Torah Sparks 5763

PARASHAT BERESHEET
October 5, 2002 - 5763
Annual Cycle: Genesis 1:1-6:8 (Hertz, p. 2; Etz Hayim, p. 3)

Triennial Cycle Year II: Genesis 2: - 4:26 (Hertz, p. 6; Etz Hayim, p. 12)
Haftarah: I Samuel 20:18 - 42 (Mahar Hodesh) (Hertz, p. 948; Etz Hayim, p.
1215)
Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman

Head of School, Jewish Academy of Metropolitan Detroit
Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations

Rabbi Martin J. Pasternak, Director
Torah Portion Summary
(1:1-2:3) The world is created in six days. The first Shabbat.
(2:4-25) The creation and, in particular, the creation of humanity. Adam and Eve
are placed in the Garden of Eden "to till it and to tend it."
(3:1-7) The snake tempts the woman to eat of the forbidden fruit. She
persuades the man also to eat it. They become aware of their nakedness, and
they make clothing for themselves from fig leaves.
(3:8-24) God's first question of human beings: "Where are you?" God punishes
the snake by making it crawl on its belly, and by the enmity of human beings;
the woman by the pains of childbirth; the man by alienation from the earth.
Expulsion from the Garden of Eden.
(4:1-15) Cain's murder of Abel and God's response. (4:17-26) The descendants
of Cain. The taunting song of Lamech. The birth of Seth, and his son Enosh.
(5:1-6:8) The ten generations from Adam to Noah.
Torah Text Being Considered
"The Lord God planted a garden in Eden, in the east, and placed there the man
whom He had formed. And from the ground the Lord God caused to grow every
tree that was pleasing to the sight and good for food, with the tree of life in the
middle of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil... And the Lord
God commanded the man, saying, 'Of every tree of the garden you are free to
eat; but as for the tree of knowledge of good and evil, you must not eat of it; for
as soon as you eat of it, you shall die.'" (Gen 2:8-9, 16-17)
Commentaries:
A. "The tree of knowledge of good and evil". What was the tree from which
Adam and Eve ate? Rabbi Meir said: It was wheat, for when a person
lacks knowledge people say, 'That man has never eaten bread of wheat.'
Rabbi Samuel ben Isaac asked Rabbi Zeira: 'Is it possible that it was
wheat?' 'Yes,' he replied. 'But surely TREE is written?' he argued. 'It grew
lofty like the cedars of Lebanon,' he replied. Rabbi Judah ben Rabbi Ila'i
said: It was grapes, for it says, "Their grapes are grapes of gall, they
have clusters of bitterness" (Deut. 32:32); those clusters brought
bitterness (i.e. sorrow) into the world. Rabbi Abba of Acco said: It was
the etrog as it is written, "And when the woman saw that the tree was
good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and a tree to be
desired to make one wise" (Gen. 3:6). Consider: go forth and see, what
tree is it whose wood (stem) can be eaten just like its fruit? And you find
none but the etrog.
Rabbi Yose said: They were figs. This may be compared to a royal
prince who sinned with a slave girl, and the king, upon learning of it,
expelled him from court. The prince went from door to door of slaves, but
they would not receive him; but she who had sinned with him opened her
door and received him. So when Adam ate of that tree, God expelled him
and cast him out of the Garden of Eden; and Adam appealed to all the
trees but they would not receive him. What did they say to him? Said
Rabbi Berechiah: 'Behold, a deceiver who deceived his Creator, who
deceived his Master!' as it is written, "Let not the foot of presumption
come unto me" (Ps. 36:12), which means the foot that presumed against
its Creator; "And let not the hand of the wicked shake me" (ibid); i.e. let it
not take a leaf from me. But because he had eaten of its fruit, the fig-tree
opened its doors and received him, as it is written, ' ...they sewed fig-
leaves together' (Gen. 3:7 Bereisheet Rabbah 15:7)
For discussion:
Adam and Eve are instructed not to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and
evil. Early Renaissance art portrayed the fruit of this tree as an apple. (Scholars
suggest that in Old English an apple was the generic term for a fruit similar to
the Hebrew jup, which originally meant fruit.) Not withstanding the
mistranslation of Renaissance artists, Midrash Rabbah on Genesis records a
dispute on the identity of the mysterious fruit. Four possibilities are suggested:
wheat, grapes, etrog, fig. Looking at each of these symbolically or
metaphorically, what might the deeper meaning be behind this four-way
dispute?
Some points to consider:
1. Eating may be considered a metaphor for domination and mastery as in

eating matzah, symbolizing mastery of freedom. Furthermore, "good and
evil" in the context of the tree is a "merism". A merism is a poetic way of
expressing totality by referring to polar opposites. In this case, eating of
the tree of knowledge of good and evil is tantamount to trying to possess
knowledge of everything, an act of hubris (hutzpah). Such knowledge
surely is reserved only for God. One can engage in inquiry into such
knowledge (one can touch the tree) but one should not think that he/she
can have complete knowledge as God does.
2. The Midrash asks the question: What fruit symbolizes this arrogance?
The wheat or grapes which are a symbol of the advance of civilization
(science)? The etrog which is a symbol of asthetics and beauty? The fig
which is a symbol of financial power and commerce?
3. What tempts us to such arrogance? What helps us better understand our
place in the world? Is this where religion comes in? What role can
religion play in the world vis-a-vis science, industry, etc.?
PARASHAT NOAH
October 12, 2002 - 5763
Annual Cycle: Genesis 6:9 - 11:32 (Hertz, p. 26; Etz Hayim, p. 41)
Triennial: Year II-5763: Genesis 8:15 - 10:32 (Hertz, p. 31; Etz Hayim, p. 48)
Haftarah - Isaiah 54:1 - 55:5 (Hertz, p. 41; Etz Hayim, p. 64


(6:9-22) The earth's corruption moves God to tell Noah that He will destroy
humankind. God commands Noah to build an ark in which he and his family and
the animals and birds will survive the flood.
(7:1-9) God orders Noah and his family to enter the ark, with all the animals.
(7:10-24) The rains begin, and continue for forty days. All life on earth is blotted
out by the waters.
(8:1-14) The Flood ends. Noah sends out a raven and then a dove to discover if
the earth has dried. The dove returns with an olive leaf in its bill.
(8:15-22) Noah leaves the ark and offers sacrifices of thanksgiving to God.
(9:1-7) God blesses Noah and his family, permits the eating of meat, and
prohibits the shedding of human blood.
(9:8-17) God places the rainbow in the sky as the sign of the covenant, the
promise that He won't bring another flood upon the world.
(9:18-29) Noah's drunkenness and death. (10:1-32) The descendants of Noah's

sons: Shem, Ham, and Yaphet.
(11:1-9) The story of the Tower of Babel and the dispersion of humankind.
(11:10-32) The ten generations from Noah to Abraham.
Every creature that lives shall be yours to eat; as with the green grasses, I give
you all these. You must not, however, eat flesh with its life-blood in it.
But for your own life-blood I will require a reckoning: I will require it of every
beast; of man, too, will I require a reckoning for human life, of every an for that
of his fellow man! Whoever sheds the blood of a man, by man shall his blood be
shed; for in His image did God make man (Genesis 9:3-6)
Commentaries:
A. As explicated in Leviticus 17:11, 14 and Deuteronomy 12:23, blood

constituted the life-essence. Consequently, popular thought had it that
one could renew or reinforce one's vitality through absorption of blood.
For this reason, blood played an important role in the cults of the dead in
the ancient world. In the Torah, however, precisely because blood is the
symbol of life, it belongs to God alone, as does life itself. (Nachum Sarna,
JPS Commentary to Genesis 9:4)
B. We have already (Gen. 1:20 and 2:19) recognized nefesh which is
related to nefets, the summit, as the highest degree of individualization in
the order of succession of the creation. Nefesh is the most independent
amongst the created beings. Equally so, we have recognized in dam
(from domeh to be like something else, to be assimilated) the prototype
of the whole body. The blood is the whole body in liquid state... Through
the dam the soul rules the body. It is to this relationship that the Word of
God refers with the words b'nafsho damo as long as its blood is held by
its soul. The individuality... is the nefesh... The animal body is only
allowed to be used for food when the blood is no longer under the control
of the soul; the tissues of the animal body can become tissues of the
human body for it is something entirely passive, inert, but the animal soul
can never become, is never to become, the human soul. According to
this, what the Torah says here is: no limb may be eaten if it comes from
the animal while it was still under the sway of the animal soul. (Samson
Raphael Hirsch on Genesis 9:4)
For discussion:
Even before there were Jews, the first commandment in the Torah deals with
eating. (Ess, ess mein kindt) In the early chapters of Genesis a human being is
told not to eat from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and evil. Humans are told to
be careful about what is eaten because if we are not, we would have to leave
Paradise. The fact that God's first commandment deals with food indicates that
eating is understood to be much more than watching over our bodies and
staying alive. Kashrut, for example, is not about hygiene (the Torah, after all, is
not a medical textbook). Kashrut is not a diet for the body. It is a diet for the soul.
In our parashah, we are introduced to one of the fundamental laws of kashrut

(the prohibition against consuming the blood of an animal) that illustrates this
idea. What support do we find for this idea in the two commentaries above?
How do these commentators see the prohibition against consuming blood
actually affecting our souls?
In Sarna's comment, we see that the prohibition is meant to instill within us the
sanctity of life. The context of the prohibition supports this in that we are told not
to take the shedding of blood lightly. There is a difference between eating cereal
and eating meat where a soul is involved. Hirsch, however, develops a different
idea. He notes that according to Genesis, Chapter 1, the characteristic that
distinguishes an animal from all the creatures prior to its creation is the nefesh.
The nefesh is that quality that makes an animal an animal. The blood carries
the soul, i.e. the instincts of the animal. Therefore, consuming the blood of the
animal is tantamount to transferring those instincts to humans which may tip the
delicate balance of instincts within us and decrease the dignity of human life.
Vegetarianism anyone?
PARASHAT LECH LECHA
October 19, 2002 - 5763
Triennial: Year II: Genesis 14:1 - 15:21 (Hertz, p.50; Etz Hayim, p. 77)
Haftarah-Isaiah 40:27 - 41:16 (Hertz, p. 60; Etz Hayim, p. 94)


(12:1-9) God speaks to Abram: "Go to the land I will show you." Abram, his wife
Sarai, and his nephew Lot travel from Haran to Canaan. Abram sets up altars to
God at Shechem, and near Bethel.
(12:10-20) Because of famine, Abram goes to Egypt. He lies saying Sarai is his
sister. Pharaoh takes her into his house. God brings plagues upon Pharaoh.
Pharaoh angrily sends Abram and Sarai away.
(13:1-13) Lot's herds men and Abram's herds men quarrel. Abram generously
allows Lot first choice of grazing land. Lot chooses the fertile Jordan valley, near
Sodom. Abram gets the rest of Canaan.
(13:14-18) God renews His promise to grant Abram the land of Canaan. Abram
settles near Hebron.
(Chap. 14) Five Canaanite kings rebel against Chedarlaomer, King of Elam. A
coalition of four eastern kings moves to punish the rebels. In the battles
between the two groups of king Lot is captured. Abram arms his followers and
pursues Lot's captors in order to rescue his nephew. He defeats them and
saves Lot and the other captives.
(Chap. 15) God makes a covenant with Abram renewing His promise of
progeny and the land of Canaan. God tells Abram that his descendants will be
exiled, redeemed and returned to the Land. The Land's boundaries and its
inhabitants.
(Chap. 16) Abram's concubine, Hagar, becomes pregnant, leading to conflict

with Sarai. Sarai mistreats Hagar, who runs away, but she returns after an
angel of the Lord promises her that the son within her womb will become the
founder of a great nation. The son is born, and is named Ishmael, considered to
be the ancestor of the Arab peoples.
(Chap. 17) God establishes circumcision as the sign of the covenant. At this
time Abram and Sarai are renamed Abraham and Sarah. God also predicts that
Abraham and Sarah will bear a son, to be named Isaac. The Sedrah concludes
with the circumcision of Abraham, Ishmael, and all the men of the household.
Some time later, the word of the Lord came to Abram in a vision. He said, 'Fear
not, Abram, I am a shield to you; Your reward shall be very great.' But Abraham
said, 'O Lord God, what can You give me, seeing that I shall die childless and
the one in charge of my household is Dammesek Eliezer!'
Abraham said further, 'Since You have granted me no offspring, my steward will
be my heir.' The word of the Lord came to him in reply, 'That one shall not be
your heir, none but your very own issue shall be your heir.' He took him outside
and said, 'Look toward heaven and count the starts, if you are able to count
them.' And He added, 'So shall your offspring be.' And because he put his trust
in the Lord, HE RECKONED IT TO HIS MERIT. (Genesis 15:1-6)
Commentaries:
A. The Holy Blessed One accounted it to Abraham for righteousness and

merit because of the faith with which he had trusted in Him. (Rashi)
B. But I do not understand the nature of this merit. Why should he not
believe in the God of truth, and he himself is the prophet, and "God is not
a man that He should lie?" (Numbers 23:29). Furthermore, he who
believed and on the basis of this belief was ready to sacrifice his only son,
the beloved one, and withstood the rest of the trials, how could he not
believe a good tiding? The correct interpretation appears to me to be that
the verse is stating that Abraham believed in God and he considered it
due to the righteousness of the Holy Blessed One that He would give him
a child under all circumstances and not because of Abraham's state of
righteousness and his reward, even though He told him, "Your reward
will be very great" (Gen. 15:1)
For discussion:
The second clause of verse 6 contains a syntactical ambiguity. What is the

subject of AND HE RECKONED IT?i Whose merit is referred to in RECKONED
IT TO HIS MERIT? Ramban cannot accept Rashi's reading. Ramban cannot
understand why the Torah would praise and reward Abraham's faith. Rather,
the verse draws attention to Abraham's humility (I don't deserve this kindness
from God). Can you defend Rashi's reading? In other words, Ramban does not
consider Abraham believing in God to be such a big deal. How would you rebut
Ramban's argument? Or to ask the question differently, usually the Torah
rewards actions, not faith. What is so striking about Abraham's faith that God
should reward it?
Belief in God is not simply a matter of saying that God exists. It is a matter of
trusting in God even when reality seems to challenge that belief. Rabbi Harold
Kushner in his commentary to the recently published "Etz Hayim" (Chumash)
writes that Abraham gave God the benefit of the doubt, believing not only in
God's existence but in God's reliability, even when circumstances might have
led him to think otherwise. The only thing we can do for God, the only thing for
which God depends on us, is to hold on to our faith even when things do not go
our way.
This is Abraham's (and our) tzedakah (favor) to God. Professor Jacob Neusner
in his book "The Bible and Us" (p. 88) makes a similar point. He writes "And
Abraham and Sarah matter because, doubting and troubled, they nonetheless
believe. Never fully persuaded, testing God and being tested by him, Abraham
muddles through to believe in a heart filled with doubt, to overcome anxiety, to
affirm and not deny, even when nothing out there gives you reason to believe"
that is an act of courage.
It is the hardest thing that most of us ever have to do: to believe, to affirm, to
say "yes" always, yes to ourselves and those we love and who love us and to
God though at times we are challenged in our belief and trust. That is why belief
marks merit, because it runs against the everyday, not because the here and
now confirm that faith. No wonder Christianity, Islam, and Judaism reach back
to Abraham. We may be filled with doubt, occupied with purely personal
concerns, and yet we are able to affirm and serve when God calls.
Care to share some of your doubts now and hear what others may have to say
about them?
PARASHAT VAYERA
October 26, 2002 - 5763
Triennial- Year II: Genesis 19:1 - 20:18 (Hertz, p. 66; Etz Hayim, p. 104)
Haftarah - II Kings 4:1 - 37 (Hertz, p. 76; Etz Hayim, p. 123)


(18:1-15) Abraham welcomes three wayfarers with full hospitality, not realizing
that they are angels. They tell Abraham that Sarah will have a son. Sarah,
overhearing, laughs in disbelief.
(18:16-33) God tells Abraham of his decision to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah.
Abraham tries to dissuade God, with the famous words," Shall not the judge of
all the earth deal justly?" Abraham bargains with God, who promises not to
destroy Sodom and Gomorrah if even ten righteous men can be found there.
(19:1-19) The angels warn Lot to flee Sodom with his family. His wife disobeys
the order not to look back, and is turned into a pillar of salt.
(19:30-38) After the destruction, Lot's daughters, believing there is no one else
left on earth, trick him into an incestuous union. They each bear sons, the
founders of the nations of Ammon and Moab.
(20:1-18) Abraham and Sarah are in Gerar. Abraham says that Sarah is his
sister, so Abimelekh king of Gerar has Sarah brought to him. In a dream, God
appears to him and frightens him away from Sarah. Abimelekh rebukes
Abraham, but then compensates him for his trouble.
(21:1-8) God keeps His promise; Isaac is born. Isaac is circumcised on the
eighth day of his life, and there is a banquet on the day of his weaning.
(21:9-21) Sarah fears the negative influence Ishmael may have over Isaac.
Hagar and Ishmael are sent away. God promises Hagar, "I will make a great
nation" of Ishmael.
(21:22-34) Abraham and Abimelekh make a covenant of peace at Be'er-sheva.
(22:1-19) The Akedah, the story of the binding of Isaac.
(22:20-24) Genealogy which includes Rebekah, future wife of Isaac.

As dawn broke, the angels urged Lot on, saying, 'Up, take your wife and your
two remaining daughters, lest you be swept away because of the iniquity of the
city.'
Still he delayed. So the men seized his hand, and the hands of his wife and his
two daughters - in the Lord's mercy on him - and brought him out and left him
outside the city.
When they had brought them outside, one said, 'Flee for your life! Do not look
behind you, nor stop anywhere in the Plain; flee to the hills, lest you be swept
away!'
Lot's wife looked back, and she thereupon turned into a pillar of salt. (Genesis
19:15-17)
Commentaries:
A. She had pity on her married daughters, and turned to see if they were
following behind her or not. In doing so, she saw the back side of the
Divine Presence and turned into a pillar of salt. (Midrash Hagadol)
B. She turned to see what would be the end of her father's house. (Targum
Eretz Yisrael)
C. She gazed beyond Lot, who was following them, acting as a rear guard
for all his household who were hurrying to be saved. (Ramban)
D. A poor person came to her door and requested salt and she refused to
give it to him. For that reason, she was punished - "measure for
measure". She sinned with salt and was punished by becoming a pillar of
salt. (Bereisheet Rabbah 51:7)
E. Rabbi Jacob Chinitz, in his writings, observes that Lot's wife was warned
not to look back - with disdain, with conceit, with condescension upon her
neighbors who were being destroyed while she was being saved. But
she did look back. She could not resist enjoying their failure and her
success even though it was only her good fortune to be married to
Abraham's nephew. By standing still in this circumstance, she was
overtaken by the form of death which was following close behind them.
(Samson Raphael Hirsch)
For discussion:
What was so bad about Lot's wife turning around and looking back? What's so
sinful about it? Not all of the comments above seem to accuse her of
wrongdoing or condemn her. Or perhaps, we should read more into what they
are implying?
When in life do you think it is not good to look back? What about the modern
American credo - "get over it" or "get past it"? Are there any applications to
events that have happened to us in recent times?
PARASHAT HAYYEI SARAH
November 2, 2002 - 5763
Triennial - Year II: Genesis - 24:10 - 24:52 (Hertz, p. 83; Etz Hayim, p. 132)
Haftarah - I Kings 1:1-31 (Hertz, p. 90; Etz Hayim, p. 142)


(23:1-20) Sarah dies at the age of 127. Abraham, after bargaining with Ephron,
acquires the Cave of Machpelah, in Hebron, as a family burial plot. This is the
first Jewish acquisition of property in the Land of Israel.
(24:1-9) Abraham sends his servant back to Aram-Naharaim ("Aram - of the two
rivers" = Mesopotamia) to find a wife for Isaac.
(24:10-28) Eliezer, Abraham's servant, has been sent to Haran to find a wife for
Isaac. He arrives in Haran, and finds Rebecca at a well, where she passes his
"test" of compassion and diligence.
(24:29-49) Eliezer tells his journey's purpose and recounts his experiences to
Laban, Rebecca's brother, and how God led him to find Rebecca for Isaac.
(24:50-52) Laban and Bethuel agree to allow Rebecca to go with Eliezer.
(24:53-67) Rebecca consents to go with Eliezer, and is given a farewell blessing

by her family. Rebecca goes to Canaan and is wed to Isaac.
(25:1-6) The genealogy of Abraham's descendants from his second marriage -

to Keturah.
(25:7-11) Abraham dies and is buried next to Sarah in the Cave of Machpelah.
(25:12-18) A genealogy of Ishmael's descendants.
"Abraham was now old, advanced in years. And Abraham said to the senior
servant of his household... 'you will not take a wife for my son from the
daughters of the Canaanites among whom I dwell, but will go to the land of my
birth and get a wife for my son Isaac...'
Then the servant took ten of his master's camels and set out, taking with him all
the bounty of his master; and he made his way to Aram-naharaim, to the city of
Nahor." (Gen. 24:1-4, 10)
Commentaries:
A. "...of his master's camels" (Gen. 24:10) They were distinct from other
camels, for they would go out muzzled because of concern over
committing theft - so that they should not graze in the fields belonging to
others. (Rashi)
B. And there was quarreling between the herds men of Abram's livestock
and the herds men of Lot's livestock (Gen. 13:7) Because Lot's
shepherds were wicked and would graze their cattle in the fields of
others and Abrahm's shepherds would rebuke them over the theft they
committed by grazing their cattle on other people's land. And Lot's
shepherds would say, "The land has been given to Abrahm, and he has
no heir, so Lot, his brother's son, will inherit him, i.e. will inherit his estate,
and this is not theft, for the land will ultimately belong to Lot. (Rashi)
C. "Now sharpen, if you please, your gear, your sword and your bow and go
to the field and catch game for me. Then make delicacies for me" (Gen.
27:3-4) --- "And catch game for me from that which is owner less and not
from what which is stolen." (Rashi)
D. Moses was grazing the sheep of Jethro, his father-in-law, the priest of
Midian; he guided the sheep far into the wilderness (Ex. 3:1) He went
into the wilderness in order to distance himself from theft so that the
flocks would not graze in the fields of others. (Rashi)
For discussion:
Rashi seems to be making the same point repeatedly in his commentary, i.e. in
four different instances. One may presume that if he made his point based on
only one instance, it would seem that he was "stretching" his interpretation in
order to make the point.
Well, maybe that is the beauty of "drash" or sermonica. You can take a verse
and suggest that it implies some further meaning beyond the literal meaning.
The new "Etz Hayim" Chumash does this. It offers literal understanding (Potok)
and "drashic" commentary (Kushner). Do we sometimes use a similar approach
when reading some types of literature - other than the Bible?
This whole super-sensitivity to theft in Rashi's commentaries - what do you

think? Is he perhaps, being overly zealous? Unrealistic?
Yet, let us ask - how would the corporate, interpersonal, or political world look
different today if we attended to such minor details as pointed out by Rashi in
his comments above?
PARASHAT TOLEDOT
November 9, 2002 - 5763
Triennial - Year II: Genesis 26:23 - 27:27 (Hertz, p. 96; Etz Hayim, p. 152)
Haftarah - Malakhi 1:1 - 2:7 (Hertz, p. 102; Etz Hayim, p. 162)


(25:19-26) Isaac marries Rebecca. During her pregnancy, she feels a struggle
within her. She gives birth to twins, Esau and Jacob.
(25:27-34) Esau sells his birthright to Jacob for a pot of stew.
(26:1-11) Isaac and Rebecca, fleeing famine, go to Gerar to live with the
Philistines. God appears to Isaac and renews the covenant with him. Fearful of
the Philistines, Isaac lies and says Rebecca is his sister. Abimelech finds out
the truth and warns the people to leave Isaac and Rebecca alone.
(26:12-16) Isaac prospers, inciting the jealousy of the Philistines, who block the
wells he dug. Ultimately, Abimelech asks him to leave.
(26:17-22) Isaac moves to the valley of Gerar, where there are further quarrels
with the Philistines over wells. He finds a peaceful place to settle and names it
Rechovot.
(26:23-33) Abimelech makes a peace treaty with Isaac, seeing Isaac's

prosperity as a sign of God's blessing.
(26:34-35) Esau marries two Hittite women, to his parents' distress.
(27:1-27) Isaac, his sight now dim, announces his intention to bless Esau, but
Rebecca and Jacob conspire to trick him into blessing Jacob instead.
(27:28-45) Isaac blesses Jacob. Esau returns home and Jacob's deception is
discovered. Esau weeps and pleads for a blessing from Isaac, who complies.
Enraged, Esau plots to kill Jacob when Isaac dies. Rebecca hears of this and
advises Jacob to flee to her brother Laban in the land of Haran.
(27:46-28:5) Isaac blesses Jacob and sends him to Haran.
(28:6-9) Esau realizes that his Canaanite wives displease Isaac, so he takes a
daughter of Ishmael for a wife.
"Rebecca then took her older son Esau's clean/best garments which were with
her in the house and clothed Jacob her younger son." (Genesis 27:15)
Commentaries:
A. Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel said: "All my days I attended upon my father
but I did not attain to one hundredth of the attention Esau gave his father,
for I attended him in soiled garments and when I went out to the
marketplace I went with clean clothes. When Esau, however, attended
his father, he waited upon him in regal garments, saying, 'Father's honor
is to be respected only in regal garments." (Bereisheet Rabbah 65:16)
B. Rav Yehudah said in the name of Shmuel: They asked Rabbi Eliezer:
"What is the limit for honoring one's parents?" He said to them: "Go see
what a certain idol worshiper in Ashkelon named Dama son of Netina did.
Once the Sages sought to buy gems for the ephod from him at 60,000
profit - Rav Kahana taught 80,000 - but the key (to the gems storage
place) was under his father's head and he would not disturb him. The
next year, the Holy One rewarded him - a red heifer was born to his herd.
When the Sages came to him, he said to them: "I know that if I were to
ask for all the money in the world, you would give it to me, but I am
asking only for the money I lost by honoring my father." Rabbi Chanina
said: "If someone who is not commanded and acts is considered
praiseworthy, how much more so one who is commanded and acts!" So
said Rabbi Chanina: "One who is commanded and acts is more
praiseworthy than one who is not commanded and acts." (Talmud
Kiddushin 31a)
For discussion:
Esau is typically portrayed in negative terms in our tradition with one exception.
He is a paradigm of kibbud av v'eim - respecting one's parents.
It is interesting to note that In discussing the extent to which someone should

honor one's parents, the Talmud uses the example of Dama the son of Netina
who, the Talmud later describes, as a general in the Roman army!
But that is not really so strange. Consider that Esau is the progenitor of the
Romans (Edom). The name Dama is similar in etymology to "dam" which
means blood, something that brings to mind the redness of Esau's physical
description. Esau is also called Edom - "Red One" based on his exclamation
when he returns from hunting and says: "Give me some of that red, red stuff
(soup)." The red heifer seems to echo this theme too.
Yet, while Esau and his descendant Dama are extolled for their respect for their
father, the Talmud still says: "The one who is commanded to act (Jewish
person) and acts is greater than the one who is not commanded and acts (Esau
and Dama the Roman). That seems counterintuitive. How do we make sense of
the Talmud's dictum?
The one who acts out of a sense of being commanded may be more consistent
and reliable in his conduct. As opposed to the one who acts when he/she feels
like it, the person who feels an obligation is more likely to do the deed even
when he/she does not feel like doing so.
But perhaps, there is even a better explanation. Acting out of a sense of

commandment gives us the opportunity to enter into even a hi gher spiritual
relationship. In performing a commandment, we experience God. If we perform
a deed on our own, we may feel good about it; the other person may feel good
about it. But if it is God's commandment that is being carried out, we experience
an additional good feeling- a feeling of joy - as we carry out His will purposively.
PARASHAT VAYETZE
November 16, 2002 - 5763
Triennial Year II: Genesis 30:14 - 31:16 (Hertz, p. 111; Etz Hayim, p. 176)
Haftarah - Hosea 12:13 -14:10 (Hertz, p. 118; Etz Hayim, p. 188)


(28:10-22) Jacob sets out for Haran, fleeing Esau. He stops for the night, and
dreams of a ladder between heaven and earth, with angels ascending and
descending. God renews for him the covenant promise given to Abraham and
Isaac. Jacob names the place Beth El - "House of God."
(29:1-30) Jacob arrives in Mesopotamia. He meets Rachel, his cousin, and

Laban, her father. Jacob agrees to work for Laban for seven years in exchange
for marrying Rachel, but Laban tricks him into marrying Leah, Rachel's older
sister. Jacob is forced to work another seven years for Rachel.
(29:31-35) Leah gives birth to four sons - Reuben, Simon, Levi and Judah - but
Rachel is barren.
(30:1-13) Rachel, jealous of Leah, gives Jacob her maid Bilhah, who bears him
two sons, Dan and Naphtali. Rachel adopts the sons as her own. Leah,
apparently no longer able to bear children, does similarly with her maid Zilpah,
who also bears two sons, Gad and Asher.
(30:14-21) Leah and Rachel quarrel over some mandrake roots, believed to
cure barrenness. Leah has two more sons, Issachar and Zebulun.
(30:22-24) Rachel finally has a son, Joseph.
(30:24-43) Jacob wants to return home to Canaan, but his father-in-law Laban
dissuades him. Jacob stays and succeeds in greatly enriching himself.
(31:1-16) Jacob realizes that his increasing wealth is causing animosity among
Laban's sons and decides to return to Canaan.
(31:17-21) Without telling Laban, Jacob gathers his herds and flocks and
leaves. Rachel takes Laban's teraphim - household idols.
(31:22-32:3) God warns Laban not to harm Jacob. Laban pursues and
overtakes Jacob. In an impassioned speech, Jacob rebukes Laban for his
devious ways. Laban and Jacob make a covenant of peace.
Now he heard the things that Laban's sons were saying: "Jacob has taken all
that was our father's and from that which was our father's he has built up all this
wealth."
Jacob saw Laban's face and behold it was not as it had been in the past.
(Genesis 31:1-2)
Commentaries:
A. From this verse we see the importance of being able to notice the
emotional state of another person from the expressions on his face.
Lavan did not say any unkind words to Yaakov. Nothing verbal was
communicated that would imply that Lavan felt resentment or animosity
towards Yaakov. Nevertheless, Yaakov was sensitized to the look on
Lavan's face. From here we can also see how careful we must be with
our own facial expressions... in causing pain to others (Zelig Pliskin in
Growth Through Torah on Gen. 31:2)
B. Shammai says: "Make your Torah study a fixed duty, say little and do
much, and greet all people with a cheerful countenance." (Avot 1:15)
C. The strong desire towards helping others, laudable though it is, may
eventuate into a personality so intent on giving that it ignores the
recipient. Though it is prudent to "say little and do much" (above) it is
absurd to extend this principle to one's approach when helping someone.
To be abrupt when giving... is to depersonalize the process of sharing.
Therefore, "greet all people with a pleasant countenance". You are
helping people who are deeply sensitive and need the warmth of your
sincere countenance as much as they may need your help. Always be
aware and attentive to the people you relate with, and ensure that
sharing itself is not dehumanized. (Reuven Bulka on Avot 1:15)
For discussion:
It is understandable that one should mind their own facial expressions, but is it
realistic to counsel that we "greet all people with a cheerful countenance"? Isn't
that being a bit too saccharine?
Do you happen to have some kind of "trick mechanism" that helps make you
look like you have sort of a pleasant smile on your face always, ie. "a cheerful
countenance"? Want to tell us how?
PARASHAT VAYISHLAH
November 23, 2002 - 5763
Annual Cycle: Genesis 32: 4 - 36:43 (Hertz, p. 122; Etz Hayim, p. 198)
Haftarah - Obadiah 1:1 - 21 (Hertz, p. 137; Etz Hayim, p. 221)


