When one starts the process of becoming a Bal Tesuvah (someone who was raised non religious, and decides to return to traditional Judaism), there are two paths one can take. You can outwardly transform yourself overnight and immediately start keeping all the observances, even though they will be meaningless to you at first, and then grow into the meaning. Or you can take it slow, and learn about the observances and start doing them at the same time.
I’m on the second path, mostly because I never really made a conscious decision to do this; it has been a natural consequence of my learning. But I’ve now reached that point where I need to make a decision about the boldest and most visually apparent Jewish observance. Do I start to wear a kippah at all times?
Wearing a kippah makes a bold statement. You’re identifying yourself to the world as an observant Jew. There are responsibilities that come with that. Suddenly you actions will reflect on the entire Jewish people. I know that I’m not quite ready for that yet. I still will go and eat at a non-kosher restaurant (but eat vegetarian), I’m not completely Shommer Shabbas (but getting there). And to see a kippah wearing Jew eating at the Pickle Barrel is not the right message that I want to send.
But on the other side, I’m running into difficulties in my tesuvah because I’m not wearing kippah. Even those who don’t feel there is a religious obligation to cover your head at all times (and in fact the requirement to do so is just a custom, not a commandment) agree that it is a requirement to wear one when performing rituals. I have been trying to perform more of the regular rituals of the day; saying blessings before and after eating, ritually washing before eating bread, saying the afternoon prayers… but you can’t do these without a kippah. So I need to keep a kippah with me at all times, and pop it on and off when needed. I wonder if that had something to do with why wearing it at all times became the custom – it’s just easier.
While I continue to struggle with this issue, I suspect that it’s just a matter of time before I start to proudly wear a kippah at all times. There are certainly social implications that go with all that, so I’m sure I’ll talk about this more when I’m closer to making that decision.
Wednesday, March 10, 2004
Tuesday, March 09, 2004
Why do bad things happen to good people?
(This post is based on an article by Rabbi Benjamin Belch)
This is really the ultimate theological question. It’s one that has troubled all the great Jewish thinkers, including the greatest of all, Moses. In this week’s Torah Portion, Moses asks this question to The One Who Knows The Answer.
At first glance the passage appears cryptic, but even if you don’t understand it, it one of those passages that you know is meaningful.
Here’s the text:
The impression this gives on the surface is that Moses is asking to see G-d’s face, G-d refuses, but lets Moses sneak a peak at his mighty shoulder blades.
This is, of course, absurd.
Moses knew that G-d has no form and therefore can not be seem by human eyes. The Talmud tells us that Moses was not asking to “see” G-d, but to “see” G-d’s “glory”, so that he can understand G-d’s plan. Basically, Moses wanted to know why good things happen to bad people.
To attempt to understand the profound wisdom in G-d’s response, we need to look at it piece by piece.
It doesn’t come across well in English, but in the Hebrew, it’s important to note that, of the many names of G-d, the one that is used here is the ones that represent kindness and compassion. We are told that ALL of G-d’s goodness will be testimony to the merciful qualities of the Almighty. What this is saying is that our perception of pain and suffering will change once we have seen it “all”. Once we can see it all (which we can not do from our perspective in this world), we will see why every strict judgment is really an act of love. It’s like a parent punishing a child. The child sees his suffering, but later looks back on it and sees it was all necessary acts of love.
This is not G-d saying “Leave me alone, I’ll do whatever I want.” What G-d is saying is that “I will be gracious to the one I will be gracious to, not the one you think I should be gracious to.” Maimonides explains that G-d judges a person’s deeds qualitatively, not quantitatively. One terrible deed can wipe out a lifetime of good deeds, and one great act can balance many sins. Only G-d knows the real values of our actions. What G-d is telling Moses (and us) is the he knows who is really righteous, who is really deserving of grace and compassion. Don’t presume to improve on his judgement.
Moses wants to “see” G-d’s way. But G-d is saying that “as long as you’re alive, you won’t be able to ‘see’”. The entire picture is not visible from our limited perspective.
Moses is told that to understand why there is evil in the world; you need to stand as a partner beside G-d, not as a passive observer down below. When G-d created the world, he purposely left it incomplete, so that man can play a part in perfecting the world. God allows for sickness so man can play a role in inventing cures.
In the words of Rabbi Belch, “God allows for droughts so that man can participate in bringing the world closer to its ideal state by inventing new irrigation methods and by building dams and desalinization plants. So the evil in the world only points up the work we still have to do. Evil is a manifestation of a world that is still incomplete, waiting for man to do his part and finish the job.”
This is the key part of the answer. G-d is telling Moses that because man is bound by time (unlike G-d) we are unable to understand events as they happen, it’s only after the fact that it might be possible for us to understand what happened.
As Kierkegaard so powerfully put it, "Life can only be understood backward, but it must be lived forward."
Rabbi Belch sums it up better than I possibly could, so I’ll leave him to do it:
This is really the ultimate theological question. It’s one that has troubled all the great Jewish thinkers, including the greatest of all, Moses. In this week’s Torah Portion, Moses asks this question to The One Who Knows The Answer.
At first glance the passage appears cryptic, but even if you don’t understand it, it one of those passages that you know is meaningful.
Here’s the text:
- Moses then said [to G-d]: "Please grant me a vision of Your Glory." He [G-d] said, "I will cause all My goodness to pass before you and will proclaim the name of the Lord in your presence. I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and I will be compassionate to whom I will be compassionate." And He said, "You cannot see My Presence and live." And the Lord said, "Behold there is a place alongside Me, and you shall set yourself on the rock. When My Glory passes by, I will put you in a cleft of the rock, and I will cover you with My Hand until I pass by. Then I will remove My Hand and you will see My Back, but My Face shall not be seen." (Exodus 33: 18-23)
The impression this gives on the surface is that Moses is asking to see G-d’s face, G-d refuses, but lets Moses sneak a peak at his mighty shoulder blades.
This is, of course, absurd.
Moses knew that G-d has no form and therefore can not be seem by human eyes. The Talmud tells us that Moses was not asking to “see” G-d, but to “see” G-d’s “glory”, so that he can understand G-d’s plan. Basically, Moses wanted to know why good things happen to bad people.
To attempt to understand the profound wisdom in G-d’s response, we need to look at it piece by piece.
- "I will cause all My goodness to pass before you and you will proclaim the name of the Lord in your presence."
It doesn’t come across well in English, but in the Hebrew, it’s important to note that, of the many names of G-d, the one that is used here is the ones that represent kindness and compassion. We are told that ALL of G-d’s goodness will be testimony to the merciful qualities of the Almighty. What this is saying is that our perception of pain and suffering will change once we have seen it “all”. Once we can see it all (which we can not do from our perspective in this world), we will see why every strict judgment is really an act of love. It’s like a parent punishing a child. The child sees his suffering, but later looks back on it and sees it was all necessary acts of love.
- "I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and I will be compassionate to whom I will be compassionate."
This is not G-d saying “Leave me alone, I’ll do whatever I want.” What G-d is saying is that “I will be gracious to the one I will be gracious to, not the one you think I should be gracious to.” Maimonides explains that G-d judges a person’s deeds qualitatively, not quantitatively. One terrible deed can wipe out a lifetime of good deeds, and one great act can balance many sins. Only G-d knows the real values of our actions. What G-d is telling Moses (and us) is the he knows who is really righteous, who is really deserving of grace and compassion. Don’t presume to improve on his judgement.
- "And He [God] said, 'You cannot see My Presence and live.'"
Moses wants to “see” G-d’s way. But G-d is saying that “as long as you’re alive, you won’t be able to ‘see’”. The entire picture is not visible from our limited perspective.
- "And the Lord said, 'Behold there is a place alongside Me, and you shall set yourself on the rock."
Moses is told that to understand why there is evil in the world; you need to stand as a partner beside G-d, not as a passive observer down below. When G-d created the world, he purposely left it incomplete, so that man can play a part in perfecting the world. God allows for sickness so man can play a role in inventing cures.
In the words of Rabbi Belch, “God allows for droughts so that man can participate in bringing the world closer to its ideal state by inventing new irrigation methods and by building dams and desalinization plants. So the evil in the world only points up the work we still have to do. Evil is a manifestation of a world that is still incomplete, waiting for man to do his part and finish the job.”
- "When My Glory passes by, I will put you in a cleft of the rock, and I will cover you with My Hand until I pass by. Then I will remove My Hand and you will see My Back, but My Face shall not be seen."
This is the key part of the answer. G-d is telling Moses that because man is bound by time (unlike G-d) we are unable to understand events as they happen, it’s only after the fact that it might be possible for us to understand what happened.
As Kierkegaard so powerfully put it, "Life can only be understood backward, but it must be lived forward."
