S'lichot: A Path to Reconstruction

I.

Day is the natural time of humanity’s activity and creativity. It is by day that we fulfill our role set out by God to Adam, to ‘settle the world and conquer it.’ (Gen. 1:28) In contrast, night is the time when Mankind retreats from his dominant stance and hides from real and imagined dangers. It is a time of אמונה, but also a time of humility, when the bravado and temerity of כחי ועוצם ידי vanishes into the dusk, and Man scurries back to his protector, God. This shift is evident in the prayers of each time of day. Morning-man states with confidence, אמת ויציב, while night-man hesitates, and assuages his confusion with אמת ואמונה.

In his essays, Rabbi S.R. Hirsch discusses the season of the Days of Awe. He writes about the industrious preparation that the animal and plant kingdoms begin in autumn. Nature itself, by design, is sensitive to the impending winter months, and begins to carefully prepare for them. Bears store energy in fat deposits, and begin months of hibernation. Squirrels hoard nuts and even insects make sure that they are ready for winter. The natural order is an ethical lesson to humanity. Do not allow life to deceive you, ‘that youth will last forever…that strength will never wane…at wealth is secure, that earthly greatness is eternal!’ This time of year turns our thoughts to assuring our spiritual sustenance, for the future. It is a season in which we are no longer able to revel in the abundance and decadence of summer; the plenty we have must be carefully preserved for the night-season of winter.

This is the season that begins our s'lichot tonight. Interesting indeed that this autumn season is one in which the nights are long, and days short. As Rabbi Hirsch points out, night leads to night, with day only a short reprieve. The season reinforces the message of dependence and humility of night-time. And it is in this double night that we congregate here, to officially begin our season of repentance and, ultimately, atonement.

Both night and autumn-winter lead us to shed any pretenses we may have developed. In our fear for our personal survival during the natural times of danger and scarcity, we are forced to recognize our stark dependence on God. We know better than ever that we need our relationship to God.

Throughout the year, in our active conquering of the world around us, it is almost inevitable that we veer from the path God has commanded us to travel. The word חטא itself means running afoul of one’s target, as an arrow that misses its mark. As nature turns us back to thoughts of God and our ultimate reliance on him, we contemplate our neglected relationship with Him. In these days, the lessons of un’taneh tokef guide us. Three things erase our sins and lead us to a sweet year: תשובה, תפילה, and צדקה. I would like to touch on these three concepts briefly, and discuss what I believe to be the central theme of the triad, the reconstruction of the broken relationship between a man and his God.

II.

In his Essay on prayer, R’ Soloveitchick describes a new approach to the concept of t'fillah. Prayer does not only make us better people, more deserving of favorable judgment. Neither is prayer simply Man's attempt to beseech God for his needs. It is a fundamental way that Mankind interacts with God, a medium through which we encounter the divine. T'fillah is not focused on God, but on Man. However, it is not only anthropocentric, because it is a dialogue between Man and God. By creating that emotional connection that prayer instantiates, Man brings himself into communion with God. By realizing that life in the absence of God is empty and cold, a person brings himself to prayer, in order to draw God back into his realm of existence, so to speak. We are commanded to find God through prayer. Thus, the very act of prayer is a form of interaction and דביקות with the Divine. When we pray, we develop a connection to God. Much as each interaction between a husband and wife pave the strength and depth of connection in their marriage, so does prayer lay a foundation of familiarity and intimacy.

Prayer, then, not only provides a venue for us to petition God for help with the minutiae of life. It also provides us with a life-line to God, Who acts as a shoulder to cry on. As Rabbi Aaron Lichtenstein writes (Jewish Perspectives on the Experience of Suffering, Ch. 2), we can always turn to God at a time of crisis, and He comforts us even when he does not immediately alleviate the suffering. T'fillah reconstructs this important aspect of the divine relationship.

III.

The recreation of our shattered relationship to Hashem as a beloved supporter is also the fundamental aim of t'shuvah.

There are two concepts used in Jewish thought for atonement. The first is כפרה, the absolution of sin. This is the cut and dry idea of penance: the correction of our propensity to break God’s word. It is affected by sacrifice and rite.

However, there is another concept, developed most clearly by the prophets, that of תשובה. This is the rectification of our damaged emotional relationship to Hashem. This requires service of the heart and mind, and a change in attitude. We realize the beauty of closeness to God – קרבת אלקים לי טוב, and mourn the actions that have placed an iron curtain between us and our Father in Heaven.

In Chagiga (15a), we read the tragedy of Elisha ben Avuyah, apostate par excellence. Goaded by R’ Meir, his faithful student, to repent, he stated, ‘I have already heard a בת קול that everyone may do teshuvah, but I am barred.’ We can imagine the sort of sins he must have done, and incited others to do, in order to be barred from repentance by heavenly decree. Even so, says the Maharsha, Elisha should have repented, for nothing can stand in the way of תשובה, even a בת קול.

I believe Elisha’s mistake was that he saw t'shuvah simply as a means of attaining atonement. He missed out on the relationship with God that t'shuvah aims to rectify. This is an emotional bond, like one between a man and wife. Imagine a situation where your wife tells you, ‘do not even ask for forgiveness, I cannot forgive you.’ The emotional bond and intimacy of the relationship does not allow you to accept this. You beg, even demand forgiveness, and it is granted in the end. This is the relationship that Elisha should have been trying to attain through t'shuvah . He did not possess it, and so he missed the fundamental lesson, and the opportunity for forgivness.

Another explicit example, the story of Elazar ben Dordia (Avodah Zara 17a) stands out in contrast, as one who learned the value of this relationship. A man who visited every harlot he could, Elazar was once confronted by a woman who told him that he would never reach עולם הבא because of his many sins. He sat and cried, begging the mountains, valleys and all of nature to intercede on his behalf. Nature refused to help him. In the analogous situation, Elisha ben Avuyah gave up on his atonement. Not so Elazar ben Dordia. אין הדבר תלוי אלא בי, he cried, taking his repentance into his own hands. As he died from the intensity of his emotion, a בת קול proclaimed that he had been accepted. His refusal to live without reconnecting his relationship to God was so strong, it overcame the seemingly impossible. (Paradoxically, it is a heavenly voice that proclaims him worthy, the same medium which claimed that Elisha would find no forgiveness.)

In הררי קדם, R’ Soloveitchik speaks of the tremendous power of repentance out of love. Since it comes from an internal need to rectify a shattered relationship with God, it has the power to transcend ordinary rules of t'shuvah such as the levels of penance and categories of sin. It is able to affect immediate and unconditional purity in the pennant one. When we utilize this internal connection to God and repent from love, we are able to reach the t'shuvah that can defeat even a heavenly decree against it.

When a woman sins against her husband, his natural love for her causes him to wish to take her back. Indeed, this analogy is not lost on the prophets. Thus, Hoshea is told to take a harlot as a wife. When she is unfaithful, God tells him to leave her and their children. When Hoshea hesitates, God remarks on his natural desire to remain with her. He says, ‘how can you tell me to abandon the Jews because of their sin, when you are unwilling to abandon your wife?’ The love and intimacy between man and wife, reflected in the bond between God and Israel, is able to transcend the chasm created by the most vile offence. אין דבר עומד בפני התשובה.

IV.

Lastly, we turn to צדקה. If תשובה and תפילה are so powerful, why do we need this third part?

The singularity of the communal Yom Kippur offerings is that they atone for Israel’s sins even without any effort on the part of the nation. The communal offerings create a national forgiveness that trickles down to the individual Jew.

In order to be forgiven on our national level, we must demonstrate to Hashem that we are unified. We love each other, and care for one another. This bond is demonstrated most powerfully by the giving of charity and kindness to the less fortunate. By demonstrating our national bond and showing love and respect to God’s people, we show our desire to be treated as part of the עם סגולה, with all the rights and privileges that brings. Thus, the final element of national teshuvah is completed by חסד and צדקה to one another.

Gerard Manley Hopkins writes of the estrangement sin engenders, and the subsequent intimacy reignited by repentance. And what action does Hashem demand of us, so that our penance may be accepted? 'But thou bidst, and just thou art/Me shew mercy from my heart/Towards my brother, every other/Man my mate and counterpart.' Demonstrating mercy and love to our fellow man is our way of deserving the same treatment from Heaven.

V.

Through the season and time of day, may we be moved to realize our close connection to God. The סליחות we are about to say will melt our hearts and help us return to God with love. Let us read the english translation, and be moved by the traditional tunes that accompany out thoughts of return and love for God. May this awesome time leave its impression on our future.

May our application of prayer, repentance and kindness lead us to a wonderful, sweet, safe and spiritually uplifting new year.

Nitzavim and Faith

In this week's portion, God warns us to keep His commandments. If we do not, we will be sent into exile, and 'we will be singled out for suffering' (Deut 29:20). The nations will stand in wonder at the torture and destruction of God's beloved nation, and they will say, 'it must be punishment for turning away from God's covenant' (29:24). And yet, no matter how far we fall, God will redeem us. 'God will return with our exiles, and have mercy; He will gather us from the lands of our dispersion', into Israel (29:3-5). God promises us this.

