Parsha Chayei Sarah - October 25, 2013

Parshat Chayei Sarah 

Cheshvan 21Pa/ October 25 

By: Joel Ackerman 

Most of this week’s parasha reads like the plot of a soap opera. The cast of characters:

Abraham: The man who had been blessed with everything – except grandchildren to inherit his legacy.

Isaac: a forty-year-old bachelor, never dated. He would inherit everything, but who was he, really?

Rebecca: Chosen by G-d to be Isaac’s wife. Was she up to the challenge?

Eliezer: A true and faithful servant or conflicted over the need to advance his own interests?

Abraham was well advanced in age – at an age when he would be reviewing his life and accomplishments, and there was a huge gap. G-d had promised him that his descendants would be exceedingly numerous, but Isaac, the son who would inherit everything, was still unmarried. Abraham did not want Isaac married to any local women, even those from the families of his close Canaanite friends, but apparently was no longer up to the task of looking for a wife for him – especially since it would involve a long journey. So he assigned Eliezer, the steward of his property, the task.  Many times humans complicate matters. Eliezer is characterized by our commentators as Abraham’s perfect servant, loyal to the core. However, some of Eliezer’s acts in this parasha seem to indicate an intent to sabotage his own mission.

 Eliezer concocts a very specific scenario that would tell him whether a particular girl would be the right wife for Isaac. It would seem extremely unlikely that anyone would carry out that scenario exactly, and the mission would therefore fail. Yet Rebecca comes to the well and enacts the scenario exactly as Eliezer had envisioned it.

 When Eliezer enters the home of Rebecca’s family, he is offered food, but refuses to eat, stating “I will not eat until I have spoken my words.” This is a scene common in many medieval romances. A stranger rides into a castle, is invited to eat at the master’s table, stands up and states “I cannot eat until I have told my story!” At this point, everyone relaxes. The stranger is on some type of quest. The evening’s entertainment has arrived.

 But this isn’t medieval Europe. This is the Middle East, where customs involving host and guest are critical, where an error in behavior can produce a serious insult, where honor is at stake. And it looks as if Eliezer’s behavior here – refusing food - is intended to be a major affront to his hosts. In reciting Eliezer’s speech to Rebecca’s family, at one point the ba’al koreh uses a shalshelet, a quavering note that rises, falls and rises again. It is only used a few times in the entire Torah; it indicates a major point of tension – a major point of conflict for the character. Why is it here for Eliezer? Rashi asserts “Eliezer had a daughter and he was searching for a pretext so that Abraham would turn to him to marry his daughter to Isaac.”

The Dubno Maggid agrees: “Eliezer… had been forced to carry out his master’s orders, but he had no real desire that his mission should be successful”. He told his story to the family in a way that they would have no desire to pursue Abraham’s proposal of marriage so that Abraham would have to come to him for the marriage.

And at the end, Eliezer demands to know whether or not they intended to do kindness and truth to his master; if not, he would pack up and go immediately. After all that, Rebecca’s family could be justified in rejecting Abraham’s proposal.

 But most commentators do not agree. Abravanel is typical. In his view, Eliezer was completely faithful. He ignores Rashi’s thought about a daughter of Eliezer. He states, as do all the commentators, that Eliezer’s concocted scenario at the well was to determine whether the girl had the necessary characteristic of chesed – kindness – that would be needed for Isaac’s wife. He asserts that Eliezer’s refusal to eat until he had spoken was necessary in case they did not reach an agreement about Rebecca because in that case he would have to leave immediately, which could not be done if he had accepted food from the host. He describes how Eliezer carefully casts his story, leaving out some details that might produce a negative response from the family. He rejects any assertion that Eliezer intended to insult Rebecca’s family or that they felt insulted.

 The usual English expression is “Man proposes, G-d disposes”. Yiddish, as usual, is much more on point: “Man tracht un Gott lacht” (man plans and G-d laughs). Whether or not Eliezer was seeking to sabotage his mission, he accomplished it with flying colors.