(32:4-24) Jacob nervously prepares for his meeting with his brother Esau.
(32:25-33) Jacob wrestles with a "man," and receives from him a blessing and a
new name, Israel, at the cost of a lame thigh.
(33:1-15) Jacob meets his brother Esau, who receives him warmly. They go
their separate ways in peace. (33:16-20) Esau returns to the land of Edom and
Jacob arrives at Shechem.
(34) The rape of Dinah and her brothers' revenge.
(35:1-15) Jacob builds an altar at Bethel, fulfilling his vow from many years
before; God renews His promise of the land to him.
(35:16-20) Rachel dies giving birth to Benjamin and is buried on the road to
Bethlehem.
(35:21-26) Reuben's sin; a review of the sons of Jacob.
(35:27-29) Isaac dies and is buried in the Cave of Machpelah.
(36:1-43) A genealogy of Esau's descendants.
"Now Dinah, the daughter whom Leah had borne to Jacob, went out to visit the
daughters of the land. Shechem son of Hamor the Hivite, chief of the country,
saw her, and took her and lay with her by force.
On the third day, when they were in pain (from circumcision), Simeon and Levi,
two of Jacob's sons, brothers of Dinah, took each his sword, came upon the city
unmolested, and slew all the males. Jacob said to Simeon and Levi, "You have
brought trouble on me, making me odious among the inhabitants of the land,
the Canaanites and the Perizzites; my men are few in number, so that if they
unite against me and attack me, I and my house will be destroyed." But they
answered, "Should our sister be treated like a whore?" (Gen. 34:1,2, 25, 30-31)
Commentaries:
A. "Simeon and Levi are brothers, weapons of violence are their stock-in-
trade. Into their company let me not come, in their assembly let me not
rejoice. For in their anger, they killed a man; and when in a good mood,
they maimed an ox! Cursed be their anger, so fierce, and their wrath how
unyielding! I will divide them up in Jacob and scatter them in Israel." (Gen.
49:5-7)
B. Each of the two brothers had a separate motive for this "fire" (anger): one
came with the human emotion of avenging the family honor - such a "fire"
is to be considered a "foreign fire" (esh zarah), i.e. an unacceptable
(alien-type) motive. The other came with zealousness for God and
without any personal considerations, and this "fire" is the fire of the Lord
(shalhevetya). Nevertheless, even with such a fire one must take
extreme care to direct its placement and timing, otherwise it can do
incalculable damage. (Netziv in Ha'amek Davar)
C. The "sons of Noah' (Gentiles) are commanded to observe certain
commandments. Thus, they are required to appoint judges in each and
every district to give judgment. And the Noachide who transgresses one
of the laws is subject to the death penalty by the sword. If he sees a
person transgressing one of these seven Noachide laws and does not
bring him to trial for a capital crime, he who saw him is subject to the
same death penalty. It was on account of this that the people of the city
of Shechem had incurred the death-penalty because Shechem (the
person) committed an act of violence and they saw and knew of it, but
they did not bring him to trial. (Rambam, Mishnah Torah, Book of Judges
9:14)
D. The Torah gives the reason why Simeon and Levi spoke with guile
(b'mirmah) to the inhabitants of Shechem; it was because they gave
themselves a "halachic hetter" or permission. Rashi calls their guile
"wisdom" and then says that in fact there actually was no guile as such
because of their right to protect the honor of the sons of Jacob. (Shabbtai
ben Yomtov in Hamikra Kifshuto)
For discussion:
1. How do you interpret this story about the violence done in the city of
Shechem and Jacob's reaction to it? Would you consider Simeon and
Levi heroes or hotheads for protecting their sister's honor?
2. While Maimonides argues that Simeon and Levi were justified in slaying
the Shechemite men because they witnessed the abduction, knew about
it and did not bring the Prince of Shechem to justice, Nachmanides
disagrees and maintains that only the prince was guilty and Jacob's
anger was appropriately directed against his sons who murdered the
men of Shechem.
3. Shabbtai ben Yomtov and the Netziv imply that one cannot explain away
the massacred with the simplistic claim that Simeon and Levi were
barbarians. Just the opposite is the case. They were religious, intelligent,
and knowledgeable in the Torah. The lesson is that even such people
are liable, by virtue of twisted legalistic reasoning, to sink to a level where
they are capable of doing evil without sensing that they committed a
crime. "Pseudo-halachic" reasoning is also criticized by the Talmud
which reports that actually in the Temple a murder took place because of
it. "It once happened that two priests (kohanim) were both running up the
ramp of the altar to offer sacrifices, when one of them came within four
cubits of the other. So he took a dagger and plunged it into the heart of
the other kohen. This informs you that the laws of defilement of garments
seem to be more important to some individuals than the spilling of blood!"
(Talmud: Yoma)
PARASHAT VAYYESHEV (HANUKKAH)
November 30, 2002 - 5763
Maftir: Numbers 7:1 - 7:17 (Hanukkah- 1st Day) (Hertz, p. 596; Etz Hayim, p.
805)
Haftarah - Zechariah 2:14 - 4:7 (Hertz, p. 987; Etz Hayim, p. 1269


(37:1-11) The Joseph story begins. Jacob favored Joseph and gave him a "coat
of many colors." Joseph's dreams indicate that his brothers will serve him some
day. Not surprisingly, Joseph's brothers hate and envy him.
(37:12-36) Joseph's brothers plot to kill him. Then, at Reuben's urging, they
change their plan to sell him into slavery. Joseph is taken to Egypt. Jacob's
sons deceive him into believing that a wild animal killed Joseph.
(38:1-30) Events in Judah's life after the selling of Joseph, particularly the story
of Tamar.
(39:1-6) Joseph's experiences in Egypt at Potiphar's house.
(39:7-19) Potiphar's wife tries to seduce Joseph. He refuses, so she falsely

accuses him of trying to rape her.
(39:20-23) Joseph is imprisoned, but once again rises to a position of authority.
(40:1-23) Pharaoh's cupbearer and baker are imprisoned. Each has a dream
which Joseph interprets. Joseph's interpretations come true, but the cupbearer
who is saved forgets his promise to help Joseph.
"A long time afterward, Shua's daughter, the wife of Judah, died. When his
period of mourning was over, Judah went up to Timnah to his sheep shearers,
together with his friend Hirah the Adullamite.
When Judah saw her (Tamar on the road to Timnah), he took her for a harlot;
for she had covered her face. So he turned aside to her by the road and said,
"Here, let me sleep with you" for he did not know that she was his daughter-in-
law.
About three months later, Judah was told, your daughter-in-law Tamar has
played the harlot; in fact, she is with child by harlotry. "Bring her out" said Judah,
"and let her be burned." As she was being brought out, she sent this message
to her father-in-law, "I am with child by the man to whom these belong." And
she added, "Examine these: whose seal and cord and staff are these?"
Judah recognized them, and said, "She is more in the right than I, inasmuch as I
did not give her to my son Shelah." And he was not intimate with her again."
(Genesis 38:12,15,24-26)
Commentaries:
A. Because he dealt justly with Tamar, Judah's offspring became the

hereditary rulers of Israel, (the king being a judge too). When the case of
Tamar came before Judah, he acquitted her, finding a plea on her behalf.
What happened there? Isaac and Jacob and his brothers sat there trying
to protect him, but Judah recognized the place where the mideed was
done. Isaac and Jacob, trying to defend him, pleaded that though the
signet and the cord were Judah's, he might have lost them. Judah,
however, definitely recognized the place, the general circumstances and
admitted his share in what had happened and said, "The thing is correct;
she is more righteous than I." (Shemot Rabbah 30:19)
B. Joseph who sanctified the heavenly Name in private (when he resisted
Poptiphar's wife) merited that one letter should be added to his name
from the Name of the Holy Blessed One, as it is written, He appointed it
in Joseph for a testimony (Psalms 81:6) where his name is spelled
Yehosef with the letter "hey"). Judah, however, who sanctified the
heavenly Name in public merited that the whole of his name should be
called after the Name of the Holy Blessed One. The four letters of the
Tetragammaton occur in Judah's name - Yehudah. (Talmud: Sota 10b)
For discussion:
Commenting on the source in the talmudic tractate, Sota, Aviva Zornberg points
out in her book "The Beginnings of Desire", "There are two different kinds of
heroism. Joseph emphatically rejects his master's wife, so that if she had not
revealed the affair nothing need ever have been known of it; for this he is
rewarded with one letter of God's Name.
Judah, however, sins, both in withholding his youngest son from Tamar and in
sleeping with her, and when the results of his act have become visible, a public
fact, he justifies her behavior and publicly confesses. This transformation of
Judah's character explains his newly found willingness to step in to rescue his
younger brother from Egyptian captivity.
The Book of Genesis begins with characters that do not take responsibility for
their actions. Adam blames Eve; Cain asks "Am I my brother's keeper?" (Gen.
4:9).
As we approach the end of Genesis, we see positive development - a biblical
character owning up publicly to his misdeeds. King David, royal descendant of
Judah, follows Judah's lead later on. When confronted by Nathan the Prophet
for committing adultery, King David admits his transgression and says "I stand
guilty before the Lord" (II Samuel 12:13).
Sometimes one wonders why prominent people in public life who are accused
of serious sexual indiscretion or some other major malfeasance tend often to
deny wrongdoing at first. It almost seems inevitable that the public glare and
further investigation will reveal the truth. Then why is there a tendency to deny
the accusation? (Think Nixon, Clinton, clergy, etc.)
PARASHAT MIKETZ (HANUKKAH)
December 7, 2002 - 5763
Maftir: Numbers 7:54 - 8:4 (Hanukkah - 8th Day) (Hertz, p. 599; Etz Hayim, p.
809)
Haftarah- I Kings 7:40 - 50 (Hertz, p. 990; Etz Hayim, p. 1273)


(41:1-44) Pharaoh dreams of seven lean cows devouring seven fat cows, and
seven thin sheaves consuming seven healthy sheaves. When none of his
advisors can give him a satisfactory explanation, the cupbearer remembers
Joseph, who is brought to Pharaoh and interprets the dream to mean that there
will be seven prosperous years followed by seven years of famine. He suggests
that Pharaoh appoint someone to supervise storaging to prepare for the famine.
Pharaoh chooses Joseph.
(41:45-52) Joseph's wife bears him two sons, Ephraim and Menasseh.
(41:53-57) The seven years of plenty pass and the famine begins.
(42:1-6) Ten of Joseph's brothers come to Egypt to get food. Their brother
Simon is left behind as a pledge that they will return.
(42:7-28) Joseph recognizes his brothers, but they don't recognize him. He sets
up a deception in order to engineer Benjamin's being brought to Egypt,
accusing them of being spies. The only way they can clear their names is by
bringing their other brother to Egypt.
(42:29-38) The brothers tell Jacob what happened to them. He refuses to send
his youngest and most beloved son Benjamin. (43:1-15) After the food runs out,
Jacob is forced to agree to allow Benjamin to go down to Egypt with the other
brothers.
(43:16-34) This time Joseph receives the brothers with great honor, and
arranges a feast for them.
(44:1-17) Joseph tests the brothers again with the accusation that Benjamin has
stolen his silver goblet.

"The seven years of abundance that the land of Egypt enjoyed came to an end,
and the seven years of famine set in, just as Joseph had foretold. There was
famine in all lands, but throught the land of Egypt there was bread. And when all
the land of Egypt felt the hunger, the people cried out to Pharaoh for bread; and
Pharaoh said to all the Egyptians, "Go to Joseph; whatever he tells you, you
shall do." Accordingly, when the famine became severe in the land of Egypt,
Joseph laid open all that was within, and rationed out grain to the Egyptians.
The famine, however, spread over the whole world. So all the world came to
Joseph in Egypt to procure rations, for the famine had become severe
throughout the world." (Gen. 41:53-57)
Commentaries:
A. Rabbi Levi Yitzhak turned to those standing around him and said, 'Do
you know the difference between our father Abraham, peace be with him,
and Lot? Why does such a spirit of satisfaction pervade the story of how
Abraham set before the angels curd and milk and tender calf? Did not
Lot also bake for them and give them to eat? And why is the fact that
Abraham received them in his tent regarded as so deserving an action?
For Lot also asked them in and gave them shelter. Now this is the truth of
the matter: In the case of Lot it is written that angels came to Sodom. But
concerning Abraham, the Scriptures say, "And he lifted up his eyes and
looked and lo, three men stood over against him." Lot saw heavenly
angels while Abraham saw poor, dusty wayfarers in need of food and
rest." Rabbi Eleazar said: Come let us be grateful to the rogues for were
it not for them we (who do not always respond to every appeal for
charity) would have been sinning every day. (Ketubot 68a)
B. Rabbi Chayim of Sanz had this to say about fraudulent charity collectors:
"The merit of charity is so great that I am happy to give to 100 beggars
even if only one might actually be needy. Some people, however, sat as
if they are exempt from giving charity to 100 beggars in the event that
one might be a fraud. (Darkai Chayim, 1962, p. 13)
C. Rabbi Shmelke of Nicholsburg said, "When a poor man asks for aid, do
not use his faults as an excuse for not helping him. For then God will look
for your offenses, and He is sure to find many of them. Keep in mind that
the poor man's transgressions have been atoned for by his poverty while
yours still remain with you. (Fun Unzer Alter Otzer, II, p.99)
D. In answer to an inquiry from a community, overburdened with beggars
Solomon b. Adret ruled that although, the poor are everywhere supported
from the communal chest, if they wish in addition to beg from door to
door they may do so, and each should give according to his
understanding and desire. (Responsa, pt. 3, #380)
E. If one noticed a poor man asking for something and ignored him, and
failed to give tzedakah, he has broken a prohibitive command, as it is
written: Do not harden your heart and shut your hand against your needy
brother (Deut. 1:7). (Rambam, Mishneh Torah - Gifts to the Poor 7:2)
F. Poor Gentiles should be supported along with poor Jews; the Gentile sick
should be visited along with the Jewish sick; and their dead should be
buried along with the Jewish dead, in order to further peaceful relating.
(Gittin 61a)
G. If the poor man stretches out his hand and he has nothing to give him, he
should not scold and raise his voice to him, but he should speak gently to
him and show him his goodness of heart; namely that he wishes to give
him something but cannot. (Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh Ediah, 249:3-5)
H. Rabbi Chana bar Chanilai would leave his hand in his pocket so that (by
the immediacy and naturalness of handing him money) a poor person
who came to ask would not feelhumiliated. (Talmud, Brachot 58b)
I. Rabbi Eliezar stated, "The reward of charity depends entirely upon the
extent of kindness in it." (Talmud, Sukkah 49b)
For discussion:
We all meet an occasional pan handler on the street. In our society today there
are governmental and social agencies which handle such matters. So why
should we give that person anything? Or maybe we should give anyway? What
do you usually do and why?
PARASHAT VAYIGASH
December 14, 2002 - 5763
Triennial Year II: 45:28 - 46:27 (Hertz, p. 172; Etz Hayim, p. 279)
Haftarah- Ezekiel 37:15 - 28 (Hertz, p. 178; Etz Hayim, p. 290)


(44:18-34) Judah passionately pleads with Joseph to spare Benjamin for the
sake of their aged father, offering himself in Benjamin's place.
(45:1-27) Joseph reveals his identity to his brothers. He calms their fears, and
sends them home to tell Jacob the good news and to bring him to Egypt.
(45:28-46:27) Jacob agrees to go down to Egypt to see Joseph. On the way,

God speaks to Jacob in a vision, saying that He will accompany Jacob to Egypt.
A list of the 70 people who went down to Egypt is given.
(46:28-30) Joseph and Jacob have a tearful reunion.
(46:30-47:10) Joseph appeals to Pharaoh to allow his family to settle in the

region of Goshen. Pharaoh agrees. Jacob is presented to Pharaoh.
(47:11-27) Joseph's policies of distribution and rationing of food during the

famine result in an increase in the wealth and power of the central government.
"So Israel set out with all that was his, and he came to Beersheba, where he
offered sacrifices to the God of his father Isaac. God called to Israel in a vision
by night: Jacob! Jacob! He answered, here. And He said, I am God, the God of
your father. Fear not to go down to Egypt, for I will make you there into a great
nation. I Myself will go down with you to Egypt, and I Myself will also bring you
back; and Josephis hand will close your eyes." (Gen. 46:1-4)
Commentaries:
A. "Fear not!" The same reassurance was given to Abraham and to Isaac; it
will be given to Moses as well. It is never preceded by a statement
revealing their disquiet. The idea is that man's inner anxieties and fears,
although unexpressed, are known to God. (Sarna in JPS Commentary on
Gen. 46:3)
B. Our Sages said: "And I shall glorify him" (Ex. 15:2). I shall accompany
Him until I come with Him to His temple. This may be compared to a king
whose son left him for foreign parts. Wherever his son went the king
went too. So it was with Israel. When they went down into Egypt, the
Divine presence accompanied them, as it is stated: "I will go down with
thee into Egypt." When they left, the Divine presence accompanied them,
as it is stated: "And I will surely bring thee up again." They went forth into
the sea, the Divine presence accompanied them, as it is stated: "And the
angel of God, who went before the camp of Israel, accompanied them
from behind." They went forth into the wilderness, the Divine presence
accompanied them, as it is said: "And the Lord went before them in a
pillar of cloud by day to show them the way." (Mechilta)
C. Said the Holy Blessed One to Moses: I said to their father Jacob: "I will
go down with thee into Egypt; and I will surely ring thee up again." Now I
have come down here to bring out his descendants, in accordance with
My promise to their forefather, Jacob. Where will I take them to? To the
place from whence they came forth, to the land that I swore to their
fathers, as it is written: "To bring them up out of that land" (Ex. 3:8)
(Shemot Rabbah)
D. "We find that it was only in the case of Jacob, and not of Abraham and
Isaac, that God appeared in "visions of the night". This was because he
was prepared to go and live outside the Holy Land. The Divine revelation
came to him, at night, to show him that the Divine resets on Israel even
in the nights, in the darkness of exile, as they stated: Wherever Israel
was exiled, the Divine presence accompanied them. They were exile to
Egypt, the Divine presence accompanied them to Babylon, the Divine
Presence accompanied them. Regarding this, Psalm 20 observes: "The
Lord answer thee in the day of trouble, the name of the God of Jacob set
thee up on high." While they are in trouble and in the darkness of the
night, the God of Jacob who was revealed to him at night, will set thee up
on high. (Meshech Chochma)
E. "This contains a wonderful promise for the very existence of the nation in
Egypt, and the meaning of "your eyes"i is Jacobis desire and the special
attribute that Jacob provides for this. It is interpreted in the portion of
Vezot Haberachah (Deut. 33:28), Thus Israel dwells in safety (betach),
alone (badad) is Jacob is abode ("ein," literally eye),in which eein
Yaakovi means to dwell in safety, alone, with "betach" meaning to be at
peace and with the attribute of love between man and his fellow, and
"badad" means not to intermingle more than is necessary with the non-
Jewish nations. "As regards "badad" Joseph endeavored with all his
might that Israel not assimilate among the Egyptians. (Haiamek Davar)
For discussion:
Jacob learns that Joseph is still alive and says, "It is enough; Joseph my son is
yet alive; I will go down and see him before I die" (Gen. 45:28). In the next
chapter, we read about Jacob's departure and arrival at Beersheba where he
offers a sacrifice to God. God appears to him in a vision and tells him "fearnot to
God down to Egypt." Yet, the text does not state that Jacob was afraid. What
might have been the nature of his fear? Can we identify with those fears?
PARASHAT VAYEHI
December 21, 2002 - 5763
Haftarah: I Kings 2:1 -12 (Hertz, p. 191; Etz Hayim, p. 312


(47:28-31) Jacob senses that his death is approaching. He asks Joseph to

swear that he will not bury him in Egypt, but will return him to the ancestral
burial place at the Cave of Machpelah in the land of Canaan.
(48:1-9) Joseph brings his two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, to Jacob to be
blessed. Jacob says they will be like Reuben and Simon, i.e., equal in status to
any of his sons.
(48:10-22) Jacob blesses Ephraim, Manasseh, and Joseph, predicting that

Ephraim, the younger, would be mightier than Manasseh, the firstborn.
(49:1-26) Jacob's last words and testament to his sons, not as they are, but as
they will be. This poetic passage is considered to be the most difficult in the
Book of Genesis.
(49:27-33) Benjamin's blessing. Jacob then instructs his sons to bury him in the
family burial place at the Cave of Machpelah. Jacob dies.
(50:1-6) Joseph mourns Jacob. Joseph makes all the necessary arrangements
to bury Jacob in the family grave, the Cave of Machpelah, in Canaan.
(50:15-21) Joseph's brothers fear that he will take vengeance on them now, but
Joseph reassures them.
(50:22-26) Joseph's last days. He has his brothers swear that when they return
to Canaan, they will bury him there (a promise eventually fulfilled by Moses and
Joshua). Joseph dies.
Commentaries:
A. Jacob wished to reveal the end to them, but the Shechinah departed
from him, and he began to say other things. (Rashi on Gen. 49:1)
B. Perhaps we are not meant to know the future lest it lead us to despair or
complacency. Perhaps, when Jacob looked into the future, he saw the
quarreling and bloodshed that would befall his descendants, and the
spirit of prophecy cannot abide where there is grief and sadness. (Naftali
of Rophshitz quoted in Rabbi Harold Kushner's commentary to Gen. 49:1
in Etz Hayim)
C. The Holy Blessed One did not want to reveal the secret of the end of
days because among Jacobis descendants there will likely be people
who will see that the days of the Messiah are far off and they will give up
hope. For there are Jews who worship God just so that they can enjoy
peace and goodness in the days of the Messiah. When they see that
redemption is far off, they will assimilate and fall into despair. Therefore,
the time of the Messiah is one of the mysteries that is not revealed to
human beings. Thus Jacob began to speak about other matters. (Meiam
Loiez on Gen. 49:1)
D. To reveal the end is simply to communicate the idea of ultimate harmony.
It is not a matter of graphic descriptions of the manner and the timing of
redemption. It is to convince Jacob's children, on the verge of exile and
diffusion, about to lose all sense of autonomy, of the intelligibility of their
destiny, that their experience really does have a "ketz" - an end - an
implicit order, a movement toward meaning. A certain vitality of vision is
given to Jacob and then blocked off from him. For if Jacob had
succeeded in conveying to his children a strong, unequivocal vision of
the end, the experience of exile would have been entirely robbed of its
necessary sting. That experience knows of no easy resolution. Jacobis
children will have to live the absurdity and its pain, its apparently fruitless
yearnings, without intoxicating visions of harmony to sustain them. What
resolutions, what orderings they achieve, they will have to achieve in the
immediacy, the vulnerability, the confusion of their own lives. (Aviva
Zornberg in The Beginning of Desire, pp. 357-358)
For discussion:
Jacob calls his children to his deathbed and prepares to speak to them about
events of the future. Yet, instead of revealing anything about the 'end of days,"
he gives a description of each son. In other words, Jacob's speech does not
follow logically from the preamble. Why does God rob Jacob of this clear
thinking? Why does the Shechinah depart and thereby prevent Jacob from
revealing the future? Why is this knowledge unhelpful or dangerous?
As the above commentators suggest, it may be that the Shechinah prevented

him from communicating the end of days so that the driving force behind our
actions is not messianism. We can see the danger of that in our world today. It
may be that we must make sense out of our lives on our own, for only in that
way do we find meaning in life. Or, alternatively, perhaps such all-
encompassing knowledge is not meant to belong to humans. Humans are
permitted only glimpses of God's total knowledge. Some people might act like
know-it-alls and pretend that they are always right and everyone else is wrong,
but ultimately even the most wise human being can possess only part of God's
wisdom.
The berachah upon seeing a wise person testifies to that truth, for the berachah
is "Praised are You, God, who has given a part (sheichalak meichochmato) to
human beings. We would stand to learn much from other individuals, political
parties, Jewish denominations if we were to internalize this truth.
PARASHAT SH'MOT
December 28, 2002 - 5763
Annual Cycle: Exodus 1:1 - 6:1 (Hertz, p. 206; Etz Hayim, p. 317)
Triennial Cycle II: Exodus 3:1 - 4:17 (Hertz, p. 213; Etz Hayim, p. 326)
Haftarah: Isaiah 27:6 - 28:13; 29:22 - 23 (Hertz, p. 225; Etz Hayim, p. 343)


(1:1-14) A list of the sons of Jacob/Israel who came to Egypt. The beginning of
the enslavement. The building of the store-cities and other acts of oppression.
(1:15-22) The midwives disobey Pharaoh's orders to kill all male Israelite
newborns. He then orders every newborn boy to be drowned in the Nile.
(2:1-10) A boy is born. His parents hide him for three months. His mother puts
him into a reed basket and floats him on the Nile, where he is found by
Pharaoh's daughter. She names him Moses. He is raised in the royal palace.
(2:11-25) Moses goes out to his people and sees their suffering. He kills an
Egyptian who was beating an Israelite, and is forced to flee to Midian. He
marries Zipporah and works for her father as a shepherd. Meanwhile, God
hears the suffering of the Israelites, and determines to help.
(3:1-10) The revelation at the "Burning Bush". Moses is called by God to be a

prophet and a leader of the people. He will be God's human agent in freeing the
people of Israel from slavery in Egypt.
(3:11-4:17) Moses expresses anxiety and doubt about his worthiness for the
task. God encourages and reassures him, and gives signs to Moses to prove to
the Israelites that he is indeed God's messenger. All in all, Moses refuses God's
assignment five times, and God provides five counter arguments. Finally,
Moses accepts the task.
(4:18-23) Further instructions from God to Moses.
(4:24-26) A peculiar incident during the journey to Egypt: Zipporah circumcises

their son to ward off danger to Moses.
(4:27-31) God sends Aaron to meet Moses, and together they convince the
people that God has sent them.
(5:1-6:1) Moses and Aaron's first confrontation with Pharaoh fails. Pharaoh
retaliates by oppressing the Israelites even more harshly. The Israelites blame
Moses and Aaron for making their plight worse. Moses complains to God, who
reassures him that he will soon see what God will do to Pharaoh.
Discussion Theme: Awareness
"Now Moses, tending the flock of his father-in-law Jethro, the priest of Midian,
drove the flock into the wilderness, and came to Horeb, the mountain of God.
An angel of the Lord appeared to him in a blazing fire out of a bush. He gazed,
and there was a bush all aflame, yet the bush was not consumed. Moses said, 'I
must turn aside to look at this marvelous sight; why doesn't the bush burn up?'
When the Lord saw that he had turned aside to look, God called to him out of
the bush: 'Moses! Moses!' He answered, 'Here I am.'" (Exodus 3:1-4)
A. "How long would you have to watch wood burn before you could know
whether or not it actually was being consumed? Even dry kindling wood
is not burned up for several minutes. This then would mean that Moses
would have had to watch the 'amazing sight' closely for several minutes
before he could possibly know there even was a miracle to watch... The
'burning bush' was not a miracle. It was a test. God wanted to find out
whether or not Moses could pay attention to something for more than a
few minutes. When Moses did, God spoke." (Rabbi Lawrence Kushner,
God was in this Place and I, I did not Know)
B. "Jacob awoke from his sleep and said, 'Surely the Lord is present in this
place, and I did not know it!" In other words, "if I had known that God
would have been here, I would not have gone to sleep in such a holy
place." (Rashi on Genesis 28:16)
C. Each person is at each moment capable of remembering all that has
ever happened to him or her and of perceiving everything that is
happening everywhere in the universe. The function of the brain and
nervous system is to protect us from being overwhelmed and confused
by this mass of largely useless and irrelevant knowledge, by shutting out
most of what we should otherwise perceive or remember at any moment,
and leaving only that very small and special selection which is likely to be
practically useful." (Aldous Huxley in The Doors of Perception, 1954)
D. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: "Everyday a Heavenly voice issues from
Mount Horeb proclaiming..." (Avot 6:2)
E. "Not only is Torah eternally unchanging, it is also always present, always
able to be heard." (Eliyahu KiTov, Sefer HaParshiyot)
F. And the Lord said to Moses, "Come up to Me on the mountain and be
there." "If Moses were to ascend the mountain, why would God specify
that he 'be there'? Because people often expend great effort in climbing a
mountain, but once they get there, they are not there; they are
somewhere else." (Rabbi Menachem Mendl of Kotzk, Itturaei Torah, 2
(248), on Exodus 24:12)
G. "The earth is the Lord's and all its fullness" (Psalm 24:1)
Sparks for Reflection:
Knowing God is often a matter of awareness of the ordinary miracles that

happen around us but which we often do not notice. Our tradition uses the
language of sleep as metaphor for a lack of awareness. Bnei Yisrael, according
to one midrash, nearly slept through Matan Torah - the giving of the Torah. Like
Jacob, we may realize too that we are often asleep and not hear the voice of
Sinai that continues to sound even today. Moses, on the other hand, attended
closely enough and long enough to notice the miracle of the burning bush. He
was a man of consciousness. He was a man, in the words of Rabbi Aryeh Lieb
of Ger, who could "awaken the holiness of God in any place."
How do we do the same? What in our tradition sharpens our ability to perceive
that which cannot be seen and that which is not readily heard? How does, for
example, the recitation of berachot help us pause and focus? How do the
mitzvot, in general, promote awareness?
PARASHAT VA-ERA
January 4, 2003 - 5763
Annual Cycle: Exodus 6:2-9:35 (Hertz, p. 232)