In Amos (9:13-15), we are again promised the vision of salvation, this time even more clearly and in far more detail:

"יג הִנֵּה יָמִים בָּאִים, נְאֻם-יְהוָה, וְנִגַּשׁ חוֹרֵשׁ בַּקֹּצֵר, וְדֹרֵךְ עֲנָבִים בְּמֹשֵׁךְ הַזָּרַע; וְהִטִּיפוּ הֶהָרִים עָסִיס, וְכָל-הַגְּבָעוֹת תִּתְמוֹגַגְנָה. יד וְשַׁבְתִּי, אֶת-שְׁבוּת עַמִּי יִשְׂרָאֵל, וּבָנוּ עָרִים נְשַׁמּוֹת וְיָשָׁבוּ, וְנָטְעוּ כְרָמִים וְשָׁתוּ אֶת-יֵינָם; וְעָשׂוּ גַנּוֹת, וְאָכְלוּ אֶת-פְּרִיהֶם. טו וּנְטַעְתִּים, עַל-אַדְמָתָם; וְלֹא יִנָּתְשׁוּ עוֹד, מֵעַל אַדְמָתָם אֲשֶׁר נָתַתִּי לָהֶם--אָמַר, יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ."

"'When the plowman shall overtake the reaper, and the treader of grapes him who sows seed; the mountains shall drip with sweet wine, and all the hills shall flow with it. I will bring back the captives of My people Israel; they shall build the waste cities and inhabit them; they shall plant vineyards and drink wine from them; they shall also make gardens and eat fruit from them. I will plant them in their land, and no longer shall they be pulled up from the land I have given them,' says the Lord your God."

I think these quotes are especially important to read and allow to permeate our souls in our present day, when so much of our tradition is under attack by skeptical elements. In the past millennia, Jews and gentiles have accepted prima facie the authenticity of the Torah and other books of the Bible. Even without the fulfillment of the positive prophecies of reconstruction, they have survived with their faith in God and His word. They lived and died for a day when their children and grandchildren would be able to witness the fulfillment of God's promises. They needed no proof.

However, around the turn of the last century, scholars and skeptics have begun to question, not only the dating of certain works, or the exact authorship of certain parts of some books, but the very concept of God's revelation of His will and future plans to Mankind. Whole sections of Jews may not believe in the divinity of our scripture, or even in the existence of God! Humanity has become cynical, and so, have chosen to question God's revelation.

However, we must pay attention to the historical currents that surrounded this movement. The return of Jews to Zion with the intent of rebuilding the land and Jewish culture gained steam. Eventually, European Jewry was destroyed, and out of the fire, like a phoenix, the modern state of Israel rose. The remnants beat back blood-thirsty hordes of Arab soldiers, intent on destroying them. This happened, not once, but five times. Jews returned and continue to stream to their land, and even the anti-Zionists admit that, if not ראשית צמיחת גאולתינו, we are living through, at least, עיקבתא דמשיחא.

This is God's most poetic answer to the skeptics. God counters their questions by making the living word of His books come true! Hashem always keeps us open to faith. Sometimes we are sustained by faith in the word, as the generations before us. However, if we begin to question its authenticity, he makes it come true, so we can no longer doubt it.

In Nitzavim and Amos, God promised us redemption, and placed his name on it as a seal of truth. It happens now as we watch! And yet, we are blinded by its shining light, even as we live through it. Future generations will ask us, did you not see the obvious fulfillment of God's word?

I realized, while speaking to a skeptical friend, that what we are witnessing with our own eyes is the irrefutable realization of the prophecies of God. These verses are our generation's personal Har Sinai experience; this is our revelation! We ourselves bear witness to the fact that God exists, and that He keeps his promises to Israel.

God's hand forces history, and history, against all odds and against all precedent, favors Israel (by all accounts a dead nationalism) and the nation of Israel rises again in the land of Israel, just as the Torah and prophets foresaw.

May this coming year be one in which all prophecies come true, and the floodgates of knowledge, light, and peace open wide. May the world bask in the glow of our redemption, and may mountains and valleys ring with the song of global salvation.

New Additions to the Blog

We now have, on the side-bar, an atomic clock with Sabbath times below it.

I hope this helps people!

Faith and Conflict

Rabbi JJ Weinberg wrote that the truly orthodox person is a person who is conflicted, and struggles with questions and doubts constantly. He never lets things stagnate, and is always challanging the limits of his doctrine. He is the most dynamic thinker alive.

How do you see this in your own life (whether or not you consider yourself truly orthodox by this description)?

Daniel's Dragon

In Sh'vuot (29b) and Nedarim (25a), the Talmud records an interesting tale of a gigantic snake. The snake fed on human beings, and the people had no way to kill it. It was simply too vicious for anyone to slay. A savior came and prepared 13 piles of grain, with animals tied up inside, as well as smoldering coals. When the snake devoured the piles of straw, the coals burned it from the inside, and split the serpent open, dead.

Rabbi Epstein (in the Soncino translation of the masechta) mentions that this tale bears similarities to the dragon of Daniel. The book of Daniel has three apocryphal chapters that are outside the Hebrew canon. However, they are found in the Septuagint, and here are the relevant verses (from here):

23 And in that same place there was a great dragon, which they of Babylon worshipped. 24 And the king said unto Daniel, Wilt thou also say that this is of brass? lo, he liveth, he eateth and drinketh; thou canst not say that he is no living god: therefore worship him. 25 Then said Daniel unto the king, I will worship the Lord my God: for he is the living God. 26 But give me leave, O king, and I shall slay this dragon without sword or staff. The king said, I give thee leave. 27 Then Daniel took pitch, and fat, and hair, and did seethe them together, and made lumps thereof: this he put in the dragon's mouth, and so the dragon burst in sunder : and Daniel said, Lo, these are the gods ye worship.

Especially since left out of the biblical canon, it is interesting to see apocryphal stories seemingly remembered in the pages of the Talmud. These books were banned (according to some) as 'outside books' by the mishnah in Sanhedrin (10:1), ostensibly to protect faithful Jews from joining early Christains or other splinter groups, who used the apocrypha as proof of continued prophecy, or simply as holy books (See Rabbi Dr. S Leiman's thesis). However, the Rabbis did not mean to deny that any good can be learned from the apocrypha. Indeed, in Sanhedrin (100b), Rabbi Yossi states about the book of Ben Sira that, "The good in it we expound".

Interestingly, Rabbi Slifkin reminds us that the mishnah uses the term 'drakon' when referencing a specific image of idolatry that is designated for destruction. Perhaps the story of Daniel's dragon is an allegory that it is not enough to destroy the idols from outside, but we must go inside ourselves to root out any dangerous concepts of idolatry from within our own hearts. We must turn the spotlight on ourselves with as much scrutiny, if not more, than we use when examining others for faults.

Stray Thought on Ethics

An interesting thought popped into my head this morning. In the past, we have discussed the tension that may exist between the natural ethic and the divine imperative that commands our obedience. We have also dealt with character attributes and how they need to be utilized.

Perhaps the natural ethic is really simply a character attribute. In other words, each individual has, to some varying degree, been imbued by God with some amount of sensitivity to that natural morality that is the pulse of the universe. However, as philosophers will be quick to point out, since each human is allocated a different level of sensitivity, the morality that makes up this world seems varied and unclear. Some people feel that eating meat is immoral, while others are not fazed by their conscience when participating in the mass murder of humanity. Since this internal moral compass is so varied, the ethics of revelation are brought to light, guiding our use of our moral and ethical attributes: compassion, hatred, vengeance and forgiveness.

Only an objective ethic can claim authority over the vastly different consciences that exist in each of us. If it tells us to suspend our need for vengeance, or our feeling of duty to have compassion, we do so.

When discussing middoth, Rabbi Kook explains that the 'good' character traits, such as love, compassion, patience and kindness, must become part of our very being. True, there are certain times we need to supress them. However, the suppression of these midoth should be against our natural tendencies. We should feel uncomfortable the whole time we suppress them. In contrast, the 'bad' midoth should never become part of our natural state of being. Rather, they should remain in our toolbox of traits, to be dusted off and used only when absolutely necessary. All the while we utilize them, we should feel a foreign attribute in our actions.

The same should hold true for our ethical traits.

(27 Kislev, 5769: Revisiting this issue, my chevrusa and I discussed the ethical in light of the Torah. Our discussion concluded that perhaps an individual halacha, such as Amalek could not be used in isolation to teach the ethics of the Torah, for it is a product not of a purely ethical form or category, but a result of various competing ethics and considerations. For example, the act of torture may be morally reprehensible. However, when used to urge a terrorist to reveal the location of a ticking time bomb, the overall ethical thing to do is to use torture. Some actions should define us (being kind, being peaceful), and are inherently ethical, while other actions, though sometimes employed, do not define our ethic, and only receive the nod of approval because of surrounding considerations. Thus, while an individual halacha may not define morality, the totality of halachot and hashkafa do, and provide a framework and set of rules to, with all the complexities of life, choose the best possible course of action when none may always be perfect. אשת יפת תואר and עמלק are thus not necessarily so different. They are both the best course of action for imperfect situations.)

Vote Feiglin

He is yet another chance Am Yisrael has to get it right.

Marriage and Creativity

In Sotah(17a), Rabbi Akiva teaches that if a man and woman are virtuous, the divine presence will abide with them. If not, fire will consume their relationship. Rashi explains that the man (איש) and woman (אשה), each bring part of God's name into the marriage. If they cultivate that Godliness, the י and ה permeate their union. If not, the only thing that remains is אש (fire).

What is so special about the relationship between a man and woman that warrants such strong extremes?

In Yadayim (3:5), Rabbi Akiva defends the canonization of Shir HaShirim. He states that, all the other books are holy, but the Song of Solomon is קדש קדשים, the holiest of holies. Rabbi Kook, among others, explains why. It is quite easy to see the holiness in books like Iyov or Yirmiyahu. Books that openly teach us to focus on the spiritual and find Godly meaning in our lives are obviously holy. However, the true task that humans are charged with in this world is not to eschew the profane. We are not to neglect the world in which we live. Rather, we are to utilize it in our worship of God. Even the source of the most lowly impurity can be used for service of the divine.

