from an outside source. The constructions of history in which the apocalyptists (as opposed to the prophets of the Bible) revel have nothing to do with modern conceptions of development or progress, and if there is anything which, in the view of directed to what history will bring forth, but to that which will arise in its ruin, free at last and undisguised.
3.
Wikipedia
Appeasement in a political context is a diplomatic policy of making political or material concessions to an enemy power in order to avoid conflict.[1]
The term is most often applied to the foreign policy of the British Prime Ministers Ramsay Macdonald, Stanley Baldwinand Neville Chamberlain towards Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy[2] between 1935 and 1939.
Their policies have been the subject of intense debate for more than seventy years among academics, politicians and diplomats. The historians' assessments have ranged from condemnation for allowing Adolf Hitler's Germany to grow too strong, to the judgment that they had no alternative and acted in their country's best interests. At the time, these concessions were widely seen as positive, and the Munich Pact concluded on 30 September 1938 among Germany, Britain, France, and Italy prompted Chamberlain to announce that he had secured "peace for our time."[3]
The setting is Jerusalem, approximately in the year 70 C.E.; the city is in the grip of a terrible famine, and it is surrounded by powerful Roman legions, under the command of Vespasian.
“Abba Sikra, the head of the ‘Biryonim,’ the extremist Jewish militants, was the brother-in-law of Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai. Ben Zakkai sent a message to Abba Sikra, ‘Come to me in secret.’ The latter came. Rabban Yochanan spoke, ‘How long are you going to continue to destroy the world by famine?’ He answered, ‘What can I do? The situation is out of my control. If I say anything opposing the ideas of my “comrades,” they will kill me.’ ”
“Rabban Yochanan told his brother-in-law to devise a plan which would be most likely to enable ben Zakkai to leave the city, to negotiate with the Romans, and bypass the tight guard of the Biryoni troops. Abba Sikra proposed that Rabban Yochanan pretend to be seriously ill, then have the word spread that he was on his death-bed and, finally, that he had died. His students would then pretend to carry his coffin for burial outside the city.”
“With his students Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua acting as pall-bearers, the coffin approached the Biryoni-manned guard-post just within the wall of Yerushalayim. The guards wanted to plunge their swords into the coffin to make sure that they were not being tricked, but the students said, ‘The Romans will say that they’re stabbing their leader!’ The guards then wanted to push the coffin hard, to see if anyone inside would cry out. Again, the students quick-wittedly told them that if they did that, the hated Romans would say, ‘The Jews are pushing the body of their leader!’ The Biryoni guard opened the gate and reluctantly let the small burial party through.”
Meeting with Vespasian
“When the Jewish party reached the Roman camp, Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai emerged from the coffin and greeted the general, ‘Peace be unto you, O King! Peace be unto you, O King!’ To which Vespasian responded, ‘You have incurred the death penalty twice. First, you have called me King, and I am not the King! Second, if I am indeed the King, why have you not come out to me earlier, to how me the proper respect?!’ ”
“Ben Zakkai answered, ‘I knew you had to be a king, because our prophets have foretold that the Temple will fall only into the hands of a king. And the reason I haven’t come out to you until now is that we are plagued by violent extremists within the city, who would not let me come out!’ ”
“Vespasian responded, ‘If there were a snake curled around a barrel of honey, would you not break the barrel (that is, set fire to the walls of the city) in order to get rid of the snake?’ ”
“Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai was not able to respond to this. (At this point, Rabbi Yosef, and some say Rabbi Akiva, comment that sometimes ‘G-d makes the wise foolish;’ for Ben Zakkai should have responded that he had hoped to defeat the militants without having to destroy the walls of the city, and then to make peace with the Romans.)”