Triennial Cycle II: Exodus 7:8 - 8:15 (Hertz, p. 236)
Maftir: Numbers 28:9 - 15 (Rosh Hodesh Shevat) (Hertz, p. 695)
Haftarah: Isaiah 66:1 - 24 (Hertz, p. 944)


(6:2-9) God reminds Moses of the Covenant He made with the patriarchs, and
announces to him the coming redemption of the Israelites from slavery. Moses
tells the Israelites, but they are too fearful to listen to him. (6:10-13) Moses is
disheartened, and reluctant to go before Pharaoh.
(6:14-27) The genealogy of the tribe of Levi.
(6:28-30) Moses continues to doubt his ability to carry out his task, saying: I am
of impeded speech.
(7:1-7) God encourages Moses and Aaron by giving him a glimpse of the
successful future of their mission.
(7:8-13) Moses and Aaron demonstrate their miraculous sign before Pharaoh:
the staff transformed into a serpent. Pharaoh's magicians duplicate this feat, but
then Aaron's "snake" swallows up theirs.
(7:14-25) The ten plagues begin. The first is the turning of the River Nile into
blood.
(7:26-8:11) The second plague: frogs.
(8:12-15) The third plague: lice.
(8:16-28) The fourth plague: beasts.
Discussion Theme: Gratitude
"Thus says the Lord, 'By this you shall know that I am the Lord.' See, I shall
strike the water in the Nile with the rod that is in my hand, and it will be turned
into blood... And the Lord said to Moses, 'Say to Aaron: Take your rod and hold
out your arm over the waters of Egypt... that they may turn to blood....And the
Lord said to Moses, 'Say to Aaron: Hold out your arm with the rod over the
rivers'... Aaron held out his arm over the waters of Egypt, and the frogs came up
and covered the land of Egypt... Then the Lord said to Moses, 'Say to Aaron:
Hold out your rod and strike the dust of the earth, and it shall turn to lice
throughout the land of Egypt." (Exodus 7:17, 19, 8:1, 2, 8:12)
A. Rabbi Tanchum said: Why didn't Moses smite the water, but Aaron did in
his stead? The Holy Blessed One said to Moses: the waters that
protected you when you were thrown into the Nile, it would be wrong for
you, Moses, to strike them. They will be smitten not by you but by Aaron.
(Exodus Rabbah 9:10)
B. Rabbi Tanchum said: Said the Holy Blessed One to Moses: The dust that
protected you after you killed the Egyptian, it would not be right for it to
be smitten by you. Therefore, these first three plagues were brought on
by Aaron. (Exodus Rabbah 10:7)
C. "We proclaim that You are Adonai our God and God of our ancestors
throughout all time. You are the Rock of our lives, the Shield of our
salvation in every generation. We thank You and praise You for our lives
that are in Your hand, for our souls that are in Your charge, for Your
miracles that daily attend us, and for Your wonders and gifts that
accompany us evening, morning, and noon. You are good, Your mercy
everlasting; You are compassionate, Your kindness never-ending. We
have always placed our hope in You... Praised are You Adonai, the
essence of goodness, worthy of gratitude." (Modim Anachnu Lach, Daily
Prayerbook)
D. Ben Zoma used to say: What does a good guest say? 'How much trouble
has my host gone to for me. How much meat he set before me. How
much wine he brought me. How many cakes he served me. And all this
trouble he has gone to for my sake!' But what does a bad guest say?
'What kind of effort did the host make for me? I have eaten only one slice
of bread. I have eaten only one piece of meat, and I have drunk only one
cup of wine! Whatever trouble the host went to was done only for the
sake of his wife and children. (Talmud Bavli Berachot 58a)
E. One who learns from another individual a single chapter, a single law, a
single verse, a single expression, or even a single letter, should accord
him respect. (Avot 6:3)
F. I did not make the air I breathe/Nor the sun that warms me... I did not
endow the muscles/Of hand and brain/With the strength/To plough and
plant and harvest... I know/I am not/A self-made man." (Rabbi Ben Zion
Bokser)
G. Most societies value the expression of appreciation and recognize its
ability to smooth the rough edges of interpersonal relations. For this
reason, we make a point of teaching our children to express thanks from
a very early age. We strive to instill gratitude as a habit, even if at times
we know the feeling behind the gesture may be lacking. We sense
intuitively that a society which devalues or denigrates the concept of
gratitude-that defines relationships by functionality alone-cannot, and
probably ought not to, thrive... The structure of giving thanks on a regular
basis, even in hard times, encourages us to focus on the positive side of
life. It does not mean that we forget the dark side, just that we keep a
true perspective, giving the positive side its due... In the end, feeling and
expressing gratitude is good for us. The Almighty does not 'need' our
thanksgiving. It is we who benefit from feeling and expressing it." (Rabbi
Adin Steinsaltz)
H. We have been recipients of the choicest bounties of heaven. We have
been preserved, these many years, in peace and prosperity... But we
have forgotten God. We have forgotten the gracious hand which
preserved us in peace, and multiplied and enriched and strengthened us;
and we have vainly imagined, in the deceitfulness of our hearts, that all
these blessings were produced by some superior wisdom and virtue of
our own." (Abraham Lincoln)
The point of the midrash on our parashah is that if Moses was to express
gratitude to inanimate objects, then certainly we should be grateful to all those
people who are responsible for who are what we are. As Rabbi Steinsaltz notes,
expressing gratitude is not only the essence of menschlichkeit, it is also the
essence of happiness. How do we cultivate that sense of awe and gratitude in a
world where it so easy to complain and be cynical? Why is it that so many of us
have what Rabbi Joseph Telushkin once called "emotional constipation," an
inability to express love and gratitude, to thank those dear to us for specific
favors and acts of kindness?
PARASHAT BO
January 11, 2003 - 5763
Haftarah: Jeremiah 46:13 - 28 (Hertz, p. 263; Etz Hayim, p. 395)


(10:1-29) The eighth plague, locusts, and the ninth, darkness.
(11:1-3) God announces to Moses the last and decisive plague, and instructs
him to tell the people to prepare for leaving by asking the Egyptians for jewels
and gold, which the Egyptians, overawed by events and by Moses' apparent
power, readily give.
(11:4-10) Moses announces the tenth plague to Pharaoh, and the slaying of all
the first-born of Egypt, but God hardens Pharaoh's heart and he does not
respond to this final ultimatum.
(12:1-13) The Passover sacrifice in Egypt. The Israelites are commanded to

take a lamb, slaughter it on the 14th of Nisan, at twilight, mark the doorposts of
their houses with its blood, and eat the lamb on the eve of the 15th. On that
same night, God struck down all the first-born of Egypt.
(12:14-20) Passover for the generations: The Israelites are commanded to

observe this festival, the 15th of Nisan, for all time. For the entire seven days of
the festival they shall not eat, or even possess, any leaven.
(12:21-28) Moses and Aaron convey the Passover commandments to the

people.
(12:29-36) The first-born of Egypt all die, and the Egyptians capitulate. The
Israelites prepare to leave.
(12:37-42) The Israelites leave Egypt.
(12:43-13:10) The laws of the Paschal lamb sacrifice for future generations, the
dedication to God of the firstborn, and further details concerning the observance
of Passover.
Discussion Theme: Idolatry Today
"For that night I will go through the land of Egypt and strike down every first-
born in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and I will mete out punishments
to all the gods of Egypt, I the Lord." (Exodus 12:12)
A. God's power to take Israel out of Egypt manifests His own exclusivity,
mocks the professed divinity of pharaoh, and exposes the deities of
Egypt as non gods. (Nachum Sarna)
B. And Egypt was burying all their first-born whom the Lord had smitten
among them; upon their gods the Lord executed judgment.
C. Since there is no rainfall in Egypt, but the Nile overflows and waters the
land and the Egyptians worship the Nile; He therefore plagued first their
god and then them. (Rashi Exodus 7:19)
D. Hapi was the Egyptian god of the Nile. The second plague struck at
Heket the god who took the shape of a frog. The fifth plague, cattle<
disease, attacked the gods Hathor (cow) and Apis (bull). The ninth
plague, darkness, triumphed over the sun god Ra. Finally, the tenth
showed the vulnerability of Pharaoh himself, the son of the Sun god.
(Noam Zion and David Dishon, A Different Night)
E. Then Pharaoh summoned Moses and Aaron and said, 'Go and sacrifice
to your God within the land.' But Moses replied, 'It would not be right to
dothis, for what we shall sacrifice the abomination of Egypt to God, our
God. If we sacrifice the abominations of the Egyptians before their eyes,
will they not stone us?' "It is characteristic of Judaism's attitude towards
ancient and modern paganism. That which other nations sacrifice
themselves is what Jews sacrifice to their God. The gods of other nations
are the mighty forces of Nature to which Man must submit, as well as the
powerful forces of Nature within himself to which he is subject. They
worship the forces about them and within themselves. But the Jew in his
sacrifice, kills the representatives of these forces, and thereby makes
himself conscious of his power of mastering the forces of Nature within
himself. In obtaining free control of these and submitting them to the Will
of the Almighty One, he frees himself also from the dominion of all the
blind external forces of Nature. He sacrifices the gods in his own inner
self, and thereby breaks the chains of dominion of the external forces of
Nature. (Rabbi S. R. Hirsch, Exodus 8:21-22)
F. If God is the only thing in the universe worthy of worship or adoration,
then anyone who becomes obsessed with the desire for wealth, beauty,
fame, or power is said to idolize them. From a modern perspective then,
idolatry is a universal phenomenon. Almost every country in the world
has military parades that glorify power, advertisements that glorify sexual
fulfillment, books that extol wealth or influence, and cults that deify movie
stars and sports figures... Idolatry is a complex phenomenon that rears
its head in every age. Far from being limited to the worship of clay
statues, it provides ample temptation today and is likely to provide
temptation tomorrow as well. Anything can become an idol if it comes to
be regarded as the be-all and end-all of human life. (Kenneth Seeskin,
No Other Gods)
The plagues described in the Book of Exodus are meant to teach both the
Israelites and the Egyptians the folly of idolatry. The sources above show how
at every step of the way, God's actions are a polemic against the false gods of
Egypt.
>The question is has idolatry disappeared for modern Jews? How does Jewish
tradition help us resist the temptations of modern idolatries? How do we make
sense of the statement in Sifre Deuteronomy that "Whoever acknowledges
idolatry disavows the whole Torah and whoever disavows idolatry
acknowledges the whole Torah?"
PARASHAT B'SHALLAH - TU B'SHEVAT, 5763
January 18, 2003 - 5763
Annual Cycle: Exodus 13:17-17:16 (Hertz, p. 265; Etz Hayim, p. 399)

Haftarah: Judges 4:4 - 5:31 (Hertz, p. 281; Etz Hayim, p. 424)


(13:17-22) The beginning of the Exodus, and its route through the desert. The
pillar of cloud and the pillar of fire.
(14:1-14) The Egyptians pursue the Israelites and catch up to them at the shore
of the sea. The Israelites panic, and Moses reassures them.
(14:15-18) God tells Moses that He will save Israel; they will cross the sea on
dry land.
(14:19-25) The splitting of the sea. The Israelites pass through safely. The
Egyptians pursue them into the sea.
(14:26-31) At God's command, Moses stretches his hand forth over the sea; its
waters close up again, and the pursuing Egyptians are drowned.
(15:1-21) The Song at the Sea, sung to God in praise and thanksgiving.
(15:22-26) The continuation of the journey; the bitter waters at Marah.
(15:27-16:36) The encampment at Elim; God feeds the Israelites with manna
and quail.
(17:1-7) The miracle of the water from the rock.
(17:8-16) The war against Amalek, the archetype of the enemies of Israel.
Discussion Theme: Glorifying God
"The Moses and the children of Israel sang this song to the Lord. They said: 'I
will sing to the Lord, for He has triumphed gloriously; Horse and drive He has
hurled into the sea. The Lord is my strength and might; He is become my
deliverance. This is my God and I will glorify Him; The God of my father and I
will exalt Him'" (Exodus 15:1-2)
A. This is my God and I will glorify Him (ve-anvehu). From the root "naveh,"
a resting place: I will offer myself to be His home. "My whole existence
and life shall be a Temple of his glorification, the 'home' of His revelation;
this is the natural consequence of Him being my God. Thus, 'I will be a
place unto Him,' or 'by my whole life I will prepare a place for Him, of
which He will gladly say, 'And I will dwell among them.'" (Rabbi Samson
Raphael Hirsch)
B. We have Bibles in our hotels but do we have those teachings in our
hearts? (Dr. Abraham Joshua Heschel)
C. This is my God and I will glorify Him (ve-anvehu). From the root "naveh,"
a habitation and dwelling: Within me and in the deepest parts of my
being, I will establish a habitation and a dwelling place for God. (Rabbi
Menachem Mendel of Kotsk)
D. This is my God and I will glorify Him (ve-anvehu). From the root "noi,"
beauty: I will speak of God's beauty and praise to all who live in the world.
For example, when the nations will ask Israel, 'How is your beloved
different from any other beloved?', Israel will reply: 'My beloved is white
and ruddy.' (Rashi)
E. This is my God and I will glorify Him (ve-anvehu). From the root, "na-eh,"
beautiful: I shall beautify God's commandments before Him by serving
God with a beautiful sukkah, a beautiful shofar. (Talmud: Shabbat 133b)
F. "Your lamb shall be without blemish, a yearling male; you may take it
from the sheep or from the goats." (Exodus 12:5) "A defective gift is an
insult to the recipient; hence, the harmony between the devotee and his
God would be impaired by such a donation. The physical perfection of
the sacrificial animal is therefore repeatedly demanded in the sacrificial
regulations. An extension of this principle is the rabbinic precept of hiddur
mitzvah, the obligation to perform an act designated a mitzvah in the
most elegant and choice manner. (Nachum Sarna)
G. Abba Shaul says: This is my God and I will glorify Him (ve-anvehu). From
the combination "ani" (I) "vhu" (and He): This is my God and I shall be
like Him; just as God is compassionate and loving, so must I be
compassionate and loving.
Sparks for Reflection
What is it about the idea of "glorifying" God that led commentators to go beyond
the simple meaning of the original and develop these more metaphorical
interpretations of the verse? How do we recognize God's role in the world and
not be self-conscious or embarrassed about articulating that role, as Rashi
suggests we should? How do we build a life so that God will dwell in our midst?
What does it mean to make our lives a "temple" in which God will dwell?
PARASHAT YITRO
January 25, 2003 - 5763
Haftarah: Isaiah 6:1-13; 7:1-6; 9:5-6 (Hertz, p. 302; Etz Hayim, p. 452)


(18:1-12) Moses' father-in-law Jethro comes to visit, bringing Moses' wife

Zipporah and his two sons.
(18:12-27) Jethro advises Moses to appoint officers and judges to help him lead
the people, creating the political structure for living by the Torah.
(19:1-6) The people prepare to accept the covenant and receive the Torah at
Mount Sinai, where they will become a "kingdom of priests and a holy nation."
(19:7-15) Moses tells the elders to prepare the people to receive the revelation.
(19:16-25) Dramatic phenomena accompany God's manifestation at Mount

Sinai. Moses ascends the mountain.
(20:1-14) The Ten Commandments.
(20:15-18) The people are terrified by God's power, and they beg Moses to
mediate between them and God.
(20:19-23) More commandments concerning the altar.
Discussion Theme: Parental Honor and Society
"Honor your father and your mother, that you may long endure on the land that
the Lord your God is assigning to you." (Exodus 20:12)
A. The obligation to respect is enjoined only for God and parents, and the
offender in either instance is liable to the extreme penalty. The parallels
point up the supreme importance that the Torah assigns to the integrity
of the family for the sake of the stability of society and generational
continuity. Family life is the bedrock on which Jewish society stands."
(Nachum Sarna)
B. Speaking halachically, the key to putting oneself together in respect to
the whole creation hangs on regard for one's own parents. The Halakhah
(Kiddushin 30b) speaks in terms of three pillars: God and the two parents
are partners in the source of the life of the child. The parent mirrors the
creation of the universe; she reflects a concept of life in which one
recognizes that to be is to be related to that which is other than self and
to discover existence outside of one's ego. To be is to find
transcendence. In other words, to be is to know that I am who I am
because others enter into my "I" ness." (Rabbi David Hartman, "The
Family As Mirroring Theological Commitment")
C. The aim of this mitzvah is for a man to recognize and bestow kindness
upon one who has done him good and that he not be base, a
dissimulator, and one who denies the good done him by another... It is
for a person to realize that his father and mother are the cause of his
being in the world; hence in very truth it is proper for him to give them
every honor and every benefit that he can." (Sefer Hachinuch)
D. The father endows the child with five virtues: beauty, strength, riches,
wisdom, and longevity... And just as the father has granted the child
these five gifts, so does the child owe him five things: to feed, provide
drink, clothe, placing shoes upon them, and guide. (Talmud Yerushalm,
Kiddushin 16a)
E. Any stable society, and certainly any ethical one fashioned upon the
principles of justice, morality, and the protection of inalienable rights, just
rest upon a staunch and firm respect for authority and authoritative
figures. At the very least, such institutions maintain order and protect
society from sinking into an oblivion of chaos and anarchy... As
submission to authority is indeed unnatural, this property must be
acquired, inculcated at a young age. Kibbud Av Va-eim tutors children in
the art and necessity of accepting another's authority... The household
provides a school for the education of this habit, and hence the home
forms the cornerstone of society." (Rabbi Moshe Taragin, "The Aims and
Attitudes Surrounding the Mitzvah of Kibbud Av Va-eim")
In what ways is the family the crucible from which attitudes towards society
emerge? What fundamental concepts or habits does the mitzvah of "kibbud av
va-eim" teach?
Did children honor their parents more in the past? If so, in what ways?
PARASHAT MISHPATIM
February 1, 2003 - 5763
Annual Cycle: Exodus 21:1 - 24:18 (Hertz, p.305; Etz Hayim, p.456)
Haftarah: I Samuel 20:18 - 42 (Mahar Hodesh) (Hertz, p. 948; Etz Hayim, p.
1216)


(21:1-11) The beginning of the Covenant Code. Laws regarding master and
slave.
(21:12-17) Capital crimes.
(21:18-22:3) Laws of personal injury, property damage, theft, and negligence.
(22:4-14) Laws governing different kinds of property custodians: unpaid, paid,

and borrowers.
(22:15-26) Laws against the seducer, occult practices, and forbidding the
oppression of the powerless and the weak, including the stranger, the widow,
the orphan, and the poor.
(22:27-30) Miscellaneous laws concerning respect for authority, gifts to the

priests, and the prohibition of eating torn flesh (treifah).
(23:1-9) Laws of righteous behavior toward others.
(23:10-19) Laws concerning the Sabbatical year, Shabbat, and Festivals.
(23:20-33) An epilogue exhorting the Israelites to follow God's law, emphasizing

the rewards they will receive if they do so.
(24:1-18) The covenant is ratified through a formal ceremony of acceptance.

Moses and the elders eat a meal and see a vision of God. Moses alone
ascends the mountain to receive the stone tablets, remaining there for forty
days and nights.
Discussion Theme: Oppressing the Stranger
"You shall not wrong or oppress a stranger; for you were strangers in the land of
Egypt. You shall not afflict any widow, or fatherless child. If you at all afflict them,
and they cry to me, I will surely hear their cry; and my anger shall be inflamed,
and I will kill you with the sword; then your wives shall be widows, and your
children fatherless." (Exodus 22: 21-23)
A. Do not oppress the stranger in your land for if you do so, he will retaliate
by reminding you of your own origin saying, 'You, too, came from
strangers" because you are descendants of those Israelites who were
strangers in Egypt. (Rashi)
B. The Torah approaches this prohibition from an ethical point of view. Do
not treat a stranger unjustly, because you have more power than he has
in the Jewish society in which you both live, and it would not be right for
you to exploit the advantage you have over him. Similarly, it is not fair to
be cruel to a widow or an orphan just because your position is more
secure than theirs. Remember that our ancestors were also politically
and economically insecure in Egypt. Did they appreciate or enjoy being
exploited! (Abraham Ibn Ezra)
C. Do not wrong a stranger or oppress him, thinking as you might that none
can deliver him out of your hand; for you know that you were strangers in
the land of Egypt and 'I saw the oppression wherewith the Egyptians
oppressed' (Exodus 3:9) you, and I avenged your cause on them,
because 'I behold the tears of such who are oppressed and have no
comforter, and on the side of their oppressors there is power'
(Ecclesiastes 4:1) and I deliver each one 'from him that is too strong for
him' (Psalms 35:10). Likewise, you shall not afflict the widow and the
fatherless child, for I will hear their cry, for these people do not rely upon
themselves but trust in Me. And in another verse God added this reason:
'for ye know the soul of a stranger, seeing ye were strangers in the land
of Egypt' (Ex. 23:9). That is to say, you know that every stranger feels
depressed, and is always sighing and crying, and his eyes are always
directed towards God. Therefore, God will have mercy upon him even as
He showed mercy to you... not because of your merits, but only on
account of the fact that God has mercy on all who are oppressed."
(Nachmanides)
D. Because humans are the image of God, they are endowed by their
Creator with three intrinsic dignities: infinite value (the image created by
God is priceless); equality (there can be no preferred image of God; that
would constitute idolatry); and uniqueness (images created by humans
from one mold resemble each other, but God creates God's images from
one couple or mold, and each is distinct from every other). (Rabbi Yitz
Greenberg in Living in the Image of God)
What would it mean to take these verses from the Torah seriously? If
economics and culture and politics upheld Greenberg's three dignities, how
would society look differently? How can we create societal conditions and
transform human behavior toward greater respect for disadvantaged segments
of our population?
PARASHAT T'RUMAH
February 8, 2003 - 5763
Haftarah: I Kings 5:26 - 6:13 (Hertz, p. 336; Etz Hayim, p. 500)


(25:1-9) God commands that donations be taken from the Israelites for the
building of the Mishkan (Tabernacle).
(25:10-40) Instructions for making the Ark and its covering, the table and its
accessories, and the Menorah.
(26:1-30) Detailed instructions for the making of the Mishkan: the cloth covering,
the gold clasps, and the goat hair tent over the Mishkan. Instructions regarding
the 48 planks of the Mishkan, and their joining above by means of the rings, and
inside by means of wooden bars.
(26:31-35) The curtain dividing the Tabernacle and screening the Holy of Holies
where the Ark was placed.
(26:36-27:19) The screen for the entrance, the altar, and the enclosure or
courtyard of the Mishkan.
Discussion Theme: Inner Beauty
"You shall then make cloths of goats' hair for a tent over the Tabernacle; make
the cloths eleven in number." (Exodus 26:7)
A. The coverings that serve as the roof... comprise four separate layers...
The lowest layer is to comprise ten multicolored sheets of fine linen
decorated with the cherubim motif... A coarser covering made of goats'
hair was to be laid above the linen fabric. (Nachum Sarna)
B. Paradoxically, given all the splendor with which the tabernacle was
decorated within-the planks that were covered with gold, the strips of
cloth made of fine twisted linen of blue, purple and crimson yarns, the
vessels made of gold and the precious stones-the tabernacle was,
nevertheless, covered on the outside with simple sheets made of goat's
hair. This is to teach that the essence is internal beauty and splendor, not
the externals of wealth which only arouse jealousy and hatred (Rabbi Y.
Jacobson in Itturei Hatorah)
C. What is the meaning of nobility? A person possessing nobility is one
whose hidden wealth surpasses his outward wealth, whose hidden
treasures exceed his obvious treasures, whose inner depth surpasses by
far that which he reveals. Refinement is found only where inwardness is
greater than outward appearance. The hidden is greater than the
obvious, depth greater than breadth. Nobility is the redeemed quality
which rises within the soul when it exchanges the transient for the
permanent, the useful for the valuable... We have learned that one can
be a villain even though very cultured and expert in science. The
possibility of saving the world from destruction depends on the
recognition that there is a supreme criterion by which we must evaluate
all human values and that there is something that rises above all the
achievements of the arts and sciences... How easy it is to be attracted by
outward beauty, and how it is to remove the mask and penetrate to that
which is inside. If a Greek poet, for example, had arrived at Samaria, the
capital of the Kingdom of Israel he would have been surprised and
overcome with emotion; he would have praised and lauded in verse the
idols, the beautiful temples and palaces which the kings of Israel and
their ministers had built. But the prophet Amos, after visiting Samaria, did
not sing, nor did he bow to the glory of the ivory buildings. When he
looked at the buildings of carved stone, at the ivory temples and beautiful
orchards, he saw in them the oppression of the poor, robbery and
plunder. External magnificence neither entranced him nor led him astray.
(A.J. Heschel "Pikuach Neshama: To Save a Soul")
How do we teach children that the criterion by which we should judge beauty is
integrity, truth or goodness? As adults, how would our marketing and
purchasing habits change if we took these criteria seriously? Some of the latest
fashions were sewn together with the sweat and tears of the underpaid. What is
beauty if it is acquired at the cost of justice?
PARASHAT T'ETZAVEH
February 15, 2003 - 5763
Haftarah: Ezekiel 43:10 - 27 (Hertz, p. 350; Etz Hayim, p. 520)


(27:20-28:30) Instructions concerning the oil for the Ner Tamid, the fashioning
of the ephod and breastplate.
(28:31-39) The directions for the High Priest's uniform.
(28:40-43) The clothing of Aaron's sons, i.e. the ordinary kohanim (priests).
(29:1-18) Instructions for the ritual consecrating Aaron and his sons as kohanim.
(29:19-37) Instructions for the consecration of Aaron and his sons during their
seven days of inauguration.
(29:38-46) Instructions concerning the Tamid, the daily sacrifice.
(30:1-10) Instructions concerning the fabrication of the incense altar and its
special function.
Discussion Theme: Models of Spirituality
"You shall make the robe of the ephod of pure blue. The opening for the head
shall be in the middle of it; the opening shall have a binding of woven work
round about - it shall be like the opening of a coat of mail - so that it does not
tear. On its hem make pomegranates of blue, purple, and crimson yarns, all
around the hem, with bells of gold between them all around: a golden bell and a
pomegranate, a golden bell and a pomegranate, all around the hem of the robe.
Aaron shall wear it while officiating so that the sound of it is heard when he
comes into the sanctuary before the Lord and when he goes out-that he may
not die." (Exodus 28:31-35)
A. Because the Holy Blessed One commanded in Leviticus 15:17 that "no
person should be present in the Tent of Meeting when the High Priest
enters to make expiation until he leaves," God commanded that the
sound be heard when the priest enters so that listeners will know to
vacate the premises. (Rashbam)
B. Therefore God commanded that the bells be made in order that the
sound therefrom be heard in the Sanctuary, that the priest enter before
his Master as if with permission. For he who comes into the king's palace
suddenly, incurs the penalty of death according to the court ceremonial...
(Nachmanides)
C. The tinkling attracts the attention of the worshipers outside the Tent to
the fact that the High Priest is performing the ritual; or the bells sent out a
message that no mishap had occurred in the course of the priestly duties
such as had happened to Aaron's two sons. Another possibility is that the
High Priest himself reminded by the sound of the bells on his robe that
he is to attune his heart and mind to his solemn duties and that he must
be fully conscious of the fact that he is in the presence of God. (Nachum
Sarna)
D. The bells, clappers jangling from a hollow center, symbolize a mode of
spiritual ecstasy: literally, a standing outside oneself, an overwhelming
consciousness of the nothingness of the human person within the priestly
robes. The High Priest as he enters the sanctuary loses all sense of his
own destiny, of the contingencies, the idiosyncrasies of his own
existence. The bell becomes an image for a hollowness that resounds
almost unbearably with God's presence. (Rabbi Yaacov Leiner, Beit
Yaacov, quoted in Aviva Zornberg's The Particulars of Rapture)
E. In reality, modesty is usually praised for the average person and certainly
for a great leader. However, that is true only in secular or mundane
matters. In matters of holiness, on the other hand, when we are dealing
with matters that relate to national holiness, the sanctity of life, critical
matters of destiny, then it is incumbent upon the leader to let his voice be
heard loudly. He should speak confidently and commandingly to draw
attention to the significance of the message. Hence, the Torah states that
the sound should be heard when he enters the Sanctuary. (Chatam
Sofer)
Each of the commentators presents a different model of spirituality by way of his

interpretation of the bells' purpose. One model focuses on the primacy of ethics
and derech eretz. Another presents a model of the worshiper losing himself,
loses a focus on the self, in order to feel God's presence. Another suggests that
some acts should be done with quietness; but when it comes to serving God,
one should unashamedly call attention without embarrassment almost as a
missionary would. Examine the commentaries above. What are the different
models? Which one "resonates" within you?
PARASHAT KI TISSA
February 22, 2003 - 5763
Annual Cycle: Exodus 30:11 - 34:35 (Hertz, p.352; Etz Hayim, p. 523)
Haftarah: I Kings 18:1 - 39 (Hertz, p. 369; Etz Hayim, p. 548)


(30:11-16) Instructions concerning the contribution of the half shekel as a

means of taking a census of men fit for military service.
(30:17-38) Instructions concerning the fabrication of the brass basin used for
washing up before entering the Sanctuary and the manufacture of the anointing
oil and the holy incense.
(31:1-11) Bezalel is appointed in charge of the making of the Tabernacle.
(31:12-17) A special warning regarding the sanctity of the Shabbat.
(31:18-32:6) God gives Moses the Two Tablets of the Covenant. Meanwhile,
down in the Israelite camp, the people despair of Moses' return, and demand of
Aaron that he make a "god" for them. The result is the Golden Calf.
(32:7-35) God tells Moses what the people are doing, and threatens to destroy
them. Moses descends the mountain, sees the people dancing around the calf,
and in a fit of anger breaks the tablets. The actual worshipers of the calf, 3000
in number, are put to death. Moses intercedes for his people and ascends Mt.
Sinai once again. He pleads with God, who relents from destroying the entire
people, though He sends a plague as punishment.
(33:1-11) God tells Moses to lead the people toward the Promised Land and
says that He will no longer dwell in their midst. The people must strip off their
finery as an act of contrition. God continues to speak to Moses directly.
(33:12-23) Moses pleads to be able to see God as a confirmation both of his

authority and his relationship with God, but that request is denied, "for a human
may not see Me and live." God does promise that Moses will be able to see His
"back," i.e., have an indirect manifestation of His Presence.
(34:1-9) Moses returns to Mt. Sinai for the third time and receives the revelation
concerning God's Thirteen Attributes.
(34:10-26) The renewal of the covenant between God and Israel. Further
instruction concerning the mitzvot.
(34:27-35) After forty days, Moses receives the second set of Tablets. He
comes down from Sinai, his face shining with rays of light.
Discussion Theme: Freedom
Thereupon Moses turned and went down from the mountain bearing the two
tablets of the Pact, tablets inscribed on both their surfaces; they were inscribed
on the one side and on the other. The tablets were God's work, and the writing
was God's writing, incised (charut) upon the tablets. (Exodus 32:15-16)
A. Read not incised (charut) but freedom (cherut), for there is none who is
free save one who is occupied with Torah study. (Avot 6:2)
B. The Tablets did not bear the writing but the writing bore and held the
Tablets... Just as the writing of the Divine Evidence was not only
independent of the material but raises the material serving it to its own
level of freedom above the ordinary laws of Nature which govern matter,
in the same way human beings, who take upon themselves the spirit of
this writing and make themselves the representatives of this spirit are
raised, borne and held by this very spirit itself, above the blind force of
'you must,' the lack of free will which clings to all matter, i.e. they become
free. (Rabbi S. R. Hirsch)
C. Freedom is not seen as the liberty to do what one feels like doing, but
rather, it means to become what one really is, namely the individual who
has etched Godliness within the self. Thus, 'read not engraved (charut)
but freedom (cherut), for there is none who is free save one who is
occupied in Torah study.' Only one who is occupied with Torah study
perceives the freedom in its true context, as a freedom towards realizing
Torah values, rather than a freedom from this restraint or that obligation.
Freedom itself is in a context, and oriented around a specific target.
(Reuven Bulka in Chapters of the Sages: A Psychological Commentary
on Pirkey Avoth)
D. Freedom is the state of going out of the self, an act of spiritual ecstasy, in
the original sense of the term. Who, then, is free? The creative man who
is not carried away by the streams of necessity, who is not enchained by
processes, who is not enslaved to circumstances. Man's ability to
transcend the self, to rise above all natural ties and bonds, presupposes
further that every man lives in a realm governed by law and necessity as
well as in a realm of creative possibilities. It presupposes his belonging to
a dimension that is higher than nature, society, and the self, and accepts
the reality of such a dimension beyond the natural order. Freedom does
not mean the right to live as we please. It means the power to live
spiritually, to rise to a higher level of existence. (A. J. Heschel, Between
God and Man)
What is the connection between "charut" (engraved) and "cherut" (freedom).