Shir HaShirim is written in allegory. On the surface, it is a representation of the activity and thoughts which, while important in this world, do not lend themselves to spiritual pursuit. It is only when this book is studied with an eye towards depth and creative allegory that it becomes a parable to the relationship between God and Man. Indeed, the book itself is an example of the highest form of serving God, by transforming the mundane through holiness. Thus, beauty, poetry, and love are tools for encountering the divine.

God placed us in a physical world with concrete realities. We are not to rebel against them, and try to shake them off. On the contrary, קדש קדשים is reached by using these forces for holiness, and uplifting them. This is the special place of Shir HaShirim. In an Aristotelian moment pointed out in Marc Shapiro’s Between the Yeshiva World and Modern Orthodoxy, both Rav Kook and Rabbi Weinberg (author of the S’ridei Eish) view the relationship between secular and holy as one of form and matter. The form is the abstract concept, while the matter is that which is acted upon and molded to reflect the form in concrete reality. For example, a plaster cast of a tooth cannot replace the tooth. It does, however, reflect the form of the tooth perfectly. Therefore, when one takes enamel (the matter) and fills the cast with it, the enamel realizes the form, and a reflection of the abstract is now realized. Thus it is with Torah and our world. The Torah is the abstract concept. Every object, being, thought and emotion is part of the matter that makes up our world. We use the Torah’s form to mold the diverse mundanities of our world into a holy reflection of the ideals of Torah. This is how we sanctify the profane.

This was, according to Rabbi Hirsch, the symbolism of the burning bush that introduced Moshe to Hashem. The סנה is the lowliest bush, a representation of physicality with no redeeming spiritual characteristics. However, when used to further God's plans in this world, it became united with the fire of God in order to deliver a message to Moshe. It was not consumed, to teach that even the lowest creature can earn immortality by heeding the call to advance God's purpose in creation.

Humanity is special amongst creations in that we are fashioned in God's image. Rabbi Soloveitchik describes this as the ability to create, change and mold the world we live in. When a man and woman marry, they take part in this creative activity. The Talmud (Kiddushin 30b) states that a man and a woman actually partner with God when they bear a child. However, if they do not utilize the world as a receptacle for spirituality, they are left only with fire. This is the consuming fire of God's anger, as it were, אש אכלה. It destroys that which is not used for its true calling.

But when a couple infuses their relationship and life with Godliness, they take part in the creation process with God. They permeate their world and the world around them with holiness, elevating the mundane to holy. In this capacity, they are proper bearers of the shechina. They bring the letters of God's name together, create completeness, and acquire immortality, like the סנה.

Re'eh: Working Ideals into Reality

(For a discussion of free will, the subject of the first verse in this week's portion, see here.)

When learning the laws of the seven year cycle in Jewish agricultural law, we may be surprised to find that the seventh year also had implications for lenders. In the seventh year, any outstanding debts between Jews were cancelled by the Torah (D'varim 15:2). As one can imagine, this would have had an effect on the willingness of the wealthy to lend out their money. And so, five verses later, the Torah warns would-be lenders not to stop lending just because the seventh year nears.

However, generations later, the rabbis were met with precisely this problem. People would not lend their money, for fear of losing it once the sh'mitta year comes along. By this time (see Gitin 36a,b) the concept of sh'mitta was in force only rabbinically (see there for a discussion of the issue), and the rabbinic law of sh'mittat k'safim was causing people abstain from lending money to others, which is a biblical offense. And so, Hillel instituted prosbol, a loophole through which the courts take possession of loan documents, and authorize lenders to collect on them. Since the courts were not subject to the laws of debt cancellation, the repayment of loans was not automatically forgiven by the seventh year.

This concept raises a number of philosophical points. What is the rationale of the cancellation of debts? Of course, not knowing ratio dei will not stop us from fulfilling the law. However, it is still of great value to understand, to the extent that we can, why God rquires this of us. Also, if God requires it, what right did a rabbi have to find a loophole in it? I would like to comment on the second question now, and leave the first for further study and contemplation.

The rabbis are entrusted with the interpretation and implementation of the divine commands, as we will read next week (D'varim 17:11). It is their job to take the written and oral aspects of the Torah that were received on Sinai, and realize them in day to day practice. Thus, the rabbinic commands and protective enactments gain a certain divine authority (Rambam Hil. Mamrim 1:1).

The divine Law, however, was not written for the actual moral and ethical level of the Jewish nation at the time it was given. It was written as an abstract ideal. The nation is to look to that ideal and work to bring their actual position closer to that ideal each day. It is a moral staff for Jews (and indeed Gentiles) to cling to as they climb to the heights of moral and spiritual piety. Torah does not reflect reality; rather, the task of good people everywhere is to make reality reflect the ideals of Torah.

(This is the true concept of tikun olam, the awesome work of perfecting the world, little by little. I believe it was the Maharal who wrote that the world was created purposely flawed, so that humans would have a hand in its perfection. Rabbi Soloveitchik speaks of this when he says that one of the charges of Man is to be creative, and take part in the perfection of the world around him, and thus, partner with God in creation (מעשה בראשית).)

This is hinted at in many commands of the Torah. For example, in the ten commandments, the order not to murder is לא תרצח. The word לא is used, as opposed to אל. The first is a simple negation, while the second is an exhortation to not do something. At first glance, we might expect the Torah to use אל, which would essentially command us 'Do not murder!' However, it uses לא, which really translates to 'You will not murder.' This is simply a statement of fact. It is this idealized fact that we in our mundane world must strive to make a reality. (I thank אבי מורי for pointing this out to me.)

In fact, this is one of the lines of reasoning that Rabbi Hirsch uses to show the divine origins of the Torah. No group of men, he reasons, would write into laws ideas that would not be feasible for those governed in their present moral and spiritual state. Only God would write laws that the Jewish nation would have to work to grow into.

And so, Hillel had to find a loophole* to hold the nation together until the time that they become spiritually and ethically ready to realize the abstract ideals of D'varim 15:9. As Rabbi Natan stated (Brachot 9:5), when the laws of God are in danger of being trampled, desperate measures must be taken to uphold them, even the seeming abrogation of those laws. Prosbol is not an ideal, but a practical demonstration that the Nation of Israel still has much room to grow, and much work to do in order to bring the kingdom of Heaven down to earth.

May we, in these wondrous beginnings of redemption, look to the Torah and realize our destiny, in the minute laws of the individual, and also in the overall thrust of our national re-awakening.

---------
*It should be noted, of course, that Hillel used a loophole, and did not legislate away the law in question. This must be contrasted to other uses of purported rabbinic takanot, such as the legalization of the breaking of the biblical laws of the Sabbath by the conservative, in order to keep Jews coming to synagogue (which, at best, is a rabbinic concept).

Brutality Again

See here. And the two posts below it. Barbarians.

Theodicy

The ninth of Av always brings my mind to the problem of evil. How can God countenance evil? More importantly, how can evil even exist? God is, after all, the supreme good; how can anything but good emanate from Him?

This question has plagued philosophers throughout the ages. It has led many to deny God's absolute goodness, and even to question His existence. Let us begin a cursory review of some Jewish responses to the problem of evil*. This is a work in progress, and any suggestions or corrections are welcome.

The Ra'avad (R Avraham Ibn David) writes in Emunah Ramah that evil comes from matter. The spiritual abstraction that spawned the world (God and the spark of truth that is the Torah) is perfectly good. However, when they become realized in creation, in physical matter, they immediately lose aspects of their goodness. In the transition to physical creation, elements of good are lost, and to the extent that something is physical, it contains evil. Evil is essentially the shadow of the material upon the landscape that was illuminated by God. Thus, when God created matter, he, in effect created evil. However, this evil is more negative existence than actual creation. Ra'avad ends by saying that, taken in context of the universe, evil is really good, only disguised.

This last point is interestingly echoed in the poetic writings of Augustine. He states that we consider some things evil because 'they are at variance with other things.' Ultimately, God should be praised for everything, even things we perceive to be bad, because they all contribute to a harmonious whole. This view does away with the work of theodicy by denying the essential existence of evil. This is hard to take, especially in light of my previous post. While it may be true, it fundamentally takes away our right to examine the world we live in critically.

The Kuzari also does this. He reminds us that all God does is good, and wryly points out that human ability to understand the workings of the world are surely at the bottom of the scale of goodness in this world. Evil and good are rewarded and punished most truly in the realm of the spirit world, that waiting room to the world to come. Thus, we are enjoined to complete our work in this world, and allow the problem of evil to be solved by He who allowed it to (seem to) exist.

Rambam agrees that evil is rooted in matter. The human soul is completely good. Evil is a function of the marriage of matter and spirit. However, the closer Mankind gets to wisdom and study, and the further Humanity moves from passion and emotion, the less will matter hold sway, and the less will this accidental evil presist.

Kabbalistic writings agree with the Kuzarian premise that all activity is ultimately good. Evil is punishment for evil in deed and thought. The concept of the Gilgul, or reincarnation is introduced to solve the problems stemming from the suffering of obvious innocents, such as children. Souls are cast into new lives that receive punishment for past lives' offenses.

The view I find most satisfying (perhaps because I thought of it before researching the subject) is R Sa'adia's. He states (Emunoth V'deoth 2) that evil is simply a product of Man not fulfilling God's will. When humans go against the divine right or do not fulfill it completely, they by negation commit evil. Of course, these results of human activity may be to punish or teach, but they are products of our actions. God has given Man the free will to go against His rule, but ultimately, He is in control of the world's destiny, and evil will be punished. The suffering of the good will also not be in vain.