 And what of Rebecca? Was she the right wife for Isaac? Was she up to the challenge of marrying a 40-year-old bachelor, probably well set in his ways, son of the world’s first Jewish mother, and whose father had nearly taken his life? Surely a strong sense of kindness was needed, but Isaac’s wife, like the wives of all of our patriarchs, had to have much more.

 I like to see how writers envision the characters in the Tanach.

 Orson Scott Card, a famed writer mainly of science fiction and fantasy, wrote a series of biographical novels of our matriarchs. He describes Rebecca as a young woman sure of herself and her convictions, who had heard great things of Abraham’s family and who did not hesitate for a moment when the chance came to become part of it. He adds the assertion that her behavior at the well, in addition to showing extreme kindness, also indicated a lack of the extreme modesty often expected of women in that society – women would not normally approach a strange man for any reason.

The author Maurice Samuel, in “Certain People of the Book”, calls Rebecca “The Manager”. He writes: “’Managerial’, too, is the best overall word for Rebekah, the wife of Isaac, and after it, ‘intuitive’, ‘unerring’, ‘competent’, all with a touch of greatness. If I had a problem in human relations it is Rebekah I would want to consult… Not Naomi, who I suspect would solve my problem by making me into the kind of person who doesn’t have that kind of problem.” He describes her as “lively, intelligent, quick in action, even as a girl; a person with a grasp of things... not the submissive and servile Oriental female of popular tradition” He states “Instinct – by which I mean the totality of her character – told Rebekah that it would be good for her husband to know, and to remember for the rest of his life, that when she was called to him she turned to her family and said “I will go – at once.”

 Yes, all agree, Rebecca was the right person for Isaac. He had the good fortune to have his wife chosen specifically for him by G-d. A lot of things could have gone wrong in this soap opera, but G-d’s plan prevailed. Who knows, perhaps He enjoyed watching the characters play out this plot. Man tracht un Gott lacht, indeed

Parsha Vayeirah - October 18, 2013

Michal Kohane

Parsha Vayeirah

Jane: Honey, what is that wooden sled still doing here? Jakie almost broke his head tripping over it when we walked into the garage! You know how much I hate it. I told you to throw it away!!

Joe: Honey, this is my favorite sled! You know how much it means to me. With this very sled my high school sweetheart and I won the foreign teens championship in Norway thirty years ago during my year abroad! You cant possibly ask me to…

G-d: Joe! Forget that old sled. Just do whatever Jane says...

Among its many amazing stories, from Abraham hosting the messengers and arguing with G-d for Sodom and Gamora, to the miraculous birth of Isaac and the mesmerizing story of the Binding, we get a one verse glimpse into what must be the most famous domestic dispute. Sarah tells Abraham to kick Hagar and Yishma’el out, and while we do not hear Abraham’s response, we can guess it, for had he quickly agreed (as he did back in chapter 15 when Sarah first offered him Hagar), there would have been no need for G-d Himself to intervene.

Last week, in Parashat Lech-Lecha (Genesis 15:1-16), Sarah (then still Sarai) suggested that Abraham (Abram) take Hagar to have a child. After all, G-d promised him an offspring, but maybe not through her? They have been in the land now, after returning from Egypt, for ten years. Surely if G-d wanted them to have children together, it would have happened by now. Maybe it’s just Sarah who is stalling G-d’s plan? As they have aged, she might have become more and more worried.

Hagar becomes pregnant, but rather than remembering she was given to Abraham so Sarah can be “built” and have continuity through her (15:2), she treats her mistress lightly. She continues to be known as Sarah’s “shifcha” (maidservant) but feels herself to be Abraham’s wife. Sarah approaches Abraham and asks for his help in the matter: “May Hashem judge between me and you”. His response is, “do to her as you wish”. 

Sarah “tortures” her (vate’aneha”) and Hagar runs away. The angel that finds her also calls her “Hagar the maidservant of Sarai” (15:8) and instructs her to go back. Rabbi Hirsch notes the order of the angel’s words: “go back and work it out”, he says (loosely this is how Hirsch explains “hit’ani”) and Hagar doesn’t move. Only when he says, “behold you’re pregnant with a son…” (15:11) she agrees to go back.