One would have thought that Torah, with all its rules, would restrict freedom.
Yet, these commentators discover ways that Torah enhances freedom. How
so? What is the freedom that comes with following the laws of Torah or studying
them?
PARASHAT VAYIKRA
March 15, 2003 - 5763
Annual Cycle: Lev. 1:1 - 5:26 (Hertz, p. 410; Etz Hayim, p. 585)
Triennial Cycle II: Lev. 3:1 - 4:26 (Hertz, p. 415; Etz Hayim, p. 592)
Maftir: Deut: 25:17-19 (Hertz, p. 856; Etz Hayim, p. 1135)
Haftarah: I Samuel 15:2 - 34 (Hertz, p. 995; Etz Hayim, p. 1280)


(1:1-17) The laws regarding the olah, or burnt offering. The entire animal,
except for the hide, was burned to ashes on the altar. The olah described here
is brought by an individual as a voluntary offering to atone for neglect of positive
commandments.
(2:1-16) The laws regarding the minhah, or meal offering. There were two types:
communal meal-offerings brought on Passover, Shavuot, and Shabbat, and
individual meal-offerings usually brought by people too poor to afford an animal
or a fowl.
(3:1-17) The laws concerning the zevah sh'lamim, the peace-offering or

"offering of well-being." Unlike the olah, which was completely consumed on th
e altar, the zevah sh'lamimwas a sacred meal, shared by donors and kohanim.
(4:1-26) The laws regarding the hattat, or sin-offering. A hattat was given for
sins one committed accidentally or unknowingly.
(4:27-35) Similar sin-offerings, but for the individual.
(5:1-26) The asham, guilt-offering. This was given when one was uncertain
whether one had offended, or in a case where someone had wronged another,
denied his guilt, then later his conscience bothered him and he wanted to
confess and make amends.
Discussion Theme: Communal Judgment
“If it is the whole community of Israel that has erred and the matter escapes the
notice of the congregation so that they do any of the things which by the Lord’s
commandments ought not to be done, and they realize their guilt—when the sin
through which they incurred built becomes known, the congregation shall offer a
bull of the herd as a sin offering, and bring it before the Tent of Meeting.” (Lev.
4:13-14)
Commentary
A. “Edah” is... the distinctive term for (the whole community), the entire
Israelite nation—men, women, and children... It can also be used of tribal
leaders meeting as an executive body, acting on behalf of the entire
community... How is it possible for the entire people to err
simultaneously? The thesis that verses 1-21 form a single case,
propounded above, whereby the high priest’s erroneous decision causes
the whole community to err, makes this eventuality highly plausible.”
(Jacob Milgrom, Anchor Bible Series Leviticus, 4:13)
B. “When the sin through which they incurred guilt becomes known”. The
reason the verb, “becomes known,” is in the passive is because
everyone in the community erred and there is no uninvolved outsider
who can objectively point out the error. That discovery must come from
within the community’s own ranks. (Shadal on Lev. 4:14)
C. Fifty years ago... a leading Orthodox rabbi used to advise his flock that
“the yarmulke is an indoor garment.” Today, Jewish males in all walks of
life proudly wear a kippah, and Jewish women publicly display their
identification with jewelry that incorporates Jewish symbols. Yet
simultaneously, masses of Jews, including some 200,000 Jewish convert
to Christianity and countless children and grandchildren of intermarriages,
are disappearing into the anonymity of American society. Religious
antagonism between adherents of the various branches of Judaism has
reached new levels of intensity... The 1990 National Jewish Population
Survey indicates that a smaller percentage of Jews affiliate with
synagogues than 20 years ago. But radically new types of religious
congregations are springing up to serve populations with special
interests—feminists, homosexuals and particular age cohorts... At the
heart of this wide-reaching transformation in religious life lies the
uniquely American glorification of individualism... For the religious
movements, the greatest challenge posed by the new individualism is the
maintenance of religious norms. In the past, all the branches of Judaism,
regardless of their differences, strongly maintained that Judaism requires
its adherents to abide by norms of behavior... Today, however, both the
Reform and Reconstructionist movements have empowered the
autonomous individual—that is, each Jew—to pick and choos e from
Judaism that which is personally meaningful. Their leaders are unwilling
to characterize how the “ideal Jew” ought to behave. Conservative
Judaism is under enormous pressure from within to accommodate to the
new individualism. Only Orthodoxy in its various permutations seems so
far able to withstand the pressure to conform to the spirit of the age.
(Jack Wertheimer, Moment Magazine, August 1994)
D. Of all the recent religious changes in America, few are more significant,
or more subtle, than the enhanced religious individualism of our time.
Americans generally hold a respectful attitude toward religion, but also
they increasingly regard it as a matter of personal choice or preference.
Today choice means more than simply having an option among religious
alternatives; it involves religion as an option itself and an opportunity to
draw selectively off a variety of traditions in the pursuit of the self. (Wade
Clark Roof and William McKinney, American Mainline Religion: Its
Changing Shape and Future, 1987)
E. Some of the enemies of Israel have said: “Since it appears that we
cannot destroy Israel through terrorism and warfare, why not try the
opposite? Make peace with the Jews and they will destroy themselves. In
the absence of an external enemy, they will collapse under the weight of
their internal divisions and disagreements.” There is certainly a legitimate
place for disagreement in Jewish life today; I hopeall the assenting and
dissenting voices will be heard. Jewish cultural and religious vitality
depends on our ability to appreciate and understand how different Jews
think about their history... Let us not argue who is more loyal to the
Jewish people or who cares more about its continuity. Instead, let us
argue about the content of that continuity.” (David Hartman, The NY
Jewish Week, July 21, 1995)
F. We Jews have survived so long surrounded by a sea of others that we
have long since acquired the capacity to absorb... the culture and many
of the behavioral patterns of those around us... And what is seeping in
these days? Hatred and incivility, intolerance, and infinite anger...
America is awash in hatred... in this country, the airwaves are filled with
expressions of hate, with political disagreement that gets personal and
vicious. Expressing hatred, whether on telephone call-in radio programs
or sleazy television talk shows, has become the new mass
entertainment... Has this begun to rub off on the Jews? Read my hate
mail, the angry reactions that pour in response to any column that calls
for supporting the peace process or that urges civility in our debates over
what is best for the Jews or Israel...” (Samuel Heilman, ibid)
Sparks for Reflection/Discussion
The Talmud tells us that if somebody sins once and then repeats it, to him it
becomes a permitted act. If he does it a third time, it becomes a commandment.
We human beings have a way of rationalizing the wrong we do. The sin offering,
or today's repentance, helps strip away that built-in insulation; we are
encouraged to be self-reflective. But, as our passage from Leviticus 4:13 points
out, the Jewish community must come before God. The process of repentance,
reflection, and reform is not just an individual one; there is communal judgment.
What should be the major issues that we as a Jewish community are

accountable for? What are the gravest sins that “the whole community of Israel”
has committed? Is it intolerance, an overemphasis on individualism,
assimilation? Have we learned anything from the population studies and social
critics of the 90’s?
PARASHAT TZAV
March 22, 2003 - 5763
Maftir: Numbers 19:1 - 22 (Hertz, p. 652; Etz Hayim, p. 880)
Haftarah: Ezekiel 36:16 - 38 (Hertz, p. 999; Etz Hayim, p. 1286


(6:1-16) Instructions concerning the Olah (burnt offering), the perpetual fire on
the altar, and the Minhah (meal-offering); the specific meal-offering brought by
Aaron and his descendants.
(6:17-7:10) Instructions concerning the Hattat (sin-offering) and Asham (guilt-

offering).
(7:11-21) The Sh'lamim sacrifice. There are three kinds: thanksgiving, in

fulfillment of a vow, and as af ree-will offering.
(7:22-38) The prohibition of eating chelev, the consecrated fat covering the
animal's internal organs, and blood. The portions of the sh'lamim that go to the
kohanim.
(8:1-5) God commands Moses to take Aaron and his sons and assemble the
people for the initiation ceremony into the priesthood.
(8:6-21) The priests perform a ritual purification and Aaron is dressed in his holy
garments. The Tabernacle is anointed, and then Aaron. Aaron's sons are
garbed. Then come a series of sacrifices as part of the consecration and
purification of the Tabernacle.
(8:22-36) The actual ordination ceremonies, lasting seven days.
Discussion Theme: Birkat Ha-gomel – The Survival Blessing
“This is the ritual of the peace-offering (well-being) sacrifice that one may offer
to the Lord: If he offers it for thanksgiving, he shall offer together with the
sacrifice of thanksgiving unleavened cakes with oil mixed in, unleavened wafers
spread with oil, and cakes of choice flour with oil mixed in, well soaked. This
offering, with cakes of leavened bread added, he shall offer along with his
thanksgiving sacrifice of well-being.” (Lev. 7:11-7:13)
Commentary:
A. Four categories of people are required to offer thanks (birkat ha-gomel)

to God: 1) those that survived a desert or another potentially hazardous
journey, 2) dangerous imprisonment, 3) serious illness, or 4) a sea
voyage. From where in the Bible do we know that one who has
recovered from serious illness must thank God? In Psalms 107:17-22, it
is written: “There were fools who suffered for their sinful way, and for
their iniquities. All food was loathsome to them; they reach the gates of
death. In their adversity they cried to the Lord and He saved them from
their troubles. He gave an order and healed them; He delivered them
from the pits of death. Let them praise the Lord for His steadfast love, His
wondrous deeds for mankind. Let them offer thanksgiving sacrifices, and
tell His deeds in joyful song…”And he must utter his thanksgiving in the
presence of ten, as it is written, “Let them exalt Him in the assembly of
the people” - (Psalms 107:32). (Talmud Berachot 54b)
B. What is the blessing that one is required to recite? “Praised are You,
Lord our God, Ruler of the universe who graciously bestows favor upon
the undeserving, even as He has bestowed favor on me.” The
congregation responds “Amen” and says “May God who has been
gracious to you continue to favor you will all that is good.” (Siddur Sim
Shalom p. 402, Shulchan Aruch 219:2)
C. One must recite this blessing in the presence of ten people (including the
one reciting the blessing), two of which must be rabbis…but if rabbis are
not present, one is not prevented from reciting the blessing. And the
custom is to recite the blessing after reading the Torah because one is
assured that ten people are present. And if one recited the blessing when
less than ten are present, some authorities permit this and others do not.
It is best in such a situation to go back and bless in the presence of ten
people but omit God’s name and kingship (only say “Baruch Ata
Hagomel…”). If someone else, in the presence of ten people, recited a
blessing on behalf of the person rescued and said “Praised are You, Lord
our God, Ruler of the universe who has been gracious to you” and the
person rescued responded Amen, then the latter person has fulfilled
his/her responsibility of thanking God. And similarly, if the other person
said in another language, instead of Hebrew, or some variant of the
traditional Hebrew formulation, “Blessed is the Compassionate One, the
Ruler of the universe, who has given you to us and not to dust” and the
rescued one responds Amen, then the latter has fulfilled his/her
responsibility of thanking God. (Shulchan Aruch 219:3-4)
D. If a man recites a blessing for his wife, for example, who just delivered a
baby, and she is not present, he says: “Praised are You, Lord our God,
Ruler of the universe who has been gracious to my wife” (she’gamal
l’ishti kol tov). And if one recites a blessing on behalf of one’s parent at a
time when the latter is not present, one says: “Praised are You, Lord our
God, Ruler of the universe who has been gracious to my
father/mother/teacher” (she’gamal l’avi/imi/rabi kol tov). One recites a
blessing including God’s name and kingship (Baruch atah Adonai
Eloheinu Melech Ha-Olam) on behalf of someone else only if one
genuinely feels close to that person (as opposed to doing so just for the
sake of peace); if one recites the blessing not on behalf of a friend or
relative, one omits God’s name and kingship (Adonai Eloheinu Melech
Ha-Olam). (Mishnah Berurah Footnote 17-18 on 219:4)
E. If one recites Gomelon behalf of himself and on behalf of others, the
other people have fulfilled their responsibility even if they do not respond
“Amen” (provided they intended to be included in the blessing). If one
delayed in reciting this blessing, one can do so at any time
subsequently.It is best not to wait, however, more than three days
(Mishneh Berurah footnote 20: even if the only way to recite the blessing
would be to do so without a Torah scroll, one should do so within the
three days because one’s recovery or rescue, within three days, is still
connected with the specific serious illness or event). (Shulchan Aruch
219:6)
F. Why was an offering of bread added to the offering of thanksgiving? In
order that the donor might be able to share this, the tangible
demonstration of his gratitude to God, with as many of his friends and
neighbors as possible. (K’li Yakar on Lev. 7:11)
The institution of the thanksgiving offering forms the basis for the requirement to
offer words of gratitude to God after rescue from times of trouble. Interestingly,
expressions of gratitude are meant to be communal. According to the K’li Yakar,
the one who brought the sacrifice shared the meal with the community.
According to Psalm 30, which conveys the picture of a worshiper who gives
thanks to God for recovery from a deadly illness, the psalmist presupposes the
presence of an assembled congregation.
Likewise, “Birkat Ha-gomel”, which we recite when we have recovered from a

serious illness or escaped a dangerous accident, is also to take place in the
presence of an assembled congregation. Whydo we take this private event and
integrate it into the life of the community?
We offer private prayers, but why is it so important that there is a public

component as well?
PARASHAT SHEMINI
March 29, 2003 - 5763
Maftir: Exodus 12:1 - 20 (Hertz, p. 253; Etz Hayim, p. 380)
Haftarah: Ezekiel 45:16 – 46:18 (Hertz, p. 1001; Etz Hayim, p. 1290)


(9:1-24) Concluding the narrative of the ordination of Aaron and his sons as
kohanim. On the eighth and final day of ceremonies, Moses instructs Aaron and
the Israelites in the proper rituals of consecration. Aaron offers a sin-offering for
himself, then Aaron. His sons offer a sin-offering on behalf of the people. Moses
and Aaron bless the people. The Kavod (glory) of God descends upon the
Tabernacle.
(10:1-7) Nadav and Avihu, Aaron's sons, offer "strange fire" which God had not
told them to offer, and they die by fire that comes forth from before God. (10:8-
11) Kohanim are prohibited from drinking alcoholic beverages when they are to
serve in the Tabernacle.
(10:12-20) Instructions to the kohanim regarding the various portions of the

offerings that they may eat. Moses finds that Aaron and his sons are not eating
the portions of the sacrifices that belong to them, and he instructs them to do
so.
(11:1-12) The signs of kashrut for land animals, and sea creatures.
(11:13-23) A list of forbidden birds and forbidden and permitted insects.
(11:24-47) A list of animals whose dead carcasses can cause ritual defilement,
and the laws regarding ritual impurity and defilement from carcasses of animals
and from reptiles. A general warning to guard against defilement and to be
concerned about ritual purity.
Discussion Theme: Inreach and Outreach
“The following you shall abominate among the birds—they shall not be eaten,
they are an abomination…..the stork; herons of every variety; the hoopoe, and
the bat.” (Lev. 11:13, 19)
Commentary:
A. There are no overall physical criteria by which to distinguish pure birds

from impure birds. Rather a long list of prohibited birds is provided, the
assumption being that all others would be permitted... The impure birds
are virtually all birds of prey. (Baruch Levine, JPS Commentary on Lev.
11:13)
B. Why is the stork called the “chasidah,” literally, “the kind one?” For it
does kindness with is companions with food. (Rashi Lev. 11:19)
C. If the “chasidah” is kind towards its kin, why is it unkosher? To be kosher
one must be kind not only to one’s kin but to all. (Menachem Mendel of
Kotsk, Hasidic Rebbe)
D. Being a Jew is a verb. Jewish living means, how do you live?... We must
develop a vibrant core of committed people who care about Judaism,
who learn, who are enthusiastic, and who let that radiate. We always try
to get the kid who doesn’t want to go to Jerusalem to go. We forget about
what to do with the kid who does go. We try to attract new people to join
a synagogue, but we don’t ask sufficiently what to do with the person
who is already there….Let’s not always talk about all those Jews who are
alienated; instead, let’s talk about the joys of Jews who celebrate their
Jewishness, who love to visit Israel, who commit themselves to the UJA
campaign, who want to line up with the Jewish people. Let’s nurture
them, and let those nurturers give light and fire to the rest of the Jewish
world. (David Hartman, Moment Magazine)
E. We must train mitzvah missionaries dedicated to missionizing Jews and
bringing them in touch with higher degrees of Jewish living. The Reform
Movement’s call for proselytizing non-Jews is misdirected; rather we
must convert Jews to Judaism... What we must do is develop an
aggressive campaign of outreach to our fellow Jews. If we know
individuals who are not members of a synagogue, we must consider it
our personal mission to convince them to join. If we know individuals who
do not come to synagogue, we must make it our personal mission to
convince them to attend, even infrequently at first. If we know individuals
who never study, we must encourage them to attend an adult education
lecture, if not a series of classes. There will be discomfort in seeking to
encourage others to become more committed to Judaism, and we will not
always be successful; people will scoff at us and make us feel
uncomfortable. Nevertheless, we have a job to do if we want Judaism to
continue. We do not seek new adherents to Judaism; rather, we seek
new commitment from those who are already Jews. (Jerome M. Epstein,
“Mitzvah Missionaries”)
F. The challenge is to create compelling communities, inspired and inspiring
communities, that can “sear the soul,” communities that can beckon
Jews—core Jews and marginal Jews—intermarried Jews and
inmarrieds—on the basis of what these Jewish communities offer as
vehicles for fulfillment, for a life of meaning, of purpose, of conviction,
and commitment. Experiencing such vibrant communities, all Jews will
be more likely to want to learn so they can become active community
members. (John Ruskay, United Jewish Communities)
G. The largest Jewish community in the world is betting its future not on
generational transmission, not on recruiting the children of this
generation’s committed Jews to be the next generation’s Jews, but on
turning on the uncommitted or non-Jews. I doubt any Jewish community
in history has attempted that feat. Moreover, this approach is based on
defeatism: since we cannot rely on our strongly and moderately engaged
Jews to replicate themselves, let us recruit the next generation of Jews
from the periphery or even outside the Jewish community... A more sane
and dignified approach would build outward from our strength. (Jack
Wertheimer, Jewish Theological Seminary)
Sparks for Reflection/Discussion:
Commentators say that the reason the “chasidah” (stork) is “treif,” despite the
connotation that it is kind (chasid), is that it only cares for its own kin. If we were
to project the strategy of the chasidah onto the American Jewish community, to
what extent is it “treif” to be concerned only with the affiliated? To what extent
should we reach out to the unaffiliated? Are they not also our kin too?
Is “outreach” a successful strategy for combating intermarriage, for example, or

does it send a mixed message about intermarriage? Outreach proponents
argue that community energy and resources need to be directed toward enticing
marginal Jews into the mainstream by gearing programs to their interests.
Inreach proponents argue that it is better to devote community energy and
funds to supporting people who are committed to Jewish beliefs and practices,
and whose children will become the future standard bearers of Judaism.
How can outreach do more than validate what Jews do and instead challenge
people to live Jewishly? How do we activate “keiruv,” outreach, that brings Jews
closer to Judaism and, at the same time, take care not to transform and dilute
the self-definition of Judaism and Jewish values so that they are completely
palatable to the unaffiliated?
PARASHAT TAZRIA
April 5, 2003 - 5763
Triennial Cycle II: Lev. 13:29 – 13:59 (Hertz, p. 463; Etz Hayim, p. 655)
Haftarah: II Kings 4:42 – 5:19 (Hertz, p. 466; Etz Hayim, p. 671)


(12:1-8) The laws governing a woman's state of ritual impurity after childbirth.
(13:1-59) Laws concerning tzara'at, the severe skin disease resembling leprosy.
If judged by the priest to have this affliction, the person was declared unclean
and kept quarantined.
Discussion Theme: Taking The Initiative
“As for the person with a leprous affection, his clothes shall be rent, his head
shall be left bare, and he shall uncover his upper lip; and he shall call out,
‘Unclean! Unclean!’ He shall be unclean as long as the disease is on him. Being
unclean, he shall dwell apart; his dwelling shall be outside the camp.” (Lev.
13:45-46)
Commentary
A. The sufferer must warn all that approach that he is impure so that they
stay away from him lest they become contaminated. (Rashi on Lev.
13:45)
B. From the fact that the leper shouts “Unclean!” it teaches th at one must
inform others of his anguish so that they may pray on his behalf. (Talmud
Moed Katan 5a)
C. An early teaching: Where is the allusion that the requirement to mark
burial sites is a Torah-based requirement? Rabbi Abahu said: From the
fact that the leper shouts “Unclean! Unclean!” The impurity shouts out:
“Stay away!” (Moed Katan 5a)
D. The Lord said to Moses, “Why do you cry out to Me? Speak to the
Children of Israel and let them journey forth! And you—lift up your staff
and stretch out your arm over the sea and split it; and the Children of
Israel shall come into the midst of the sea on dry land...” (Exodus 14:15)
E. Moses, too, was praying, and God told him, “Now, when Israel is in
distress, is no time for lengthy prayer.” (Rashi on Ex. 14:15)
F. If you try to do what you can, God will help you do what you cannot.
(Bachya ibn Pakuda)
G. The relationship between the family and Jewish institutions is like a
seesaw. The two parties on the seesaw agree to be partners. It works
best if the parties are of equal weight. It works best if they agree to
collaborate. So, too, family education works best if we get both the family
and the institution on the seesaw. Sometimes it’s just a matter of asking.
We taught each generation to send their children to a Jewish school.
Now we have reached the limit of efficacy of sending our kids to be
educated. We need a new model. (Vicky Kelman, The Whizin Institute)
H. You claim that you want a spiritual leader. Are you prepared to let than
individual guide you? I understand that you want a teacher. Are you
prepared to study? You indicate that you want someone who will
stimulate your children. Are you prepared to bring them to the
synagogue? You ask me to inspire you in prayer. Are you prepared to
pray? You note that you want your spiritual leader to stimulate the
synagogue to grow in its ability to affect people’s lives. You want the
synagogue to touch people in times of joy and sadness. Are you
prepared to join us in that effort? (Rabbi Jerome Epstein, The United
Synagogue of Conservative Judaism)
Despite the leper’s status as victim, the leper is obligated to let the community
know that he is impure. He must take some initiative. The family of the
deceased is obligated to inform the community, by virtue of a gravestone, where
the deceased is buried so that kohanim do not mistakenly tread in a forbidden
area.
Again, initiative must be taken; one cannot simply be passive and consider
one’s duties fulfilled. Similarly, Moses is told that in a time of need, he, too, must
act and not simply rely on God to rescue the people.
By extension, Vicky Kelman argues that education requires more than simply
outstanding teachers and schools but an involved family. “Drop-off Judaism”,
Judaism whereby parents drop off their child at synagogue and do not,
themselves, enter with their child, becomes drop-out Judaism.
How do we convey to the Jewish community that spirituality requires initiative; it

doesn’t just happen. If Jews want to be spiritually moved by the beautiful voice
of the cantor, they must come to synagogue; if they want to be inspired by the
lessons of our tradition, they must take the initiative and attend study sessions;
if they want their children to have a relationship to the rabbi, they must bring
their child to the synagogue; if they want the synagogue community “to be
there” for them in times of need, they must be “there” for others as well.
How do Jewish congregations worldwide fair vis-à-vis this type of initiative?