Rabbi Belch sums it up better than I possibly could, so I’ll leave him to do it:
- The Biblical exchange between God and Moses teaches us to beware of assumptions that are incomplete and erroneous, assumptions that lead us to question the goodness of God.
Moses says to God, in effect, "God, I want to honor you totally, but my lack of understanding of Your ways interferes. How can I honor you completely when I see good people who have it bad and bad people who have it good?"
God says, "Hold off, I question two of your premises."
"Which premises?"
"Number one, don't be so quick when you call some people good and others bad, because you don't know for sure. Number two, when you say they have it bad or they have it good, are you sure of your definitions? Are you sure you know what you are talking about? You are not positive. And you can't be positive because you can't see My face. You will only be able to see it in retrospect. In retrospect a terrible thing could be the best thing. Sometimes it will take you years to see. Sometimes you will never see, not in your days on Earth anyway."
….
A wife says to me, "My husband got sick, he remained sick for the rest of his days, and then he died. Where is the good in that? Don't tell me to wait for the end of the story. I have seen the end of the story. He died."
Yet God tells us, "Man cannot see Me and live." We don't have the entire picture even at the time of death. Death is the gateway to the great beyond -- and that very description reminds us that there is more after our earthly passage. What is still not clear during our finite existence, God seems to be saying, will be possible to comprehend once we are blessed with the divine perspective of eternity.
Friday, March 05, 2004
Parashat T'tzave
This weeks Torah portion deals with the construction of the Mishkan (the portable sanctuary, or the Tabernacle). As Jew’s, we’re so used to the idea of “G-d’s house” (The Mishkan, the Temple, a Shul, a Synagogue…) that we don’t really appreciate what a strange idea it is. If G-d is infinite and transcendent, how can his presence be localized in one particular spot?
Even though this portion comes before next week’s episode of the Golden Calf, if we reconstruct the timeline, it seems that the instructions for building the Mishkan are given after the Golden Calf. That raises a key question; is the Mishkan built as a result of the Golden Calf, or in spite of it? In other words, was the Mishan part of the original plan, or did G-d see the Golden Calf and realize that we needed something physical to help us relate to an infinite G-d?
It being a response to the Golden Calf seems to be a logical answer, but that means that it would have been preferable not to have it, but it was given to us because we needed it. Mimonities has a strong opinion in his writings that it must have been part of the original plan. The Temple was the most Holly things in Judaism; he could not believe that it could have been plan B.
That begs the question, why do we need a Temple. Mimonities answers that the point of the Mishkan (and the Temple) is to take the experience of the revelation at Sinai and institutionalize it. Take the “one night stand” (so to speak) if the revelation at Sinai, and turn that into an ongoing relationship between the Jewish people and G-d. We need to make the revelation a part of our daily consciousness. We need to look at Torah every day as if it is new, as if we have just accepted it.
I think that much of the difficulty steams from a misunderstanding of what the Temple is. The term "House of G-d" is not just misleading, it’s almost blasphemous. The idea that G-d can be localized in just one place is inconsistent with the idea that G-d is everywhere, or as I recently heard it said, G-d is anywhere you allow him to be. The Torah says (which was latter copied by another famous book/movie) "If you build it, I will come".
But were will G-d come to. Most people say that the where, is into the Temple. But that steams from a mistranslation of the verse. The verse does not say "Build me a house and I will dwell in it"; it says "Build be a house and I will dwell in you". That's the key. The Temple is not a place for G-d to live, it a means of opening up each of us so we can allow G-d into our lives and into the world.
And that’s the key to understanding the Temple. It’s a constant reminder that the acceptance of Torah is not something that our ancestors did at Sinai; it’s something we each do every day so that we can allow G-d into our lives.
Shabbat Shalom.
Even though this portion comes before next week’s episode of the Golden Calf, if we reconstruct the timeline, it seems that the instructions for building the Mishkan are given after the Golden Calf. That raises a key question; is the Mishkan built as a result of the Golden Calf, or in spite of it? In other words, was the Mishan part of the original plan, or did G-d see the Golden Calf and realize that we needed something physical to help us relate to an infinite G-d?
It being a response to the Golden Calf seems to be a logical answer, but that means that it would have been preferable not to have it, but it was given to us because we needed it. Mimonities has a strong opinion in his writings that it must have been part of the original plan. The Temple was the most Holly things in Judaism; he could not believe that it could have been plan B.
That begs the question, why do we need a Temple. Mimonities answers that the point of the Mishkan (and the Temple) is to take the experience of the revelation at Sinai and institutionalize it. Take the “one night stand” (so to speak) if the revelation at Sinai, and turn that into an ongoing relationship between the Jewish people and G-d. We need to make the revelation a part of our daily consciousness. We need to look at Torah every day as if it is new, as if we have just accepted it.
I think that much of the difficulty steams from a misunderstanding of what the Temple is. The term "House of G-d" is not just misleading, it’s almost blasphemous. The idea that G-d can be localized in just one place is inconsistent with the idea that G-d is everywhere, or as I recently heard it said, G-d is anywhere you allow him to be. The Torah says (which was latter copied by another famous book/movie) "If you build it, I will come".
But were will G-d come to. Most people say that the where, is into the Temple. But that steams from a mistranslation of the verse. The verse does not say "Build me a house and I will dwell in it"; it says "Build be a house and I will dwell in you". That's the key. The Temple is not a place for G-d to live, it a means of opening up each of us so we can allow G-d into our lives and into the world.
And that’s the key to understanding the Temple. It’s a constant reminder that the acceptance of Torah is not something that our ancestors did at Sinai; it’s something we each do every day so that we can allow G-d into our lives.
Shabbat Shalom.
Thursday, March 04, 2004
Purim 2
Today is the Fast of Esther. This day is to mark the three days of fasting all the Jews of Shushan did in preparation for Esther going before the Queen to plead ask for the Jews to be saved from Haman’s evil plan.
As a rule, Jewish holidays have two aspects; a spiritual side (special prayers) and a physical side (eating special foods). There are two exceptions to this rule; Yom Kippur, which is purely spiritual (you eat a big meal the day before to prepare for the fast), and Purim, which is purely physical (you fast the ay before to prepare for the party). The commentaries argue, that this rule still holds – they argue that Yom Kippur and Purim are two halves of the same day.
The commentators also make a very interesting statement; they say that Purim is in fact a holier day than Yom Kippur. After all, the full name for Yom Kippur is Yom Ha’Kippurim, which literally translated is “A day like Purim”. How can Purim, a day of drinking and parting, be holier than Yom Kippur, a day of fasting and praying?
Unlike secular holidays which merely mark an anniversary of an event, Jewish holidays have a theme and are designed so every Jew can spiritually internalize these themes. The theme of Passover is freedom, the theme of Purim is joy, and the theme of Rosh Ha’Shana is renewal. In that way, Jewish holidays are an opportunity for grow closer to G-d. The goal of growing closer to G-d is just as true on Purim as it is on Yom Kippur.
On Yom Kippur you feel the spirituality… the fasting, the prayer… It’s easy to connect to G-d on a day like that. But on Purim, making that connection is not so easy (after all, you are supposed to get partly drunk). Just like G-d’s face was hidden during the events of Purim (and G-d name does not appear in the Book of Esther), it’s not clear how we connect to G-d on Purim. But if you understand how G-d operates in the world, you see G-d face in the events of Purim, and in the Purim celebrations today.
Someone who is able to connect to G-d on Purim has grown much more that if they connect to G-d on Yom Kippur. That’s why the commentators say that Purim is holier than Yom Kippur.
Have an easy fast.
As a rule, Jewish holidays have two aspects; a spiritual side (special prayers) and a physical side (eating special foods). There are two exceptions to this rule; Yom Kippur, which is purely spiritual (you eat a big meal the day before to prepare for the fast), and Purim, which is purely physical (you fast the ay before to prepare for the party). The commentaries argue, that this rule still holds – they argue that Yom Kippur and Purim are two halves of the same day.
The commentators also make a very interesting statement; they say that Purim is in fact a holier day than Yom Kippur. After all, the full name for Yom Kippur is Yom Ha’Kippurim, which literally translated is “A day like Purim”. How can Purim, a day of drinking and parting, be holier than Yom Kippur, a day of fasting and praying?
Unlike secular holidays which merely mark an anniversary of an event, Jewish holidays have a theme and are designed so every Jew can spiritually internalize these themes. The theme of Passover is freedom, the theme of Purim is joy, and the theme of Rosh Ha’Shana is renewal. In that way, Jewish holidays are an opportunity for grow closer to G-d. The goal of growing closer to G-d is just as true on Purim as it is on Yom Kippur.