In this week’s Torah portion, Isaac is born and Sarah observes with great distress the interactions between her son, Isaac and that son, Yishma’el.  She doesn’t just tell Abraham to send Hagar and Yishma’el away but uses the verb “garesh”, same root used for gerushin, divorce. The text tells us that Abraham felt very badly for his son, but G-d says, “don’t feel bad for the boy and for your maidservant”, which might be the first time that someone actually notes the special bond that developed between Abraham and Hagar. For a brief moment, it seems that G-d “understands” Abraham’s feelings. It is important to note that up until this point, none of our key Biblical heroes had a second wife so perhaps no one knew how complicated the theory can get in real life. Still, in spite of the brief compassion, G-d tells him: “Listen to Sarah’s voice”. Rashi notes that this comes to show that Abraham was secondary to Sarah in prophesy. Rabbi Hirsch notes that the voice is likened to the soul and that G-d instructed Abraham to be tuned with Sarah’s spiritual knowledge. In a way, Abraham was the transistor but Sarah was the antenna.  In fact, G-d never talks to Abraham without Sarah being an active part of his life!

But there is also irony in this section, expressed by the choice of roots: first, it is Yishma’el who is the one “metzachek” (same root as Yitzchak, from to laugh) and Sarah is the one about whom it is said, “shma bekola” (same root as Yishma’el, from to hear, listen).

I admit: There was a time when I was almost jealous of Sarah. Wouldn’t you like it if G-d showed up at your home too when you’re about to lose an argument, telling everybody to listen to you and do as you say?!

But then it dawned on me how terrible it must have felt for Sarah not to be heard by the person who was her nearest and dearest to her, especially when it came to the most critical issue in their life; to be so unheard, that G-d Himself had to intervene. Having such a powerful ally might shed light not only her great spirituality but also on the grave state on their relationship at that moment.

But in spite of the pain and him not fully understanding, Abraham complies. He gets up early, packs a lunch and saddles his donkey. By doing so, perhaps he gives Sarah what is still the greatest gift any person can give another human being: the gift of listening.  

Parsha Noach - October 4, 2013

Parsha Noach 

Tishrei 30/ October 4 

By: Neska 

I just noticed a similarity between Parsha Bereshis and Parsha Noach - the eating of the fruit of the Tree and the drinking of the fruit of the Vine. Both causing the resultant loss of Paradise.

No sooner does Hashem create the human when, at some point during that time and the beginning of Shabbos (one year, a thousand years, 10 billion years) the human errs and we all experience the beginning of the end, as it were.

No sooner does Hashem cause the flood to recede when Noach, (having kept to his task building the Ark. keeping life on the Ark and unloading the Ark), plants a vineyard, takes a drink (a sip? a glass? a whole bottle?) gets drunk and we all, once again, experience the beginning of the end, as it were.

The "apple" and the wine. How physical we humans are. No instant Moshiach for us. No elevated level the second (7th, 8th) time around. We have yet failed again.

And we are still trying to regain The Garden.

Shabbat Shalom

Parshat Bereshit - October 7, 2013

Member Mini Drash 

By: Even Gordon-Ramek 

In Lech Lecha we learn the chronicles of our Patriarch and forefather Abraham, who was chosen by Ha Shem to lead the Jewish people

Ha Shem said” Go away from your land, from your birthplace, and from your father’s house to the land that I will show you. I will make you a great nation. I will bless you and make you great. You shall become a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and he who curses you, I will curse. All of the families of the earth will be blessed through you.

Why did Ha Shem choose Abraham? What did He see in this man to be so chosen, and for such a formidable task?

Ha Shem had choices. There were other fine and learned men before Abraham. They believed in the Supernal Being and were qualified in many ways. There was Noah There was Manoch. These men also walked with God. But the problem was that when they died, Their belief died with them. They were unable to transmit their belief in the Supreme Being that would last throughout generations.