This may be best left for another post, but I find it particularly interesting to consider the talmudic dictum, 'he who is merciful to the wicked will end up wicked to the merciful'. It is precisely when we veer from divine morality, and attempt to be more moral than God towards enemies of His Kingdom, that we sow the seeds of evil towards those who cling to His ways. It is not always clear how, but the ripple effect is always there. And so, that profoundly Jewish essence of mercy, when mis-applied, will lead to the most perverted and warped injustice against those who demonstrate that very trait of loving-kindness.

* I found an article at JewishEncyclopedia.com helpful in sourcing some of the following ideas. Also, Rabbi Carmy has a book relating to suffering that I hope will shed more light on this topic.

Children of our Past

The ninth of Av. Soaked with the tears of countless who still mourn the destruction of 2,000 years. Please, God, please, let it be enough. End this bitter exile, and redeem us! And the echo that brings our cry back to our own ears seems to say, 'work with me to end it, and to redeem you...' (UPDATE: See the Muqata for another extremely apropos pictoral post.)

Nothing connects me to the pain and sorrow of our history more deeply than the children. Who does not see their own little boy or girl in the pain of a starving child's eyes? Stronger than any קינה, more powerful than six million names, here are the faces that haunt me day and night...

Religious Renaissance

Rabbi Adlerstein has a post on a disturbing subject at Cross-Currents. He makes some good points, and I do not mean to negate any of the constructive criticism in the post. However, I think an important possibility is being overlooked.

The question is, why is it that seemingly well-adjusted citizens of Israel are moving to Messianic Judaism for their religious experience? While the question was raised in the scope of Israel and Messianic Judaism, the issue is just as valid when asked about youth in any Jewish community who replace the religious experience of traditional Judaism with any alternative. It is my contention that the answer lies in the culture of replacement that we have absorbed from the world around us.

We live in a world-culture whose mantra is, ‘if it’s not perfect, trade it in!’ Every day, people opt to upgrade their cell phones, computers and cars, instead of having their present ones fixed. It is easier, and the thrill of novelty is an opiate to the drudgery that is so much of life.

The same holds true for many aspects of our lives. The current culture is that if a marriage becomes challenging, divorce is the answer. If one's career seems to grow boring, career change is immediately suggested. People pick up and drop hobbies and leisure activities in the blink of an eye. Sadly, this replacement culture has invaded the study halls, as well. Many people feel the need to constantly be presented with novel, interesting subjects in university or the beit midrash. Sadly, even religious experience, no matter how inspiring, can become routine, and that spark we first felt when serving God may be dampened.

The fact is that habit can be a bore. No matter how exhilarating, the doing the same thing every day can become dull, and people will begin to look for new inspiration. And so, we must ask: how are we meant to deal with flagging interest in these areas of life that are so important? Mature people who are confident in their faith will look inward for this renaissance, but many modern people will immediately look outward to find religious renewal.

It is unfair to place the blame for the lack of this external renewal on the practitioners of Jewish Orthodoxy. Even in boredom, it is our job to recognize the inherent value in what we are doing, and re-ignite our passion through it. We can’t just trade it in, when it is an important part of our lives.

This level of responsibility and maturity must be a part of our educational plans for our youth. We must periodically bring up new aspects of the service of Hashem. There are plenty. A good discussion on the power of prayer can be enough to uplift a flagging spirit. Excitement about the poetry and depth of Tanach is another way to boost interest. Educators must make an effort to show their charges the many aspects of Torah, and teach them that they can find renewed inspiration through their age-old traditions, instead of looking for it in other faiths.

Our House in Israel III

Well, the building is almost done. We should have the kitchen and granite in by next Friday. Here are some interim pictures:

Above, you can see the front entrance, which is actually on the right side of the house. The overhang is not finished yet.

Here, you can see the entrance area. There is a double-ceiling, which allows people on the second floor to look down from the balcony. The wood has not yet been put up on the bannister top.

This is a picture inside our kitchen, before the cabinets are put in. The electrical and water sleeves will be inside lower cabinets. After the cabinets and granite are installed, the walls will be finished.

With God's help, the house should be done by the first week in July. I will try to post pictures when it is completed. Good Shabbos!

Bilaam's Secret Weapon

Bilaam desperately wanted to destroy the nation of Israel. The midrash quoted by Rashi teaches that he hated Israel even more than Balak, the king who hired him. Balak only wished to chase the Jews from his area (ואגרשנו מן הארץ), while Bilaam planned to wipe them off the globe.

And so, Bilaam set out, and with the help of Balak, tried time and again to curse the Jews. However, each attempt was thwarted by God, who withheld his mystical moment of anger each day (See Brachoth 7a), and forced a blessing out of the mouth of the evil prophet. In one instance, Bilaam was inspired by the privacy each Jewish home provided its neighbors, by having windows that specifically faced away from other homes windows. In another, the prophet described the Jews as a nation that dwells unto itself.

Balak saw Israel's strength precisely in their ability to draw distinctions and boundaries between things that need to be separate. This is, in fact, one explanation of the symbolism behind שעטנז and the dietary laws, according to Rabbi Hirsch. The Beit Halevi says that man's ability to preserve physical distinctions like keeping meat and milk separate is a reason that the Torah was given to us, and not to angels. The maintenance of boundaries that God sets, both in the natural law (ex. כלאיים) and in the moral Law He delivered at Sinai (ex. שעטנז and בשר בחלב), is a major task given to Israel. By doing so, we bow to His greater wisdom, and keep order in this world. Keeping this in mind, Israel has the capacity to become a shining city atop a hill, and lead the world towards God by example of a perfect society. A light unto the nations must dwell apart from them, to provide a goal and structure.

Indeed, the order that God placed in nature is a model for the order that exists in morals and ethics. Just as it is naturally wrong to place an ox and a ram in a yoke together, causing them both stress and pain because of their different gaits, so it is morally wrong to blur the line between what is mine and what is my fellow man's.

The Jewish nation was able to maintain their aloof nobility in the face of Bilaam's attempts to curse them. In fact, throughout history, our nation demonstrates the ability to keep its distance when threatened with hate and rage from the nations. However, Bilaam realized after three attempts, that his very blessings to the Jews were their Achilles' heel.

And so, Bilaam decides to change tactics. Instead of threatening the Jews openly, he decides to help them blur the line between Jew and Midianite, between morality and sin. He sends girls to seduce the Jews. Acceptance and toleration are experiences that cause Jews to lose the demarcations that God's law demands. Sin ensues, and the spiritual walls of protection have been breached.

Throughout the generations, Bilaam's blessings and scheming serve to remind us of the two sides of the same coin. Boundaries, natural and moral, allow Israel to fulfill its national calling, bringing spirituality and שכינה into this world. The blurring of these boundaries ultimately leads Mankind astray, and disaster follows closely in the wake.

When Israel recognizes its uniqueness and destiny in the scheme of history, it will proudly march before the nations, bringing them to an awe-filled appreciation for Godliness. As the Talmud states (Yoma 86a), "ראו כמה נאים דרכיו כמה מתוקנים מעשיו עליו הכתוב אומר (ישעיהו מט) ויאמר לי עבדי אתה ישראל אשר בך אתפאר." May we all work to bring this realization to our whole nation, and bring about the fulfillment of our purpose as an אור לגוים.

Olmert Reveals The Truth

Ynet reports:

רה"מ: לא ניתן לספק בטווח הקצר את כל הביטחון לעוטף עזה
ראש הממשלה, אהוד אולמרט, התייחס בכנס קיסריה בחיפה למצב התושבים בשדרות וביישובי עוטף עזה ואמר: "איננו יכולים לספק בטווח הקצר את כל הביטחון שהיינו רוצים לספק לכם.
"מי שרוצה לחיות בישראל צריך לקחת סיכון מסוים. סיכון זה הוא עדיין פחות ביחס לזה שיש בקיום חיים יהודיים במקומות אחרים", הוסיף אולמרט

Olmert admits that he does not have the ability (desire, really) to protect those Jews living surrounding the Gaza Strip. He says that living in Israel comprises certain dangers, which are still less than living outside of Israel as a Jew.

What an incompetent, evil man. The first purpose of a government is to defend its citizens! If he can't do it, then he has lost his right to the premiership. Let someone govern who respects his duties.

Chukas: The Staff and the Word

In one of the most famous parts of the Torah, the Jews, yet again, complain to Moshe about their lack of water. Thirty eight years ago, in a similar situation, God commanded the leader of the nation to strike a rock with his staff. Doing so freed a spring of water that accompanied the people miraculously through the desert. However, this time, God instructs Moshe to speak to the rock. Midrashim explain why, but the fact is that Moshe disobeys God's express word, and strikes the rock.

This seemingly small mistake is cause for great rebuke. Because Moshe and Aharon 'lost faith in God, and did not sanctify His name in the eyes of the nation', Moses loses his right to enter the Land of Israel. The Talmud (Sanhedrin 90b) tells us that God punishes and rewards us measure for measure. Why did Moshe's mistake warrant this strict punishment?

Rabbi Hirsch discusses the symbolism of the staff that accompanied Moshe on his mission to redeem Israel from Egypt and beyond. Moshe, the reluctant leader, was chosen by God, and plucked from a comfortable life as heir to the Midianite priesthood, to change the course of nature and history. The staff represents God's direct intervention in the mundane matters of Man and the physical laws of nature. It is the staff of miracles.

When the nation came to Sinai, God gave them a written and oral law, words which instructed them how to lead their personal and national lives. Life is not meant to constantly be lived in direct contact with the miraculous suspension of the laws of nature. The Torah teaches us how to live within the laws of nature, and without direct Godly intervention in the course of history.