On Yom Kippur you feel the spirituality… the fasting, the prayer… It’s easy to connect to G-d on a day like that. But on Purim, making that connection is not so easy (after all, you are supposed to get partly drunk). Just like G-d’s face was hidden during the events of Purim (and G-d name does not appear in the Book of Esther), it’s not clear how we connect to G-d on Purim. But if you understand how G-d operates in the world, you see G-d face in the events of Purim, and in the Purim celebrations today.
Someone who is able to connect to G-d on Purim has grown much more that if they connect to G-d on Yom Kippur. That’s why the commentators say that Purim is holier than Yom Kippur.
Have an easy fast.
Tuesday, March 02, 2004
Purim 1
With Purim coming up this Sunday, I thought I’d spend most of the week talking about Purim.
The book of Esther is unique among all books of the Bible; it is the only one that does not mention the name of G-d. Despite this, many (including myself) argue that it is in the book of Esther that the face of G-d is most clearly seen.
This morning my Rabbi pointed out that not only does the name of G-d not appear; it seems that it was purposely left out. There are several places where you would expect to see some mention of G-d. When Mordechai is telling Esther to speak to the King on the Jew’s behalf, you would expect him to say that “Maybe it was for this reason that G-d put you in this position”, but instead we read “And who knows if it is not for just such a time that you reached this royal position.” When Esther tells Mordechai (and all Jews) to fast for her, she doesn’t ask for them to pray to G-d.
There are many opinions why this is so. One is that Mordechai and Esther compiled the story as letters that were sent to Jews across the Empire. Since they could not be sure that the letters would be treated with the proper respect required for a document containing the name of G-d, they wrote the book without it.
Another explanation is that they were trying to capture in the written story, the idea that G-d presence was hidden, and it wasn’t until after the fact that you can see the hand of G-d. This is really a model for how we relate to G-d today. It’s hard to see G-d in our day to day life; it’s too easy to pass things off as coincidence. But after the fact, once you have some perspective, you see how things came together just right, and you realize that it was all part of G-d’s plan.
The book of Esther is unique among all books of the Bible; it is the only one that does not mention the name of G-d. Despite this, many (including myself) argue that it is in the book of Esther that the face of G-d is most clearly seen.
This morning my Rabbi pointed out that not only does the name of G-d not appear; it seems that it was purposely left out. There are several places where you would expect to see some mention of G-d. When Mordechai is telling Esther to speak to the King on the Jew’s behalf, you would expect him to say that “Maybe it was for this reason that G-d put you in this position”, but instead we read “And who knows if it is not for just such a time that you reached this royal position.” When Esther tells Mordechai (and all Jews) to fast for her, she doesn’t ask for them to pray to G-d.
There are many opinions why this is so. One is that Mordechai and Esther compiled the story as letters that were sent to Jews across the Empire. Since they could not be sure that the letters would be treated with the proper respect required for a document containing the name of G-d, they wrote the book without it.
Another explanation is that they were trying to capture in the written story, the idea that G-d presence was hidden, and it wasn’t until after the fact that you can see the hand of G-d. This is really a model for how we relate to G-d today. It’s hard to see G-d in our day to day life; it’s too easy to pass things off as coincidence. But after the fact, once you have some perspective, you see how things came together just right, and you realize that it was all part of G-d’s plan.
Friday, February 27, 2004
Parashat Truma
This week’s Torah portion talks about the building of the Mishkan (the portable Temple) and some of its vessels. One of the vessels are the two Cherubs that make up the lid of the Ark of the Covenant. The Cherubs are made from gold and are in the form of winged children.
Next week we'll read about the sin of the golden calf. If we were punished for making a golden calf, then why is it ok to make a golden Cherub? Wouldn’t this fall under the category of “Thou shalt not make graven images”?
The answer goes to the very core of our belief system. Are the Ten Commandments G-d’s codification of basic human morality, or are they G-d defining morality? In other words, was it wrong to worship other god’s, and the 10 commandments just write that down. Or is it wrong to worship other god’s BECAUSE G-d said so.
Judaism teaches that morality is defined as the word of G-d. What G-d says is, by definition, morality. Any other system of morality falls apart when you press it.
So if G-d commanded us to make the Cherub, then it can’t be immoral. That’s the difference between the golden calf and the Cherub. One is against the will of G-d and one is according to it.
The lesson here is summed up in the saying “Don’t out tzadek a Tzadek” (or in the Christian world, “Don’t be more Catholic than the Pope”). If G-d says something is OK, don’t forbid yourself from doing it because it seems to contradict a different commandment. G-d is the only one who truly knows the intention of the Torah, so we can not try to out interpret him.
Shabbat Shalom.
Next week we'll read about the sin of the golden calf. If we were punished for making a golden calf, then why is it ok to make a golden Cherub? Wouldn’t this fall under the category of “Thou shalt not make graven images”?
The answer goes to the very core of our belief system. Are the Ten Commandments G-d’s codification of basic human morality, or are they G-d defining morality? In other words, was it wrong to worship other god’s, and the 10 commandments just write that down. Or is it wrong to worship other god’s BECAUSE G-d said so.
Judaism teaches that morality is defined as the word of G-d. What G-d says is, by definition, morality. Any other system of morality falls apart when you press it.
So if G-d commanded us to make the Cherub, then it can’t be immoral. That’s the difference between the golden calf and the Cherub. One is against the will of G-d and one is according to it.
The lesson here is summed up in the saying “Don’t out tzadek a Tzadek” (or in the Christian world, “Don’t be more Catholic than the Pope”). If G-d says something is OK, don’t forbid yourself from doing it because it seems to contradict a different commandment. G-d is the only one who truly knows the intention of the Torah, so we can not try to out interpret him.
Shabbat Shalom.
Friday, February 20, 2004
Parashat Mishpatim and Purim
There is a passage in this weeks Torah portion, where G-d is offering the Torah to the Jewish people at Sinai. The text says that the Jewish people stood under the mountain. The Midrash explains, that G-d lifted up the mountain and held it over the Jewish people and said, “Accept the Torah, or there will be your grave.”
So, first off, this doesn’t sound like the Jews accepted the Torah out of free will – it sounds more like they were forced into it. They felt that G-d would have dropped the mountain on top of them if they didn’t accept it; hence the enthusiastic “We will do and we will listen” (see last posting).
But if you look closely at what G-d said, you see another problem. If G-d is holding the mountain over the Jews and would have dropped it on them if they did not accept Torah, then G-d should have said “Accept the Torah, or here will be your grave.” Why did G-d say ‘there’ instead of ‘here’? Where is the ‘there’ that G-d was refereeing to?
The commentary explains that ‘there’ means in the time of Achashverosh – the King from the Purim story. Of all the times and places to choose from, why did G-d say that their grave would be there if they did not accept Torah?
To answer that, we need to see what is special about that time, and what it means to accept Torah.
In order to accept Torah, you need to know what the Torah means. At first that was easy, you have Moses to explain. After that if you had a Torah question, you would go to a prophet and ask them (there were over 1,000,000 prophets in Jewish history). When did prophesy stop? After the destruction of the First Temple. (I’ll discuss why it stopped then in another posting). Once the Temple was gone, no new person could attain prophesy, but those who attained that level in the time of the Temple, retained it.
The Purim story happens about 60 years after the destruction of the Temple, so any prophets who were around at the time of the destruction of the temple had died out. So that was the first time in Jewish history that there were no prophets to turn to for questions about Torah law.
At that point, the Jewish people had a choice; they could either abandon Torah, or make a commitment to study, so that they can learn what the Torah is telling us. The events of Purim convinced the people to choose to accept Torah. This time they accepted it without a mountain over their head.
What G-d was saying, is that if you don’t accept torah in the time of Achashverosh, then that will be the grave of the Jewish people.
In this light, we can even better understand the phrase from last posting “Na-asai v’Nishma” – “We will do and we will listen”. They were saying that while they had prophets to guide them, they will do the words of the Torah as they were told. But after that they agreed to study and learn torah, so that they can continue their relationship with G-d.
Shabbat Shalom.
So, first off, this doesn’t sound like the Jews accepted the Torah out of free will – it sounds more like they were forced into it. They felt that G-d would have dropped the mountain on top of them if they didn’t accept it; hence the enthusiastic “We will do and we will listen” (see last posting).
But if you look closely at what G-d said, you see another problem. If G-d is holding the mountain over the Jews and would have dropped it on them if they did not accept Torah, then G-d should have said “Accept the Torah, or here will be your grave.” Why did G-d say ‘there’ instead of ‘here’? Where is the ‘there’ that G-d was refereeing to?