“At this point, an Imperial messenger arrived from Rome, and announced, ‘Arise! For the Emperor has died and the Senators have decided to make Vespasian, General of the Legions of Rome, the new Emperor!’ ”
“Vespasian, in the act of rising, had put one boot on, but was unable to get the second one on, nor was he able, at this point, to take the first one off. Rabban Yochanan, witnessing the new Emperor’s discomfiture, told him not to be concerned, because the source of the problem was that he had just received wonderful news, and the natural response of the body, under those circumstances, is to swell. The cure would be to have someone whom Vespasian disliked come before him, which would induce the opposite reaction in the body, to shrink back, so his foot would be restored to its normal size. (It is interesting to note that the presence of the Jewish leader was not having the effect of someone distasteful to the new Emperor; apparently, Vespasian had developed some grudging respect for the Jewish scholar.)”
“Vespasian said to Rabban Yochanan, ‘I will leave now, to return to Rome. But I will dispatch someone to take my place. Before I go, ben Zakkai, you may make a request, which I will grant you.’ ”
“Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai responded with this historic three-fold request:
1) that the Romans guarantee the safety of the scholars of Yavneh, where the new Sanhedrin (Jewish Supreme Court) would be located
2) that the Romans guarantee the survival of the family of Rabban Gamliel, a descendant of the House of David
3) that the Romans allow their physicians to restore the health of Rabbi Tzaddok, who had fasted for forty years to pray for the safety of the City and the Temple (apparently, Rabban Yochanan felt that the presence of Rabbi Tzaddok would be necessary to guarantee the maintenance of the Jewish spirit in the face of the overwhelming catastrophe about to befall the nation)”
“(Here again, Rabbi Yosef, and some say Rabbi Akiva, comment that sometimes ‘G-d makes the wise foolish;’ for Ben Zakkai should have requested the preservation of Jerusalem and the Holy Temple, and that the Jewish People should be given a “second chance” to prove their loyalty to Rome.)”
“But the Talmud, in defense of Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai, explains his thinking; namely, that events had gone too far for such a request to be honored. In order, therefore, to preserve the Torah, for that is the ‘reason for being’ of the Jewish People, it would have to be located somewhere else, ‘temporarily,’ if that was G-d’s will.”
And that was the beginning of the 2,000 year dislocation of the Jewish People and the Torah, from their Land, although there never was a time that the Land was totally empty of its Jewish sons and daughters.
See: https://www.ou.org/holidays/the-three-weeks/the_fateful_meeting/
מקור חז"לי נוסף המביא את אגדה זו הוא החיבור אבות דרבי נתן,[8] הקדום לתלמוד הבבלי, שגם בו מופיע הסיפור על כך שהקנאים אינם מוכנים לפשרות, שרבי יוחנן מתחזה למת ותלמידיו מוציאים אותו מירושלים, שם הוא פוגש את המצביא, מודיע לו על קיסרותו על סמך אותו פסוק שבבבלי, ומבקש ממנו את יבנה, לאחר שהקיסר נותן לו רשות לבקש. בגרסה זו מופיעים כמה הבדלים. אספסיאנוס מתואר באופן חיובי יותר, כמי שלא רוצה להחריב את ירושלים, ומבקש בקשה קטנה כדי להשלים. הנתק בין הקיצוניים לרבי יוחנן גדול יותר, מכיוון שלפי המסופר בבבלי, אחיינו ראש הביריונים מסייע לרבי יוחנן לצאת מירושלים, ולפי המסופר באבות דרבי נתן "רבי יוחנן מדבר לקנאים והם לא שומעים לו