Ha Shem saw in Abraham amazing strength and courage, , Abraham had characteristics of kindness and generousity. Ha Shem began to test Abraham. Abraham passed all of the ten tests put before him. He welcomed the three strangers, sent to him by Ha Shem. He agreed to the covenant of circumcision, and of course, Akeda Itschak, the binding of Isaac.

He challenged his own father, at a young age, and went against the common evil practices of idolatry, It is very difficult to go against and disobey the norms of society.

Abraham even had the courage to challenge Ha Shem about Sodom, in the name of justice and mercy. In Genesis 18:25 He said”You dare not. Shall the Judge of all the earth not do justice?

Today,people sacrifice all ethics for the sake of making money. When people drop and discard all of their values, because of a society that demands it, this is contemporary idolatry.

 However, for all of his fine characteristics, the most important and successful accomplishment that Abraham displayed, was in his devotion to propagating the faith. He not only had the ambition to pass the faith on the next generation, through Isaac and to his grandson Jacob,, but he had the strength and the ability . Related to Abraham, in Genesis(18:19) “For I have known him, that he may instruct his children and his posterity to do righteousness (tsedakah) and justice.

This is a trait of the seed of our father Abraham. The giving of charity is greater than all the offerings. The doing of righteousness and justice is preferable to Ha Shem than the sacrificial offering.


As Jews today, we have the same obligation as did Abraham. The Torah repeats in many places the commandment to teach our children. The only way we can propagate the faith is through our children. In past generations, Jews were harassed and persecuted to give up their faith State sponsored anti-semitism was legend.

Today there still exists anti-semitism, but we have a worse enemy. The challenge of modern day Jews is the danger coming from ignorance, assimilation ,apathy and indifference.

As Abraham was tested, so we are being tested. Are we teaching our children.?

Today, only 5% of Jewish families send their children to Jewish Day schools. Admitedly, in past days, there were no Jewish Day schools in the Bay area. But with the availability of the schools now, why do so few Jews participate.?

Also, in the area of philanthropy, the statistic was that 50% of giving was to Jewish causes, in the 1950’s. Today, there is only 20% of giving to Jewish causes.

With only 5% of Jewish children being exposed to Jewish learning.

Parshat Nitzavim- Vayeilech - August 31. 2013

NITZAVIM – HAAZINU 5773 

“YASHER KOACH” 

Barry Waldman 

(based on the writings and shiurim of Rav Matis Weinberg: www.thelivingtree.org) 

Teshuva stands as a central theme of parsha Nitzavim. To attain some insight into the nature of teshuva, it is worthwhile reflecting on the first person who did teshuva. Surprisingly, the midrash identifies that person as Reuven:

‘Reuven returned to the pit’ – God said to him: ‘Never has a person sinned before Me and done teshuva; you are the first to introduce teshuva. By your life, one of your descendants will introduce his prophecy with teshuva.’ Who was this? This was Hoshea: ‘Return, O Israel, to the L-rd your G-d.’ (Bereishis Rabbah 84:13) 

I say “surprisingly” because the midrash tells us that there were others who did teshuva well before Reuven:

Adam asked Kayin, "What has become of the judgment which Hashem cast upon you?" Kayin answered, "I did teshuva and I was pardoned."

Upon hearing this, Adam exclaimed, "So great is the power of teshuva, yet I did not know?!" And he, too, did teshuva. (Bereishis Rabbah 22:13)

This discrepancy is a hint that there are hierarchies within teshuva, and that Reuven was the “first” in the sense of achieving a level that others did not.

The midrash makes it clear that Kayin and Adam had an agenda – to be pardoned. In his Hilchot Teshuva, Rambam describes how even on one’s deathbed, such a teshuva can be effective in avoiding Divine punishment. But a teshuva that functions mainly to shield oneself from retribution is a very low level teshuva. It may prevent one from being “sent to hell,” but it is surely not a teshuva that allows one to experience Life with all of its power and creative potential. Let’s examine how Reuven’s teshuva was a step towards the latter.