Immediately following the exodus from Egypt, the nation was completely governed by the miraculous divine intervention in every aspect of its life. It was not prepared for a natural mode of existence, where action is governed by the law of God. And so, God told Moshe to strike the rock with his staff. However, thirty eight years later, the people were on the brink of entering Canaan. They needed to learn that the miraculous mode of guidance was about to end, and they must turn to the word of God instead of the staff, for counsel.

When Moshe struck the rock instead of speaking to it, he reinforced the wrong message to the people. To correct this, Moshe now must teach the lesson of the word over the staff with his very life. Moshe transfers his power to Joshua. He is the first link in rabbinic tradition. His reception of the Torah is as a tradition from his master, and not from God Himself. Thus, the one who takes the people across the Jordan is one who is totally grounded in the word of God as a tradition from his teachers, the beginnings of rabbinic authority. It is this persona that will sustain Israel throughout history, beginning with their entrance to Israel. By leaving the people at the border of Israel, and transferring power to the rabbinic tradition, Moshe teaches the people the lesson they missed in the striking of the rock.

Baruch Shekivanti?

In the beit midrash, it is considered an exciting delight to find that one's original thought was actually innovated by an earlier source, unbeknownst to the current thinker. This is usually taken to be a vindication of the thought patterns of the learner, and an exoneration of his logic. The happy student may exclaim, 'baruch shekivanti!', which ostensibly means 'blessed is He who directed me [to the same conclusion as source x]'. This phrase has become of modern parlance in orthodox circles, and is used in situations removed from torah learning, as well.

However, it is interesting to note that the Hebrew phrase does not mean what we hope it to mean; it is grammatically incoherent. 'Kiven' means 'directed'. It is the פיעל form of .כ.ו.נ. The 'ti' at the end simply appends the subject, I. Taken together, 'kivanti' means 'I directed'. 'Baruch' is a word that connotes blessing or thanks to the subject. So, 'baruch shekivanti' means 'blessed is it that I have directed'.

Obviously, this is not what users of the phrase mean to say. The speaker means the blessing or thanks to be directed towards God, who has directed him to the thought at hand.

To be as forgiving as possible, one might suggest that the pharse simply means to bless the very fact that the thinker has been directed to this thought. However, this also falls apart, because the subject of the Hebrew formulation is the thinker himself! It is improbable indeed that a student would be so full of hubris as to bless the fact that he himself directed the thought into his own mind. In any case, that would not require a blessing.

Rather, it seems that the proper formulation in Hebrew should be, 'Baruch Shekivnani'. 'Kiven' still means 'directed', but the suffix 'ani' makes the speaker the object, not the subject. Thus the subject is God (who is commonly taken as an implied subject in phrases of blessing*), and the thinker is the object of the directing that God has done. Thus, 'Blessed or thanks to He who directed me'.

*For example, ברוך דיין אמת, or ברוך שפטרני מענשו של זה, which are shortenings of the standard blessing formulation, and imply God as the subject.

The Red Heifer and Purity of Will

When impurity is contracted by contact with a dead body, seven days of waiting are mandated. On the third and seventh day, the subject must be sprinkled with a special preparation of water and heifer-ash. After this, he may immerse in מים חיים, and is considered pure. Rashi quotes the midrash and states that this is one of those laws whose understanding is beyond human ken, and therefore is a חק. However, Nachmanidies attempts an explanation, and the Talmud itself (Menachot 19a) does not see the word חק as an exhortation against attempts at divining ratio dei, rather as a description of how fundamental each aspect of this law is to its fulfillment.

Rabbi Hirsch's general view of ritual purity and impurity has been discussed before. Freedom of will in spiritual and moral matters are the sine qua non of our ability to see the commands of the Torah as binding. Only if we truly have the ability to hallow our lives can we strive for purity of action in the way of God's law. This moral freedom is questioned when Man comes into contact with death. A human corpse seems to tell our physical senses that all is predestined, and that our moral choices end with the whole of man dead, as any other living thing. This would leave no room for an immortal world which finds transcendent meaning in the moral decisions of humanity while it lives.

The preparation of the red heifer solution is a public negation of this notion. Outside of the היכל, the whole nation witnesses as the Kohen prepares the solution which symbolizes Man's ability to ultimately triumph over death. Demonstrated is the fact that Man is not made up solely of the physical; the important part of Humanity, the spirit, lives on and is immortalized by moral and Godly action.

The sprinklings also contribute to this meaning. The third day of creation was when animals were created, submitting themselves to the natural law of God's creation. The seventh day symbolizes the infusion of Godliness into the world. No longer is creation seen as a physically complete unit. Instead, the Law is introduced, and Man is tasked with obeying God, not out of nature, but out of will.

When an impure person is sprinkled on the third day, he hallows his physical being for service of God. On the seventh day, the spiritual component is re-dedicated, and Man's return to moral free-will is complete. The dedication of the spirit cannot be complete without the dedication of the physical. Only a complete organic creature can be imbued with the holiness of free-willed service of God.

Thus, the moral turpitude of pre-destined action is replaced with the liberating of Man's will to serve God. This is accomplished fully when the whole of Man, in all his dualities, spiritual and physical, transient and immortal, are dedicated to the free-willed service of God.

Gaza Today

This article from Maariv really shows the blood-thirsty Arab treatment of their political opponents. I would not suggest the faint-hearted to watch the clip.

For all you peace demanders out there, this is how they treat each other. Do you really think they will treat the Jews of Israel any differently if we do not staunchly defend ourselves against them?

Never forget who your enemy is, and more importantly, that you are your enemy's enemy. He will treat you like this if he has the chance.

Revisionist History

The way Israel is portrayed today, looking back at the Six Day War, is an example of hostorical revisionism in action. Just look at how Time Magazine saw the war back then. Thanks to Jameel at the Muqata for the article.

Rambam's Argument from Contingency

1) Existence comes in two flavors. An object exists necessarily or contingently.

2) Contingent existence means that it is theoretically possible for it to not exist.

3) Necessary existence is when it is not possible for the object to not exist.

4) When we look at the universe, we see many things (including the universe itself) that exist.

5) Why do they exist?

6) Well, something exists either because a) it must exist (necessarily exists) or b) it was brought into existence by something whose existence we can already explain.

7) As stated in 4, we know things exist.

8) This can only be explained by something that exists necessarily, however far you have to go back.

9) We therefore conclude that Something exists necessarily.

This argument is similar to the first cause argument, but it deals not with temporal contingency, but logical contingency. (This leaves open the door for an eternal universe.)

PS. XGH claims that infinite regress is just as logical to posit as a first cause. However, in fact, if one denies the impossibility of logical infinite regress then one is really denying logic as a formal system. Our whole concept of logic is based on the premise that the world we see around us is founded on cause and effect. This is what gives us permission, given a premise, to infer a conclusion. One who denies this has entered the realm of mysticism and if one has entered mysticism, she is in a very weak position to criticize any form of Emuna whatsoever.

12 for 12

In contribution to Nefesh B'Nefesh's new project, here are my 12 reasons for loving Israel:

1) The state that does, bar none, the most of any country in the world to further the study and dissemination of Torah. Israel supports countless בני תורה who learn full-time, and provides structure for others who want to incorporate torah learning into their lives otherwise.

2) A country that experienced open miracles and demonstrated God's existence and continued concern with our Nation's wellfare. The Six Day War is the most obvious example of this.

3) The land where all 613 mitzvot can be kept, even theoretically. More than half the commandments in the torah are dependent upon the land (תלויות בארץ).

4) A place every Jew, no matter who, is welcome and given immediate citizenship and a bundle of rights and benefits. In the history of the world, there is only one country that sees its mission as the protection and flourishing of every Jew.

5) A place about which the Chazon Ish said, "there is no greater mitzvah than the working of her land." (Censored out of all but the first edition of his writings.)

6) A place that the very act of breathing and living is a mitzvah.

7) A place where people really act like extended family to one another. Don't believe me? Go to any makolet and tell the owner that you don't have money, can you take milk and eggs, and pay tomorrow.

8) A place where the act of working and producing is not a self-centered activity, but one that contributes to our national economy and vitality.

9) The place where, when shopping at a mall, you can catch a mincha minyan at the mall's beit knesset.

10) A place where you automatically feel at home.

11) A place that fulfills prophecies, Like Amos's (9:13-15). " הִנֵּה יָמִים בָּאִים, נְאֻם-יְהוָה, וְנִגַּשׁ חוֹרֵשׁ בַּקֹּצֵר, וְדֹרֵךְ עֲנָבִים בְּמֹשֵׁךְ הַזָּרַע; וְהִטִּיפוּ הֶהָרִים עָסִיס, וְכָל-הַגְּבָעוֹת תִּתְמוֹגַגְנָה. וְשַׁבְתִּי, אֶת-שְׁבוּת עַמִּי יִשְׂרָאֵל, וּבָנוּ עָרִים נְשַׁמּוֹת וְיָשָׁבוּ, וְנָטְעוּ כְרָמִים וְשָׁתוּ אֶת-יֵינָם; וְעָשׂוּ גַנּוֹת, וְאָכְלוּ אֶת-פְּרִיהֶם. וּנְטַעְתִּים, עַל-אַדְמָתָם; וְלֹא יִנָּתְשׁוּ עוֹד, מֵעַל אַדְמָתָם אֲשֶׁר נָתַתִּי לָהֶם--אָמַר, יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ".

12) A place that doesn't suffer you, but needs you!