והוא יוצא מעצמו". באבות דרבי נתן אספסיאנוס מלכתחילה מתייחס לרבי יוחנן יפה, מכיוון שמרגליו הודיעו לו שרבי יוחנן תמך בשלום איתו, בעוד שבבבלי המצביא מקבל אותו בכתף קרה, מוכיח אותו ומתווכח איתו. הבדל נוסף הוא שבעוד שבבבלי מיד בתחילת הפגישה רבי יוחנן מודיע לו על קיסרותו, באדר"נ ההודעה היא רק בסוף הפגישה. וגם בקשת רבי יוחנן באדר"נ קצת שונה: "איני מבקש ממך אלא יבנה, שאלך ואשנה בה לתלמידי ואקבע בה תפילה ואעשה בה כל מצוות האמורות בתורה." בקשה זו, כפי שניתן לראות, אינה מתייחסת כלל לשושלת רבן גמליאל (אם כי רבי יוחנן בעצמו הוא חלק ממנה), ואף אולי אינה מתייחסת ליבנה כאל מרכז קיים, כי חכמיה לא מוזכרים כלל. בנוסף, בבבלי קיימת ביקורת על רבי יוחנן על כך שלא ביקש מהקיסר את ירושלים עצמה, בעוד שבאדר"נ אין כלל ביקורת. גדליה אלון בעקבות מדרש איכה רבה, שם מסופר כי בעת הבקשה היה רבי יוחנן כלוא בגופנא. ובעקבותיוסף בן מתתיהו היו בגופנא וביבנה ריכוזים של אסירים יהודים (מעין מחנות מעצר שלאחר המרד), משער כי בקשתו של רבי יוחנן הייתה להיות מועבר ליבנה, היות ששם היו כלואים תלמידים וחכמים. אפשרות נוספת היא שההעברה ליבנה לא הייתה תוצאה של בקשה, אך הקמת בית הדין שם נבעה פשוט מנוכחותו של רבי יוחנן. לעומת גדליה אלון שסובר שאין אזכור נוסף לכך שביבנה התקיים מרכז רוחני לפני חורבן בית המקדש. שטיינזלץ בפירושו בתלמוד שם, מתאר כי יש מקורות שונים שדווקא מאמתים את כך שיבנה כבר הייתה מרכז רוחני.
5.
The Fast of Gedalia
After the destruction of the First temple, Gedalia was appointed by Nebuchadnezzar II of Babylon as governor of Yehud province. This province was the last refuge for Jews to remain in Judaea. It’s formation was the only thing that stood in the way of making the destruction of the Second Jewish Commonwealth utterly complete. On hearing of the appointment, the Jews that had taken refuge in surrounding countries returned to Judah. But the zealots were incensed since only total destruction could bring the rupture and necessary disruption to force God’s hand and bring the ultimate redemption.
Ishmael, and the ten men who were with him, murdered Gedaliah, together with most of the Jews who had joined him and many Babylonians whom Nebuchadnezzar had left with Gedaliah (Jeremiah 41:2-3). The remaining Jews feared the vengeance of Nebuchadnezzar (in view of the fact that his chosen ruler, Gedaliah, had been killed by a Jew) and fled to Egypt. Although the dates are not clear from the Bible, this probably happened about four to five years and three months after the destruction of Jerusalem and the First Temple in 586 BCE. (see)
The day that was chosen to assassinate Gedaliah was the Jewish New Year and by tradition a fast of Gedaliah is held on the day after Rosh Hashanah.
Closing song: “Lo Alecha” by an early 70’s Jewish group called Kol B’Seder made up of Jeff Klepper and Dan Freelander and available on iTunes Jewish Music for the Masses: Jeff Klepper Live In Concert
An exploration of the major themes of Rosh Hashanah; Malchiot, Zichronot and Shofarot in the context of Ancient Near Eastern New Year festivities and rites.
Source Notes:
What’s new about the Jewish New Year
The three components of Rosh HaShannah
Malkhiot – Kingship - מלכיות
Zikhronot - Remembrances - זכרונות
Shofarot – Shofar Blast - שופרות
1.
Source in the Mishnah
one says avot and gevurot and kedushat Hashem, and [then] includes malkhiot with kedushat hayom, and [then] blows [the shofar; then] zikhronot and [then] he blows; [then] the shofarot and [then] he blows [a third time];
We may not have less then ten [verses] of malkhiot, ten of zikhronot and ten of shofarot. (Mishneh Rosh Hashanah 4: 5-6)
2.