In order to do so, we’ll work backwards. In Reuven’s merit, his descendant Hoshea became a prophet of teshuva. Next week is Shabbat Shuva and the haftorah is taken from the last chapter of his book, beginning with the words, “Return, O Israel, to Hashem your God, for you have stumbled in your iniquity.” It ends with the words, “for the paths of Hashem are straight (yesharim), and the righteous shall walk in them, and the rebellious shall stumble on them.” (Hoshea 14:10)

What exactly is meant here by “the rebellious shall stumble” on the paths of Hashem, as opposed to the righteous who “walk in them?” The simple sense of the pasuk is that for the righteous, the straight path is easy and natural. Not so for the rebellious, for whom the derech Hashem is strewn with obstacles.

By taking a closer look at the precise nature of Reuven’s sin, we may be able to arrive at an alternative explanation for this pasuk. So what exactly did Reuven do wrong?

Upon the death of Rachel, Yakov brought his bed into her maidservant, Bilhah’s, tent. Reuven reacted by moving the bed into Leah’s tent (Shabbos 55b). Such unseemly violation of another’s marital relationship is considered by the Torah to be equivalent to adultery. Hence,

 “Reuven went and lay with Bilhah…” (Bereishis 35:22)

Rashi explains Reuven’s motivation:

Since he (Reuven) disarranged his (Yakov’s) bed, Scripture considers it as if he had lain with her. Now why did he disarrange and profane his bed? [It was] because when Rachel died, Yakov took his bed, which had been regularly placed in Rachel’s tent and not in the other tents, and moved it in to Bilhah’s tent. Reuven came and protested his mother’s humiliation. He said, “If my mother’s sister was a rival to my mother, should my mother’s sister’s handmaid [now also] be a rival to my mother?” For this reason, he disarranged it.

When Adam ate from the Tree, and Kayin killed his brother, they knew they were doing something wrong. But not for one minute did Reuven believe he was committing a sin by disarranging his father’s bed. Wasn’t he protecting his mother, defending her honor, righting an injustice?! Moreover, was he not also doing God’s work in living up to his name? Hashem saw that Leah was unloved, so He opened her womb; but Rachel remained barren. Leah conceived and bore a son, and she called his name, Reuven, as she had declared, “Because Hashem has seen my humiliation, for now my husband will love me.” (Bereishis 29:31-2)

In Reuven’s mind, not only was he not committing a sin – he was doing a great mitzvah!

And herein lies perhaps the real meaning of the pasuk from Hoshea,

“for the paths of the Lord are straight (yesharim), and the righteous shall walk in them, and the rebellious shall stumble on them.”

Stumbling vis-à-vis the derech Hashem does not mean being on the derech Hashem and tripping; it means being convinced you’re on the derech Hashem when you’re really not!

Rashi explains why Reuven was not present when Yosef was lifted out of the pit and sold into slavery:

“And Reuven returned (vayashav) to the pit” - But when he (Yosef) was sold, he (Reuven) was not there, for his day to go and serve his father had arrived (Gen. Rabbah 84:15). Another explanation: He was busy with his sackcloth and his fasting for disarranging his father’s bed (Peskikta d’Rav Kahana ch. 25).

Reuven’s teshuva was a long process of shattering tightly held convictions, reassessing assumptions, and viewing events from alternative perspectives. It culminated in his attempt to rescue Yosef, the son of his mother’s rival, from the pit. Reuven was eventually able to put aside his righteous indignation over his mother, and enter a different contextual space – his relationship with Yakov, in which he came to understand and care for that which his father loved. Paradigm shifts of this nature are the stuff of teshuvah.

This is perhaps most significant when it comes to our relationship with Torah itself. Asked to identify Moshe Rabbeinu’s greatest accomplishment, many would say “ascending Mount Sinai to receive the Ten Commandments.” Ironically, Hashem views Moshe’s highest achievement as descending the mountain and smashing them. In fact, only when Moshe shattered the tablets, does God give him a “Yasher Koach!” As Rashi comments on the last pasuk of the Chumash:

“…and for all the strong hand and for all the great awesomeness that Moshe performed before the eyes of all Israel.”