PARASHAT METZORA
April 12, 2003 - 5763
Annual Cycle: Lev. 14:1 – 15:33 (Hertz, p. 470; Etz Hayim, p. 660)
Triennial Cycle II: Lev. 14:1 – 14:32 (Hertz, p. 470; Etz Hayim, p. 660)
Haftarah: Malachi 3:4 – 24; 3:23 (Hertz, p. 1005; Etz Hayim, p. 1295)


(14:1-20) Instructions concerning the ritual of purification and the sacrifices that
the m’tzora (person afflicted with tzara'at) must bring in order to complete the
process of ritual purification.
(14:21-32) The sacrifices that the person brings if he/she cannot afford the
regular ones.
(14:33-57) Law of tzara'at on a house; summary of chapters 13 & 14.
(15:1-33) Rules governing discharges of various bodily fluids and their effect on
the ritual purity of the individual.
Discussion Theme: Breakthroughs and Humility
“The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: This shall be the ritual for a leper at the time
that he is to be cleansed. When it has been reported to the priest, the priest
shall go outside the camp. If the priest sees that the leper has been healed of
his scaly affection, the priest shall order two live clean birds, cedar wood,
crimson wool, and hyssop to be brought for him who is to be cleansed. The
priest shall order one of the birds slaughtered over fresh water in an earthen
vessel; and he shall take the live bird, along with the cedar wood, the crimson
wool, and the hyssop, and dip them together with the live bird in the blood of the
bird that was slaughtered over the fresh water. He shall then sprinkle it seven
times on him who is to be cleansed of the eruption and cleanse him; and he
shall set the live bird free in the open country.” (Lev. 14:1-7)
Commentary
A. Cedar wood is used because it leprosy comes because of the sin of

haughtiness. (Rashi on Lev. 14:4)
B. The cedar, a tall and beautiful tree, serves to remind the sinner that he
considered himself high and glorious; that is, the moral flaw that was
punished by leprosy was haughtiness. (Tanchuma Chapter 3)
C. Crimson wool and hyssop are used so that the leper learns to humble
himself from his arrogance like a worm (a pun on “to-la’at” which means
dyed wool and a worm) and like hyssop (which does not grow tall).
(Rashi on Lev. 14:4)
D. All mitzvot are best done with kavannah, intention and awareness, with
the exception of humility which, if done with intention and awareness,
becomes arrogance. (Menachem Mendel of Kotsk, Hasidic Rebbe)
E. “Gossip is cathartic, empowering and comforting... one of the great
luxuries of democracy. It is the tawdry jewel in the crown of free speech
and free expression... It makes you interesting and boosts your self-
esteem at having it to relate.” (Liz Smith, syndicated columnist for Brill’s
Content, a media monthly)
F. “We spread damaging words about others as a means of elevating
ourselves.” (Chafetz Chayim, rabbinical ethicist)
G. When God gave Moses the instructions for the paschal sacrifice, God
didn’t mention using hyssop. He merely said the Israelites should take
the blood of the sheep and put it on the doorposts of the lintel. Moses,
apparently on his own, added that the blood should be applied with a
bunch of hyssop. Putting the blood on the doorposts was an act of
defiance. By using the blood of an animal considered a god of Egypt, the
Israelites proclaimed the cult to be mere idolatry. Showing defiance was
important not for its own sake, but to establish in the people’s minds that
they were free of Egyptian bondage and idolatry, physically and
emotionally. But there was a danger that self-assurance might lead to
arrogance. Possibly for this reason, Moses told the elders to dip the
bunch of hyssop in the blood and then apply it to the doorposts. The
hyssop, traditionally considered one of the lowliest plants, was meant to
inspire humility. Moses thus tried to balance the act’s defiance with the
humble procedure through which the act would be accomplished.
(Reuven Bulka “Hyssop’s Fables”)
H. If one has been healed from his affliction, then certainly he has done
teshuvah, has regretted hissins, and humbled himself. Why, then, must
one humble oneself again “at the time that he is to be cleansed” (verse
1)?
I. There are two times when one must humble himself: at the beginning of
the repentance process when one recognizes God’s greatness and the
human being’s smallness; and later after one has done teshuvah and re-
enters the community. (Avraham of Sokechov, Hasidic Rebbe)
Let’s return to the question asked by our last commentator? Why is humility
required at the beginning of the teshuvah process and at the end? What does
Rabbi Avraham mean that it is required when one re-enters the community?
Anyone who has voluntarily started a weight-loss diet or embarked on a new
exercise regimenhas experienced the sense of pride that comes from having
the willpower to resist temptation and discipline the self. There seems to be a
tendency to inflate our sense of self when we advance to a more healthful way
of life. A similar temptation exists when we take a step forward in our spiritual
lives: we find it hard to remain humble. As we become more spiritually aware,
more religiously observant, or more involved in community service, we are
tempted to flaunt our newly discovered level of commitment.
Therefore, the process of re-entering the community—for the leper as for us—
must be done with humility. How do we balance a justified sense of
accomplishment or pride in drawing closer to God with humility? How do we
push forward to deeper levels of spirituality and yet advance with “hyssop in
hand?”
Sometimes a person can be overbearing when they proclaim, “I have the

answer!” How does that apply to religious approaches?
PARASHAT AHAREI MOT
April 26, 2003 - 5763


(16:1-28) The order of worship on Yom Kippur, including the sacrifices and the
practice of the scapegoat.
(16:29-34) Laws and practices of Yom Kippur, including the command to fast.
(17:1-16) The prohibition of slaughtering animals any place except the Altar; the
prohibition of eating blood, or eating any animal which has died (nevelah) or
been torn (trefah).
(18:1-30) A warning to keep away from all idolatrous practices; a list of the
categories of forbidden marriage and other forbidden sexual relationships,
followed by a general warning to avoid abominable behavior and follow God's
ways.
(9:1-24) Concluding the narrative of the ordination of Aaron and his sons as
kohanim. On the eighth and final day of ceremonies, Moses instructs Aaron and
the Israelites in the proper rituals of consecration. Aaron offers a sin-offering for
himself, then Aaron. His sons offer a sin-offering on behalf of the people. Moses
and Aaron bless the people. The Kavod (glory) of God descends upon the
Tabernacle.
Discussion Theme: Assimilation
“The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Speak to the Israelite people and say to
them: I the Lord am your God. You shall not copy the practices of the landof
Egypt where you dwelt, or the land of Canaan to which I am taking you; nor
shall you follow their laws. My rules alone shall you observe, and faithfully follow
My laws: I the Lord am your God.” (Lev. 18:1-4)
Commentary
A. You shall faithfully observe all My laws and all My regulations, lest the
land to which I bring you to settle in spew you out. You shall not follow
the practices of the nation that I am driving out before you. For it is
because they did all these things that I abhorred them. (Lev. 20:22-23)
B. The substance of this mitzvah is that we should not behave like them in
our way of dress and our conduct. As it was taught in the Midrash Sifra
(13:9), “neither shall you walk in their customs”—that you should not
follow their practices in matters that are established for them, such as
theaters, circuses, and amphitheater spectacles. These are all forms of
sport and entertainment that they enact in their mass gatherings, when
they assemble to commit lunatic acts, immorality, and idol-worship... In
the language of the Midrash Sifre (on Deut 12:30 “take head to yourself
that you be not ensnared to follow them”) “ensnared to follow them” —
perhaps you will emulate them and do things like them; and so they will
be a snare for you. Thus you should not say, “Since they go out in velvet,
I will go out in velvet”; “because they go out in helmets, I will go out in a
helmet”—this being one of the pieces of armor of the horsemen. In the
phrasing of the Books of the Prophets, “I will punish…all who clothe
themselves in foreign attire” (Zephaniah 1:8). At the root of the mitzvah
lies the purpose to have us move away from them and despise all their
customs, even the way of dress. (Sefer HaChinuch Mitzvah #262)
C. The deeds of the Canaanites and Egyptians were the most abominable
of all the nations. The apparent implication is that there is no harm in
imitating the foul deeds of nations that are not evil—but this cannot be so.
By singling out these two nations, the Torah teaches Jews never to think
complacently that as long as they do not commit the vulgar and obscene
sins epitomized by Canaan and Egypt, they will not be corrupted by
lesser sins. By focusing on the worst nations, the Torah indicates that sin
is a progressive process: “Ordinary” transgressions inevitably lead to
more serious ones, until the sinner descends to the morass of Canaan
and Egypt. Thus, a Jew must scrupulously avoid even the first step on
the road to corruption. (Moshe Feinstein, Lev. 18:3)
D. Bar Kapparah said: Owing to four factors were the people of Israel
redeemed from the land of Egypt: they did not alter their names; they did
not change their language; they did not spread malicious gossip; they
were free of sexual license (some add: and they did not change their
distinctive form of clothing). (Midrash Mechilta Bo Chapter 5)
E. Bar Kapparah (in contrast to the above statement by him) said: Let the
words of Torah be uttered in the language of Japheth (Greek) in the tents
of Shem. (Genesis Rabbah 36:8)
F. For if creation in time were demonstrated—if only as Plato understands
creation—all the overhasty claims made to us on this point by the
philosophers would become void. In the same way, if the philosophers
would succeed in demonstrating eternity as Aristotle understands it, the
Law as a whole would become void and a shift to other opinions would
take place. (Maimonides, Guide to the Perplexed, 2:26)
G. After the Hellenization of the Near East, Jews frequently adopted Greek
names…W hen the time came for Judah the Maccabee to choose
ambassadors to Rome, who could best represent his Hebraic policies, he
chose two men with the good Jewish names of Jason and Eupolemos…
In the time of the Mishna, most Jews did not speak Hebrew... While
many spoke Aramaic, countless others spoke Greek and no other
language, so much so that even in the Holy Land, rabbis were very often
forced to preach in Greek... In the Temple the coffers used for the
contribution of the annual half-shekel were marked, according to reliable
testimony, not alef, bet, gimmel but alpha, beta, gamma, obviously in
order to make those coffers intelligible to all Temple personnel... Later on,
Arabic replaced Greek and Aramaic in countries under Muslim
domination... Professor Elias Bickerman, the great modern Jewish
Hellenist, has stressed that Alexandrian Jewry was unique in that it alone
of all Hellenistic ethnic groups was able to survive as a living culture, and
that it was able to do so precisely because of its ability to translate its
culture, that is, to undergo a considerable amount of assimilation... A
frank appraisal of the periods of great Jewish creativity will indicate that
not only did a certain amount of assimilation and acculturation not
impede Jewish continuity and creativity, but that in a profound sense this
assimilation or acculturation was even a stimulus to original thinking and
expression and, consequently, a source of renewed vitality. To a
considerable degree, the Jews survived as a vital group and as a
pulsating culture because they changed their names, their language,
their clothing and with them some of their patterns of thought and
expression... In the great challenge of assimilation in the Gaonic period
the leadership followed the same procedure... In defending the traditions
of Judaism, Saadiah appealed to reason and philosophy no less than to
authority and precedent. In doing so, he not only appropriated intellectual
tools from the surrounding Arabic world, but he himself helped to
accelerate the process of assimilation of rabbinic Judaism to the canons
and tastes of the intellectual Arabic society.” (Gerson D. Cohen “The
Blessing of Assimilation”)
Assimilation is typically a negatively charged word in the contemporary Jewish

world. Yet, from Biblical times to modern times, the Jewish community has
always appropriated new forms and ideas for the sake of our own growth and
enrichment. Maimonides, for example, considered Aristotelian philosophy the
most perfect intellectual tradition available to human beings and would have
been prepared to reinterpret the biblical story of creation if Aristotle had
provided a valid demonstration for the eternity of the universe. How do we
properly channel assimilation so that it can be a blessing and not a curse? How
do we balance the highly challenging intellectual power of the outside world with
its enriching power to renewed creativity in the Jewish world?
PARASHAT KEDOSHIM
May 2, 2003 - 5763
Maftir: Numbers 28:9 - 15 (Hertz, p. 695; Etz Hayim, p. 930)
Haftarah: Isaiah 66:1-24; 1:23 (Hertz, p. 944; Etz Hayim, p. 1220)


(19:1-14) Laws of holiness, including the mitzvah of imitating God: "You shall be
holy, for I the Lord your God am holy."
(19:15-22) Miscellaneous mitzvot which express the overall theme of this Torah
portion, including just judicial proceedings, love of one's neighbor, and
respecting elders.
(19:23-37) Other mitzvot, including "orlah", the prohibition of eating a tree's fruit
until its fourth year; prohibitions of pagan and occult practices;the requirements
to respect the aged, treat the stranger fairly, and have honest weights and
measures.
(20:1-27) Miscellaneous prohibitions and a concluding passage on the laws of

holiness which sanctify the Jewish people and make them distinctive among the
nations.
Discussion Theme: A Parental Obligation
“The Lord spoke to Moses , saying: Speak to the whole Israelite community and
say to them: You shall be holy, for I, the Lord your God, am holy. You shall each
revere his mother and his father, and keep My sabbaths: I the Lord am your
God.” (Lev. 19:1-3)
Commentary
A. The problem is why my child should revere me. Unless my child will
sense in my personal existence acts and attitudes that evoke
reverence—the ability to delay satisfactions, to overcome prejudices, to
sense the holy, to strive for the noble—why should he revere me?
(Abraham Joshua Heschel)
B. To the extent that we are observed in action by children, we are all
teachers. We become their models and what they watch forms the
memories from which their own actions are drawn. Role modeling is the
most powerful form of teaching, even as it was when Aristotle crystallized
the idea for his students in ancient Greece: “The soul never thinks
without a picture.” (Author unknown)
C. My children constantly ask me why I’ve done things I didn’t realize I was
doing. They noticed even if I did not. I am astonished to hear them
repeating verbatim entire sentences I’ve uttered days before—including
words I’d rather not have them know. Whenever I don’t give money to a
homeless person on the street they demand an explanation. Every action
or omission conveys some message that our children receive, and that is
all the more true of minute interactions with them, multiplied by the tens
of thousands every year. We either teach Torah or something else at
every moment, “when we lie down and when we rise up.” If we do not
teach Torah enough of the time, the opposite of Torah will prevail in the
world... Home remains, even now when we spend so much time outside
of it, the center of the moral self’s activity and so of its concern... Home is
the daily battleground where theory and practice skirmish, and so the
place where the Torahs’ words are most often heeded, stifled, distorted,
or ignored. Deuteronomy takes a child’s-eye view: unimpressed by books
that he or she cannot read, but impressed for life by what goes on about
the house...” (Arnold Eisen, “Taking Hold of Torah”)
D. The father is bound in respect to his son, to circumcise him, redeem him
if he is a firstborn, teach him Torah, take a wife for him, and teach him a
craft. Some say to teach him to swim too. (Talmud Kiddushin 29a)
E. The parent imparts information and in addition creates a living
environment which embodies educational values. Values are not only
transmitted through formal learning but also through the living and
intimate community of the family... In moments of crisis, one derives the
strength to overcome weakness and temptation not only from one’s
critical reasoning powers, but also from “significant others” who have
impressed themselves upon one’s consciousness. Parents as living
models can instill courage in moments of crisis. (David Hartman,
“Memory and Values”)
Sparks For Reflection/Discussion
The Talmud’s discussion in Tractate Kiddushin of a child’s obligation to parents

begins with parents’ obligations to children. One would have thought that the
obligations of a child towards parents would have taken priority given that the
Torah commands children to revere parents (Lev. 19:1-3) and honor them
(Exodus 20:12 and Deuteronomy 5:16). How do you explain that paradox?
What are the obligations that parents have towards children? To what extent is
the fulfillment of those obligations a precondition for children fulfilling the
obligation to revere and honor their parents?
PARASHAT EMOR
May 10, 2003 - 5763


(21:1-22:15) Prohibitions against the priest (kohen) coming near a dead person.
The marital laws of the priest, and the special holiness of the High Priest
(Kohen Gadol) concerning marriage and bereavement.
(21:16-22:16) Laws concerning a kohen who has been rendered ritually impure.
Who is permitted and forbidden to eat the meat of the sacrifices.
(22:17-33) Defects that disqualify an animal from being sacrificed, and other
related laws. (23:1-34) Laws concerning the holiness of Shabbat, Passover, the
bringing of the first omer offering, the counting of the omer, and the holiday of
Shavuot. Laws concerning Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur, and Sukkot.
(24:1-9) The Ner Tamid (Eternal Light) and the Showbread, twelve loaves left
on display in the Tabernacle.
(24:10-16) An incident of blasphemy and the punishment of the blasphemer:

death by stoning. The law of blasphemy for the future.
(24:17-23) Other laws which have major penalties - murder and causing severe
injury.
Discussion Theme: The Centrality of Shabbat
“The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Speak to the Israelite people and say to
them: These are My fixed times, the fixed times of the Lord, which you shall
proclaim as sacred occasions. On six days work may be done, but on the se
venth day there shall be a Sabbath of complete rest, a sacred occasion. You
shall do no work; it shall be a Sabbath of the Lord throughout your settlements.”
(Lev. 23:1-3)
Commentary
A. Leviticus 23 is a calendar of the annual festivals celebrated in biblical

times... In conformance with biblical tradition, this calendar also includes
the Sabbath, even though it is not, technically speaking, a calendrical
festival….The statement “on six days work may be done” emphasizes
three norms of conduct basic to the observance of the Sabbath: 1) the
prohibition of “melachah,” “work”; 2) the sanctity of the Sabbath; and 3)
the requirement that the Sabbath be observed in all Israelite settlements.
(Baruch Levine, JPS Commentary)
B. ”For six days we ask and receive no answers. On Shabbat we are silent
and suddenly know... Just as you clean and prepare your home for
Shabbat, Shabbat cleans and prepares your soul for wisdom... “You shall
be holy” is the challenge of the weekday. You already are holy is the
secret of Shabbat... God creates us moment to moment. Each instant is
fresh and open to infinite possibility. During the week, we forget this. On
Shabbat we remember.” (Gerer Rebbe, Sefat Emet)
C. Seven days without Shabbat makes one weak. (Anonymous pun)
D. If we have one insight, it is that ritual is the greatest source of strength.
Take the Shabbat, which, for a Jew like me means spending a day when
you cannot work, answer the phone, use a car or watch television. It is
an extreme form of environmental consciousness-raising because you
cannot manipulate the world and instead have the chance to see it as
God’s work of art. (Jonathan Sacks)
E. Shabbat is the main gate to God’s palace. It is a gateless gate. There is
no door to open or close. Nothing is hidden. There is nowhere to go.
Shabbat is about being not becoming. There is nowhere to go on
Shabbat; you are already there. There is no one to be on Shabbat, you
already are. (A Hasidic observation)
F. Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: On the eve of the Sabbath, the Holy
Blessed One, gives to each Jewish person an enlarged soul and at the
close of the Sabbath, God withdraws it, for it says: God ceased from
work and rested; once the Sabbath has ceased, woe that the additional
soul is lost. (Talmud Beitza 27a)
G. On Shabbat the soul is more deserving of being visited with this spirit
than during the week... By the neshamah yeterah is meant an additional
holy spirit (ruach ha-kodesh ha-yeterah), more sublime than any other,
as it is written: “Daniel surpassed the others by virtue of his ruach
yeterah” (Daniel 6:4). For when this spirit is present in the soul, one is
given power to understand and grasp…and on Shabbat, the holy spirit is
over all, and the soul reaches its full potential (kochah)... for the soul’s
power is enlarged in consonance with the seventh day – that is, Yesod,
its source). (Azriel of Gerona)
PARASHAT B'HAR
May 17, 2003 - 5763
Haftarah:Jeremiah 32:6 - 27 (Hertz, p. 539; Etz Hayim, p. 758)


(25:1-7) The land shall be sanctified through the shemittah, the Sabbatical year
of agricultural rest.
(25:8-17) Also, every 50th year is a Jubilee, in which all land and slaves are to
be released. The land returns to its original owners, the slaves are freed. Thus,
no land is sold forever; it is in effect a lease until the next Jubilee, which must
be reckoned in the price.
(25:18-22) Faithful observance of these laws is to be rewarded with ample

crops in the sixth year of the seventh cycle, so that there will be enough food for
two years.
(25:23-38) Even between Jubilee years, families must help impoverished

relatives regain their holdings. An Israelite or resident alien who becomes
impoverished should be loaned money at no interest.
(25:39-55) Laws limiting the power of a slave owner.
(26:1-2) Laws against idolatry, and for the observance of Shabbat.
Discussion Theme: The Spiritual Meaning of Israel
“If your kinsman, being in straits, comes under your authority, and you hold him
as though a resident alien, let him live by your side: do not exact from him
advance or accrued interest, but fear your God. Let him live by your side as
your kinsman. Do not lend him money at advance interest, or give him your food
at accrued interest. I, the Lord, am your God, who brought you out of the landof
Egypt, to give you the landof Canaan, to be your God.” (Lev. 25:35-38)
Commentary
A. “To give you the land of Canaan” as a reward for accepting My

commandments upon yourselves. “To be your God” for whoever resides
in the Land of Israel, I am a God to him; and whoever leaves it is like one
who worships idols. (Rashi on Lev. 25:28)
B. The connection between God and the Jewish people is dependent on
settling the Land of Israel, for in Israel the Holy Presence dwells and it is
the land chosen for prophecy and holiness. (Baruch Epstein, Torah
Temimah on Lev. 25:38)
C. One should always dwell in the Land of Israel and not in the Diaspora, for
anyone that leaves Israel for the Diaspora is as if he worships idols.
(Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Melachim 5:12)
D. Rabbi Elazar ben Shamua and Rabbi Yochanan Ha-Sandlar were on
their way to study Torah outside of the Land of Israel. When they reach
Sidon in Lebanon, they remembered the Land. They began to cry and
they rent their garments and they recited the verse Deut. 11:31-32:
“When you have occupied it and are settled in it, take care to observe all
of the laws...” Said they: Dwelling in Eretz Yisrael is equal to all the other
commandments in the Torah. Whereupon they turned around and went
back to Israel. (Sifre Devarim - paragraph 80)
E. Rabbi Simlai expounded: Why did Moses our teacher yearn to enter the
Land of Israel? Did he want to eat of its fruits or satisfy himself from its
bounty? But thus said Moses: “Many mitzvot were commanded to Israel
which can only be fulfilled in Eretz Yisrael. I wish to enter the land so that
they may all be fulfilled by me.” (Talmud Sota 14a)
F. Whoever moves to Israel for the sake of heaven and conducts himself in
holiness and purity, there is no end to his reward, provided that he can
support himself there. (Meir of Rothenburg, 13th century)
G. Israel is not just a place--it's a story. And it's not just any story--it's our
story, your story, the story of where we've come from, and the story of
where we're going. It's a story that our people have been telling for a long
time, and we feel a need to be part of it… This is the first chance in 2000
years that the Jews have had to see if we can use our tradition to create
a society that is different--and, yes, better--than the places we all left to
come here. If we build a fair and decent country, where people are
treated well and where even people we disagree with are allowed to
express their views, it will be our doing and we'll have the right to be
proud of it. For the first time in centuries, it is Jews who will decide how
to treat poor people, how we should take care of immigrants, what we will
do with criminals, how we should run the schools and educate the next
generation. Here, in this country, it's Jews who will decide how to treat
the Arab minority fairly without losing the Jewish character of this country,
how to use the power of the army in a just way, how to preserve the
memory of what's happened to the Jews without becoming only bitter
and angry... I hope that as you grow older, you'll think you were fortunate
that we brought you here. Fortunate to grow up in a country where kids
are still freer and more carefree than in any other place we know. Lucky
to be in a place where your history--your story--pops up every day and
reminds you who you are. Lucky to be in a place that for thousands of
years and for millions of Jews was merely a dream, but for you is home.
Blessed to be in a place that's new enough that you can make a
difference if you try. And lucky enough to be in a place that's important,
that's even worth fighting for. (Daniel Gordis, If A Place Can Make You
Cry)
H. There is no answer to Auschwitz... To try to answer is to commit a
supreme blasphemy. Israel enables us to bear the agony of Auschwitz
without radical despair, to sense a ray of God’s radiance in the jungles of
history... (Abraham Joshua Heschel)
I. I write all these things as someone who considers himself lucky to live in
Israel—not because I think it is utopia but because Israel is the only
place in which a Jewish person can live with the vital ingredients of the
history and culture and mental life of all the generations of Jews that
have preceded him, and can realize them in the creation of a new and
modern reality... This is what it all comes down to: Not to be foreign. To
belong. To be a partner with equal rights and obligations, a native and an
organic part of this great body... Living means not just defending the
borders, as Israel does with great effectiveness, but also doing
something about what is going on within those borders. (Israeli author
David Grossman in New Yorker, April, 20, 1998)
J. Israel is one of history’s soaring proclamations of mankind’s worth to
itself and to its Creator... Israel began with nothing much more than sand,
hope and belief. And yes, fifty years later, it is indeed the Mideast’s only
democracy, a growing center of science, technology, art, music. Israel is
not a dirge—but a country. (A.M. Rosenthal, NY Times, 4/28/98)
Leviticus 25:38 led Rashi, based on the Talmud Ketubot 110b, to make a
radical statement about the significance of dwelling in Israel. It compares the
one who dwells outside the Land, or someone who leaves the Land, to an
idolater. Perhaps less radical a claim might be: Israelcompletes us spiritually in
a way that living outside the Land does not. The question is: in what way does
Israel contribute to our identity as Jews? What spiritual dimension does it add to
our lives? And when we visit, do we visit as pilgrims or as tourists? Shlomo
Riskin once wrote, “Israelis not Disneyland.” If that is the case, what spiritual
meaning does Israelhave beyond being a tourist site? To what extent do we feel
part of the story of our people when we visit Israel?
PARASHAT B'HUKKOTAI
May 24, 2003 - 5763
Haftarah: Jeremiah 16:19 – 17:14 (Hertz, p. 551; Etz Hayim, p. 762)


(26:3-13) The blessings of peace and prosperity Israel will receive if they follow
the way of Torah and mitzvoth.
(26:14-46) The curses and punishments that Israel will suffer if they violate the
covenant, including defeat in war, famine and exile. It concludes with words of
comfort; if the people of Israel will return to God in repentance, God will forgive
them.
(27:1-13) Laws concerning a vow to donate the valuation of a person and of an

animal to the Temple. The Torah sets forth specific shekel amounts for different
aged males and females. Pledges of animals to the Sanctuary.
(27:14-29) Laws concerning the redemption of houses and fields, the

redemption of the firstborn, and the devotion of property to the Temple.
(27:30-34) Laws concerning the tithe of fruit, sheep and cattle; the conclusion of
the Book of Leviticus.
Discussion Theme: Torah Study
“If you follow My laws and faithfully observe My commandments, I will grant
your rains in their season, so that the earth shall y ield its produce and the trees
of the field their fruit.” (Lev. 26:3-4)
Commentary
A. “If you follow My laws”: One might be able to think that this refers to
fulfillment of the commandments. When it says “and faithfully observe My
commandments,” see that fulfillment of the commandments has been
stated. What, then, do I maintain is meant by “If you follow My laws?”
That you should be laboring in the Torah. (Rashi on Lev. 26:3)
B. “You will go/You will follow” connotes movement from place to place, and
alludes to the process of Torah study, in which one regularly progresses
to increasingly more sophisticated levels of understanding. “Go/follow”
also means “you will walk,” which can be a laborious activity; thus “you
shall be laboring in Torah.” (Gur Aryeh on Lev. 26:3)
C. The words “you should be laboring in the Torah” found in Rashi on
Leviticus 26:3 do not simply mean that one should be constantly
engaged in the study of Torah. Rather, these words refer to how we view
our livelihood and everything we do. The obligation of the Jew is to
ensure that our lives and everything we do is done in the spirit of the
Torah. Our sages illustrate this with the following illustrations: A man
earns his livelihood in the field. He plows and sows, harvests and reaps.
While working in the field, the observant Jew fulfills the mitzvah of
“kilayim” (making sure not to mix seeds), “leket, shich-cha, and peah”
(the obligation to leave part of the field for the poor). In that way he is
laboring in the way of Torah. Likewise, business people who uphold
standards of ethics in the workplace and do not commit even subtle acts
of fraud are also laboring in the way of Torah. Similarly, one can interpret
the statement in Pirkei Avot (6:4), “and in Torah one should labor,” to
mean that all one’s labor in life should be guided by Torah and be
conducted in the spirit of its commandments. (Moshe Elyakim Mikoznitz)
D. The Talmud Kiddushin 30b states that “If you occupy yourselves with the
Torah, you will not be delivered into the hands of the evil inclination, but if
you do not occupy yourselves with Torah, you will be delivered into its
hands.” The only escape route lies through “occupying oneself with the
Torah.” What does that mean? The expression ‘esek... refers to an
activity which forms a person’s main pre-occupation, which wills all his
heart and soul and which he pursues single-mindedly all his waking
hours….This is how we are commanded to pursue the goal of Torah-
knowledge…But what of someone who is engaged in a business or
profession? Is it not inevitable that he must take his mind off the Torah?
The truth is that it is by no means inevitable. As is well known, the tribes
of Yissachar and Zevulun made a pact: Zevulun would go out in ships
and trade, and from their profits they would supply the needs of
Yissachar, who would sit and occupy themselves with the Torah. But in
fact both Zevulun and Yissachar were occupied with the Torah: one in
learning it and one in supporting it. The driving force in their lives was
identical: to magnify and glorify the Torah of Hashem... I have seen with
my own eyes a simple craftsman, a tailor, ignorant of Torah-knowledge,
whose occupation nevertheless was all Torah. All his thoughts, all his
ambitions, were concentrated on one point only: that his sons and sons-
in-law should be great in Torah. He was prepared to live on bread and
water himself so that part of his meager earnings could be set aside for
this holy purpose. All his work was thus nothing but “Torah occupation”:
he was an example of a life devoted to Torah. But it has never been
permitted, God forbid, to the holy people of Israel to occupy themselves
with material pursuits in such a manner that the point of inner aspiration
should be directed toward material ends for their own sake: to “live
comfortably,” “to have a good time,” and so on. (Eliyahu Dessler)
E. The halachot relating to consumer transactions are diametrically
opposed to the skewed societal values that have taken root in the United
States today: A) We consumers are the only ones who count. B) The
bottom line is the only thing that matters. C) We are measured by what
we possess, i.e. we are what we have. The Torah attempts to shake us
loose from such values by insisting that: A) We are not the only ones
who count. Those with whom we engage in commercial transactions, e.g.
merchants, were also created in God’s image and we are responsible for
their economic and emotional well-being. B) What counts is our ethical
behavior while we are achieving the object of our shopping ventures. C)
We are not what we consume. Rather, our essence lies in how we use
our possessions in pursuing the goals set by God, and in treating our
possessions as gifts from Him. By applying spiritual values to this most
materialistic of pursuits, we can counteract the influence of a society that
increasingly values “what” over “who.” (Saul Berman “The Halakhot of
Shopping")
Sparks For Reflection/Discussion
To reap the rewards of our parashah, one must, according to Rashi, engage in
Torah study and observe mitzvot. Yet, the requirement to study Torah is so
encompassing that it would seem that there would be little time for anything
else. Each of the above commentaries sets up a model by which we can both
pursue a livelihood and labor in Torah. Some of the other commentators make a
close reading of Rashi on our verse in Leviticus and observe that he did not use
the language of “studying” Torah but “laboring” in Torah. Rabbi Moshe Elyakim
Mikoznitz interprets that to mean that anyone’s profession can be holy work
because every profession involves specific mitzvot. Rabbi Dessler argues that
as long as one labors in the name of a higher purpose, one is laboring in Torah.
Rabbi Berman argues that one labors in Torah when one engages in worldly
pursuits (even shopping) if one upholds the Torah’s unique values and its
standards of honesty and fair dealing.
Are these models possible with the professional lives that we lead? How can
we, on the one hand, fulfill our tradition’s demand to labor in Torah and, on the
other hand, still pursue a livelihood? Of course, we could attend synagogue
adult education programs – but what else can we do to meet the standard of
“laboring” in Torah?
PARASHAT B'MIDBAR
May 31, 2003 - 5763
Annual Cycle: Num. 1:1 - 4:20 (Hertz, p. 568; Etz Hayim, p. 769)
Triennial Cycle II: Num. 2:1 - 3:13 (Hertz, p. 572; Etz Hayim, p. 774)
Haftarah: I Samuel 20:18 - 42 (Hertz, p. 948; Etz Hayim, p. 1216)


Discussion Theme: Everyone Has Something To Teach
"This is the line of Aaron and Moses at the time that the Lord spoke with Moses
on Mount Sinai. These were the names of Aaron's sons: Nadav, the first-born,
and Avihu, Eleazar and Itamar; those were the names of Aaron's sons, the
anointed priests who were ordained for priesthood." (Numbers 3:1-3)
Commentary
A. A beraita teaches: Rabbi Shmuel bar Nachmani said in the name of