Living in Israel and the Feast of First Fruits

Each of the שלש רגלים has a מגילה associated with it. On פסח, we read שיר השירים, and on סוכות, we read קהלת. Today, we read מגילת רות. רות begins with a famine in the land of Israel. Elimelech, one of the great men of the generation, takes his wife and two sons to the land of Moav, outside of Eretz Yisrael. There Elimelech dies, and eventually, so do his two children, Machlon and Kilyon. The stage is then set for Naomi to return to Israel with רות and eventually create the Davidic dynasty. Why is רות chosen to be read on שבועות? After an exploration of the holiday, perhaps we can come up with a deeper understanding.
The torah reading for the holidays is taken from פרשת המועדים, found in פרשת פנחס. Yesterday, we read "וביום הביכורים", the description of the offerings for שבועות. Interestingly, the holiday is not called חג השבועות, but יום הביכורים. The holiday is called so because the unique קרבן brought on it is the שתי הלחם, the first of the new wheat crop which could be brought to the בית המקדש. The holiday of ביכורים was also the time that most crops ripened, and was therefore the prime time to do the מצווה of ביכורים. We call it שבועות, named by the 7 week period of עומר leading from יציאת מצריים to מעמד הר סיני and the giving of the torah to the Jewish people.

Let us first discuss the special קרבן of the holiday, שתי הלחם. The torah says in ויקרא כג:טו, in פרשת אמור: "וספרתם לכם ממחרת השבת מיום הביאכם את עומר התנופה שבע שבתות תמימות תחיינה...והקרבתם מנחה חדשה לה'...ממושבותיכם תביאו לחם תנופה שתים שני עשרונים...ביכורים לה'" At the end of the 7 weeks, we are commanded to bring the offering, which is two measures of wheat flour baked into two loaves that are waved in the בית המקדש. The obvious question is, why two loaves? Usually, a קרבן consists of one bull, ram or goat. Why suddenly the number two? Also, the meal offering of פסח was barley. Why is the שבועות one of wheat?
In שמות ו:ט, it states that when Moshe began trying to convince Pharaoh to free the Jews, even the Jews would not listen to Moshe, "מקוצר רוח ומעבודה קשה", because of the tremendous strain and burden of the slavery. חז"ל on this פסוק explain interpret that the Jews did not listen to Moshe to abandon their idolatrous ways. This is difficult. Why do חז"ל invent a new reason that the Jews did not listen to Moshe? The torah already provided one, that the Jews were weary and strained from the hard labor! ספר גלילי זהב offers an explanation: Many animals live alone, without belonging to a herd or group. They live, hunt, kill and eat for one reason: to serve themselves. Other animals live in a herd and are sometimes even willing to lay down their lives to protect the herd. We as Jews are meant not to only to live a personal, individual life, but to sublimate that personal life to the כלל, to כלל ישראל. We are to see our individual selves as citizens of a nation, and we are to see the national goals of עם ישראל as goals that are more important than individual goals. In short, we are meant to be not self-centered, but nation-centered, כלל ישראל-centered. חז"ל say that this is a fundamental difference between the Jews and non-Jews. Regarding עשו, the torah says נפשות, souls, and regarding יעקב it says נפש, soul. Jews, since they serve one G-d, are one unbreakable unit, while non-Jews, who serve many gods, are each an individual unit. True, non-Jews come together to form alliances and nations, but they only do so for external financial, military or social concerns. Jews, on the other hand, are fundamentally an indivisible unit because we all serve one G-d.
When a Jew loses this sensitivity to the nation and becomes an individual who only looks out for himself, that Jew is no longer serving G-d, rather himself. This is עבודה זרה, idolatry.
It is this idolatry that חז"ל were concerned with in מצריים. The burden of slavery caused the Jews to think as individuals, and lose their national identity. And so, on פסח, the meal offering is made of barley, the traditional food of animals. However, on שבועות, Jews are to rise above their animalistic, individualistic ways and become Human, identifying themselves as Jews on a national level. Therefore, the meal offering of שבועות is wheat, the grain of human food. Also, I think that the two loaves is also symbolic of the fact that the Jewish way is to care for others. The two loaves represent a Jew caring not only for himself, but for s neighbor, as well.
The רמב"ם in his פרוש המשניות on בכורות ד:ג states, "בני ארץ ישראל הם הנקראים קהל". The Jews of the Land of Israel are the ones who are considered the plurality, the nation of Israel. The חתם סופר drives home this point by saying that, "אילו חס ושלום לא ישאר שום ישראל בארץ ישראל, אפילו יהיו יושבים ישראל בחוץ לארץ, מקרי כליון האומה, חס ושלום" “If, Heaven forbid, no Jews lived in Israel, even if they lived outside of Israel, it would still be considered the destruction of the nation.” The חתם סופר is clear: although Jews would still live, the nation of the Jews would be destroyed. The רמב"ם and חתם סופר are based on the גמרא in כתובות קי, which states that, “ a person should live in Israel even in a city that is full of non-Jews, rather than a city outside Israel that is full of Jews. This teaches one who dwells outside Israel is as if he worships idols”. One who lives outside Israel is as if he is an idolater in the sense of idolatry of the Jews in Egypt, the idolatry of self-centeredness. One who lives outside of Israel is weaker in their national bonds of כלל ישראל, and thus, if there were no Jews in Israel, the national brotherhood and connection of Jews, the אומה, the nation, would be lost.
To summarize, the idea of the שבועות offering of שתי הלחם is an admonition to be concerned with the concerns of the nation, not only our own individual concerns. When we are concerned only with ourselves, our efforts die with us. But when we connect our lives with the concerns of the כלל, our lives become eternal, for כלל ישראל is eternal. This eternity is only in full force in ארץ ישראל.

But why is this eternity only in the land of Israel? To understand this, let us examine the ביכורים, which is the torah’s name for שבועות.
In מסכת ביכורים פרק ג', the משניות describe the ceremony of ביכורים: “How were the ביכורים taken up [to ירושלים]? All the cities of district would assemble in the [central] city of the district, and spend the night in the open space without entering any of the houses. Early in the morning the officer would say, "Arise, let us ascend to Zion, to the house of ה' our G-d!" ... An ox [with horns] bedecked with gold and with an olive-crown on its head led the way ..."
Rabbi Kook, in his commentary on the משנה, explains the symbolism of the ox in depth. The Jewish nation is meant to be an "עם לבדד ישכון", a nation apart from the others. We were given a land which can produce all that the nation needs. And so, a large part of the nation lived an agricultural life. The ביכורים are a symbol that demonstrates how we are to look at the agricultural process. The ox represents honest labor. Only through hard work and השתדלות can the ברכה of ה' devolve upon our fruits. When we learn the lesson of the ox, then will we merit to the gold on its horns. The gold symbolizes prosperity. This gold is placed on the ox’s horns. The horns of an animal are external tools given to the animal. The horns symbolize the fact that the gold is a tool, a means to an end, and not an end in itself. Gold, or prosperity, is only a means to the ultimate goal, and that is what sits on the ox’s head: olives. Olive oil is a symbol for light, specifically, the light of the מנורה. The מנורה was a symbol of חכמה, torah knowledge. Thus, we work to become prosperous, but the purpose of that prosperity is to allow us time and energy for the ultimate goal, which is the learning and keeping of the torah.
The symbol of the ceremony of ביכורים now becomes taking the secular and making it holy. We take physical labor, and elevate it to holiness. The purpose of עם ישראל is not to dabble in holiness. We are not to live a life in which we have many points of holiness. No! We are to take our whole lives, even the most spiritually empty parts of it, even the חול in our lives, and elevate it to קודש, to holiness! Our lives must be an infusion of holiness into the profane. This is the lesson of the ביכורים.
But it is only in the land of Israel that we engage in the bringing of ביכורים. ביכורים are only brought from the fruits of the land of Israel. The lesson of ביכורים can only be fully understood and put into practice in the land of Israel. Why is this?
In next week’s פרשה, שלח, ten leaders of Israel tour Israel and incite the nation to rebel against entering Israel. These men were great צדיקים and גדולים of the generation. How could they sin so grievously? Rav Greenburg, ראש ישיבה at כרם ביבנה explains that the מרגלים were seduced by the benefits of life in the desert. In the desert, G-d miraculously cared for the Jewish nation’s every physical need. Our clothing grew along with us, and did not wear out. We had the מן outside our tents every morning. We had the well of מרים to quench our thirst. All we had to do was learn torah from משה רבינו. The מרגלים decided, why leave this paradise and go into Israel where we will have to work the land, fight wars and set up government? Why not stay in the מדבר where we do not have to really come in contact with the profane?
The מרגלים misunderstood the basic lesson of the torah that is taught by the ביכורים. True spirituality is only gained by infusing חול with קדושה. Only by entering the land of Israel and engaging in the profane and elevating it to קדוש do we really fulfill our calling as Jews.
And only in Israel do we truly fulfill this calling. Only in Israel, a land where even the physical labor is a service of G-d, where working the land is a mitzvah in and of itself. The גמרא in כתובות states that walking ד' אמות in Israel changes a bad decree from Heaven. Israel is different from other lands. In Israel, even the physical act of walking has spiritual repercussions. The גמרא elsewhere states that, "אוירא דארץ ישראל מחכים", the air of Israel endows us with wisdom. Only Israel has this special קדושה which allows even its physical characteristics to be laden with spiritual meaning and power.
The מרגלים did not understand the meaning of ארץ ישראל. The lesson of ביכורים was lost on them.
To summarize what we have learned so far: Israel is a special land where the physical is imbued with spiritual meaning. It is the only land where the Jewish task of infusing the profane with holiness can be fully realized. The מרגלים did not realize the importance of taking the physical and making it spiritual.
We can now better understand why the Jews of Israel are considered כלל ישראל, and outside Israel, Jews are less connected to the national aspect of עם ישראל. It is because our sacred task, the infusion of spirit into physical, can only truly be accomplished in Israel. Outside the land, we are, as it were, mired in the idolatry of self-centeredness, by not focusing on the כלל.