The commentary explains that ‘there’ means in the time of Achashverosh – the King from the Purim story. Of all the times and places to choose from, why did G-d say that their grave would be there if they did not accept Torah?
To answer that, we need to see what is special about that time, and what it means to accept Torah.
In order to accept Torah, you need to know what the Torah means. At first that was easy, you have Moses to explain. After that if you had a Torah question, you would go to a prophet and ask them (there were over 1,000,000 prophets in Jewish history). When did prophesy stop? After the destruction of the First Temple. (I’ll discuss why it stopped then in another posting). Once the Temple was gone, no new person could attain prophesy, but those who attained that level in the time of the Temple, retained it.
The Purim story happens about 60 years after the destruction of the Temple, so any prophets who were around at the time of the destruction of the temple had died out. So that was the first time in Jewish history that there were no prophets to turn to for questions about Torah law.
At that point, the Jewish people had a choice; they could either abandon Torah, or make a commitment to study, so that they can learn what the Torah is telling us. The events of Purim convinced the people to choose to accept Torah. This time they accepted it without a mountain over their head.
What G-d was saying, is that if you don’t accept torah in the time of Achashverosh, then that will be the grave of the Jewish people.
In this light, we can even better understand the phrase from last posting “Na-asai v’Nishma” – “We will do and we will listen”. They were saying that while they had prophets to guide them, they will do the words of the Torah as they were told. But after that they agreed to study and learn torah, so that they can continue their relationship with G-d.
Shabbat Shalom.
Wednesday, February 18, 2004
Parashat Mishpatim – We will do and we will listen
This weeks Torah portion continues with the account of the revelation at Sinai, and contains the famous statement by the Jewish people, “Na-asai v’Nishma” – “We will do and we will listen”.
This phrase is often offered as an indication of how great the way that we accepted the Torah was. We didn’t say that we’ll listen to what G-d has to say, and then decide if we will do it. We said “I unconditionally accept your law. Now tell us what it is.” We had total trust in G-d that he would give us a law that is good.
At least that’s how it’s always been explained to me.
Rabbi Kahn disagrees. He argues that we each know many friends whom, if we would call them up and say we need a favour, they would say “No problem, you name it I’ll do it.” They would agree before you tell that what the favour is. Now these are very special friends and should be recognized, but is it really that amazing a thing that it should be picked out of the text and held up as a sign of out commitment for 3500 years?
The key to understanding this phrase is to look at its tense. Most people think that it’s in the future tense “We will always do, and we will always listen”. But in fact, it’s in the present tense. It’s saying that “We will constantly, and every moment, do that which you command us, and we will constantly, at every moment, learn your Torah.”
That’s what’s so amazing about this phrase. Our forefathers didn’t just accept the law for that day, or year, or for their lifetime. They accepted it upon all future generations. They accepted upon the entire Jewish people, for all time, to do all the mitzvoth and constantly study them.
It’s through that study that we are able to hear G-d’s voice just as clearly as our ancestors heard at Sinai.
This phrase is often offered as an indication of how great the way that we accepted the Torah was. We didn’t say that we’ll listen to what G-d has to say, and then decide if we will do it. We said “I unconditionally accept your law. Now tell us what it is.” We had total trust in G-d that he would give us a law that is good.
At least that’s how it’s always been explained to me.
Rabbi Kahn disagrees. He argues that we each know many friends whom, if we would call them up and say we need a favour, they would say “No problem, you name it I’ll do it.” They would agree before you tell that what the favour is. Now these are very special friends and should be recognized, but is it really that amazing a thing that it should be picked out of the text and held up as a sign of out commitment for 3500 years?
The key to understanding this phrase is to look at its tense. Most people think that it’s in the future tense “We will always do, and we will always listen”. But in fact, it’s in the present tense. It’s saying that “We will constantly, and every moment, do that which you command us, and we will constantly, at every moment, learn your Torah.”
That’s what’s so amazing about this phrase. Our forefathers didn’t just accept the law for that day, or year, or for their lifetime. They accepted it upon all future generations. They accepted upon the entire Jewish people, for all time, to do all the mitzvoth and constantly study them.
It’s through that study that we are able to hear G-d’s voice just as clearly as our ancestors heard at Sinai.
Monday, February 16, 2004
Good vs. Evil
Many religions talk about the internal struggle between good and evil. Rabbi Kahn in his lecture “An introduction to Jewish Mysticism” says that is not entirely accurate.
When you got up this morning, did you think to yourself; “Should I get up and go to work, or should I rape and pillage”? Most of us don’t have to struggle with real evil (that’s not to say there aren’t people who do have to struggle with that). The internal struggle in Judaism is different.
Judaism teaches that each person has a “Yetzer Hora” and “Yetzer Ra” – generally translated and evil inclination and good inclination. These two are always fighting. While “good” and “evil” are accurate translations for the words “Hora” and “Ra”, it does not capture the meaning. Rabbi Kahn explained that in Judaism “good” means meaningfulness and “evil” means meaninglessness.
When you eat an apple, we’re supposed to first say a short blessing thanking G-d for the food. Your Yetzer Ra wants you to say the blessing, and your Yetzer Hora wants you to just eat. But what’s “good” about saying the blessing, and what’s “evil” about not saying it? Saying the blessing gives meaning to the act of eating. You acknowledge that the food you are about to eat was given to you by G-d, and that mindset elevates the act of eating from a physical act to a spiritual one. Not saying the blessing tries to push a potentially meaningful spiritual act into a meaningless physical one.
That’s our struggle; to try to instill meaning into everything that we do. A Jew who is just starting to pray every morning will struggle with the issue of getting up a half hour early every day to say his prayers. His Yetzer Ra wants to start the day with meaningful prayer, and his Yetzer Hora wants to start the day with meaningless sleep. That’s his struggle.
But a Jew, who has been saying his morning prayers every morning for 50 years, has a different struggle. His struggle is does he put the extra effort to concentrate closely on his prayers and make them meaningful, or does he say them mechanically and just do an empty meaningless act?
There is a spectrum of meaningfulness in praying. The left is meaningless and as you move right you get more meaning:
Not saying the prayers Doing it mechanically Concentrating it
In the first example, the person was sitting somewhere between not saying the payers and just doing it mechanically. His struggle was do I move to the left on the above spectrum or to the right. In the second example the person sits between saying it mechanically and concentrating on it. He has the same struggle, do I move to the left or the right.
So when go to sleep at night lets not say to ourselves “Well, didn’t rape and pillage today, so my day was good”. Let’s instead say “I moved my life towards meaningfulness today, so it was a good day.”
When you got up this morning, did you think to yourself; “Should I get up and go to work, or should I rape and pillage”? Most of us don’t have to struggle with real evil (that’s not to say there aren’t people who do have to struggle with that). The internal struggle in Judaism is different.
Judaism teaches that each person has a “Yetzer Hora” and “Yetzer Ra” – generally translated and evil inclination and good inclination. These two are always fighting. While “good” and “evil” are accurate translations for the words “Hora” and “Ra”, it does not capture the meaning. Rabbi Kahn explained that in Judaism “good” means meaningfulness and “evil” means meaninglessness.
When you eat an apple, we’re supposed to first say a short blessing thanking G-d for the food. Your Yetzer Ra wants you to say the blessing, and your Yetzer Hora wants you to just eat. But what’s “good” about saying the blessing, and what’s “evil” about not saying it? Saying the blessing gives meaning to the act of eating. You acknowledge that the food you are about to eat was given to you by G-d, and that mindset elevates the act of eating from a physical act to a spiritual one. Not saying the blessing tries to push a potentially meaningful spiritual act into a meaningless physical one.
That’s our struggle; to try to instill meaning into everything that we do. A Jew who is just starting to pray every morning will struggle with the issue of getting up a half hour early every day to say his prayers. His Yetzer Ra wants to start the day with meaningful prayer, and his Yetzer Hora wants to start the day with meaningless sleep. That’s his struggle.
But a Jew, who has been saying his morning prayers every morning for 50 years, has a different struggle. His struggle is does he put the extra effort to concentrate closely on his prayers and make them meaningful, or does he say them mechanically and just do an empty meaningless act?
There is a spectrum of meaningfulness in praying. The left is meaningless and as you move right you get more meaning:
Not saying the prayers Doing it mechanically Concentrating it
In the first example, the person was sitting somewhere between not saying the payers and just doing it mechanically. His struggle was do I move to the left on the above spectrum or to the right. In the second example the person sits between saying it mechanically and concentrating on it. He has the same struggle, do I move to the left or the right.
So when go to sleep at night lets not say to ourselves “Well, didn’t rape and pillage today, so my day was good”. Let’s instead say “I moved my life towards meaningfulness today, so it was a good day.”