Rabbi Yonatan: Anyone who teaches his friend's child, Scripture regards
that person as if he/she gave birth to that child, as it says in Numbers 3:1
"This is the line of Aaron and Moses" after which the Torah states in
Numbers 3:2 "These were the names of Aaron's sons." This juxtaposition
of verses teaches that Aaron bore them but Moses taught them, and thus
those children are identified as his too. (Sanhedrin 19b)
B. To what extent is one obligated to teach one's child Torah? Rav
Yehudah said in the name of Shmuel: Learn the answer from the
example of Zevulun ben Dan, a student in the days of the rabbis. For his
grandfather taught him Scripture, Mishna, Talmud, the laws and the
legends of our traditionà.This position of Shmuel's is similar to what is
taught in a beraita: Deuteronomy 11:19 states "You shall teach them to
your children," from which we learn that one has an obligation to teach
children. From where do we know that one has an obligation to teach
grandchildren? It is learned from the verse in Deuteronomy 4:9 which
states (But take utmost care and watch yourselves scrupulously, so that
you do not forget the things that you saw with your own eyes and so that
they do not fade from your mind as long as you live.) And make them
known to your children and to your children's children." Rabbi Yehoshua
ben Levi said: Anyone who teaches his grandchild Torah, Scripture
regards that person as if he or she received it on Mount Sinai. (Kiddushin
30a)
C. Anyone who has the obligation to learn Torah has an obligation to teach
it. (Kiddushin 29b)
D. Moshe received the Torah from Sinai and handed it on to Joshua and
Joshua to the Elders and the Elders to the Prophets and the Prophets to
the members of the Great Assembly. They said three things: Be
deliberate in judgment; raise us many disciples; and make a fence
around the Torah. (Avot 1:1)
E. Up to this point, we may suppose that Judaism is a religion for professors
of law and public administrators and for their students. Nothing could be
further from the truth. For the climax of the first saying refers to Torah,
and Torah speaks to all Israel, not only to judges and apprentices. What
the age does, everyone should do-it is not merely an issue of knowledge.
In all, the message of the men of the great assembly sets the stage for
what follows. For it has two points of interest: the life of doing, hence,
judging and teaching; and the life of learning, hence, Torah. (Jacob
Neusner, Torah From our Sages: Commentary on Pirkei Avot 1:1)
F. Our sages say: Rav Yehudah said in the name of Rav: If one withholds a
teaching from his pupil, it is as though he has robbed him of his ancestral
heritage, as it is written in Deuteronomy 33:4, "Moses gave us the Torah,
the inheritance of the congregation of Jacob." (Sanhedrin 91b)
G. Rabbi Yannia was once walking along the road, and saw a man who was
extremely well endowed. Assuming he was an important, scholarly,
influential man, Rabbi Yannai said to him: Would you like to come to our
house? The man replied: Yes. Rabbi Yannai brought him into his home,
and gave him food and drink. And as they were eating and drinking
together, he examined him in his knowledge of Bible, and found out that
he had none; examined his knowledge of Mishnah, and realized that he
had none; his knowledge of legends, and saw that he had none; his
knowledge of Talmud and saw he had none. Rabbi Yannai then told him:
Wash and recite grace. Said the guest: Let Yannai recite grace in his
own home. Seeing that he could not even recite a blessing, Yannai told
him: Can you at least repeat what I say? Said he: Yes. Said Rabbi
Yannai: Instead of grace after meals, say: 'A dog has eaten Yannai's
bread.' Offended, the man stood up, and grabbed Rabbi Yannai, saying:
My inheritance is with you, and you are withholding it from me! Said
Rabbi Yannai with puzzlement: What legacy of yours is there with me.
He replied: Once I passed by a school, and I heard the voices of the little
children saying, 'Moses gave us the Torah, the inheritance of the
congregation of Jacob.' They did not say 'the inheritance of the
congregation of Yannai,' but the 'congregation of Jacob.' (Midrash
Leviticus Rabbah 9:3)
H. The Torah does not belong to Rabbi Yannai and his friends but to the
entire Jewish people. The Torah is not the property of a certain group or
brotherhood. In the Jewish people, there is no sect of "knowers" to whom,
and to whom alone, the Torah was given. Rather, the Torah is for the
entire Jewish peopleàWe are commanded and obligated to make sure
that it will reach the hands of all of its potential inheritors, all those who
belong to "the congregation of Jacob." Our great task is to create a
Jewish mission: not to convert Gentiles, but to proselytize Jews.One who
holds even a tiny portion of this treasure, of this estate of the entire
Jewish people, has no right to keep it for himself, for it belongs to all...
This is a direct, personal calling; it is not the responsibility of lawyers or
of specially committed institutions or organizations. It is the simple,
humane duty incumbent upon me, who sees the princes roaming the
streets naked and barefoot, while I am holding their plundered property in
my hand." (Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz "Heritage and Inheritance")
For discussion:
Each of these sources describes an obligation to teach that goes beyond our
obligation to teach our own children. We have an obligation to be teachers to
our grandchildren, to our friends' children, to all in the "congregation of Jacob."
To paraphrase the Talmud, once we have learned Torah, we have an obligation
to teach that Torah. And we pray to God everyday before the Shema for the
courage and inspiration to "learn and to teach, to preserve and observe, and to
fulfill all the words of the Torah." Yet, while we may see ourselves as teachers
of our children, we are reluctant to be Torah missionaries to our fellow Jews.
What prevents us from taking up Rabbi Steinsaltz's challenge "to create a
Jewish mission: not to convert Gentiles, but to proselytize Jews?"
Rabbi Jerome Epstein, Executive Vice Pres. of the USCJ, echoes this challenge
when he writes: "Our challenge is to establish and train a serious corps of
Conservative Mitzvah Missionaries in our synagogues who will be dedicated to
missionizing Jews and bringing them in touch with higher degrees of Jewish
living." If the very future of Jewish life is at stake, how do we combat the
discomfort we may feel encouraging others to become more committed to
Judaism?
PARASHAT NASO
June 14, 2003 - 5763
Haftarah: Judges 13:2 - 25 (Hertz, p. 602; Etz Hayim, p. 812)


Discussion Theme: Women Studying Torah
"The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Speak to the Israelite people and say to
them: If any man's wife has gone astray and broken faith with him in that a man
has had carnal relations with her unbeknown to her husband, and she keeps
secret the fact that she has defiled herself without being forced, and there is no
witness against her-but a fit of jealousy comes over him and he is wrought up
about the wife who has defiled herself; or if a fit of jealousy comes over one and
he is wrought up about his wife although she has not defiled herself, the man
shall bring his wife to the priestà. The priest shall adjure the woman, saying to
her, 'If no man has lain with you, if you have not gone astray in defilement while
married to your husband, be immune to harm from this water of bitterness that
induces the spell. But if you have gone astray while married to your husband
and have defiled yourself, if a man other than your husband has had carnal
relations with you may the Lord make you a curse and an imprecation among
your people, as the Lord causes your thigh to sag and your belly to distend."
(Numbers 5:11-14, 19-21)
Commentary
Immediately upon drinking the water, her face would turn yellow, her eyes
would bulge, and her veins would swell. And they would say: Take her out of
the Courtyard. If she had merit, it would protect her from the effects of the water.
Some merit protects for one year, some for two, and some for three. From here
Ben Azzai learned: A man is obligated to teach his daughter Torah so that if she
should drink these waters, she would know that merit will protect her. Rabbi
Eliezer says: Anyone who teaches his daughter Torah teaches her lewdness.
Rabbi Joshua says: A woman prefers one measure of lewdness to nine
measures of separation. (Mishnah Sota 3:4)
Phew! Let's see what all this means to us - in our time.
A. Ben Azzai feels that this ability to use Torah to ward off the devastation
of the bitters waters is advantageous. Therefore he declares that every
father should teach his daughter Torah. With that merit, the waters, if
ever tasted, would be rendered null and void. Rabbi Eliezer responds by
saying that Torah should not be used for such a purpose. Firstly, it would
give women carte blanche to commit immoral acts, knowing that their
Torah learning would make them immune to the effects of the bitter
waters. Secondly, Rabbi Eliezer may have been saying that using Torah
for this type of personal insurance policy would be an outrage and an
abuse of the power of Torah. From this perspective, Rabbi Eliezer's
statement is not a sweeping restriction of women's place in Torah study.
The statement rather teaches us the important lesson that while all of us
should continue to strive to learn more and reach higher, any Torah
learning is valueless unless it is used to enhance our personal morality
and foster a closer relationship to God. (Avi Weiss "The Sotah Teaches
Us the True Purpose of Torah Learning")
B. The word Torah ("whoever teaches his daughter Torah") does not here
refer to the entire Torah, written and Oral. The word has very limited
meaning in this Mishnah, referring specifically to the law of Sotah as
outlined in the Mishnah's discussion. The Mishnah might, therefore, be
understood as follows: if a woman drinks the bitter waters and does not
immediately show signs of guilt, she may still be guilty but the signs may
be delayed up to three years in concession to the meritorious deeds
which she has performed in her lifetime. On this basis, Ben Azzai says
that a man should teach his daughter the rules of Sotah so that if she
should drink the bitter waters and not receive immediate punishment she
should not think she has evaded the consequences of her sin. Rather,
she may expect the signs of guilt to appear within three years if she is, in
fact, culpable. Ben Azzai is concerned that a father should impress upon
his daughter the importance of marital fidelity. She should be taught that
she cannot escape punishment for immoral behavior even if that
punishment is sometimes delayed. Opposing this opinion is Rabbi
Eliezer, who holds that a father who teaches the law of this Mishnah to
his daughter is teaching her obscenity. She will come to think that she
can get away with immoral behavior, believing that the meritorious
actions to her credit will defray any punishment. If her father explains that
she may escape punishment for up to three years, it is possible for her to
think she can escape altogether. Drinking the bitter waters might not then
be seen as the terrible experience that it is supposed to be and a woman
might think that she could behave immorally and still avoid retribution.
This interpretation of the Mishnah would preclude the use of Rabbi
Eliezer's statement as a general prohibition to teach Torah to women.
Rather, there is here a specific opinion on a specific case and does not
necessarily indicate that Rabbi Eliezer thought that women were "unfit for
study." (Marc Angel, "Understanding and Misunderstanding Talmudic
Sources")
C. Ben Azzai presents the reason a man is obligated to teach his daughter
Torah. If she studies Torah, she will know that if she commits adultery,
her punishment will be postponed because of the good deeds she has
done in the past. It is hard to imagine a more absurd rationale for
teaching women Torah!à.It is doubtful that he is more forgiving of
adultery. More likely, his statement indicates his repudiation of the entire
Sotah ritual. Not only does merit protect, as already stated, but a woman
should be entrusted with this knowledge in advance in order to alleviate
her fear of what Ben Azzai considers to be an excessively harsh ritual.
Interpreted this way, Ben Azzai's statement is yet another example of the
rabbis' ability to reflect and comment upon women's unfair lot in life. He
seems to say that this ritual is such a travesty of justice that the only way
to rectify matters is to teach women Torah, so that they know that
nothing will happen to them for a long time if they drink the water, even if
guilty. (Judith Hauptman in "Re-reading the Rabbis: A Woman's Voice")
For discussion:
In the last century, a revolution has taken place in terms of women and Torah
study. The prohibition against teaching women Torah has been ignored or
counter-argued. The establishment of seminaries for girls, co-educational day
schools, and Stern College for Women shows that even in the Orthodox
movement radical innovations have taken place. In egalitarian circles, it is taken
for granted that women may and should study Torah. Yet, if one's position is
based in halachah, then that position must reconcile itself with traditional
sources like Rabbi Eliezer's statement in Mishnah Sotah. Which of the
arguments above seems most cogent? Is there another interpretation of the
Mishnah that you would offer?
PARASHAT B'HA-ALOT'CHA
June 21, 2003 - 5763
Haftarah: Zechariah 2:14 - 4:7 (Hertz, p. 620; Etz Hayim, p. 836)


Discussion Theme: Doesn't God Know Our Needs?
"The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Have two silver trumpets made; make them
of hammered work. They shall serve you to summon the community and to set
the divisions in motion. When both are blown in long blasts, the whole
community shall assemble before you at the entrance of Meeting; and if only
one is blown, the chieftains, heads of Israel's contingents, shall assemble
before you. But when you sound short blasts a second time, those encamped
on the south shall move forward. Thus short blasts shall be blown for setting
them in motion, while to convoke the congregation you shall blow long blasts,
not short ones. The trumpets shall be blown by Aaron's sons, the priests; they
shall be for you an institution for all time throughout all ages. When you are at
war in your land against an aggressor who attacks you, you shall sound short
blasts on the trumpets, that you may be remembered before the Lord your God
and be delivered from your enemies. And on your joyous occasions-your fixed
festivals and new moon days-you shall sound the trumpets over your burnt
offerings and your sacrifices of well-being. They shall be a reminder of you
before your God: I, the Lord, am your God." (Numbers 10:1-10)
Commentary
A. Numbers 10:9 states, "When you are at war in your land against an
aggressor who attacks you, you shall sound short blasts on the trumpets,
that you may be remembered before the Lord your God and be delivered
from your enemies." From this verse we learn it is a mitzvah to plead
fervently with God through prayer and teruah (shofar blasts) whenever
the community is faced with great distress... for it is a mitzvah to affirm in
moments of distress our belief that the Holy One listens to prayers and
intervenes to grant aid. (Nachmanides' commentary to Maimonides'
Sefer Hamitzvot, Positive Commandment #5)
B. Judaism, in contradistinction to mystical quietism, which recommended
toleration of pain, wants man to cry out aloud against any kind of pain, to
react indignantly to all kinds of injustice or unfairness. For Judaism held
that the individual who displays indifference to pain and suffering, who
meekly reconciles himself to the ugly, disproportionate and unjust in life,
is not capable of appreciating beauty and goodness. Whoever permits
his legitimate needs to go unsatisfied will never be sympathetic to the
crying needs of others. A human morality based on love and friendship,
on sharing in the travail of others cannot be practiced if the person's own
need-awareness is dull... Therefore, prayer in Judaism, unlike the prayer
of classical mysticism, is bound up with the human needs, wants, drives,
and urges, which make man suffer. Prayer is the doctrine of human
needs. Prayer tells the individual, as well as the community, what his, or
its, genuine needs are, what he should, or should not, petition God
about... God needs neither thanks nor hymns. He wants to hear the
outcry of man, confronted with a ruthless reality. He expects prayer to
rise for a suffering world cognizant of its genuine needs. In short, through
prayer man finds himself. Prayer enlightens man about his needs. It tells
man the story of his hidden hopes and expectations. It teaches him how
to behold the vision and how to strive in order to realize this vision, when
to be satisfied with what one possesses, when to reach out for more. In a
word, man finds his need-awareness, himself, in prayer. Of course, the
very instant he finds himself, he becomes a redeemed being. (Rabbi
Joseph B. Soloveitchik)
C. Prayer is an act of self-purification, a quarantine for the soul. It gives us
the opportunity to be honest, to say what we believe, and to stand for
what we say. However, prayer is no panacea, no substitute for action. It
is, rather, like a beam thrown from a flashlight before us into the
darkness. It is in this light that we grope, stumble, and climb, discover
where we stand, what surrounds us, and the course which we should
choose. Prayer is our attachment to the utmost. Without God in sight, we
are like the scattered rungs of a broken ladder. To pray is to become a
ladder on which thoughts mount to God to join the movement toward Him,
which surges unnoticed, throughout the entire universe. We do not step
out of world when we pray; we merely see the world in a different setting.
The self is not the hub, but the spoke of the revolving wheel. In prayer we
shift the center of living from self-consciousness to self-surrender. God is
the center toward which all forces tend. He is the source, and we are the
flowing of His force, the ebb and flow of His tides. (Rabbi Abraham
Joshua Heschel)
D. In its original form, prayer is not asking God for anything; it is not a
request. It is a cry; an elementary outburst of woe, a spontaneous call in
need; a hurt, a sorrow, given voice. It is the call of human helplessness
directed to God. It is not asking, but coming with one's burden before
God. It is like the child's running to the mother because it hurts. It is not
the bandage that the child seeks instinctively but the nearness of the
mother, to unburden his heart to the one of whose love he is certain. So
the human being brings his sorrow before God: look, O God, what has
been done to me, consider what has become of meà.To pray means to
make God the confidant of one's sorrow and need. The asking and
begging are natural enough, but they are of secondary importance.
Decisive is the pouring out of the heart because one has to; the pouring
out of the heart before God because He is the nearest, because He is
the closest, because He is the natural confidant of the human soul.
(Rabbi Eliezer Berkowitz in "Studies in Torah Judaism")
E. Prayer serves admirably to articulate man's ideals, to make them
conscious of the goals, which they profess, and to strengthen their
determination to attain them. A study of the prayers in any of the great
liturgies will reveal this emphasis upon fundamental ideals of human
conduct and aspiration. The function of prayer, as of ritual generally, is to
make them conscious ideals such as these perpetually in the forefront of
our consciousness. Unlike the multiplication table or a chemical equation
which needs to be learned only once, the ideals of conduct, both
personal and collective, are perpetually threatened by inundating tides of
selfishness, ignorance, and shortsightedness. The exercise of prayer can
keep these ideals vividly alive (Rabbi Robert Gordis in "A Faith for
Moderns")
For discussion:
Nachmanides says that one is only required to pray when one feels compelled
to do so, during some time of need, using one's own words and format. Prayer
for Nachmanides is at its essence a plea for mercy and support during moments
of concern and necessity.
Modern thinkers offer other explanations for petitionary prayer. They help us
answer the question: Why ask God for anything? Surely God is omniscient and
knows everything about us. Why should God have to be informed about our
troubles? How do you answer these questions? Do any of the above
commentators offer you a direction?
PARASHAT SH'LAH L'CHA
June 28, 2003 - 5763
Haftarah: Joshua 2:1 - 24 (Hertz, p. 635; Etz Hayim, p. 856)


Discussion Theme: Forgiveness
"And the Lord said to Moses, 'How long will this people spurn Me, and how long
will they have no faith in Me despite all the signs that I have performed in their
midst? I will strike them with pestilence and disown them, and I will make of you
a nation far more numerous than they.'
But Moses said to the Lord. 'Therefore, I pray, let my Lord's forbearance be
great, as You have declared, saying, 'The Lord, slow to anger and abounding in
kindness; forgiving iniquity and transgression; yet not remitting all punishment,
but visiting the iniquity of fathers upon children, upon the third and fourth
generations.' Pardon, I pray, the iniquity of this people according to Your great
kindness, as You have forgiven this people ever since Egypt.' And the Lord said,
'I pardon, as you have asked.'" (Numbers 14:11-20)
Commentary
A. "To walk in God's ways" (Deuteronomy 11:22). These are the ways of the
Holy One: "gracious and compassionate, patient, abounding in kindness
and faithfulness, assuring love for a thousand generations, forgiving
iniquity, transgression, and sin, and granting pardon." (Exodus 34:6).
This means that just as God is gracious, compassionate, and forgiving,
you too must be gracious, compassionate, and forgiving. (Sifre - Devarim,
Ekev)
B. If you have done your fellow a slight wrong, let it be a serious matter in
your eyes; but if you have done your fellow much good, let it be a trifle in
your eyes. And if your fellow has done you a slight favor, let it be a great
thing in your eyes; if your fellow has done you a great evil, let it be a little
thing in your eyes. (Avot D'Rabbi Natan, Chapter 41)
C. Forgive your neighbor the wrong he has done you, and then your sins
will be pardoned when you pray. Does anyone harbor anger against
another, and expect healing from the Lord? If one has no mercy toward
another like himself, can he then seek pardon for his own sins? (Ben Sira
28:2-4)
D. What if someone hurts you and begs forgiveness, but you just don't want
to give it? Perhaps you think their plea is not fully sincere, you are still
hurting too much, or maybe you just want to inflict a little suffering on the
person who hurt you. But there is a pragmatic reason for readily granting
forgiveness; it is one of those acts for which Jewish tradition promises a
generous and unique reward from God: "Rabba said Whose sin is
forgiven? The sin of him who forgives sins committed against himself or
herself" (Megillah 28a). In other words, if you are merciful to those who
offend you, then God will be merciful to you when you offend Him. I
understand this talmudic teaching as a kind of divine common sense. If
you are unforgiving to those who have offended you, then you forfeit the
right to ask God to treat you with the mercy that you are unwilling to
extend to others. Conversely, if you are compassionate, that entitles you
to a greater portion of God's compassion. (But what if you are too angry
to forgive?) Then you should work on yourself. Try to enter into the other
person's mind and imagine why she might have acted as she did. Did
she deceive you in business? Perhaps she felt under such financial
pressure that she didn't think clearly or fairly. Did he betray a secret?
Maybe he told others out of a desperate need to seem important.
(Joseph Telushkin, "The Book of Jewish Values")
E. It is forbidden for a person to be cruel and not forgive. Rather one should
be easy to pacify and hard to arouse to anger. And when the offending
party comes to ask forgiveness, one should grant forgiveness with a full
heart and in good spirit. And even if the person caused great pain or
repeatedly caused offense, one should not take vengeance. For that is
not becoming of the Jewish people. (Maimonides Laws of Repentance
2:10)
F. "Master of the Universe, I hereby forgive anyone who angered or
antagonized me or who sinned against me-whether against my body, my
property, my honor, or against anything of mine; whether he did so
accidentally, willfully, carelessly, or purposely; whether through speech,
deed, thought, or notion; whether in this transmigration or another
transmigration. May no man be punished because of me. May it be your
will, my God and the God of my forefathers, that I may sin no more.
Whatever sins I have done before You, may You blot out in your
abundant mercies, but not through suffering or bad illnesses. May the
expressions of my mouth and the thoughts of my heart find favor before
You, my Rock and my Redeemer". (Meditation before the bedtime
Shema in Artscroll Prayerbook page 289)
G. The embarrassing secret is that many of us are reluctant to forgive. We
nurture grievances because that makes us feel morally superior.
Withholding forgiveness gives us a sense of power, often power over
someone who otherwise leaves us feeling powerless. The only power we
have over them is the power to remain angry at them. At some level, we
enjoy the role of being the long-suffering aggrieved party. The Book of
Deuteronomy in the Bible makes a distinction between murder, which is
to be punished severely, and accidental manslaughter, which is treated
more leniently. But how do we know if a fatal injury was caused
deliberately or accidentally? Deuteronomy says (Deuteronomy 4:42) if
the person who caused the injury had not been feuding with the victim
over the previous two or three days, we can assume it was an accident.
Commenting on that verse, the sages of the Talmud offer a fascinating
psychological insight. They say that the normal life span of a quarrel is
two or three days. If a person hurts or offends you, you are entitled to be
upset with him for that long. (We are talking about routine arguments and
misunderstandings here, not major offenses.) If the bitter feelings extend
into a fourth day, it is because you are choosing to hold on to them. You
are nursing the grievance, keeping it on artificial life support, instead of
letting it die a natural death. (Harold Kushner in "How Good Do We Have
to Be?)
H. Not to forgive is to be imprisoned by the past, by old grievances that do
not permit life to proceed with new business. Not to forgive is to yield
oneself to another's control. If one does not forgive, then one is
controlled by the other's initiatives, and is locked into a sequence of
action, a response of outrage and revenge. The present is overwhelmed
and devoured by the past. Those who do not forgive are those who are
least capable of changing the circumstances of their lives. In this sense,
forgiveness is a shrewd and practical strategy for a personàto pursue for
forgiveness frees the forgiver. (Time magazine quoted in Dov Peretz
Elkins' "Moments of Transcendence")
Rabbi Harold Schulweiss once said that the purpose of prayer is not the
adulation of God but the imitation of God. It isn't the admiration of God but the
emulation of God's ways. That is concept behind the source from Sifre.
Reconciliation is difficult. It requires heroism and sacrifice. What is it that

prevents us from being more forgiving? Is it the emotional satisfaction in
claiming the role of victim? Is it power? Is it a sense of moral superiority? How
can we let go of that incessant need to judge others? How do we move out of
the role of victim and see beyond their actions to the person who is acting? How
do we give up our ideas of being better than others and see ourselves as
equals and co-learners? How do we make sure that we don't cede all control to
the one that offended us and allow him/her to trap us in the past?
PARASHAT KORAH
July 5, 2003 - 5763
Haftarah: I Samuel 11:14 - 12:22 (Hertz, p. 649; Etz Hayim, p. 876)


Discussion Theme: The Value and Validity of Debate
"And the Lord spoke to Moses and Aaron, saying, 'Stand back from this
community that I may annihilate them in an instant.' And the Lord spoke to
Moses, saying, 'Speak to the community and say: Withdraw from about the
abodes of Korach, Datan, and Aviram.' Moses rose and went to Datan and
Aviram, the elders of Israel following him. He addressed the community, saying,
'Move away from the tents of these wicked men and touch nothing that belongs
to them, let you be wiped out for all their sins.' So they withdrew from about the
abodes of Korach, Datan, and Aviram." (Numbers 16:20, 21, 23-27)
Commentary
A. Any dispute that is for the sake of Heaven will in the end yield results.
And any dispute that is not for the sake of Heaven will in the end not
yield results. What is a dispute for the sake of Heaven? This is the sort of
dispute between Hillel and Shammai. And what is one that is not for the
sake of Heaven? It is the dispute of Korach and all his party. (Avot 5:17)
One day Rabbi Yochanan said to Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish (in a
religious debate): Never con a con-man (a robber is an expert at robbery).
So what good did you ever do for me? When I was a robber, people
called me, 'my lord' (literally, rabbi) and now people call me 'my lord.'
Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said to him: I'll tell you what good I've done for
you. I brought you under the wings of the Presence of God. Rabbi
Yochanan was offended and Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish fell ill. Rabbi
Shimon ben Lakish died and Rabbi Yochanan was very distressed. The
Rabbis said: Who will go and restore Rabbi Yochanan's spirits? Let
Rabbi Eleazar ben Pedat go because his traditions are well honed. He
went and took a seat before him. At every statement that Rabbi
Yochanan made, he commented, 'There is a teaching that supports your
view.' Rabbi Yochanan said to him: Do you think you are like the son of
Lakisha (that you are a good substitute for him)? When I would state
something, Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish would raise questions against my
position on twenty-four grounds, and I would find twenty-four solutions,
and it naturally followed that the tradition was broadened, but you say to
me merely, 'There is a teaching that supports your view.' Don't I know
that what I say is sound? So he went on tearing his clothes and weeping,
'Where are you son of Lakisha, where are you son of Lakisha.' He cried
until his mind turned from him. The Rabbis asked mercy for him and he
died. (Bava Metziah 84a)
B. Torah learning takes place only in community beginning with Talmud
study, the companion in learning, and ascending upward to the life of the
community as a whole. We test our thoughts against the views of others;
otherwise we construct a private world, a self-fabricated prison. Second,
we compare our way of taking things apart and putting them back
together against the ways others do the same work, our ideas against
theirs. In the learning community of Israel, we bear responsibility to one
another for our views, and we owe one another not only a statement of
what we think, but a clear explanation of why we think so. Not only that,
but faced with a disagreement about our view, we bear the obligation to
give the other reasons why we are right and the other is wrong. All
learning involves contention: 'I think,' 'you think,' do not suffice. 'I think
because,' 'you are wrong because' - these define the act of learning. Two
contradictory positions cannot be right-not in the real world of lucid
transactions. Without reason we resort to force, rewriting history by
appeal to who controls the state. To the famous philosophical saying, 'I
think therefore I am,' we may add, 'I argue, therefore I am Israel.' When
you argue you accord to the other a serious hearing for ideas besides
your own, and when you take the other seriously, the other person opens
up and out to you. Argument not only forms an act of respect but a
statement of trust. And community builds upon trust. In the end, we see
that Rabbi Yochanan cannot survive in a world in which people agree
with everything he says. He dies. And so does a community that
abandons the ambition to argue and gives up on the notion that
contending ideas form the nourishment of the social order. And so, all
alone, do all those who insist on their opinion, without reasoned
argument to sustain it. 'Well, anyhow, that's my opinion' forms the
sentence of death. Without reason, holy Israel would perish. (Jacob
Neusner in "Reason and the Learning Community of Israel, the Holy
People")
C. Rabbi Abba said in the name of Shmuel: For three years, Beit Shamai
and Beit Hillel disputed. The former said: the law follows me. The latter
said: the law follows me. A Divine Voice emerged and said: both these
and those are the words of the living God, but the law accords with Beit
Hillel. But given that both are the words of the living God, why did Beit
Hillel merit for the law to go according to them? It is because those in
Beit Hillel were congenial and humble and they would teach their own
position and their opponents' position. And not only that, they would
teach the words of Beit Shamai before teaching their own position.
(Eruvin 13b)
D. What is the significance of Beit Hillel's moral virtues in granting priority to
Hillel's school over Shammai's? Humility is necessary to open them to
hear the opponent's views to reach a better rational clarification of the
truth which is achieved through discussion. Since the humble ones
suspect that they might err, they will double check themselves. Thus
humility becomes a cognitively fruitful trait associated with skeptical self-
criticism. Another possible explanation is that ethics are more important
for social peace. Hillel is a pursuer of peace like Aaron. Deciding in favor
of Beit Hillel is less likely to lead to exclusion of the dissenters and the
creation of sectarianism. Alternatively, Hillel's humility leads the people to
accept their leadership more readily since they are not acting for self-
interest or arrogantly promoting their own greater wisdom. Additionally,
humility opens one to reality, not only to the ideal, so that law can be
modified and society can survive change more easily. Unlike Shammai
who chased away the potential convert, Hillel is considerate of human
needs that halachah must address, not only of the ideal it demands.
Another possibility is that humility towards God means that the decisions
will be less influenced by one's desire to be right and more by the desire
to please God which is, after all, the purpose of determining the law.
Finally, humility is a religious value that may even be more important
than the fidelity to the logic of the text. After all, it is service of God and
realizing a religious way of life-not merely obeying the rules-that is the
goal of Judaism. (Noam Zion based on Avi Sagi's "Eilu v'Eilu")
As we see from the source in Pirkei Avot, Korach's attack on Moses is

considered the paradigmatic dispute "not for the sake of Heaven." The latter
source, however, does not provide a reason. The sources that follow the one
from Avot may suggest some possible answers. Certainly it was not simply that
Korach engaged in dispute, for debate is looked upon favorably in our tradition.
Rabbi Yochanan, for example, eventually died from despair because he lacked
a "chevruta," a partner, to debate him. The Talmud in Kiddushin 30b states that
even a parent and child or a teacher and student should debate as vigorously
as enemies; in the end, if the debate is over a matter of substance, they will
emerge with great affection for one another.
Based on the sources above, including Neusner who states that debate is a
mechanism for creating community and Noam Zion who provides reasons why
Hillel's position was accepted, what qualities did Korach lack or what rules of
debate did he ignore? What made his dispute "not for the sake of Heaven?"
PARASHAT HUKKAT-BALAK
July 12, 2003 - 5763
Haftarah: Micah 5:6 - 6:8 (Hertz, p. 682; Etz Hayim, p. 914)