Source in the Torah
Speak unto the children of Israel, saying: In the seventh month, in the first day of the month, shall be a solemn rest unto you, a memorial proclaimed with the blast of horns, a holy convocation.
דַּבֵּר אֶל-בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, לֵאמֹר: בַּחֹדֶשׁ הַשְּׁבִיעִי בְּאֶחָד לַחֹדֶשׁ, יִהְיֶה לָכֶם שַׁבָּתוֹן--זִכְרוֹן תְּרוּעָה, מִקְרָא-קֹדֶשׁ
Leviticus 23:24
Rashi: a remembrance of Scriptural verses dealing with remembrance and Scriptural verses dealing with the blowing of the shofar (R.H . 32a)
זכרון פסוקי זכרונות ופסוקי שופרות
Where is the source for Malkhiot – Kingship – מלכיות ?
Where is the source for the New Year?
Where is the source for repentance and new beginnings?
Review of Last year’s session….
The Kingship of God is the core message of Judaism.
3.
מודה אני לפניך מלך חי וקים
I give thanks before You, Living and Eternal King
4.
בָּרוּךְ אַתָּה ה' אֱ-להֵינוּ מֶלֶךְ הָעולָם
Blessed art You Lord our King…
5.
בָּרוּךְ אַתָּה ה' הא-ל הָקדוש
בָּרוּךְ אַתָּה ה' המֶלֶךְ הָקדוש
6.
The 9th and 10th proof text for Malchiyot:
The 9th proof text brought for malchuyot (kingship) is the verse from Zechariah 14, 9 used to close the Aleinu prayer. [Some believe Aleinu was written by Tanna Rav in 3rd century Babylonia for Rosh Hashanah services.]
וְהָיָה ה' לְמֶלֶךְ, עַל-כָּל-הָאָרֶץ; בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא, יִהְיֶה ה' אֶחָד--וּשְׁמוֹ אֶחָד
And the LORD shall be King over all the earth; in that day shall the LORD be One, and His name one.
The 10th and last proof text:
שְׁמַע, יִשְׂרָאֵל: ה' אֱ-לוהֵינוּ, ה' אֶחָד
Hear Oh Israel the Lord your God, the Lord is one.
7.
The whispered [subversive] proclamation said out loud...
ברוך שם כבוד מלכותו לעולם ועד
Blessed be the name of the glory of His kingdom forever and ever.
8.
אבינו מלכנו א'ן לנו מלך אלא אתה
“Our father. our king we have no king other than you.
[author: Rabbi Akiba - Babylonian Talmud, Ta’anit 25b highpoint of Selichot services leading up to Yom Kippur and of the Yom Kippur service itself and the closing prayer at the Neila service]
9.
Biblical rejection of a human king
But the thing displeased Samuel, when they said: 'Give us a king to judge us.' And Samuel prayed unto the LORD.
And the LORD said unto Samuel: 'Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee; for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected Me, that I should not be king over them.
According to all the works which they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt even unto this day, in that they have forsaken Me, and served other gods, so do they also unto thee.
( see Samuel I 8: 4-22)
כִּי לֹא אֹתְךָ מָאָסוּ, כִּי-אֹתִי מָאֲסוּ מִמְּלֹךְ עֲלֵיהֶם. כְּכָל-הַמַּעֲשִׂים אֲשֶׁר-עָשׂוּ, מִיּוֹם הַעֲלֹתִי אוֹתָם מִמִּצְרַיִם וְעַד-הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה, וַיַּעַזְבֻנִי, וַיַּעַבְדוּ אֱ-לֹהִים
10.
The New Year
The four new years are: On the first of Nisan, the new year for the kings and for the festivals; On the first of Elul, the new year for the tithing of animals; Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Shimon say, on the first of Tishrei. On the first of Tishrei, the new year for years, for the Sabbatical years and for the Jubilee years and for the planting and for the vegetables. On the first of Shevat, the new year for the trees according to the words of the House of Shammai; The House of Hillel says, on the fifteenth thereof.