“Before the eyes of all Israel” – That his heart inspired him to break the Tablets before their eyes, as it says, “And I smashed them before your eyes.” The mind of the Holy One, Blessed be He, was in accord with the mind of Moshe about this, as it says, “Asher shibartah (which you shattered) which implies, “Yishar kochacha” (May your strength be well directed) sheshibarta – “for having shattered the Tablets.”

Why was God so pleased with the shattering of His Torah? Very simply – after the incident with the Golden Calf, it was no longer His Torah. A Torah that is based on self-projections and artificial realities, that is manipulated for personal agendas and internecine competition – is a Torah that is severed from Other and exists only in the windmills of one’s mind. The only hope is for its complete destruction and the rebuilding of a new Torah that exists within the context of real relationship.

But when things in the moment seem so clear and so right – as it did for Reuven when he disarranged his father’s bed, and as it did for bnei Yisrael when they danced around the Golden Calf – how do you know if you’re following the path of truth, or merely deceiving yourself? What is the external referent? It can’t be the Torah itself, because you can’t use something you’ve potentially corrupted as the gauge to determine if you’ve remained uncorrupted!

Rav Matis Weinberg suggests that we look to two archetypes: Avraham – the seeker of truth, and Bilaam – the master of deception.

Whoever has the following three characteristics is a disciple of Avraham Avinu; but [whoever has] three opposite characteristics is a disciple of Bilaam haRasha:

Someone with an eye for good, unpretentious, with limited needs is a disciple of Avraham Avinu. Someone with an eye for evil, arrogant, with extensive needs is a disciple of Bilaam haRasha. (Avot 5:19)

Their differences become our reality check:

“A path may seem yashar to a man, but in the end, it is a path of death.” (Mishlei 14:12). How to know? No matter the Torah or the scholarship, tzizit length or alma mater, piety or liberalism, the initial criterion is more primal and seminal… Whose disciple? How much joy in others…how driven by ego…how demanding the needs…how blinding the desires…how desperate the projections…how indulgent of inner ugliness....Such a
reality check is made possible through the demands of living with a backdrop of significance, the urgency of discovering the view and response that matches not imagination but facts: a reality check that ultimately checks openness to reality…(Rav Matis Weinberg: FrameWorks – Balak)

When teshuva is driven by even the most kosher of agendas, by the need to attain forgiveness, it remains caught within the ongoing Bilaam-like “windmills of your mind.” Only the search for reality, driven by the sheer belief in and love of Life that characterized the life of Avraham – a quest that may even lead you to convict yourself – can lead to the teshuva of a Reuven.This Yom Kippur, as we beat our chest with every al chet, reflecting on what we know we’ve done wrong – we ought to honestly evaluate what our deepest drives are. And then we can try to do as Reuven did: to think about what we’re convinced we’ve done right, and re-evaluate that. That’s a teshuva “first” worthy of Hashem’s “Yasher Koach”!

Parshat Ki Teitzei - August 17, 2013

I Think I’ll Create Man: 

A Cautionary Tale 

Elul 5773 

By Irwin Kaplan 

“I think I’ll create Man,” He said, “and I’ll distinguish him from the other beasts by adding the ability to think, not just to react; to see beyond his limitations and to have a measure of control over his own destiny.” There
were other planets, other experiments, but this combination of attributes was unique to the planet Earth.

It seemed like a good idea, but recognizing that this was a prototype, He created a comfortable environment and established some simple tests to validate the experiment, so that modifications could be made before going into full-scale production. It didn’t take long to discover that the ability to think didn’t necessarily bring with it enlightened self-interest. The first test was temptation and failure resulted in punishment, banishing Adam and Eve from their idyllic setting. That would seem to be enough incentive for a thinking being to become aware of the consequences of his actions and to act in accordance with his self-interest.