Friday, February 13, 2004
Parashat Yitro – The 10 Commandments
It’s interesting to note that Jews, Protestants and Catholics disagree over what each of the 10 commandments are. A comparison can be found here.
Judaism holds that the first commandment is “I am the Lord thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.” The problem is that that’s more of a statement than a commandment? So what’s the commandment associated with it? Most sources hold that the commandment is to know that there is a G-d.
But who is this commandment for? If someone already believes in G-d they don’t need to be told this? If the don’t, then they won’t care what it says in the Torah. And can you really command belief?
The answer is as follows: The Torah does not say "BELIEVE" in God. Nor does it say to wonder, feel, intuit, assume, presume, hope, or aspire that there's a God. Rather, the Torah commands us to "KNOW" there is a God!
Western society typically associates religion with “blind faith”. Judaism rejects that idea. The first commandment tells us to use reason and logic to ascertain the existence of G-d. We are told to question, to explore and to understand… not to simply follow along blindly.
Just how one goes about doing that is more difficult, and will have to be left to a future posting.
Shabbat Shalom.
Judaism holds that the first commandment is “I am the Lord thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.” The problem is that that’s more of a statement than a commandment? So what’s the commandment associated with it? Most sources hold that the commandment is to know that there is a G-d.
But who is this commandment for? If someone already believes in G-d they don’t need to be told this? If the don’t, then they won’t care what it says in the Torah. And can you really command belief?
The answer is as follows: The Torah does not say "BELIEVE" in God. Nor does it say to wonder, feel, intuit, assume, presume, hope, or aspire that there's a God. Rather, the Torah commands us to "KNOW" there is a God!
Western society typically associates religion with “blind faith”. Judaism rejects that idea. The first commandment tells us to use reason and logic to ascertain the existence of G-d. We are told to question, to explore and to understand… not to simply follow along blindly.
Just how one goes about doing that is more difficult, and will have to be left to a future posting.
Shabbat Shalom.
Wednesday, February 11, 2004
Parashat Yitro - What happened at Saini
This week’s torah portion contains the central event in Jewish history, the giving of the Torah at Mount Sinai.
It’ important to understand what was given and how it was given. Most people’s understandings of this are based on Cecil B. DeMille’s movie; if you liked the movie, try the book… it’s much better.
In the movie, Moses goes up the mountain, gets the two tablets, and goes and gives them to the Israelites. This is very different from the account in the Torah. The Torah version goes basically like this.
The Israelites are camped by the foot of the mountain and are told by Moses (who was told by G-d) to get ready for the revelation. G-d then speaks directly to the entire nations (more 2 million people) and tells them the 10 commandments.
There are a variety of positions about what G-d actually said to the people. Some hold that G-d speaks all 10 directly to the people; this is what the simple reading of the text implies. Others hold that G-d only spoke the first two, and then the people begged G-d to use Moses as an intermediary (because the experience was to powerful for them). This is supported by the fact that the first two commandments are given in the first person (“I am the Lord your G-d”), and the rest are in the second person (“You shall not take the name of the Lord in vain”). Others hold that G-d spoke all 10 simultaneously, and then Moses was used as an intermediary to explain them. Others hold that G-d only spoke the first letter of the first commandment, and the people intuitively understood the rest. This is a very interesting topic that is far to involved for this forum.
After G-d speaks directly to the people, Moses goes up the mountain and is there for 40 days. While there he gets 2 things. Firstly, Moses received the two tablets. (Most people only know about that one, but if that’s all he got why did it take 40 days?) Secondly he was taught all of the 613 mitzvot (commandments) and the principles of how to apply them. In short he was given what Jews refer to as the Oral Law. So if anyone ever tells you that the Oral law is just Rabbi’s interpretation of the written law, you can tell them they have it backwards. The oral law was given first. The written law (the Torah) was dictated to Moses over the next 40 years in the dessert.
The fact that G-d spoke directly to the entire people is a key bit of information that was left out of the movie. It’s the basis of the entire Jewish religion. Why is it so important? Because it is what separates Judaism from all other religions. All other religions are based on one person claiming to have been spoken to by G-d, and then convincing others of that fact. The problem with that claim is that it can never be proved or discredited. The Jewish claim is different; our claim is one that can not be faked.
Imagine the following. You’re sitting at dinner, and someone speaks up and says “Guess what, G-d spoke to me yesterday. He gave me a new set of laws and said that everyone should follow me.” Would you believe this? Maybe, it depends how charismatic the person is. You can not disprove it, but you can never know for sure.
Now try this one. You’re sitting at dinner, and someone speaks up and says “Do you remember 5 minutes ago, when G-d spoke to all of us and gave us some new laws and told you to follow me?” Do you believe that one? This one you can either prove or disprove. If you did experience what he claims you did, then you know he tells the truth. If you didn’t, then you know he’s lying.
Judaism is based on the second claim. All other religions are based on the first. That’s why no other religion disputes the events at Sinai. It can be taken as a historical fact.
I could talk for hours on this subject… but I’d better not.
It’ important to understand what was given and how it was given. Most people’s understandings of this are based on Cecil B. DeMille’s movie; if you liked the movie, try the book… it’s much better.
In the movie, Moses goes up the mountain, gets the two tablets, and goes and gives them to the Israelites. This is very different from the account in the Torah. The Torah version goes basically like this.
The Israelites are camped by the foot of the mountain and are told by Moses (who was told by G-d) to get ready for the revelation. G-d then speaks directly to the entire nations (more 2 million people) and tells them the 10 commandments.
There are a variety of positions about what G-d actually said to the people. Some hold that G-d speaks all 10 directly to the people; this is what the simple reading of the text implies. Others hold that G-d only spoke the first two, and then the people begged G-d to use Moses as an intermediary (because the experience was to powerful for them). This is supported by the fact that the first two commandments are given in the first person (“I am the Lord your G-d”), and the rest are in the second person (“You shall not take the name of the Lord in vain”). Others hold that G-d spoke all 10 simultaneously, and then Moses was used as an intermediary to explain them. Others hold that G-d only spoke the first letter of the first commandment, and the people intuitively understood the rest. This is a very interesting topic that is far to involved for this forum.
After G-d speaks directly to the people, Moses goes up the mountain and is there for 40 days. While there he gets 2 things. Firstly, Moses received the two tablets. (Most people only know about that one, but if that’s all he got why did it take 40 days?) Secondly he was taught all of the 613 mitzvot (commandments) and the principles of how to apply them. In short he was given what Jews refer to as the Oral Law. So if anyone ever tells you that the Oral law is just Rabbi’s interpretation of the written law, you can tell them they have it backwards. The oral law was given first. The written law (the Torah) was dictated to Moses over the next 40 years in the dessert.
The fact that G-d spoke directly to the entire people is a key bit of information that was left out of the movie. It’s the basis of the entire Jewish religion. Why is it so important? Because it is what separates Judaism from all other religions. All other religions are based on one person claiming to have been spoken to by G-d, and then convincing others of that fact. The problem with that claim is that it can never be proved or discredited. The Jewish claim is different; our claim is one that can not be faked.
Imagine the following. You’re sitting at dinner, and someone speaks up and says “Guess what, G-d spoke to me yesterday. He gave me a new set of laws and said that everyone should follow me.” Would you believe this? Maybe, it depends how charismatic the person is. You can not disprove it, but you can never know for sure.
Now try this one. You’re sitting at dinner, and someone speaks up and says “Do you remember 5 minutes ago, when G-d spoke to all of us and gave us some new laws and told you to follow me?” Do you believe that one? This one you can either prove or disprove. If you did experience what he claims you did, then you know he tells the truth. If you didn’t, then you know he’s lying.
Judaism is based on the second claim. All other religions are based on the first. That’s why no other religion disputes the events at Sinai. It can be taken as a historical fact.
I could talk for hours on this subject… but I’d better not.
Monday, February 09, 2004
Doing and Understanding
Over the weekend I was listening to a lecture called “Introduction to Jewish Mysticism” by Rabbi Ari Kahn. I’ll have to listen to it many more times to absorb all the information, but there was one phrase that really resonated with me.
He was talking about how Judaism is not an “all or nothing” religion, and how it is important to proceed carefully when you’re on the path back towards traditional Judaism. The theme of different people reactions along this path came up. His response was that “Some things you have to understand before you can do it, other things you have to do before you can understand it.”
Many of the laws of Judaism, you need to study and understand before you can do it. But some laws, like Shabbas, you need to do before you can understand.
There is much more going on with Shabbas than you can possibly understand from reading about it in the Mishna. The joy of Shabbas is more than the sum of the actions (or inactions), there is a spiritual side than can only be understood by doing it.
An outsider would look at an observant Jew and conclude that Judaism is full of rituals. If one wants to become religious, you need to understand the rituals so that you can perform them.