[Mishnah Rosh Hashanah 1:1]
Rabbi Chisda said, 'They only taught [that the year begins in Nissan] this in regard to Jewish kings. But for the kings of the nations of the world, we count from Tishrei, (Babylonian Talmud 3a)
א"ר חסדא
לא שנו אלא למלכי ישראל אבל למלכי אומות העולם מתשרי מנינן
11.
Babylonian New Year - Akitu - Akkadian: rêš-šattim, "head of the year") 21 Adar - 1 Nisannu.
There were twelve days of public ritual which according to Henri Frankfort in his seminal work: Kingship and the Gods, was a time of purification, of renewal of the vegetation. It was also a time of dramatic reenactments, it was at this time that the destinies of both gods and mankind were fixed, and the king began his reign on new year’s day.
Highlights:
4th day - During the day the Epic of Creation Enuma Elish would be recited. The Enuma Elish, is most likely the oldest story concerning the birth of the gods and the creation of the universe and human beings. It then explains how all the gods united in the god Marduk, following his victory over Tiamat. The recitation of this Epic was considered the beginning of preparations for the submission of the King of Babylon before Marduk on the fifth day of Akitu.
5th day - The submission of the king of Babylon before Marduk. The king would enter to the Esagila accompanied by the priests, they would approach all together the altar where the high priest of the Esagila impersonates Marduk then he approaches the king, begins to strip him of his jewelry, scepter and even his crown then he would slap him hard while the altar would kneel and begins to pray asking for Marduk's forgiveness and submitting to him saying: "I have not sinned O Lord of the universe, and I haven't neglected your heavenly might at all"... Then the priest in the role of Marduk says: "Don't be afraid of what Marduk has to say, for he will hear your prayers, extends your power, and increases the greatness of your reign". The removal of all worldly possessions is a symbol of the submission the king gives to Marduk. After this the king would stand up and the priest would give him back his jewelry, scepter and crown then slaps him hard again hoping for the king to shed tears, because that would express more the submission to Marduk and respect to his power. When the priest returns the crown to the king that means his power was renewed by Marduk, thus April would be considered not only the revival of nature and life but also to the State as well. [i]
12.
Egypt there was theSed Festival
The Egyptian Sed Festival held in the Fall and celebrated the continued rule of a pharaoh. The ancient festival might, perhaps, have been instituted to replace a ritual of murdering a pharaoh who was unable to continue to rule effectively because of age or condition. … They primarily were held to rejuvenate the pharaoh’s strength and stamina while still sitting on the throne, celebrating the continued success of the pharaoh. The Sed-festival developed into a royal jubilee intended to reinforce the pharaoh’s divine powers and religious leadership.
13.
When was Kingship introduced to the Jewish New Year?
In the critical view, the Pentateuchal legislation in which the festival appears belongs to the Priestly Code (P) and, therefore, to the post-Exilic period, when the Babylonian influences had become particularly pronounced. The older critical views consider the whole institution to be post-Exilic, pointing out, for instance, that there is no reference to it in the lists of the feasts in Deuteronomy (16: 1—17). More recently, however, Sigmund Mowinckel has advanced the suggestion that there existed in pre-Exilic Israel an autumnal New Year festival on which God was “enthroned” as King (analogous to the Babylonian enthronement of *Marduk).
(Encyclopedia Judaica; Louis Jacobs article “Rosh Hashannah’)
14.
Earliest significance to Tishrei 1 -10 (Leviticus 25)
- Then shalt thou make proclamation with the blast of the horn on the tenth day of the seventh month; in the day of atonement shall ye make proclamation with the horn throughout all your land.
- And ye shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty throughout the land unto all the inhabitants thereof; it shall be a jubilee unto you; and ye shall return every man unto his possession, and ye shall return every man unto his family.