So with that out of the way, He decided to go into full-scale production by creating a system for production that appealed to the many aspects of self interest. First, He built the mechanism right into His creation, so that it wasn’t necessary to build manufacturing plants to generate copies, thereby making the production process one of reproduction. Second, He made the process simple and egalitarian, so one did not need an advanced degree to participate. Third, He made it fun, serving the animal need for immediate gratification. Then, He made it as a response to Man’s awareness of his own mortality (an awareness that came with the ability to think), so that there was continuity that created the illusion of immortality. This was necessary, because thinking, a process designed to have no limits, needed to have a way of dealing with open-ended issues that could not conclusively be resolved with facts. So beyond the factual, there needed to be a way of harnessing the runaway potential of thinking. Lastly, progeny was an integral part of survival, both as a contributor to the maintenance of life and as the caretaker of old age.

But the juxtaposition of the concept of mortality, which was retained as a component of this particular experiment, with the ability to see beyond one’s limitations resulted in a nagging insecurity, and insecurity precipitated individual and collective actions that defied reason. Since punishment had proved to be ineffective as a universal deterrent, He introduced Faith as the antidote to insecurity, to convey a sense of comfort to tame the mind. As demonstrated with Abraham and many who followed, Faith could work, but, in the world of the thinking Man that He had created, Faith would also not be uniformly effective. As constructed, the experiment was pretty straightforward, but it was becoming apparent that thinking can be its own enemy, because it was influenced by feelings and feelings didn’t necessarily respond to reason. And full scale reproduction brought with it the full range of the bell curve of human behavior.  So, taking advantage of both the animal instinct and the ability to think, He decided to integrate reason with consequences and in a dramatic display, issued the Ten Commandments, which would not appear to have been necessary in a world of thinking people who had the capacity to look after their own self-interest.

Looking back, it is amazing to see how access to the same information can result in so many different conclusions. Insecurity became the dominant force among individuals and their collective societies, rising to the level of world events. Individual fears of hunger, of deprivation, of destruction, of inferiority, of anonymity, of subjugation, of these and others all bound together by the fear of death were reflected in the collective culture and reason became the slave of emotion, not its master. Faith, the very force that was to bring people together and confer inner peace, did succeed in bringing people together, but for both peace and for destruction, pitting civilizations against one another, aided by reason to manipulate and control, as well as to create weaponry to reinforce civilizations’ barriers. The consolidation of wealth and power, which created the illusion of mastery over one’s ultimate destiny, became dominant motivations, again with reason as its slave, to manufacture weapons of mass destruction and to ignore the accelerated depletion of the very resources needed for survival in a vain effort to overcome insecurity.

At one end of the bell curve, there were a relatively few individuals who represented some of the best minds in medicine, religion, technology, philosophy, the arts and sciences, who worked patiently and diligently to make contributions toward a better world, in the hope that these contributions would produce more durable results than could be achieved through destruction.

The forces that dominated the course of history, however, were generated by the determination of a relatively few individuals at the other end of the bell curve, who also drew on some of the best minds in medicine, religion, technology, philosophy, the arts and sciences, employing power, force and reason to support their futile pursuit of immortality.

But preying on fear had always proved more effective than appealing to reason and insecurity doesn’t have the patience for long term solutions, so the violent and powerful minority continued to be the dominant force in dictating the course of world events, taking actions intended to protect the future that only sacrificed the future for the present. None seemed to be deterred by the predictable and inevitable pattern of power rising to the top, only to be replaced. Technology, not wisdom, was the legacy of each generation.

After the experience of thousands of years of small triumphs and large defeats, He concluded that the experiment had failed, so, early into the Twenty-First Century, He mobilized the forces of insecurity, employing the weapons of mass destruction that reason had created, and destroyed the Planet Earth, leaving it uninhabited and uninhabitable, as He had done with other planets where the experiments had failed.

Parshat Va'etchanan

Parshat Va'etchanan - Shabbat Nachamu
Av 13, 5673 ~ July 20, 2013
by Sheldon Schaffer

Parashat Va’etchanan is a very rich Torah portion that presents a number of themes for a drash including:  Moses pleading with God one last time to be allowed to enter the Land; a prophesy about eventual exile of the Israelites from the Land; a repetition of the Ten Commandments (with some interesting differences) and the Shema. All of this is very rich material for drashing.  However, this week  is also one of the named Shabbatot -Shabbat Nachamu (the Sabbath of Comfort), and I want to deviate from the usual practice of these mini-Drashot to concentrate on a theme from Shabbat Nachamu that I find to be a fascinating aspect to Judaism.