However, to the observant Jew, what they are doing should not be rituals. It’s only a ritual if it doesn’t have any meaning to you. To the observant Jew, they are participating in a profound act that elevates your soul… that’s hardly ritualistic. But, until you do the ‘ritual’ (many times), you can not possibly understand that aspect of it.
I’m going to have to play this around in my mind for a while before I fully grasp the profoundness of it… maybe if I put it into practice, I’ll understand it better.
He was talking about how Judaism is not an “all or nothing” religion, and how it is important to proceed carefully when you’re on the path back towards traditional Judaism. The theme of different people reactions along this path came up. His response was that “Some things you have to understand before you can do it, other things you have to do before you can understand it.”
Many of the laws of Judaism, you need to study and understand before you can do it. But some laws, like Shabbas, you need to do before you can understand.
There is much more going on with Shabbas than you can possibly understand from reading about it in the Mishna. The joy of Shabbas is more than the sum of the actions (or inactions), there is a spiritual side than can only be understood by doing it.
An outsider would look at an observant Jew and conclude that Judaism is full of rituals. If one wants to become religious, you need to understand the rituals so that you can perform them.
However, to the observant Jew, what they are doing should not be rituals. It’s only a ritual if it doesn’t have any meaning to you. To the observant Jew, they are participating in a profound act that elevates your soul… that’s hardly ritualistic. But, until you do the ‘ritual’ (many times), you can not possibly understand that aspect of it.
I’m going to have to play this around in my mind for a while before I fully grasp the profoundness of it… maybe if I put it into practice, I’ll understand it better.
Friday, February 06, 2004
Parashat B’Shalach
This weeks Torah portion gives us the answer for a common themes of Jewish jokes. The joke usually asks why the Jews wandered in the desert for 40 years (and is usually answered with something like ‘because the men wouldn’t stop to ask for directions).
The portion starts “17. It came to pass when Pharaoh let the people go, that God did not lead them [by] way of the land of the Philistines for it was near, because God said, Lest the people reconsider when they see war and return to Egypt 18. So God led the people around [by] way of the desert [to] the Red Sea…” [Exodus 13:17-18]
G-d knew that when Israel arrived in the land of the Philistines (which is biblical Israel), they would face a war. G-d also knew that that Israel was not ready for war. If Israel would come up against a war so soon after leaving Egypt, they would flee back into the relative safety (albeit slavery) of Egypt.
But what was it that Israel wasn’t ready for? The obvious answer is that they were not physically ready for a war… after all, slavery doesn’t exactly make you fit to be warriors. But if that’s the case, why would taking the route by way of the Red Sea (actually Sea of Reeds) – which is only an extra few weeks travel – make them physically ready?
The answer is that the problem wasn’t physical, it was a spiritual deficiency. Witnessing the 10 plagues wasn’t enough to convince Israel that with G-d in their corner they can win a war against the Philistines. There was more that Israel needed to witness (the more is, of course, the revelation at Sinai and the many miracles in the desert).
So we start with G-d not wanting Israel to face war yet. But the portion ends with Israel fighting a war with Amalek. If G-d took Israel the long way around so they would not have to face war, then why does the portion end with Israel getting into a war?
Israel was not spiritually ready for war at the start of the portion. Through the portion, G-d gets Israel spiritually ready with a series of miracles (water from rocks, manah…) which were designed to show Israel that comes with service of G-d.
Reading the text, the Amalek attack seems to come out of left field… there is no description of them coming; in the middle of a paragraph we get “8. Amalek came and fought with Israel in Rephidim”[Exodus 17:8]. Looking at the line before this, we begin to understand what is happening. After complaining to Moses about lack of water, the text says “… the children of Israel [tested] the Lord, saying, Is the Lord in our midst or not?” [ Exodus 17:7].
Israel looses faith in G-d, and are immediately faced with war. It’s hard to not see a correlation there. This is a theme we see repeated many times in the Torah. From Psalm 81 “If only my people would heed Me, if Israel would walk in My ways. In an instant I would subdue their foes, and against my tormentors turn My hand.” The lesson here is just as applicable today was it was when G-d first taught it to the Jews 3500 years ago.
Shabbat Shalom.
The portion starts “17. It came to pass when Pharaoh let the people go, that God did not lead them [by] way of the land of the Philistines for it was near, because God said, Lest the people reconsider when they see war and return to Egypt 18. So God led the people around [by] way of the desert [to] the Red Sea…” [Exodus 13:17-18]
G-d knew that when Israel arrived in the land of the Philistines (which is biblical Israel), they would face a war. G-d also knew that that Israel was not ready for war. If Israel would come up against a war so soon after leaving Egypt, they would flee back into the relative safety (albeit slavery) of Egypt.
But what was it that Israel wasn’t ready for? The obvious answer is that they were not physically ready for a war… after all, slavery doesn’t exactly make you fit to be warriors. But if that’s the case, why would taking the route by way of the Red Sea (actually Sea of Reeds) – which is only an extra few weeks travel – make them physically ready?
The answer is that the problem wasn’t physical, it was a spiritual deficiency. Witnessing the 10 plagues wasn’t enough to convince Israel that with G-d in their corner they can win a war against the Philistines. There was more that Israel needed to witness (the more is, of course, the revelation at Sinai and the many miracles in the desert).
So we start with G-d not wanting Israel to face war yet. But the portion ends with Israel fighting a war with Amalek. If G-d took Israel the long way around so they would not have to face war, then why does the portion end with Israel getting into a war?
Israel was not spiritually ready for war at the start of the portion. Through the portion, G-d gets Israel spiritually ready with a series of miracles (water from rocks, manah…) which were designed to show Israel that comes with service of G-d.
Reading the text, the Amalek attack seems to come out of left field… there is no description of them coming; in the middle of a paragraph we get “8. Amalek came and fought with Israel in Rephidim”[Exodus 17:8]. Looking at the line before this, we begin to understand what is happening. After complaining to Moses about lack of water, the text says “… the children of Israel [tested] the Lord, saying, Is the Lord in our midst or not?” [ Exodus 17:7].
Israel looses faith in G-d, and are immediately faced with war. It’s hard to not see a correlation there. This is a theme we see repeated many times in the Torah. From Psalm 81 “If only my people would heed Me, if Israel would walk in My ways. In an instant I would subdue their foes, and against my tormentors turn My hand.” The lesson here is just as applicable today was it was when G-d first taught it to the Jews 3500 years ago.
Shabbat Shalom.
Thursday, February 05, 2004
Tu Bi’Shvat
This Saturday is the holiday of Tu Bi’Shvat – literally the 15th day of Shvat. The holiday is the New Year for the trees. The holiday is typically celebrated by eating the seven species of Israel (wheat, barley, olives, grapes, dates, figs, and pomegranates) and planting trees in Israel (or donating to a charity that does the same).
Today, we play up the Zionistic aspect of the holiday, but in fact the holiday is Biblical in origin. There are 4 New Years in Judaism. There is the 1st of Nisan, which is in the New Year for the Kings, the nth year of a Kings rule begins on this day. Then there is the 1st of Elul, which is the New Year for the animals. Every 10th animal born is given to the Priests, this day determines which year a given animal is counted with. Then there is the 1st of Tishrei, which is what we all know as Rosh HaShana. Then there is Tu Bi’Shvat, the New Year for the trees, which has a similar meaning as the New Year for the animals.
We do nothing to mark the New Year for the Kings or Animals, why do we celebrate the New Year of the Trees? It’s because trees are considered Holy… in fact the Torah often compares trees to man. Just as fruit and trees have been instilled with the power to grow physically, man has the power to grow physically.
The Kabbalists tell us of 4 kinds of creations, rocks, plants, animals and man. Rocks (and all inanimate objects) just sort of sit there doing nothing. Plants spend their whole day eating. Animals can think and walk around, but what are they thinking about? They think about getting food. What do they walk around for? They walk around to get food. Animals are basically thinking and walking plants. That’s why their head is on the same level as their body, because their brain is just there to serve the body. A man’s head is on a higher level than its body. Man can reach a higher level than the purely physical aspects of a plant or animal.
So this Tu Bi’Shvat, when you taste the sweet fruits of the land and say the She’Hechianu, be sure to think about the power of growth in the fruits, in the trees, in the Torah and is also within each of us
Today, we play up the Zionistic aspect of the holiday, but in fact the holiday is Biblical in origin. There are 4 New Years in Judaism. There is the 1st of Nisan, which is in the New Year for the Kings, the nth year of a Kings rule begins on this day. Then there is the 1st of Elul, which is the New Year for the animals. Every 10th animal born is given to the Priests, this day determines which year a given animal is counted with. Then there is the 1st of Tishrei, which is what we all know as Rosh HaShana. Then there is Tu Bi’Shvat, the New Year for the trees, which has a similar meaning as the New Year for the animals.