- And if thy brother be waxen poor with thee, and sell himself unto thee, thou shalt not make him to serve as a bondservant.
- As a hired servant, and as a settler, he shall be with thee; he shall serve with thee unto the year of jubilee.
- Then shall he go out from thee, he and his children with him, and shall return unto his own family, and unto the possession of his fathers shall he return.
- For they are My servants, whom I brought forth out of the land of Egypt; they shall not be sold as bondmen.
- For unto Me the children of Israel are servants; they are My servants whom I brought forth out of the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.
- In the Talmud Tishrei 1 -10 (Babylonian Talmud Rosh Hashana 8b)
According to the Talmud, servants were formally freed on the 1st of Tishri, but were allowed to remain on the homesteads of their former masters and to enjoy themselves for ten days, until Yom Kippur, when the trumpet was blown (Lev. xxv. 9) as a signal for their departure, and for the restoration of the fields to their original owners (R. H. 8b).
15.
Significance of remembering the sound of the Shofar (Exodus 21)
- If thou buy a Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve; and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing.
- But if the servant shall plainly say: I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free;
- then his master shall bring him unto God, and shall bring him to the door, or unto the door-post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him forever.
Babylonian Talmud, Kiddushin 22b
Now, why was the ear chosen to be bored out of all the organs of the body? According to Rabban Jochanan ben Zakkai The Holy One Blessed be He said said: The ear that heard on Mount Sinai, “For the children of Israel are slaves to Me ” (Lev. 25:55) and not slaves to slaves… and [then] went and acquired a master for himself, [this ear] shall be bored.
“You shall not steal” (Exod. 20:13) and [then] went and stole, shall be bored. And if [the text is referring to] one who sold himself [into servitude, the reason is that]
רבן יוחנן בן זכאי היה דורש את המקרא הזה כמין חומר מה נשתנה אזן מכל אברים שבגוף אמר הקב"ה אזן ששמעה קולי על הר סיני בשעה שאמרתי (ויקרא כה, נה) כי לי בני ישראל עבדים ולא עבדים לעבדים והלך זה וקנה אדון לעצמו ירצע
Conclusion
17.
Eric Fromm – You Shall be as Gods pp73 – 75
“Obedience to God is also the negation of submission to man.”
“The idea of serfdom to God was, in the Jewish tradition, transformed into the basis for the freedom of man from man. God’s authority thus guarantees man’s independ
[i] Compare to the accounts of the High Priest in the Holy of Holies:
The first mishna in Yoma stipulates that the Kohen Gadol must be sequestered for one compete week prior to Yom Kippur to purify himself and prepare for the holiday.
Prior to entering the Holy of Holies the Kohen Gadol removed his golden garments, immersed in the mikvah, and changed to a new set of linen garments, again washing his hands and feet twice.
There was good reason for the High Priest's decision not to elongate his prayer at this particular time: many a High Priest was struck down dead while in the Holy of Holies. Although the First Temple stood for 410 years, in all there were only 12 High Priests during that entire period; because they were very righteous, they were blessed with longevity. However, the Second Temple, which stood for a total of 420 years, was presided over by more than 300 High Priests. This is because in the spiritual decline of those days, many of these men were corrupted, and bought their office through influence. The Zohar, mentions that a rope was tied around his foot, to drag him out in case he dies.
Additionally, if he would change any detail of the incense service within the Holy of Holies (as we mentioned with regard to the Sadducees), he would also die. With this is mind, it is understandable that the eyes of all Israel awaited the exit of the High Priest with bated breath. Being aware of his people's agitation, the High Priest's first concern was that he should not cause them any unnecessary anxiety... and the longer he stayed within, the more Israel's apprehension grew. Thus the High Priest saw fit to forego the opportunity to engage in a long personal prayer, and recited the shorter version so as to exit the Sanctuary with reasonable speed.