To understand why a Sabbath of Comfort comes at this time, we just need to look back to last Tuesday - Tisha B’Av. We all recognize that Tisha B’Av is the saddest day of the Jewish calendar.  In the three Shabbatot leading up to Tisha B’Av, the Haftorot are taken from the prophets Isaiah and Jeremiah and are Haftorot of affliction or rebuke that prophesy the destruction of the Temple and the exile of the Israelites due to the failure of the people to follow the precepts of the Torah.  After these rebukes and mourning, we enter into seven Shabbatot where the Haftorot provide words of comfort from the prophets.  Shabbat Nachamu is named for the first words of the Haftorah that we read this Shabbos :  “Nachamu, nachamu  ami, omer Elohekhem", Be comforted, be comforted my people, says your God. Here, Isaiah speaks to the people to tell them that although they have been punished doubly for their sins, there will come a time when the exile will end, the future will once again be bright and the people will return to the Land.  The comfort is that God will make the return easy. God will make the road back straight, every valley shall be raised and every mountain and hill shall be made low.  The musically inclined among us will recognize that these words of Isaiah were used by George Fredrick Handle to begin his oratorio The Messiah. 

To me, the juxtaposition in our liturgy of the sadness of Tisha B’Av followed by words of comfort that we read this week brings to mind something that I see often in Jewish thought - the ability in Judaism to move rapidly from extreme sadness to comfort and even to happiness. 

Some other sadness-gladness juxtapositions include one that is closely connected in time to Tisha B’Av.  Just six days after Tisha B’Av, Tu B'Av (the 15th of Av) is considered one of the happiest days in the calendar. In tractate Tanit (30b) Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel states that the two happiest days of the year are Yom Kippur and Tu B'Av.  Many may not consider Yom Kippur to be one of the happiest days of the year. Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel bases his statement on the happiness that comes from our teshuvah that results in God’s forgiveness of our transgressions against Him during the past year. Tu B'Av is counted as one of the happiest days because of a number of happy events that tradition says happened on this date. For example, Tu B’Av is counted as the date on which the Jewish people were forgiven for the sin of the spies.   Moreover, it is recounted in the Gemara in Taanit that it was a practice on Tu B’Av that maidens would don identical dress (so as not to embarrass girls who did not have fine garments) and go to dance in the fields where bachelors would pick out prospective brides.  In Israel today, this practice is mirrored in Tu B'Av being similar to Valentine's Day.

Finally, there is another stark juxtaposition between the sad and the happy in our calendar that occurs yearly - the immediate transition from the sadness of Yom HaZikaron to the joy of Yom HaAtz'maut.  A friend of mine was in Israel during these observances this year.  He was in Rabin Square in Tel Aviv the evening of Yom HaZikaron and noted the somberness and respect of the masses of people gathered there.  A large number of the people were 20-30 year-olds. This is a group that is usually tethered to their cell phones and iPods.  He was struck by the fact that not a single cell phone rang nor did any of the people have earphone speakers in their ears.  He returned to Rabin Square the next day to find multiple bands, people dancing in the street and many, many people calling or texting with their smart phones.  He was extremely struck by this dramatic switch from the somber to the joyous.

For me, these examples illustrate the resilience of the Jewish people. Our people have been subject to tragedies for well over two thousand years, yet we are basically a hopeful group who celebrate joy and happiness throughout the year. I think that this one of the geniuses of the Jewish people which has allowed us to survive and move forward.

Finally, on Shabbat Nachamu I would like to thank the Beth Jacob community for the comfort offered to me. I feel blessed to be a part of this remarkable congregation let by very special Rabbis and look forward to continuing to move forward with you with a spirit of hope and resilience.

Gut Shabbos