This brings back to מעמד הר סיני and שבועות. In ילקוט שמעוני on פרשת יתרו, the מדרש tells us that G-d gave the torah under the מזל of תאומים, the star sign of Gemini, twins. If עשו had chosen to convert and rejoin the nation of Israel, he would have been welcome. Why did עשו not choose so? The גרי"ז explains that when ה' promised the land to אברהם and his descendants, he said that first, those descendants would go through a torturous exile, and only after this, would then come to take over the land. רש"י comments that when עשו left יעקב, he left from fear of this exile. עשו said, "אין לי חלק לא במתנה שנתנה לו הארץ ולא בפרעון השטר." עשו decided that he abdicates his right to the land, and will not go down to exile for it. יעקב is left as the only descendant who goes down to Egypt, and is given as a reward the rights to the land and the Torah. This is why עשו did not merit מתן תורה. Originally, עשו and יעקב were to be the fathers of the Jewish nation. עשו would deal with the physical, and יעקב would deal with the spiritual, like a יששכר זבולון relationship. This is what the חז"ל mean when they say that עשו could have had a part in מתן תורה. However, when עשו gave up on the exile and on the land, he gave up on torah, as well.

So, back to our original thought. Why is מגילת רות chosen as the מגילה of שבועות? In בבא בתרא דף פא, רבי שמעון בר יוחאי states that the reason that Elimelech and his sons died was that they left the land of Israel. The גמרא in מגילה states that one who dies outside the land of Israel is lamented that he died before his time. The מהרש"א explains that he who dies outside of Israel must have died early because of the sin of living outside ארץ ישראל. If I may, I would like to present a חידוש. Perhaps the early death that the גמרא speaks of is not necessarily dying before one’s time, but something more subtle. Perhaps the גמרא is telling us that one who lives outside ארץ ישראל, even when they live a full life in years, they are not living a full life in meaning. A life outside ארץ ישראל is one that cannot contain the full weight of the ideas of כלל ישראל, being part of the nation of Israel, and cannot fully infuse the קדושה of ה' into the physicality of the world. Perhaps this is the part of life we mourn for one who dies outside Israel.

And so, מגילת רות becomes an admonition to us to connect to the concepts of שבועות.מגילת רות tells us to pay close attention to the lessons of the שתי הלחם, the ביכורים, and מתן תורה. שתי הלחם teaches us that life is only fully meaningful when we become part of the eternal, to כלל ישראל. The ביכורים teach us that the task of כלל ישראל, to infuse the secular with קדושה is only truly fulfilled in the land of Israel. And if we learn these lessons, and impress in our hearts the special, unique קדושה of ארץ ישראל, the only place we can truly marry the profane and holy, then we will be closer to the coming of the משיח, במהרה בימינו.

Blood Torah?

Wow.

Is this really what Hashem wants?

Torah and the Spies

A month or two ago, someone (I forget who) asked me for a source for the idea that the sin of the spies was a desire to live outside of Eretz Yisrael, where they could learn Torah and deal only in spiritual matters, instead of entering the Land, where they would have to deal with the pragmatics of life as a sovereign state, running an army, government, and the like.

I mentioned I thought it was in the Ramban. I now found that the source is the Shlah Hakadosh, from kabbalistic precedents. It is also mentioned, I believe, in Michtav Me'eliyahu. The Lubavitcher Rebbe goes into this in his Sicha on Parashas Shelach, 5747.

If anyone remembers who I was discussing this with, please lead them to this post. I appreciate it.

Good Shabbos! UPDATE 19/6/13: The source for this is the S'fat Emet on the sin of the spies. - Found in נגיעות בשפת הלב by R Yair Dreyfus.

Philosophy of Prayer

Prayer is a mainstay of Judaism, and of religions in general. It is a periodic return to communion with God. However, if considered, the concept of prayer raises a number of theological questions. Since God is truly omniscient, why would He need our prayer to know what is best for us? And since he knows what is in our heart, why does expressing it verbally mean so much? Since he is unified and perfect, how can he 'need' our prayer, or anything else, for that matter? On the other hand, the Talmud (Sotah 12a) is not the first to mention the concept that, 'a righteous man decrees, and God fulfills it.' What are we to make of this bundle of theological contradictions?

There are two major schools of thought regarding the purpose of prayer that I would like to summarize. I will then bring a basic description of Rabbi Soloveichik's philosophy of prayer. Perhaps after this we can have a better understanding of why it is that we pray.

The first theory is theurgical. This view posits that God acts as father and judge, and allows Himself to be swayed by His children's appeals. This view is strongly advocated in Kabbalah, and Kabbalistic theory is employed to explain how a perfect God can be swayed in this way. This view, while uncomfortable for some, is probably the most common way that prayer is perceived by people. We hope that God attentively listens to our prayer, and cares about our small desires and needs. We trust that His infinity is not too large a chasm for Him to bridge, and 'if we open a door the size of a needle's eye, God will enlarge the opening' the rest of the way (Brachot 55a).

The second major theory of prayer is anthropocentric, focusing on the human who prays. God is not affected by prayer; the petitioner is. A person who stands in prayer, almost by definition, purifies himself with thoughts of repentance and hopes to become a more deserving creation. The praise of God leads to an upwelling of sentiment to be deserving of God's blessing. The petitional parts of prayer show a person how much he depends on God, and the thanksgiving in prayer reminds a person of the love and compassion God continually showers upon him. Through prayer, a petitioner is destined to better himself, and raise himself to greater heights. After prayer, he is in a new position as a subject of God, with new merits, and erased demerits. He is now deserving of a new judgment from God. And so, prayer affects God, as it were, indirectly, by changing the essence and thus the appropriate judgment of the person who prays¹.

Rabbi Soloveichik takes a different approach. My teacher, Rabbi Carmy, calls it the volitional/dialogical theory of prayer. He posits that prayer is not Man's attempt to influence God, but it is a fundamental way that Mankind interacts with God. Prayer is a medium through which we encounter God. Prayer is not focused on God, but on Man. However, it is not only anthropocentric, because it is a dialogue between Man and God. By creating that emotional connection that prayer instantiates, Man brings himself into communion with God. By realizing that life in the absence of God is empty and cold, a person brings himself to prayer, in order to draw God back into his realm of existence, so to speak.

We are commanded to find God through prayer. As a mitzvah, prayer demands of us to take notice of the chilling emptiness possible in a rational, natural world. We are enjoined to feel the loneliness of a universe that does not pay us heed. This loneliness reaches a crisis, and we call out to God, seeking a warm, intimate relationship with him. Thus, the very act of prayer is a form of interaction, דביקות, with the Divine. Furthermore, the fact that prayer is codified as a commandment means that the warmth of emotional connection to God is something that every human can experience.

Each of the above three approaches has benefits. The theurgical maintains the intimate bond between Man and God which is part of the general understanding of spirituality. The anthropomorphic allows us to understand prayer as a means to change ourselves, and thus be worthy of Divine grace. It makes religious petition active as opposed to passive. And finally, Rabbi Soloveichik's dialogical theory centralizes the communion aspect of prayer, and presents it as a way to interface with Divinity. Perhaps a synthesis of these three views is necessary to have a full picture of the power and importance of prayer.

-------------------------------------------------------------

¹ This difference of viewpoints calls to mind Rabbi Jonathan Saks' beautiful explanation of the controversy between Maimonides and Nachmanides. Rambam views prayer as a מצוה דאוריתא, based on Deut 11:13, while Ramban sees it as a rabbinic enactment. Rabbi Sacks cites the Talmud (Brachot 26b) where Rabi Yose views prayer as based upon the example of the patriarchs, while Rabi Yehoshua sees it as a replacement for the sacrificial rite. It seems natural to understand Rabi Yose as allowing for a biblically-ordained commandment to pray, while Rabi Yehoshua seems to organically subscribe to the rabbinic approach.

This dispute reminds us, says Rabbi Sacks, of the two modalities of our holy Torah: the prophetic, and the priestly. While the priestly laws are strict and formulaic (when the sons of Aharon stepped out of the proscribed method of sacrifice, they paid the ultimate price), the prophetic experience is one of intuition, spontaneous emotion, and intimate uniqueness. The priestly type of service of God is set - permanent and unchanging, while the prophetic eschews such formalism and embraces the unique and individual. Both modalities have a place in our traditions, as we can now see. When Rabi Eliezer states that one should not make his prayer קבע, the talmudic rabbis disagree over what he meant. Some understand him to be simply rejecting the tendency for prayer to become rote. On the other hand, some see him as rejecting formalized prayer completely, and saying that each day's new experience and reality should engender a different formulation of prayer within the soul. Thus, the אמוראים seem to each be taking a side in the question of prophetic vs priestly prayer.

It seems that this tanaitic, amoraic disagreement culminates in the argument between Rabmam and Ramban. According to Rambam, prayer is divinely commanded - it is based upon the prayers of the forefathers. On the other hand, the Ramban sees it as rabbinically enacted as a replacement for the sacrifices. Since it is so, it must apply to the formula.

This argument fits in nicely with the view expressed above: Rambam, the rationalist par excellence, holds that prayer is human-centered, for Man cannot change God. Thus, God commands Man to pray, to better himself. However, Ramban, the mystic between the two, holds that prayer may, mystically, affect God - and so, it is a rabbinically mandated replacement for the sacrifices - and therefore, was not commanded biblically, for the task was accomplished in biblical times by offerings.