Discussion Theme: Donkeys Talking?
Then the Lord opened the donkey's mouth, and she said to Bilam, 'What have I
done to you that you have beaten me these three times?' Bilam said to the
donkey, 'You have made a mockery of me! If I had a sword with me, I'd kill you.'
The donkey said to Bilam, 'Look, I am the donkey that you have been riding all
along until this day! Have I been in the habit of doing thus to you?' And he
answered, 'No.'" (Numbers 22:28-30)
Commentary
A. Now the serpent was the shrewdest of all the wild beasts that the Lord
God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say: You shall not
eat of any tree of the garden?" (Genesis 3:1) The serpent is the evil
prompter. (Bava Batra 16a)
B. Although he is small in appearance, he does much damage. The Torah
describes things figuratively by various names which are similar to them,
just as a king is called 'lion' as it says 'A lion is gone up from his thicket'
(Jeremiah 4:7), or enemies who do harm, 'serpents, adders,' as it says,
'For behold I will send serpents, adders, among you which will not be
charmed' (Jeremiah 8:17). (Just as a lion is used by the prophet to
represent Nebuchadnezzar and adders to represent the enemies of
Israel, so the serpent represents Satan and the evil inclination which is
within the human being leading him astray.) In this manner the evil
inclination which tempts man is called 'serpent,' for he is similar to a
serpent, which is an animal with limited utility but great potential to do
harm though small in appearance. Our Sages have told us that Samael
(the accuser; Angel of Death) rode on the serpent meaning that the
power of lust, bringing to sin, accomplishes its end through the medium
of the power of imagination which brings to man visions of physical,
material pleasures, which lead him astray from the way of perfection
intended by God. (Sforno on Genesis 3:1)
C. Rav Saadia Gaon stated, now that it has become clear to us, that the
ability to speak and think was given over only to human beings. Thus, we
must say that the serpent and the donkey did not, in fact, speak. Rather,
an angel spoke for them. But it seems to me that we should take the
words of the Torah literally. Namely, the serpent did speak, and it walked
upright. And the One that gave human beings the ability to think, gave
the serpent and donkey that power too. And the verse (3:1) attests to this
in that it states that the serpent was "arum" (shrewdest) of all the wild
beasts, a comparison made relative to the animals not the humans. And
the word "arum" means wise. (Ibn Ezra on Genesis 3:1)
D. The truth is that the donkey did speak. And if you understand the mystery
of the angels that appeared to Abraham as people and the mystery of the
angels who appeared to Jacob as people, then you will understand the
miracle of the donkey, namely, that God can cause a human being to see
angels as people and can cause other supernatural phenomena such as
a talking donkey. (Ibn Ezra on Numbers 22:28)
E. God gave the donkey the power to speak just as we pray, "May the Lord
open my lips and mouth to utter praises" (Psalms 51:17). All of this was
meant to arouse Bilam to do teshuva, to repent, and be reminded that
"from the Lord comes the utterances of the tongue" (Proverbs 16:1),
even to one who is unprepared. How much more so that God can
remove this power according to His will from one who is prepared. Now
all this happened so that a man such as he not be destroyed (i.e. God
was concerned for Bilam's welfare and did not want him to bring calamity
on himself; apparently, Bilam was a man of great spiritual powers which
were sadly channeled improperly, but nonetheless, it would have been
tragic for such a person to be destroyed despite the fact that such
potential was squandered). (Sforno on Numbers 22:28)
F. Ten things were created on the eve of the Sabbath at twilight, and these
are they: the mouth of the earth, the mouth of the well, the mouth of the
donkey. (Avot 5:6)
G. Since the law of nature was established by God, it was God's wish that it
not be interfered with under any circumstance. But since God foresaw
certain emergencies in the history of His people that would require
special intervention in the normal operation of nature, God made
provisions for them at the final completion of creation before the nightfall,
which ushered in the first Sabbath. (Maimonides on Avot 5:6)
H. It is, however, possible that God who gave the donkey the power of
speech, also bestowed upon her an additional power of vision, so that
she saw the likeness of a human being, although Scripture does not
mention it. Thus God opened the eyes of the donkey and she indeed saw
the angel, just as Scripture mentions later in regard to her master, "And
the Eternal opened the eyes of Bilam, and he saw the angel of the
Eternal" (28:31). For the whole matter of the donkey was a great miracle,
being a new creation like those that were created at twilight on the eve of
the first Sabbath, and it is not merely called "an opening of eyes."
However, our Rabbis have only mentioned among the miracles the
opening of the mouth of the donkey although the whole matter-and
especially her seeing the angel-was miraculous in nature. The reason for
this miracle was to show Bilam "Who has made man's mouth or who
makes a man mute" (Exodus 4:11), and since God can make the mute
speak, how much more so can God can make the mute speak, how
much more so can God make mute at His will the mouth of tho se who
can speak, and can also put words into their mouths, so that they speak
in accordance with His will, for everything is in His power. It was thus a
warning to Bilam not to follow enchantments and soothsaying, and not to
curse Israel thereby, because he was primarily an enchanter and
soothsayer.(Nachmanides on Numbers 22:28)
I. The donkey talking was an event that he saw in a dream as if God had
opened the mouth of the donkey to cause it to speak. (Levi ben Gershon
(Ralbag) on Numbers 22:28)
How do we deal with talking donkeys and serpents in the Bible? Assuming the
constancy of nature that the flowers bloom today as they bloomed thousands of
years ago, and that animals today walk and communicate the way they did
thousands of years ago, why do we not have talking snakes and donkeys
today? Which of the above explanations sits best with you? Did all of this
happen in a dream? Was there a Divine ventriloquist at work? Are these stories
allegories?
PARASHAT PINHAS
July 19, 2003 - 5763
Haftarah: Jeremiah 1:1 - 2:23 (Hertz, p. 710; Etz Hayim, p. 968)


Discussion Theme: Q & A - An Age-Old Jewish Technique
The daughters of Tzelophechad came forward. They stood before Moses,

Eleazar the priest, the chieftains, and the whole assembly, at the entrance of
the Tent of Meeting, and they said, 'Our father died in the wilderness. He was
not one of the faction, Korach's faction, which banded together against the Lord,
but died for his own sin; and he has left no sons. Let not our father's name be
lost to his clan just because he had no son! Give us a holding among our
father's kinsmen!' Moses brought the case before the Lord. And the Lord said to
Moses, 'The plea of Tzelophechad's daughters is just; you should give them a
hereditary holding among their father's kinsmen; transfer their father's share to
them. (Numbers 27:1-7)
Commentary
A. By his example, Moses taught the heads of the Sanhedrin of Israel that
were destined to arise after him, that they should not be embarrassed to
ask for assistance in cases too difficult for them. For even Moses, who
was Master of Israel, had to say, 'I have not understood.' Therefore
Moses brought their cases before the Lord. (Targum Yonatan)
B. This is one of the four legal cases that came up before Moses our master.
In two of them Moses was quick to act and in two of them Moses was
tardy. In each case Moses said: I have not heard the like. He was quick
to act in the case of the unclean person who could not keep the passover
at is appointed time (Numbers 9:6-13) and in the case of the daughters
of Tselophechad (27:1-11; 36:1-12) because civil cases were involved.
But in the case of the wood gatherer who profaned the Sabbath willfully
and in the case of the blasphemer who pronounced the holy Name
blasphemously (Leviticus 24:10-23), Moses was tardy because these
were capital cases. This was in order to teach the judges who would
succeed Moses that they should be quick in civil cases and tardy in
capital cases, so that they would not be in a hurry to put to death even
one condemned to death. (Targum Neofiti)
C. But there are some men who were unclean by reason of a corpse and
could not offer the passover sacrifice on that day. Appearing that same
day before Moses and Aaron, those men said to them, "Unclean though
we are by reason of a corpse, why must we be debarred from presenting
the Lord's offering at its set time with the rest of the Israelites?" Moses
said to them, "Stand by, and let me hear what instructions the Lord gives
about you." And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Speak to the Israelite
people, saying: When any of you or of your posterity who are defiled by a
corpse or are on a long journey would offer a passover sacrifice to the
Lord, they shall offer it in the second month, on the fourteenth day of the
month, at twilight. They shall eat it with unleavened bread and bitter
herbs, and they shall not leave any of it over until morning. (Numbers
9:6-12)
D. There came out among the Israelites one whose mother was Israelite
and whose father was Egyptian. And a fight broke out in the camp
between that half-Israelite and a certain Israelite. The son of the Israelite
woman pronounced the Name in blasphemy, and he was brought to
Mosesàand he was placed in custody until the decision of the Lord
should be made clear to them. (Numbers 24:10-12)
E. There were three other things equally difficult that Moses could
comprehend only after God made him to see them plainly. They were the
compounding the holy anointing oil, the construction of the candlestick in
the Tabernacle, and the animals the flesh of which is permitted or
prohibited. Also the determination of the new moon was the subject of a
special Divine teaching. (Louis Ginsberg in Legends of the Jews)
F. In the Mishnah, the four "questions" are attributed to the parent who
teaches the son: "Look how different this night is" The four questions
become four curious behaviors that ought to arouse wonder, for
amazement is the beginning of the search for knowledge. The parent
must know how to "open up" the youngest child who doesn't even know
how to forumlate questions. For example, "Listen dear, let's look around
and see what surprises are planned for us during tonight's meal."
Hopefully, the child will not only respond with that "Aha" experience of
eyes opened wide, but also add his own comments to the parent's four.
Under no circumstances should this be merely a ritualized recitation of
questions by the parent or the young child. In fact, the "four questions"
are not obligatory at all. As a medieval Spanish rabbi explained
(Haggadah, Meam Loez, page 234-236 Hebrew Edition): "It is a mitzvah
to tell the story of the exodus from Egypt by arousing one's mind and
heart and drawing the things out of us. All present at the seder should
ask their parent or anyone sitting beside them at the table to explain the
reason for each and every thing. Even if one is alone at home and knows
all the reasons, one should conduct a discussion with oneself, asking
and answering one's own questions." (Noam Zion and David Dishon, A
Different Night, Leader's Guide)
G. Why were the Rabbis so insistent that the Exodus story open with
spontaneous questions? First of all, one can view this as an educational
device. Teachers know that if they can just get their students to pay
attention, get their minds working on something they find interesting, then
teachers have gone a long way towards creating an openness to learning
new things. The R abbis wanted to remind the leaders of the seder not
just to focus on the story-but first to make sure to have an active,
attentive audience. On a deeper level, the Rabbis may have reflected
that questioning is an essential part of the freedom celebrated on the
seder night. The whole Talmudic literature is in the form of questioning
and dialogue-not the meek questioning of inferior to superior but the
give-and-take interaction of adamant rivals pitted against one another,
and sometimes even against God! (see Bava Metzia 59b). An essential
characteristic of free people is that they notice the world around them,
make distinctions and search for meaningful patterns. They want
understanding, not inscrutability. For a slave mentality, nothing is
"different" - all tasks are part of the same meaningless arbitrariness.
There is no point in asking if no one answers, no place for questions in a
world where the master's arbitrary orders are the ultimate justification for
the way things are. In beginning the seder with genuine (not rote)
questions, the Rabbis show that we not only tell the story of freedom, but
we act like free people. (Noam Zion and David Dishon, A Different Night)
H. My years in the rabinnate taught me to seek ways of talking about
Judaism that would be meaningful to Jews of various backgrounds.
Although I had been an Orthodox rabbi in the Bronx and in Montreal for
seventeen years, my congregations were made up of people of many
different backgrounds and levels of observance and belief. During my
rabbinnic training at Yeshivah University, Iwas taught to answer halakhic
questions. The details of the laws of kashrut and similar mitzvot were
studied with rigor and devotion. Upon entering the rabbinate, I was
anxious to answer the great halakhic questions of the Jewish community.
I waited with anticipation, but to my dismay there were no questioners.
Finally I realized that the role of the rabbi was not so much to provide
answers as to create questions. (David Hartman, A Heart of Many
Rooms)
I. The Talmud, the greatest of all rabbinic works, is distinguished, above all,
by its commitment to questions and challenges. The Mishnah gives the
law; the Talmud asks, "why?" "For what reason?" "Maybe there's an
alternative?" These questions challenge even God and God's law (the
Torah). We are a people of questions. By continuing to ask questions, we
guarantee our freedom. (David Kraemer, JTSA)
Why is the question so sacred in Judaism? Abraham Joshua Heschel once

explained that the role of religious educators is to be the midwife to the birth of a
question, for Judaism a response to life's deepest questions.
How do we foster an environment that values the question, provokes curiosity,

legitimates debate, or validates challenging even our most sacred beliefs? How
do we do that in a respectful way? To what extent should there be religious
"authority" in our modern faith? Is everything open to question? What isn't?
PARASHAT MATTOT-MAS'EI
July 26, 2003 - 5763
Haftarah: Jeremiah 2:4-38; Jer. 3:4; Jer. 4:1-2 (Hertz, p. 725)


Discussion Theme: Dwelling in Israel
"The Reubenites and the Gadites owned cattle in very great numbers. Noting
that the lands of Jazer and Gilead were a region suitable for cattle, the Gadites
and the Reubenites came to Moses, Eleazar the priest, and the chieftains of the
community, and said, 'the land that the Lord has conquered for the community
of Israel is cattle country, and your servants have cattle. It would be a favor to
us,' they continued, 'if this land were given to your servants as a holding; do not
move us across the Jordan.'" (Numbers 32:1-5)
Commentary
A. In the steppes of Moab, at the Jordan near Jericho, the Lord spoke to
Moses, saying: Speak to the Israelite people and say to them: When you
cross the Jordan into the land of Canaan, you shall dispossess all the
inhabitants of the land. You shall apportion the land among yourselves
by lot, clan by clan: with larger groups increase the share, with smaller
groups reduce the share. Wherever the lot falls for anyone, that shall be
his. You shall have your portions according to your ancestral tribes.
(Numbers 33:50-54) In my opinion Numbers 33:50-54 constitute a
positive commandment of the Torah wherein God commanded them to
settle in the land and inherit it; for God gave it to them; and they should
not reject the heritage of the Lord. (Nachmanides on Numbers 33:53)
B. Rabbi Simlai expounded: Why did Moses our teacher yearn to enter the
land of Israel? Did he want to eat of its fruits or satisfy himself from its
bounty? But thus said Moses: 'Many mitzvot were commanded to Israel
that can only be fulfilled in Eretz Yisrael. I wish to enter the land so that
they may all be fulfilled by me.' (Sotah 14a)
C. Both husbands and wives may force their spouses to make aliyah.
(Mishnah Ketubot 13:11)
D. It is forbidden to leave Eretz Yisrael unless two 'seah' of wheat sell for
one 'selah.' Rabbi Shimon said, if one can find any wheat at all, even if
one 'se'ah' costs a 'selah,' he should not emigrate. (Bava Batra 91a)
E. Whoever moves to Israel for the sake of heaven and conducts himself in
holiness and purity, there is no end to his reward, provided that he can
support himself there. (Meir of Rothenburg, Germany, 1215-1293)
F. Since there is danger involved and since it is hard to earn a living there,
every person should judge his physical and monetary capabilities if he
will be able to fear Heaven and observe mitzvot in Israel. (Israel Isserlein,
Austria, 1390-1460)
G. Rabbi Moses Feinstein, Iggrot Mosheh, Even ha-Ezer, I (102),
distinguishes between two distinct categories of positive commandments.
There are precepts whose performance is mandatory, e.g., circumcision,
the donning of tefillin, etc., and others which are not mandated as
obligatory responsibilities but nevertheless, when indeed performed,
constitute the fulfillment of a commandment. Rabbi Feinstein maintains
that even according to Nachmanides residence in Eretz Yisrael is not
obligatory because this commandment is not a mandatory one.
According to this interpretation, Nachmanides' position is that the act of
dwelling in Israel constitutes voluntary fulfillment of a commandment
rather than the discharge of an obligation. Dissenting sharply, Rabbi
Ovadia Yosef asserts that the commandment constitutes a mandatory
obligation, and that even in our own day there exists "a definite obligation
upon all who fear the word of God and His commandments to ascend to
the Land of Israel." (J. David Bleich, Contemporary Halakhic Problems)
There are various approaches including those who say it is a mitzvah to
make aliyah, those who say living in Israel merely enables one to
observe more mitzvot, those who discourage emigration, those who say
that one must be pragmatic and determine if one can make a living and
observe mitzvot, and even those who say (Rabbi Judah in Ketubot 110b-
111a) that if one leaves Babylonia to make aliyah it is a sin. But the
thrust of Numbers 33:53 as well as of the entire Bible and Talmud is that
all Jews are supposed to live in Eretz Yisrael. That is what God
repeatedly promised our ancestors, that is why God redeemed us from
Egypt, and that is where a large percentage of the mitzvot need to be
observed. (David Golinkin, Dean of the Israeli Conservative Rabbinical
School)
H. This concerns the intelligent young man, Reb Mordecai, the Ashkenazi
who came from Germany, having left his father and mother and his
birthplace, to settle in the Holy Land, the glory of Israel, in Safed. Now he
cannot get settled for he does not find peace alone, and he cannot find a
wife. Therefore, his health is impaired. He asks us whether he is
permitted by Jewish law to leave Palestine; for he fears he might fall into
sin by remaining unmarried. Now, with the mercy of God, I will answer.
Maimonides states that a man is permitted to leave Palestine to marry, to

study Torah, and to avoid famine in the land. But the journey must only
be temporary. When the permitted purposes are achieved or their
realization attempted to the utmost of one's ability, the traveler must
return to Palestine. Now this Mordecai, since he is going to marry, is of
course permitted to go. Yet this is permitted so far as it seems from the
above sources that this is conditional, namely, he must return after he
marries unless his wife's parents make the premarriage condition with
him that he shall not take her out of her native land. Then he is naturally
free of the obligation to return because he could not find a wife unless he
accepted the condition of remaining there. In fact, after going more
deeply into the matter, it seems just ified to say that the opinion of the
tosefot and Maimonides, that an emigrant must return, applies only to
one whose dwelling place and that of his fathers has been in Palestine.
Such a person is forbidden to leave, excepting only to marry; and hemust
then return. But this man, Mordecai, who came from a distant land to the
Holy Land, had intended to find here a wife and a home.
Now, since he could not get settled here, then his very coming to
Palestine was based upon a condition that was not fulfilled. Indeed, the
intention of Maimonides was to defend those who dwell outside of
Palestine. Our teacher did not think it right to say that whoever dwells
outside of Palestine was as if he has no God (as the Talmud says). That
is why he wrote that the meaning of the Talmud, which says that a man
should always live in Palestine and not outside of it, does not refer to
those whose ancestors for generations dwelt outside, after being exiled
from the Holy Land at God's decree. Evidently, then says Maimonides,
when the Talmud says that no one shall dwell outside Palestine, it means
that no one shall leave Palestine to dwell outside. That is why the
Talmud specifically says, "whoever leaves Palestine, it is as if he
worships idols." My general conclusion is that this Reb Mordecai is
permitted to go outside of Palestine to marry. (Responsum of Rabbi Yom
Tov Zahalon, rabbi of Safed, born 1557)
The above sources present a wide range of opinions on whether or not making
aliyah is obligatory. Some Jewish movements have put aliyah at the top of their
religious agenda and encourage American Jews, for example, to move to Israel.
Other movements are more ambivalent. What should the Conservative
Movement's stance be? How imperative should it be in our principles? In our
practice as Jews? How should we relate to the prayers that we recite regularly
in our Services that speak of our "return to Israel"?
PARASHAT D'VARIM
August 2, 2003 - 5763
Annual Cycle: Deuteronomy 1:1-3:22 (Hertz, p. 735; Etz Hayim, p. 980)

Triennial Cycle 2: Deuteronomy 2:2-30 (Hertz, p. 743; Etz Hayim, p. 990)
Haftarah: Isaiah 1:1-27 (Hertz, p. 750; Etz Hayim, p. 999)


Discussion Theme: Strength and Heroism
Then the Lord said to me: You have been skirting this hill country long enough;
now turn north. And charge the people as follows: You will be passing through
the territory of your kinsmen, the descendants of Esau, who live in Seir. Though
they will be afraid of you, be very careful not to provoke them. For I will not give
you of their land so much as a foot can tread on; I have given the hill country of
Seir as a possession to Esau. What food you eat you shall obtain from them for
money; even the water you drink you shall procure from them for money.
Indeed, the Lord your God has blessed you in all your undertakings. He has
watched over your wanderings through this great wilderness; the Lord your God
has been with you these past forty years: you have lacked nothing. We then
moved on, away from our kinsmen, the descendants of Esau, who live in Seir,
away from the road of the Arabah, away from Elath and Ezion-geber; and we
marched on in the direction of the wilderness of Moab. And the Lord said to me:
Do not harass the Moabites or provoke them to war. For I will not give you any
of their land as a possession; I have assigned Ar as a possession to the
descendants of Lot. When all the warriors among the people died off, the Lord
spoke to me saying: You are now passing through the territory of Moab, through
Ar. You will then be close to the Ammonites; do not harass them or start a fight
with them. For I will not give any part of the land of the Ammonites to you as a
possession; I have assigned it as a possession to the descendants of Lot.
(Deut. 2:2-9, 16-19)
Commentary
A. "Though they will be afraid of you, be very careful." In what way should
they be careful? Do not provoke them. (Rashi on 2:4-5)
B. The new generation, full of strength and vigor had to learn to practice
self-control and curb their own aggressiveness aroused by the very fear
displayed by the weaker neighbor. No advantage should be taken, but
"What food you eat you shall obtain from them for money; even the water
you drink you shall procure from them for money." (Nechama Leibowitz,
Studies in D'varim, Parashat D'varim)
C. Ben Zoma says: Who is mighty? He who conquers one's passions, as it
is said in Proverbs 16:32: One who is slow to anger is better than the
mighty, and one who rules over one's spirit is better than one who
conquers a city. (Pirkei Avot 4:1)
D. The mighty individual is the one who conquers one's passions; not the
one who is blessed with a good physique, rather one who is able to
overcome whatever instinctual drives might incline the individual towards
undesirable forms of behavior. Whether it be wisdom, might, wealth, or
one's honored station in life, all of these are active processes; one must
continuously learn, one must continuously fight against one's own inner
inclinations, one must continually have the attitude of satisfaction with
what one has, and one must continually bestow honor on others. In this
process, we gain fulfillment of the values of wisdom, might, wealth, and
honor. (Reuven Bulka in Chapters of the Sages: A Psychological
Commentary on Pirkey Avoth)
E. Being courageous in Judaism does not mean acting Rambo-like in
destroying enemies from without. Rather, the person who is able to
destroy an inner enemy and overcome temptation is the true Jewish
hero. This is the meaning of the Mishnah (Avot 4:1) that defines a
courageous person as he who can overcome his desires. These were
the same words that were used by the rabbis (Tamid 32a) to Alexander
the Great, arguably the most courageous man alive at that time (in non-
Jewish terms). They told him that true courage is shown by overcoming
one's inner desires; by defeating oneself. The Talmud (Megillah 16b)
proves this idea from a verse (Isaiah 28:6) demonstrating that true
strength actually means self-control. (Nachum Amsel, The Encyclopedia
of Moral and Ethical Issues)
F. The greatest struggle in your life is not with society; it is with yourself.
This idea is not taught in America today. We are taught that we are
victims of a society that is sexist, racist, anti-Semitic, anti-Asian, anti-
Hispanic, anti-woman, anti-old, anti-young-anti- just about everyone. The
temptation is therefore overwhelming to see your problems and
challenges in life as being with America and not with yourself. Please
understand: In this society, my greatest challenge is Dennis; your
greatest challenge is you. And if you can make you better, you will make
this society better. Please don't buy the rhetoric that the external is the
problem. In a free and affluent country like this, we are the problem.
(Dennis Prager, The Prager Perspective, May 1, 1997)
G. Whereas the classical hero advances in battle to defeat his enemy, the
Biblical hero retreats from conflict with his fellow man. Whereas the
classical hero battles monsters and dragons, the biblical hero battles his
own inner demons. Whereas the classical hero seeks to become "a god,"
the biblical hero teaches all men to know the one true G-d. The Knights
of the Round Table are born for adventure. But the Biblical knight of faith
is born for service. And whereas the classical hero is wrapped in
splendor draped in glory, the biblical hero is naked and innocent before
G-d. Religion replaced honor with humility, hatred with harmony, mortal
conquest with moral courage, and a passion for publicity with a desire for
the divine countenance. In the process a new definition of heroism was
born. Our ancient Rabbis proclaimed, "Who is a hero? He who conquers
his own selfish inclination." (Shmuely Boteach, Oxford Preacher of the
Year)
God demands restraint of the Israelites three times as they travel towards the
Promised Land. They are told to refrain from attacking the descendants of
Esau, the Moabites, and the Ammonites. In other words, prior to waging
waragainst the seven Canaanite nations, the Israelites were commanded to
fight their internal inclination to attack certain other nations. Was this type of
heroic restraint a precondition to inheriting the Land? How does Jewish law help
cultivate this type of heroism?
PARASHAT VA'ET'HANAN
August 9, 2003 - 5763

Triennial Cycle 2: Deuteronomy 12:29-14:29 (Hertz, p. 765; Etz Hayim, p. 1015)
Haftarah: Isaiah 54:11-55:5 (Hertz, p. 776; Etz Hayim, p. 1032)


Discussion Theme: Commandedness
Honor your father and your mother, as the Lord your God commanded you, that
you may long endure, and that you may fare well, in the land that the Lord your
God is assigning to you. (Deut. 5:16)
Commentary
A. Rabbi Eliezer was asked: How far does the honor of parents extend?
Said he: Go forth and see what a certain non-Jew, Dama, son of Netinah
by name, did in Ashkelon. The Sages sought jewels for the ephod
(breastplate for the high priest) at a profit of six hundred thousand golden
dinari - but as the key was lying under his father's pillow, he did not
trouble him. The following year the Holy Blessed One gave him his
reward: A red heifer was born to him in his herd. When the Sages of
Israel went to him to buy it he said to them: I know you, that even if I
asked you for all the money in the world you would pay me, but I ask you
only the money I lost through my father's honor. And Rabbi Chanina said:
If this is the reward given to someone who is not commanded and acts,
then imagine how much greater the reward would be for someone who
IS commanded and acts. For Rabbi Chanina said: Greater is the one
who is commanded and acts than the one who is not commanded and
acts. (Kiddushin 31a)
B. It seems that the reason that the one who is commanded and acts is
preferable is because he worries and is concerned more lest he
transgress the mitzvah versus the one who is not commanded and acts
who has "bread in his basket," i.e. if he wants, he does not have to fulfill
the mitzvah. (Tosafot Kiddushin 31a on "Greater is the one who is
commanded and acts")
C. He is greater because he is worried to fulfill the commandment of his
creator. (Tosafot Avodah Zara 3a on "Greater is the one who is
commanded and acts")
D. Many reasons are given explaining why the one who acts out of a sense
of command is greater. Tosafot in Kiddushin explains that the
commanded person, since he knows that he is obligated to act, his
inclination rebels and tries to get him not to do the commandment. On
the other hand, the one who is not commanded, since he can take a
pass on doing the act at any time, he does not have to fight his rebellious
nature. And there are those who wrote that since God did not command
the latter to do the act, what pleasure does God derive from the person
doing something he was not commanded to do? And in the name of the
Ramban, it was written that the mitzvot are not commanded for God's
benefit but for the human being's benefit and need to give people the
opportunity to draw close to God through obedience to God's
commandments. And for that reason, the one who is not commanded
does nothing special. (Adin Steinsaltz Iyyunim Tractate Kiddushin 31a on
"Greater is the one who is commanded and acts")
E. We might find this logic perplexing, for we have been taught to believe
that what is given freely is more desirable, more heartfelt, than what is
given out of obligation or imperative. The problem with that logic, and the
reason the rabbis came down on the side of obligation, was best
expressed in the famous opening scene of "Fiddler on the Roof." After
begging for alms and getting less than the week before, the petitioner
sighs, "Because he had a bad week, I should suffer?" We can count on
people who feel obligated to act on behalf of others, but people who do it
out of the goodness of their hearts may not be there when doing good is
inconvenient or gets in the way of competing desires. Aristotle
commented much of what we call good character is rooted in habit and
imposition. We cannot wait for people to be good; we must mandate it.
"Virtue comes about, not by a process of nature, but by habituation."
Being Jewish, doing Jewish, means behaving out of obligation, the
obligation one's fellow, even when it is difficult to do. (Author Unknown)
F. While motives and character assessment interest many secular moral
thinkers, the true test of moral character is its reliability. And here, the
religious character is often superior. As the ancient Talmudic dictum
holds, "The person who is commanded and acts right is greater than the
person who is not commanded and acts right." Why? Because the
person who does good because he feels commanded is obeying a code
that is greater than he is. Even if he does not feel like engaging in the act,
he will do so. On the other hand, the individual who does not feel
obligated to any outside command does good because he feels it is right
and feels like doing so - and only then. In the final analysis, which
individual is more morally reliable - the one who always does what he
feels is right, or the one who acts in accordance with a moral code to
which he feels obligated? With regard to credit and gratitude to anyone
who does good in this world, if our greatest concern is that goodness
increase and prevail, we cannot rely on those who answer only to
themselves and to their consciences. When you have to answer only to
yourself, it is all too easy to err and it is all too easy to rationalize away
anything. (Dennis Prager, The Prager Perspective, February 15, 1998)
We usually think that the volunteer deserves greater reward than the one who
acts out of duty or obligation. Yet, the Talmud, in discussing the mitzvah of
honoring parents, argues the opposite. It cites the example of a Roman
nobleman named Dama ben Netina, someone not commanded to fulfill the
mitzvah of honoring parents but who was part of a culture that valued respect
for parents in an exemplary manner. The Talmud uses that example as a foil
and contrasts Dama's reward to that of someone who does the same good act
but out of a sense of command. The Talmud asserts that the latter gains a
greater reward. What is the logic behind this paradox? Why is Rabbi Chanina's
statement so central to Judaism? How is it one of the defining attitudes that
distinguish Judaism from American liberalism?
PARASHAT EKEV
August 16, 2003 - 5763