We do nothing to mark the New Year for the Kings or Animals, why do we celebrate the New Year of the Trees? It’s because trees are considered Holy… in fact the Torah often compares trees to man. Just as fruit and trees have been instilled with the power to grow physically, man has the power to grow physically.
The Kabbalists tell us of 4 kinds of creations, rocks, plants, animals and man. Rocks (and all inanimate objects) just sort of sit there doing nothing. Plants spend their whole day eating. Animals can think and walk around, but what are they thinking about? They think about getting food. What do they walk around for? They walk around to get food. Animals are basically thinking and walking plants. That’s why their head is on the same level as their body, because their brain is just there to serve the body. A man’s head is on a higher level than its body. Man can reach a higher level than the purely physical aspects of a plant or animal.
So this Tu Bi’Shvat, when you taste the sweet fruits of the land and say the She’Hechianu, be sure to think about the power of growth in the fruits, in the trees, in the Torah and is also within each of us
Monday, February 02, 2004
Not Yet
The story is told of Franz Rosenswag (who was voted the most influential Jewish philosopher of the first half of the 20th century). He was an assimilated Jew, who had a cousin who converted to Christianity. His cousin wanted Franz to convert also, after all Franz did not believe in Judaism, maybe he could believe in Christianity. Franz eventually agreed, but said he didn’t want to convert from pagan to Christian, he wanted to go from pagan, to Jew, to Christian – just like Jesus and the apostles did. So he decided he would first learn about Judaism, and then convert. So he started on that route, and never stopped learning.
In his old age, he was asked if he wore Teffilin? He did not, but his answer was interesting; he responded “Not yet”. He knew that Teffilin was one step on the ladder, and maybe one day he would get there. Even though he didn’t feel the need to keep that Mitzvah at that time, he knew that it was a possibility that he may in the future.
If people would have asked me if I was Shomer Shabbas, I would have answered “No”. The same answer would have been given for most other Mitzvot. But I think from now on I’m going to change my answer to “Not yet”. I know that I’ll never reach the point in my journey of keeping every Mitzvah, but there are none that I can say I would never do. But answering “Not yet” keeps me on my journey.
In his old age, he was asked if he wore Teffilin? He did not, but his answer was interesting; he responded “Not yet”. He knew that Teffilin was one step on the ladder, and maybe one day he would get there. Even though he didn’t feel the need to keep that Mitzvah at that time, he knew that it was a possibility that he may in the future.
If people would have asked me if I was Shomer Shabbas, I would have answered “No”. The same answer would have been given for most other Mitzvot. But I think from now on I’m going to change my answer to “Not yet”. I know that I’ll never reach the point in my journey of keeping every Mitzvah, but there are none that I can say I would never do. But answering “Not yet” keeps me on my journey.
Friday, January 30, 2004
If you don’t cry, who will?
A little over 2 years ago, when I was starting my Teshuva, I read an article on Aish.com that really affected me. The article, written by Chezi Goldberg, called “If you don’t cry, who will?”. It was written just after a horrible triple bombing in Jerusalem.
The article asked the question, why are all Jews not brought to tears after every attack? How can we expect other to be outraged by what’s happening, if we are not outraged ourselves. The Talmud teaches that for every tear that’s shed, a drop of blood is spared. If we would all cry, think of all the blood that would be saved.
The authour, Chezi Goldberg, was born and raised in Toronto, and moved to Israel 15 years ago to work as a counsellor for Adolescents and Families at Risk. Chezi Goldberg was tragically murdered in the bus bombing on Jan 29th. G-d willing, some blood will be spared because of the tears I shed upon hearing that.
His article closes with “King Solomon said, ‘There is a time for everything.’ Now is the time for crying. May God protect each and every one of us from our enemies so that we will not have to cry in the future.
The article asked the question, why are all Jews not brought to tears after every attack? How can we expect other to be outraged by what’s happening, if we are not outraged ourselves. The Talmud teaches that for every tear that’s shed, a drop of blood is spared. If we would all cry, think of all the blood that would be saved.
The authour, Chezi Goldberg, was born and raised in Toronto, and moved to Israel 15 years ago to work as a counsellor for Adolescents and Families at Risk. Chezi Goldberg was tragically murdered in the bus bombing on Jan 29th. G-d willing, some blood will be spared because of the tears I shed upon hearing that.
His article closes with “King Solomon said, ‘There is a time for everything.’ Now is the time for crying. May God protect each and every one of us from our enemies so that we will not have to cry in the future.
Thursday, January 29, 2004
Parashat Bo
In this weeks Torah portion, we read about the final 3 of the 10 plagues, the laws of Passover, and the commandments to wear Teffilin, consecrate the first-born animal and redeem one's first born son (Pidyon-HA’Ben).
There are so many interesting issues in this parasha, it was hard for me to decide which one to talk about. What I decided, was to talk about the Jewish calendar.
Rosh Ha’Shana, is the Jewish New year, it occurs in the month of Tishrei. However, in this parasha, it says “This month shall be to you the head of the months; to you it shall be the first of the months of the year” [Exodus 12:2]. This exchange takes place during the Exodus, which happens in the month of Nissan.
So which is the first month, Tishrei or Nissan?
Rosh Ha’Shana marks the creation of the humanity, so Tishrei was made the first month. Often people accept G-d as a creator who then sat back and let nature take it course. But the exodus, with all its open miracles, teaches us that G-d’s role as director of history is even greater than his role as creator. And that’s why at the Exodus, the order of the months were changed to mar this new relationship between G-d and man.
This notion helps explain another question. If Shabbat commemorates the six days of creation, why is it only the Jews who are commanded to observe it? The answer is found in the text of the Friday night Kiddish, where we declare that Shabbat is to remember creation and the exodus fro Egypt. Because, while G-d created the entire world, it was through the Jewish exodus that mankind came to appreciate G-d as the guiding hand of history.
Shabbat Shalom.
There are so many interesting issues in this parasha, it was hard for me to decide which one to talk about. What I decided, was to talk about the Jewish calendar.
Rosh Ha’Shana, is the Jewish New year, it occurs in the month of Tishrei. However, in this parasha, it says “This month shall be to you the head of the months; to you it shall be the first of the months of the year” [Exodus 12:2]. This exchange takes place during the Exodus, which happens in the month of Nissan.
So which is the first month, Tishrei or Nissan?
Rosh Ha’Shana marks the creation of the humanity, so Tishrei was made the first month. Often people accept G-d as a creator who then sat back and let nature take it course. But the exodus, with all its open miracles, teaches us that G-d’s role as director of history is even greater than his role as creator. And that’s why at the Exodus, the order of the months were changed to mar this new relationship between G-d and man.
This notion helps explain another question. If Shabbat commemorates the six days of creation, why is it only the Jews who are commanded to observe it? The answer is found in the text of the Friday night Kiddish, where we declare that Shabbat is to remember creation and the exodus fro Egypt. Because, while G-d created the entire world, it was through the Jewish exodus that mankind came to appreciate G-d as the guiding hand of history.
Shabbat Shalom.
Monday, January 26, 2004
More on Answering Prayers
I was listening to a class on “How to be spiritual in an unspiritual world”, the class talked a lot about prayer and it got me thinking on the issue.
I wanted to share a few insights from the class, and a few of my own.
First the class talked about the reason for prayer. If we understand the reason, we have a better chance of understanding the answers we get to our prayers. The example that was given was a farmer who is having a bad season, praying for crops. In this case, the goal of the interaction is better crops, the method of getting the goal, it by praying. Sometimes the prayer succeeds (in the form of better crops), and sometimes it fails. It’s very hard to understand why it works sometimes and not other times.
That’s all from the point of view of the farmer. Let’s look at this same situation from G-d’s point of view. G-d created us for the purpose of having a relationship with him – the ultimate pleasure in life is to connect to G-d. So from G-d’s point of view, the goal of the interaction is prayer and the method is the providing/withholding of crops. Let me say that again, from G-d point of view, the goal of the interaction is to connect to G-d, and the way G-d gets you to seek the connection to him is by providing/withholding something.
This all revolves around the issue of the soul. I’m not going to get into the issue of does the soul exist, the issue is which of these two statements are more connect “I have a soul” or “I am a soul”. There is a profound difference in how you perceive the world, based on which one of these you believe. This is an issue that came up in my exploring Musar, and an issue I plan to further explore and talk about at some later time.