Discussion Theme: Holiness
I started down the mountain, a mountain ablaze with fire, the two Tablets of the
Covenant in my two hands. I saw how you had sinned against the Lord your
God: you had made yourselves a molten calf; you had been quick to stray from
the path that the Lord had enjoined upon you. Thereupon I gripped the two
tablets and flung them away with both my hands, smashing them before your
eyes. (Deut. 9:15-17)
Commentary
A. Breaking the tablets expresses Moses' rage. His act also has legal
significance. In Mesopotamian law the cancellation of a contract is
expressed by breaking the clay tablets on which it is written. This is the
equivalent of ripping up legal documents written on tearable materials.
By smashing the tablets, Moses indicated that the covenant was
annulled because the people had violated one of its most fundamental
conditions. Relations between God and Israel were severed. (Jeffrey
Tigay, JPS Commentary, Deut. 9:17)
B. The dazzled joy of the dancing exposes a hidden truth. One manner of
expressing that truth is articulated by Sefath Emeth: the letters, the
words of God, have left no deep imprint in their hearts. A deeper desire
possesses them: for any object, any fetish, with which they can lose their
self-consciousness, their entrapment in time. If Moses, as idealized
object, has failed them, they turn to the Golden Calf in a reflexive motion
towards an idiom of their time. For Moses, this moment is one of
traumatic, retroactive understanding. The orgiastic release of the
people's dancing tells him what his own role has been for them. This is
the profound loneliness that leads him to smash the tablets. For he
realizes that the fetishism that he is witnessing represents a fantasy in
which he too figured. His loneliness is born of the distance between the
person and the uses to which the persona is put. Moses, therefore,
smashes the tablets, not in pique, but in a tragic realization that a people
so hungry for absolute possession may make a fetish of the tablets as
well. The whole narrative of redemption has now been pathologically
restructured for him: the tablets of revelation take on the macabre
lineaments of another idol. (Aviva Zornberg, The Particulars of Rapture)
C. Everything that is holy-the Land of Israel, Jerusalem, etc. - is more than
an aspect of the Torah, and it is sanctified by the holiness of the Torah.
Do not imagine that the Temple and the Sanctuary are holy in and of
themselves, God forbid! God dwells amongst His people, and if they
transgress His covenant, they (the Temple and the Sanctuary) are bereft
of their holiness and become as profane objects. The tablets, bearing the
writing of God, are also not holy in and of themselves; it is only for you
that they are holy, and when the bride goes whoring from her canopy
they become no more than pieces of clay; they are not holy in and of
themselves, but only for you, if you keep the commandments engraved
upon them In sum, there is nothing holy in the world. Only God is holy,
and it is Him who is befitting of praise and worship. Holiness inheres in
no created thing, except insofar as the people of Israel keeps the Torah
in accordance with the will of the Creator. (Meshech Chochmah on
Exodus 32:19)
D. Holiness lies in keeping the commandments as it says in Deut. 28:9,
"The Lord will establish you as His holy people." (Ibn Ezra on Deut. 28:9)
E. The Land of Israel is the holiest land. And in what does its holiness
consist? In that the omer and the first-fruits and the twin loaves are taken
from it. (Kelayim 1:6)
F. Holiness consists of doing God's command and can be ascribed neither
to the subject who performs it nor to the objects that are the focus of its
performance. The latter in and of them selves - like everything else in the
world-are indifferent from a religious point of view. To raise them to the
level of holiness is to make them divine, and that is as idolatrous as
worship of the golden calf, itself. Nor does the calf necessarily have to be
of gold: It can be of stone; it can be a place, a country, or a people, or
even an idea or a particular personality. (Yeshayahu Leibowitz in
Contemporary Religious Thought)
Professor Tigay explores the legal significance of the smashing of the tablets.
The other commentators cited above explain that the smashed tablets not only
symbolize a broken covenant. The smashed tablets teach an important lesson;
namely, a misapprehension of holiness can be a form of idolatry. Holiness is
only an attribute of God, according to these sources. The Land of Israel, for
example, as stated in Mishna Kelayim, is not intrinsically holy. It is sanctified by
virtue of the omer and first fruits that are taken from it. "To see holiness as the
essence of some object existing in the world of nature or of history is to raise
that thing to the level of the divine-and that is idolatry," writes Yeshayahu
Leibowitz. Where do we see examples of this type of idolatry in today's Jewish
world?
PARASHAT RE'EH
August 23, 2003 - 5763



Discussion Theme: Putting Mourning Into Perspective
You are children of the Lord your God. You shall not gash yourselves or shave
the front of your heads because of the dead. For you are a people consecrated
to the Lord your God; the Lord your God chose you from among all other
peoples on earth to be His treasured people. (Deut. 14:1-2)
Commentary
A. Because you are children of the Eternal, it is becoming for you to be

comely and not be cut about and bald due to the tearing out of hair.
(Rashi on Deut. 14:1)
B. Once you realize that you are children of the Eternal and that God loves
you more than a father loves his child, you should not cut yourselves in
bereavement for anything that God does, because whatever God has
done is for your good although you may not understand it, just as little
children do not understand their father, yet rely on him. "For you are a
people consecrated to the Lord your God" and you are not like all the
other nations; therefore, you shall not do as they do. (Ibn Ezra on Deut.
14:1)
C. If your parent were to die, you should not gash yourselves or pull out
your hair to inflict great pain upon yourself because you are not orphans
despite the tragedy, for you have a great living eternal parents, namely
the Holy Blessed One. The idolater, however, when his parent dies has
no remaining parent that can help him in his hour of need for the father
that remains for him is constructed out of wood and the mother that
remains for him is made of stone - thus idolaters weep, gash themselves,
and tear out their hair. (Chizkuni on Deut. 14:1)
D. In Leviticus we already have remarked how the prohibition of incisions on
one's body and making baldness on one's head as a sign of grief over
death ensured the keeping of one's self-estimation, the consciousness of
one's own worth arising from being directly belonging to God, even in
comparison and in connection with our dearest and most honored
personalities. No personality may chain us so closely to it, allow us to be
so absorbed into it, that when it departs from us we may throw our own
personality after it, as having no longer any value, as would be what the
permanent sign of cut or baldness on our body is meant to express. Now
in the previous chapter the danger was described which even our highest
relationship to God could be exposed to by unrestricted devotion to
persons who infuse us with love and respect. A danger which would arise
all the more easily in the isolation in which the people were now about to
enter, small settlements and circles far away from the center, and people
of imposing spirituality or in prominent positions would have much
stronger influence. So that the Torah repeats with increased significance
the prohibition against incisions and tearing out one's hair which wishes
to keep up our own self-valuation even against our nearest and dearest,
and brings the great idea home to all classes throughout the people that
you are children of God, in the very first instance your nearest relation is
your Father in heaven and you are His children. The tie that attaches you
to your God is closer to, and comes before all other ties. (Samson
Raphael Hirsch on Deut. 14:1)
E. In my opinion the purport of the expression "for you are a people
consecrated to the Lord your God" is to state an assurance of the eternal
existence of the souls before the Holy Blessed One. The verse declares:
Since you are a holy people and the treasure of God, neither does God
respect any person but He devises means that he that is banished be not
an outcast from Him" (II Samuel 14:14) - therefore it is improper for you
to make incisions in your flesh and tear your hair for the dead even if "he
perishes in youth" (Job 36:14). Scripture, however, did not prohibit
weeping for the dead since it is natural to cry when parting from beloved
ones, and when they go on a journey even in life. From this verse, there
is support for our Rabbis in prohibiting excessive mourning for the dead.
(Nachmanides on Deut. 14:1)
F. Gashing the flesh until the blood runs and removing hair are known as
mourning rites the world over. Some scholars think that they were
believed to have an effect on the ghost of the dead person, either as
offerings of blood and hair to strengthen the ghost in the nether world or
to assuage the ghost's jealousy of the living by showing it how grief-
stricken they are. These rites could also be acts of self-punishment
expressing feelings of guilt, which are often experienced by survivors
after a death." (Jeffrey Tigay, JPS Commentary, on Deut. 14:1)
G. One should not perform extreme rites of mourning when bereaved
because, as God's children, one is never totally orphaned. (Abravanel on
Deut. 14:1)
The core of this Torah portion is a set of laws whose intent is to create a
spiritual distance between the Israelites and their pagan neighbors. The
Israelites are not only forbidden to engage in idolatry but also to incorporate
elements of pagan worship into Israelite practice. The pagan sites of worship
are to be destroyed, and all of Israelite worship of the One singular God is to be
centralized in one singular location. Another way in which the Israelites
distinguish themselves from their idolatrous neighbors is through the laws of
mourning. Specifically, we are forbidden to disfigure ourselves when mourning.
The question is why not? What is the connection between God as
parent/Israelites as children and the prohibition against gashing oneself? What
values are expressed in this ancient law that guide mourning practices today?
PARASHAT SHOFTIM
August 30, 2003 - 5763



Discussion Theme: Capital Punishment - A Rorschach Test?
If, however, a person who is the enemy of another lies in wait for him and sets
upon him and strikes him a fatal blow and then flees to one of these towns, the
elders of his town shall have him brought back from there and shall hand him
over to the blood-avenger to be put to death; you must show him no pity. Thus
you will purge Israel of the blood of the innocent, and it will go well with you.
(Deut. 19:11-13)
Commentary
A. Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for in
His image did God make man. (Genesis 9:6)
B. He who fatally strikes a man shall be put to death. (Exodus 21:12)
C. You may not accept a ransom for the life of a murderer who is guilty of a
capital crime; he must be put to death. (Numbers 35:31) A Sanhedrin
that executed one person in seven years is called murderous. Rabbi
Elazar ben Azaria says once in seventy years. Rabbi Tarfon and Rabbi
Akiva say that if we had been on the Sanhedrin, no one would ever have
been executed. Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel says that they would thereby
multiply shedders of blood in Israel. (Mishnah Makkot 1:10)
D. One who murders without clear proof that he is the murderer, i.e. there
were not two witnesses, or without warning having been administered by
two witnesses, the king has authority to execute him and to perfect the
world in accordance with what the hour requires. The king is empowered
to take the measures necessary to inspire fear, and to break the hands of
the world's evil people. (Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Laws of Kings
3:10)
E. One who commits murder without witnesses is placed in a cell and fed
with bread of adversity and waters of affliction. How do we know he
committed the murder? Shmuel said: There were witnesses but they did
not warn him. Rav Chisda said: He was convicted through witnesses who
were disproved on the minor circumstances of the crime, but not on the
vital points. The murderer is placed by the court in a cell and fed with
barley bread until his stomach bursts. (Talmud Sanhedrin 81b)
F. The Bible is quite explicit about the specific need for execution for the
sake of retributive justice. The rabbis of the Talmud never rejected
execution as an inherently unjust punishment. Professor Moshe
Greenberg suggests that talion for murder was indeed a moral step
forward in the Near East. The death penalty prevented the rich person
from buying him self or her self out of the crime. Actual cases of judicial
execution in the Tanach and in the Second Commonwealth are quite rare.
Moreover, the rabbis of the Talmud, who developed a legal system
through interpretation of the Bible, imposed an array of restrictions on
capital cases. These extraordinarily strict demands (two credible
witnesses who had each forewarned the potential offender), meant to
prevent mistaken identity, allow for a situation in which execution would
have become very rare. We do not know how rare because the Romans
eliminated capital punishment at least forty years before the Temple was
destroyed and Jewish jurisprudence no longer had standing to impose
the death penalty. (Elie Spitz "The Jewish Tradition and Capital
Punishment")
G. There are few areas in Jewish law where the biblical and talmudic view
so conflict as in the matter of capital punishment. The dominant, although
not exclusive, line of argument proffered in the Talmud opposes the
death sentence, even in the case of premeditated murder. It places so
many restrictions on the judicial authorities that very few, if any,
murderers would be convicted were these restrictions enforced. A
contemporary Orthodox legal scholar, Rabbi J. David Bleich, notes that,
from the perspective of Jewish law, "fingerprints, forensic evidence and
the like must be relegated to the category of circumstantial evidence" and
thus are judicially worthless.
The Talmud explains that they would have ensured that no death
sentences were carried out by subjecting the witnesses to such
searching cross-examination that, inevitably, there would be questions
they couldn't answer. Akiva and Tarfon would have used the witnesses'
inability to answer as the rationale for not sentencing the defendant to
death (Talmud Makkot 7a). Gerald Blidstein has rightly noted that the
"source of their opposition was not a fear of killing the innocent but a
reluctance to kill the guilty." Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel's response, that
Akiva and Tarfon's behavior would have caused an increase in murder,
reflects, of course, the view that the death sentence is a deterrent. To me,
it seems that the impossible range of restrictions the Rabbis placed on
judicial authorities constituted a form of protest against Roman rule, for
the Romans executed whomever they wanted, for whatever offense,
based on the flimsiest evidence.
(On the other hand), in times of emergency, these extreme precautionary

measures could be suspended, a ruling subsequently incorporated into
Maimonides's code (see "Laws of Kings" 3:10). Second, the Talmud
ruled that if it was clear to the court that a defendant had committed
murder, but one of the technical factors had not been fulfilled, then the
courts were empowered to impose their own form of capital punishment
(see Sanhedrin 81b). (Joseph Telushkin "Murder and the Death Penalty")
Dennis Prager, in his quarterly journal "Ultimate Issues" (April-June, 1989)

asserts that opposition to capital punishment for murder can reveal more about
a person than his views on any other contentious issue. One's position on the
death penalty is a kind of Rorschach test because the reasons offered by
opponents to capital punishment are usually not the reasons for their opposition.
Rather, he claims, it has to do with one's ability to recognize evil and to confront
it. He believes that "it is not death whose existence people want to deny; it is
evil's.
The wish to deny evil-specifically, that people are the primary cause of evil-is
the strongest denial mechanism operating in the world today - It is particularly
strong in the West, among those who believe that people are basically good,
and that reason alone, not force, is needed for good to triumph. This denial of
evil explains another major belief of opponents of capital punishment-the moral
equation of capital punishment with murder. 'To kill the offender is to respond to
his wrong by doing the same wrong to him.' (This belief states that) nothing is
morally better or worse; no one is morally better or worse.
Whether they intend to or not, opponents of capital punishment direct their

compassion toward those who commit the greatest evil man can commit. And
that misdirected compassion inevitably expresses itself in misdirected cruelty-
toward the society at large, toward the bereaved who yearn to see justice done,
and toward those who fight against the greatest evil man can commit." Do you
agree with Prager's argument? Given the great discrepancy in the positions of
the Bible and Talmud and perhaps even with the Talmud itself, is Prager correct
that our position on capital punishment says more about us than about the issue
itself?
PARASHAT KI TETZE
September 6, 2003



Discussion Theme: The Primacy of Ethics
A handmill or an upper millstone shall not be taken in pawn, for that would be
taking someone's life in pawn. (Deut. 24:6)
Commentary
A. Creditors sometimes took only the upper stone, which weighed only four
or five pounds and could not easily be replaced since basalt was not
found naturally in most parts of the country. This would suffice to render
the mill useless and induce the debtor to repay the debt as soon as
possible."That would be taking someone's life in pawn," that is,
something vital, a means of survival or anything with which the debtor
prepares necessary food. (Jeffrey Tigay, JPS Commentary, on Deut.
24:6)
B. You shall not enter his house to fetch his pledge. You shall not sleep with
his pledge. You shall restore the pledge. (Deut. 24:10, 12-13)
C. If you take your neighbor's garment in pledge, you must return it to him
before the sun sets, it is his only clothing, the sole covering for his skin.
In what else shall he sleep? Therefore, if he cries out to Me, I will pay
heed, for I am compassionate. (Exodus 22:25-26)
D. The borrower will cry to God, pleading that he is no different from the
lender. Why should the lender enjoy a comfortable night's sleep while he,
the borrower, does not because his bed garment was taken from him as
a security? Where is the justice in this? He will cry. (Da'at Zekenim on
Exodus 22:25)
E. If a person holding a pledge dies, he obviously cannot return the pledge
to the owner and his children might not be inclined to do so. Hence until
the sun goes down, that is until the sun sets on his life, he must instruct
his children to return the pledge to the lender and so avoid eventual
difficulties and complications. (Keli Yakar on Exodus 22:25)
F. If the lender is severely exacting of the borrower, the latter will be
compelled to give pledge upon pledge until the lender has him
completely under his control. He will then cry out to Me and I will surely
listen. (Alshech on Exodus 22:26)
G. Thus said the Lord: For three transgressions of Israel and for four, I will
not revoke the punishment because they have sold for silver the innocent
and the needy for a hidden gain. They who trample the heads of the poor
into the dust of the ground, and thrust the humble off the road upon
garments taken in pledge, they stretch themselves out beside every altar.
(Amos 2:6-8)
H. The creditor may seize whatever he desires except what is essential for
life. Amos is not alone in indicting elements of the population for such
immoral behavior. Compare the words of the prophet Ezekiel, who uses
the seizing or returning of a distraint as one of his criteria for
distinguishing between a righteous and wicked man (Ezek. 18:7, 12, 16;
33:15). Job three times refers to the same theme in his catalogue of
iniquities committed by the people. "They lead away the donkeys of the
fatherless and seize the widow's bull as a pledge" (Job 24:3). Moreover,
significantly this accusation in Job is directly followed in the next verse (v.
4) by "They chase the needy off the roads," thereby providing a similar
juxtaposition of charges against the wealthy found in Amos 2:7-8. In
Amos's denunciation, moreover, these wealthy creditors add insult to
injury, for not only do they violate a law that is intended to provide
protection for the poor but they also take these very garments and
spread out by every altar - Even at the cultic shrines themselves, the
wealthy remain insensitive to the illegal and immoral acts they commit
against the destitute. Amos - clearly indicates that the taking of basic
necessities for reclining and feasting was extremely widespread at this
time, thereby poignantly emphasizing how abhorrent their action was.
Even if their behavior were within the letter of the law, as long as the
poor are made to suffer, the practice is denounced as being totally
reprehensible. (Shalom Paul, Commentary on Amos)
I. I hate, I despise your festivals. I take no delight in your solemn
assemblies. Even if you offer me burnt offerings and your meal offerings,
I will not accept them. Remove from me the din of your hymns! And to
the melody of your lutes, I will not listen. But let justice roll on like water,
and righteousness life an ever-flowing stream. (Amos Chapter 5:21-24)
J. To (some), justice was an obligation like other obligations, a
commandment among many commandments of the law. Injustice was
improper, of course, but neither more nor less offensive than any other
infringement of the rules. Amos makes justice the supreme command
overriding every other consideration or obligation, however important to
the life of the community. Other ills of society are remediable, but
injustice is a stab at the vital center of the communal whole. Worship in
biblical religion could never be an end in itself, for God is not in need of
ritual. In Israel, worship is God's favor to man, an act of His grace
intended for the good of man, not God. Worship is meant to inspirit man
with passion for justice, to purify and prepare him for the encounter with
God. Worship and ritual are means, while justice and righteousness are
ends. More, even, righteousness and justice are the encounter. God is
justice, and His holiness is exalted in righteousness. (Shalom Spiegel,
"Amos v. Amaziah")
Amidst all of Deuteronomy's attention to the problem of idolatry, the simple laws
of everyday interactions between people might get overlooked. But, as the
prophet Amos, notes ethics are primary. Sadly, the Israelites do not take to
heart the words of Deuteronomy as the books of Ezekiel, Job, and Amos note.
Amos, in particular, speaking to the 8th century BCE citizens of the northern
kingdom, says to them that it is not ritual that is paramount but righteousness.
"Rite (ritual) without right (righteousness) is wrong," as Professor Shalom Paul
puts it. How often do we see "pious" people violating simple ethical norms?!
Why is it that we find it much easier to observe ritual than adhere to the ethical
standards established by our tradition?
PARASHAT KI TAVO
September 13, 2003 - 5763



Discussion Theme: Happiness
As soon as you have crossed the Jordan into the land that the Lord your God is
giving you, you shall set up large stones. Coat them with plaster and inscribe
upon them all the words of this Teaching. When you cross over to enter the land
that the Lord your God is giving you, a land flowing with milk and honey, as the
Lord, the God of your fathers, promised you-upon crossing the Jordan, you shall
set up these stones, about which I charge you this day, on Mount Ebal, and
coat them with plaster. There, too, you shall build an altar to the Lord your God,
an altar of stones. Do not wield an iron tool over them; you must build the altar
of the Lord your God of unhewn stones. You shall offer on it burnt offerings to
the Lord your God, and you shall sacrifice there offerings of well-being and eat
them, rejoicing before the Lord your God. And on these stones you shall
inscribe every word of this Teaching most distinctly. (Deut. 27:2-8)
Commentary
A. It is taught: Rabbi Yehuda ben Biteira says: when the Temple stood, joy
was derived through eating meat as it says in Deut. 27:7 "and you shall
sacrifice there offerings of well-being and eat them, rejoicing before the
Lord your God." Now that the Temple no longer stands, joy is derived
through wine alone, as it says in Psalms 104), "wine gladdens the heart
of man." (Pesachim 109a)
B. The meaning of the statement in Pesachim 109a is not that today it is not
a mitzvah to eat meat on a holiday because doing so no longer brings joy.
Rather, even today, one is obligated to eat meat on the holiday because
by its nature meat engenders a fullness of spirit and joyfulness of the
soul. Yet, because the meat is not sanctified meat and is not, therefore,
eaten in Jerusalem, it is not sufficient on its own to raise one's joy to the
highest possible level. And thus, one needs an additional ingredient,
namely wine which gladdens the heart. (Baruch Epstein in Torah
Temimah)
C. The happiness with which one should rejoice is the fulfillment of the
mitzvot and the love of God who commanded them is a great service.
Whoever holds himself back from this rejoicing is worthy of retribution, as
Deut. 28:47 states, "...because you did not serve God, your Lord, with
happiness and a glad heart." (Maimonides, "The Laws of Lulav")
D. One who is always happy will, by virtue of that happiness experience
success in the world. Happiness requires one to muster all one's
resources to push away sadness, because one is naturally predisposed
to worry about one's troubles. Because one always has troubles and
challenges in life, one must actually force oneself willfully with all one's
power to be happy. Happiness is, furthermore, an antidote to many
maladies. Dancing, singing (music), movement, and exercise of the body
uplift the spirit and make possible a feeling of happiness. One should
understand that simply the recognition of being Jewish is an amazing fact
and a source of joy and happiness. And if one says out loud the phrase,
"Praised is God who created us for His glory and distinguished us from
those who were not given the Torah," it has the potential to bring great
joy. (Rabbi Nachman of Breslav)
E. If we understand simcha to be spiritual elation rather than the
gratification of all our physical desires, it becomes evident that self-
esteem is essential for simcha. Spiritual joy is dependent on a feeling
that one is worthwhile, that one's life has a purpose, and that there is
significance to one's existence in the universe. The far-reaching effects
of low self-esteem can be appreciated if we realize that the ultimate in
human error and human transgression, avodah zarah, had its origin in
low self-esteem. The Rambam states that idolatry began to sprout
because people did not believe that they were deserving of Divine
attention. People thought that God withdrew from direct involvement with
His creation because it was beneath His dignity to associate with such
lowly beings. The Rambam thus points out that avodah zarah is not a
denial of the existence of the one true God, but a denial of God's
involvement with man, which had its origin in man's feeling unworthy of
God's providence. The essence of Jewishness and the refutation of
avodah zarah is therefore contingent upon man believing that he is
indeed significant and worthy of God's attention. In as much as we have
defined self-esteem as an awareness of our capabilities, it follows that as
we become increasingly aware of our capabilities, the intensity of our joy
should increase. There is yet another important relationship between
self-esteem and joy. People who feel themselves to be not only
undeserving but also worthless are often haunted by a morbid fear that
they do not merit joy, and that any happiness they might experience will
be short-lived. They are actually afraid to be happy because they fear
that if they are, the object of their joy will be taken from them. But, we
should know that we are loved (by God), and that a father does provide
for his children out of his great love for them, as long as the children do
not use the father's gifts in a destructive manner. Abraham Twersky,
"Self-esteem, joy, and enjoying life" in Let us Make Man Among the
questions a person will have to answer on his day of judgment before the
heavenly tribunal is, "Did you enjoy My world?" Thus appropriate
enjoyment of life is essential to living. (Jerusalem Talmud Kiddushin
4:12)
F. But we won't find happiness in the ways we've learned all our lives.
Popular Western concepts of joy are captured in the declaration by
America's founding fathers that all people deserve the inalienable right to
life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The problem with that notion,
however, is this: Happiness cannot be pursued. When we pursue
happiness, it always runs away from us. Instead, we must pursue goals
other than happiness, and as a natural by-product of their pursuit, we will
be happy. (Marc Gafni in Soul Prints)
The commandment to rejoice or be happy appears frequently in the Book of

Deuteronomy. It appears in Deut. 12:7, 16:14, 15, and in our verse above. What
advice do our commentators give to experience this type of joy or happiness?
Which of the many bits of advice above resonates most in your life?
PARASHAT NITZAVIM-VAYELEKH
September 20, 2003 - 5763



Discussion Theme: Repentance
When all these things befall you-the blessing and the curse that I have set
before you-and you take them to heart amidst the various nations to which the
Lord your God has banished you, and you return to the Lord your God, and you
and your children heed His command with all your heart and all your soul... then
the Lord your God will restore your fortunes and take you back in love. (Deut.
30:1-3)
Commentary
A. Shuv, "return," is the verb from which teshuvah, the Hebrew term for
repentance, is derived. The Hebrew term does not refer only to contrition
but to a change of behavior, literally a "return" to God and to the behavior
that He requires. The concept of returning to God in the Torah is not
identical to its better known from in the Prophets and in classical Judaism.
In the Torah it is mentioned only as something that occurs after
punishment has taken place: if the people take their punishment to heart
and return to God, He will terminate their punishment. The prophets
developed the concept further. They called upon people to repent before
it was too late, and to thereby avert punishment altogether. The concept
of teshuvah in classical Judaism combines both ideas, with emphasis on
the latter. (Jeffrey Tigay, JPS Commentary, Deut. 4:30)
B. How is one proved to be a true penitent? Said Rabbi Judah: If the
opportunity to commit the same sin presents itself on two occasions and
he does not yield to it. (Yoma 86b)
C. The repentant sinner should strive to do good with the same faculties
with which he sinned. With whatever part of the body he sinned, he
should now engage in good deeds. If his feet had run to sin, let them now
run to the performance of the good. If his mouth had spoken falsehood,
let it now be opened in wisdom. Violent hands should now open in
charity... The trouble-maker should now become a peace-maker. (Rabbi
Jonah Gerondi, The Gates of Repentance)
D. Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing
himself. (Tolstoy)
E. Be the change you want the world to become. (Ghandi)
F. The human flaw is that we can deteriorate. And our virtue is that we can
improve. The virtue of angels is that they cannot deteriorate. Their flaw is
that they cannot improve. (Author unknown)
G. Teshuvah... assumes the possibility of reversing the past. Despite
reality's flow, within this unity the future may transform the meaning of
the past. The sages, long ago stated that teshuvah existed before the
creation of the world, that is, that it is not subject to the usual order of
time; or, as Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav had it, since time does not exist
for God, "teshuvah is essentially above time." By returning to God, man
rises above time and so becomes able to correct the wrongs of the past
and see himself as though he were newly born. When this happens,
even his former days are transformed for the positive. To use
Soloveitchik's expression, the most essential aspect of teshuvah is that
"the future has overcome the past." (Ehud Luz, "Repent")
H. We seek teshuvah because in the Jewish tradition the aim of life is to
grow in soul. That is why an old rabbinic saying asserts that a repentant
sinner stands upon a height that not event the greatest tzaddik (righteous
person) can reach. The growth that is required to acknowledge one's sin,
to seek to repair it, and to change one's ways is enormous and
impressive. With each of those steps, the individual climbs higher and
reaches towards holiness. We sin for many reasons---fear, insensitivity,
cruelty, a hunger for pleasure. But true teshuvah comes not from fear or
from the desire for pleasure but from something deeper. True teshuvah
comes from a wellspring of joy. That may sound strange considering the
terror and worry and anguish that consciousness of our sins sometimes
causes us. But the end of a soul aligned with itself, with others, and with
God is a feeling of great joy... Teshuvah is the soul's homecoming in this
world. The pain of sin has been transfigured to joy, and the past has
become a path back to God. (David Wolpe in Why be Jewish?)
I. The Baal Shem Tov once met a cantor in a small community who used to
recite the Al Chet with a lively tune rather than with the traditional somber
melody that befits such a solemn prayer. He asked the cantor to explain
this unusual behavior, and the cantor replied, "If a devoted servant of a
king is assigned the task of cleaning the palace and removing all the
trash, would he not be jubilant in the knowledge that he is beautifying the
king's abode? Man is the palace of God, because He resides within each
of us. When I confess my sins and dispose of objectionable matter that
has accumulated within me, and thereby make myself into a more
acceptable and suitable place for God to dwell, should I not rejoice?"
(Abraham Twersky in Let us Make Man)
What factors stand in the way of doing teshuvah? What can we do as a

community to create a teshuvah community, one where people take seriously
the desire and need to correct shortcomings? Which of the above
commentators inspires you most?

Torah Sparks 5763

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Torah Sparks 5763

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PARASHAT BERESHEET

October 5, 2002 - 5763

Annual Cycle: Genesis 1:1-6:8 (Hertz, p. 2; Etz Hayim, p. 3)

Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman

Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations

Torah Portion Summary

(1:1-2:3) The world is created in six days. The first Shabbat.

(5:1-6:8) The ten generations from Adam to Noah.

Torah Text Being Considered

Some points to consider:

1. Eating may be considered a metaphor for domination and mastery as in

Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman

Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations

Torah Portion Summary

(9:18-29) Noah's drunkenness and death. (10:1-32) The descendants of Noah's

(11:10-32) The ten generations from Noah to Abraham.

Torah Text Being Considered

A. As explicated in Leviticus 17:11, 14 and Deuteronomy 12:23, blood

In our parashah, we are introduced to one of the fundamental laws of kashrut

Some points to consider:

Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman

Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations

Torah Portion Summary

(Chap. 16) Abram's concubine, Hagar, becomes pregnant, leading to conflict

Torah Text Being Considered

A. The Holy Blessed One accounted it to Abraham for righteousness and

The second clause of verse 6 contains a syntactical ambiguity. What is the

Some points to consider:

Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman

Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations

Torah Portion Summary

(21:22-34) Abraham and Abimelekh make a covenant of peace at Be'er-sheva.

(22:1-19) The Akedah, the story of the binding of Isaac.

(22:20-24) Genealogy which includes Rebekah, future wife of Isaac.

Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman

Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations

Torah Portion Summary

(24:50-52) Laban and Bethuel agree to allow Rebecca to go with Eliezer.

(24:53-67) Rebecca consents to go with Eliezer, and is given a farewell blessing

(25:1-6) The genealogy of Abraham's descendants from his second marriage -

(25:12-18) A genealogy of Ishmael's descendants.

Torah Text Being Considered

Some points to consider:

This whole super-sensitivity to theft in Rashi's commentaries - what do you

Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman

Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations

Torah Portion Summary

(25:27-34) Esau sells his birthright to Jacob for a pot of stew.

(26:23-33) Abimelech makes a peace treaty with Isaac, seeing Isaac's

(26:34-35) Esau marries two Hittite women, to his parents' distress.

(27:46-28:5) Isaac blesses Jacob and sends him to Haran.

It is interesting to note that In discussing the extent to which someone should

But perhaps, there is even a better explanation. Acting out of a sense of

Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman

Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations

Torah Portion Summary

(29:1-30) Jacob arrives in Mesopotamia. He meets Rachel, his cousin, and

(30:22-24) Rachel finally has a son, Joseph.

Torah Text Being Considered

Prepared by Rabbi Lee Buckman

Department of Services to Affiliated Congregations

Torah Portion Summary

(34) The rape of Dinah and her brothers' revenge.

(35:21-26) Reuben's sin; a review of the sons of Jacob.