Next the class talked about the two kinds of prayer. It did this by comparing the two parts of the morning service. In Psekei D’Zimrah, we thank G-d for all that he has given us. In the Amidah (which is the bulk of the 2nd part), we ask god for all that we don’t have. The Amidah is considered to be the more significant part of the service. Asking G-d for what we don’t have is deemed more important that thanking him for what we do. I’ll certainly need to think about that one more before I fully understand the message, but it certainly has the ring of a profound observation.
In the next few postings I’ll talk about some insight on prayer that I have had as a result of this class.
I wanted to share a few insights from the class, and a few of my own.
First the class talked about the reason for prayer. If we understand the reason, we have a better chance of understanding the answers we get to our prayers. The example that was given was a farmer who is having a bad season, praying for crops. In this case, the goal of the interaction is better crops, the method of getting the goal, it by praying. Sometimes the prayer succeeds (in the form of better crops), and sometimes it fails. It’s very hard to understand why it works sometimes and not other times.
That’s all from the point of view of the farmer. Let’s look at this same situation from G-d’s point of view. G-d created us for the purpose of having a relationship with him – the ultimate pleasure in life is to connect to G-d. So from G-d’s point of view, the goal of the interaction is prayer and the method is the providing/withholding of crops. Let me say that again, from G-d point of view, the goal of the interaction is to connect to G-d, and the way G-d gets you to seek the connection to him is by providing/withholding something.
This all revolves around the issue of the soul. I’m not going to get into the issue of does the soul exist, the issue is which of these two statements are more connect “I have a soul” or “I am a soul”. There is a profound difference in how you perceive the world, based on which one of these you believe. This is an issue that came up in my exploring Musar, and an issue I plan to further explore and talk about at some later time.
Next the class talked about the two kinds of prayer. It did this by comparing the two parts of the morning service. In Psekei D’Zimrah, we thank G-d for all that he has given us. In the Amidah (which is the bulk of the 2nd part), we ask god for all that we don’t have. The Amidah is considered to be the more significant part of the service. Asking G-d for what we don’t have is deemed more important that thanking him for what we do. I’ll certainly need to think about that one more before I fully understand the message, but it certainly has the ring of a profound observation.
In the next few postings I’ll talk about some insight on prayer that I have had as a result of this class.
Sunday, January 25, 2004
The Answering of Prayers
When Mandy and I were going through our miscarriages, I obviously did a lot of praying. Aside from the obvious prayers for Mandy’s health and for us to have a child soon, I also prayed for the wisdom to understand the message G-d was trying to send us.
I understood that G-d is in compete control of everything, and that even the miscarriages were part of G-d’s plan. Mandy and I had both prayed for a child, and while our prayer was answered, it seemed to be answered with a “No”. I knew that there was a reason for the negative answer to our prayer, G-d was sending us a message, and it’s up to us to decode it. So I prayed for the wisdom to do that.
This past weekend, I think my prayer may have been answered. I think I may understand a tiny part of message.
Before the miscarriages, our greatest fear about having a baby was that Mandy would not be able to get pregnant. It took her parents many years to conceive Mandy and her sister. When we prayed to G-d for a child, G-d’s answer wasn’t “No” it was “Not right now”. But G-d didn’t want us to worry that we would be unable to conceive, so we conceived very easily both times, but then lost the pregnancy. We are now no longer worried that we’ll be unable to conceive. And we now have a pregnancy that, G-d willing, will carry through.
There is still another part of the message that is unclear, why were we not to have a child at that time? I don’t think we’ll be able to answer that one for a long time … until we have enough perspective to look back on these events. Maybe it was because we needed to visit Israel (and we would not have gone if the first pregnancy would have held). Maybe it was because we needed to be brought closer to G-d, or to each other. All three of these things were consequences of the miscarriages.
I don’t know that we’ll ever KNOW what message G-d was sending to us, but I thank G-d for giving me with wisdom to get a glimpse of what the message might be.
I understood that G-d is in compete control of everything, and that even the miscarriages were part of G-d’s plan. Mandy and I had both prayed for a child, and while our prayer was answered, it seemed to be answered with a “No”. I knew that there was a reason for the negative answer to our prayer, G-d was sending us a message, and it’s up to us to decode it. So I prayed for the wisdom to do that.
This past weekend, I think my prayer may have been answered. I think I may understand a tiny part of message.
Before the miscarriages, our greatest fear about having a baby was that Mandy would not be able to get pregnant. It took her parents many years to conceive Mandy and her sister. When we prayed to G-d for a child, G-d’s answer wasn’t “No” it was “Not right now”. But G-d didn’t want us to worry that we would be unable to conceive, so we conceived very easily both times, but then lost the pregnancy. We are now no longer worried that we’ll be unable to conceive. And we now have a pregnancy that, G-d willing, will carry through.
There is still another part of the message that is unclear, why were we not to have a child at that time? I don’t think we’ll be able to answer that one for a long time … until we have enough perspective to look back on these events. Maybe it was because we needed to visit Israel (and we would not have gone if the first pregnancy would have held). Maybe it was because we needed to be brought closer to G-d, or to each other. All three of these things were consequences of the miscarriages.
I don’t know that we’ll ever KNOW what message G-d was sending to us, but I thank G-d for giving me with wisdom to get a glimpse of what the message might be.
Friday, January 23, 2004
Parahat Va-Eria
This weeks Torah portion continues the story of the Exodus from Egypt. We get up to the point of the seventh plague.
The overriding question that needs to be asked about the early part of the book of Exodus is; If G-d wanted to take the Jews out of Egypt, why the long drawn out process. At any point G-d could have snapped his fingers (so to speak) and the Jews would have been out of Egypt and standing at the foot of Mount Sinai waiting to receive the Torah.
The classical explanation goes something like this. To understand why we needed the 10 plagues, we first need to understand the Jewish view of miracles in general. As Rabbi Spiro puts it
But to this rule, the 10 plagues were a notable exception. There is no natural explanation for the 10 plagues; they are a clear example of G-d flipping the laws of nature on their end.
So why did we need them? Egypt was a very spiritual, but very idolatrous society. The essence of Idolatry is that every force of nature has its own god. The Egyptians worshiped the Nile god, the sun god, the cat god the sheep god… The 10 plagues were designed, by G-d, to show the Jews and trhe rest of the world that the idols are false, that he alone controls the entire world and everything in it.
As Rabbi Spiro points out:
Abraham was given a mission; this mission was given to the entire Jewish people at Mount Sinai. That mission is to change the world, to bring the entire world to the realization of one G-d. This process was needed so that the truth of G-d becomes entrenched deep in the Jewish soul.
Looking at it that way, we see that the process of Exodus is not over. That’s why on Passover, we spend the first half of the sedar talking about the past (the story of Exodus) and the second half talking about the future. The Exodus is an ongoing process that will end in the time of the Messiah (may it come speedily in our days).
Shabbat Shalom!
The overriding question that needs to be asked about the early part of the book of Exodus is; If G-d wanted to take the Jews out of Egypt, why the long drawn out process. At any point G-d could have snapped his fingers (so to speak) and the Jews would have been out of Egypt and standing at the foot of Mount Sinai waiting to receive the Torah.
The classical explanation goes something like this. To understand why we needed the 10 plagues, we first need to understand the Jewish view of miracles in general. As Rabbi Spiro puts it
- ‘Judaism holds that nature does not act independently of God, but, at the same time, God created the laws of nature and does not interfere with them. God is certainly capable of doing whatever He likes, but He doesn't play around with the physical world and its workings. Therefore, most miracles are natural phenomena with awesomely good timing.’
But to this rule, the 10 plagues were a notable exception. There is no natural explanation for the 10 plagues; they are a clear example of G-d flipping the laws of nature on their end.
So why did we need them? Egypt was a very spiritual, but very idolatrous society. The essence of Idolatry is that every force of nature has its own god. The Egyptians worshiped the Nile god, the sun god, the cat god the sheep god… The 10 plagues were designed, by G-d, to show the Jews and trhe rest of the world that the idols are false, that he alone controls the entire world and everything in it.
As Rabbi Spiro points out:
- "If we examine the plagues carefully we can readily see that each one was designed to show God's control of all forces in nature: water and earth, fire and ice, insects, reptiles and mammals, light and darkness, and finally, life and death."
Abraham was given a mission; this mission was given to the entire Jewish people at Mount Sinai. That mission is to change the world, to bring the entire world to the realization of one G-d. This process was needed so that the truth of G-d becomes entrenched deep in the Jewish soul.
Looking at it that way, we see that the process of Exodus is not over. That’s why on Passover, we spend the first half of the sedar talking about the past (the story of Exodus) and the second half talking about the future. The Exodus is an ongoing process that will end in the time of the Messiah (may it come speedily in our days).
Shabbat Shalom!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)