Jewish tradition beautifully meshes these two in that each day we repeat our prayers twice, first individually, and then as a community in חזרת הש"צ. We have survived for 2,000 years as a community, Rabbi Sacks points out, because we have both the priestly and prophetic modalities: without the former, we have no tradition, but without the latter, no sponteneity. (See the footnote in here.)

Who Wrote Devarim?

A decade ago, Rabbi Ya'akov Charlop wrote an article discussing the authorship of the book of Devarim. Recently, while teaching tractate Megillah, I had reason to bring up his major points, that I realized afterwards was perhaps a bigger step than most attendees were ready to take at face value.

It is clear that Devarim is written in a different voice than the rest of the Five Books of Moses. Much of it is written in the first person, from Moshe's perspective, and God is spoken of in the third. This is in contrast to the rest of the Torah, in which Moshe is spoken of in third person. On the other hand, the Talmud treats the many commandments that appear exclusively in Devarim as completely Biblical commandments. The tension is clear. Who actually wrote the book of Devarim?

There is an argument in the Talmud as to the author of the book, which is carried through to the Rishonim.

In Sanhedrin (99a), the Talmud states clearly that the claim that there is even one sentence in the Five Books that were not written literally word for word by Moses from the mouth of God is heresy, and a fulfillment of the verse, 'כי דבר ה' בזה.' The Ramban (in his preface) and the Maimonides (Laws of Prayer, 13:6) agree to this view, and hold that the change in voice and motive in the book is a purely stylistic one, and does not represent a change in authorship.

On the other hand, the Talmud in Megillah (31b) states that the curses of Devarim are not as strict as the curses of Vayikra, and therefore, the curses of Devarim may be broken into different עליות, while those of Vayikra must be read without pause. The reason given is that the Vayikra curses are recorded by Moshe directly from the mouth of God, while the Devarim curses represent Moshe's own re-iteration of them. Rashi explains that "[in Vayikra] Moshe was made a messenger to say, 'thus said God,' for behold, they [the curses] are written in the language of [first person] , ex. ונתתי, while in Devarim, it states 'יככה ה,' Moshe spoke these on his own, [as if to say] if you break His commandments, He will repay you..."

The Ra'avan holds in accordance with this view, and cites the fact that the amora'im treated the verses in Devarim differently with regards to certain kinds of exegesis (most notably, סמוכים). Also, the אור החיים holds this way, and says that the first verse of the book serves to clarify that only this book was written by Moshe, but the rest of the Torah was dictated by God.

The Vilna Gaon (whose view I unknowingly expressed the week before at my shiur), explains that the first four books were literal transmissions from God to the Jewish people, with Moshe as the medium. None of his personality was present in the message. This is the אספקלריה המאירה, the perfectly translucent prophecy that was unique to Moshe. However, the book of Devarim was given to Moshe closer to the manner of the prophecies of other prophets. God would implant a vision, and it was up to the prophet to translate that into a message to the People. Thus, the message was colored by the individual prophet's persona. Thus, the book of Devarim was conceptually the word of God, but it was Moshe who wrote it.

According to this, we can understand why the commandments in Devarim are treated completely as commandments in any other book, while the actual writing and the textual scrutiny that the Sages applied may be different than the other books. The book of Devarim is a sort of bridge between the writings of God and the writings of the prophets.

Response to Jewish Atheist

Jewish Atheist has a post about capital punishment in the Torah and in present day Iraq. Here is my response to him:

I thought I should comment a few differences between the formal Jewish death sentence of stoning and what you witnessed on that horrible video. You cannot compare them, and here is why:

1) In Jewish courts, the condemned was drugged before the death, so that they would not feel the same pain or fear as if they were awake. This is akin to the drugs used in today's lethal injections which place the condemned in a relaxed, sleeping state before death.

2) They were thrown off a cliff first before rocks were thrown
so that the person would die immediately. The stones were ceremonial, not the cause of death.

3) To be liable for one of the 4 formal deaths (stoning is one of them) the person had to be warned, and had to agree they know they will be punished, but want to sin anyway. In other words, the only way to get these capital punishments is to want to rebel against God, with foreknowledge of the consequences. This is clear from Maimonides quoting the Talmud (source to come).

4) The Jewish concept of these capital punishments was 'וכל ישראל ישמעו ויראו', ie. to provide deterrence for others so that they not sin. This is actually one of the main reasons the US has capital punishment today.

5) Jewish capital punishment was carried out after a court case and verdict. More than a majority of a large court of learned judges was required to condemn a person, and the execution was delayed to allow for any evidence to come forth and exonerate or allow a loophole.

You cannot separate the Oral Law from the Written. We who believe the Written Word as the word of God believe it to be provisoed by His Oral Law, and that lays down the five points I just mentioned. In other words, the same God who wrote those verses, gave over the Oral Law that modifies them. See Rabbi Hirsch on the fact that the Written Law is like lecture notes that leave out important details, and the Oral Law was the lecture.

Thus your problem is really only with someone who does accept the written law, but not the oral law that modulates it. In other words, your problem with stoning is not with Orthodox Jewish thought, much less practice.

What do you think?

How Police Brutality should be Met

In Los Angeles, at an (illegal) immigration rally, Police were met with violence. Their response was to fire 240 rounds of rubber bullets, and to strike demonstrators and journalists who were obeying the orders to disperse. Sounds kind of like Amona, right?

Well, not quite. First of all, while the police in LA were certainly brutal, there were not 300 cases of head trauma that arrived at ER's throughout southern California. The scale of this offense was much smaller than anything witnessed at Amona, or the student protests in Israel of late.

However, the more important difference, and this one is the clincher, is the top brass response to the violence. Police Chief William J. Bratton said that the public has "an absolute and unqualified right to expect and demand an aggressive review" of what occured (link).

Police officials immediately denounced the thuggish tactics displayed by the officers. The public was told that with the amount of training the officers receive, this response was unacceptable. Three investigations are ongoing, and you can be sure that heads will roll.

There will always be brutal cops. Law enforcement tends to bring that out in a person. However, the sign of a compassionate, just government is immediate denunciation of this behavior, and a professional atmosphere where this activity will not be tolerated. Israel has a lot to learn from Los Angeles in regards to this issue.

Mutual Responsibility

When Israeli Police beat religious kids in the town of Amona, it was only another example of the extreme brutality that these forces display. When they badly beat orthodox demonstrators against the construction of highway 6, it was again displayed. There are many cases that should result in jail sentences, but instead result in promotions.

The latest occured today, when police set loose like a pack of dogs attacked a group of university students protesting a tuition increase. One student said, "My pants are soaked with the blood of a friend whose head was split open" by Israeli policemen.

As Jews, we are known as merciful people whose heritage is compassion. How is it, then, that when law enforcement, in our own country, takes up batons and fists and steel-toed boots against our own people, we do not rise in public outcries of abhorrence, demanding the heads of these police-thugs? Where is our defense of the downtrodden?

When a Jew was pounced during anti-expulsion demonstrations, his nose ripped away from his face by an Israeli officer of the law, where were the students? When Rabbi Meir Kahane was hounded by the security forces and branded an extremist, where were the Religious Zionist leaders? When religious kids are beaten, or charedi men trounced, where are the secular humanists of the land? It seems that when we do not protest injustice, we may be the next victim. And he who came before us, he whom we did not defend, will not be around to defend us.

It may be that some people need to experience first-hand the agony of a ripped face, or a billy club to the belly, in order to protest police brutality. But enough is enough. We must rise in one voice, and demand that civil rights be upheld in Israel! These cops must pay for their crimes. When we return to the values of our Torah, we will deserve a police force that knows its limits, not the police force of some third world country.

No more Israeli police brutality.

Acharei Mos: The Yom Kippur Goats

When one sins, he brings a goat as a chatas, or sin offering. Rabbi Hirsch explains the symbolism of this offering. The goat represents the individual sinner's obstinacy, his egotistical desire to do his own bidding, and obey no one external. A naturally stubborn animal, the goat is full of its own vigor and will. It symbolizes the fact that when one sins, he has cast off the yoke of Heaven for that time, and acted without subjugating himself to God's rule. This symbolic goat is brought to the Temple, where submits itself to slaughter. This represents man's ideal, which is submission to God's will. This is an ideal which the sinner has lost, and he brings the offering as a lofty reminder of what his relationship with God must rest on.

The goat is then brought to the fires of the altar, and its blood sprinkled on the sides. When this happens, the sinner learns the lesson that by submitting to the yoke of God, we take our temporal, transitive existence in this world, and convert it into immortality. By keeping our actions in tune with the desires of Hashem, we sublimate our lives, and they become part of the eternal. The altar represents the processing of God's will on earth. Our actions, indeed our very bodies, are to be "לחם אשה ריח ניחוח לה." They are to serve as fuel for the flame of God.

On Yom Kippur, however, a double goat offering is brought. The two goats are to be as identical as possible; they should be bought together, and of the same height and appearance. They represent not only one man, but mankind in general. A lottery decides which one will be for Hashem, and which will go לעזעזל. In other words, no outward properties decide if a particular human will do good or evil. It is truly up to each individual. This is the foundation of free will, that we each choose to do good or evil. Our actions are not predestined or determined by genetics.

The goat that is chosen to be for God immediately submits to slaughter and becomes fuel for God's fire. Meanwhile, the one destined for azazel stands in its own vigor and power. It continues to live. However, it comes to the door of the Temple, but no further. It represents people who choose to turn their backs on God's teachings. He heads out to the desert. One who chooses to live outside the bounds of free-willed subservience to God really has no place in the ideal human society. This person has decided to make his life a hedonistic celebration of his own ego. While he may have a pleasant life (symbolized by his staying alive longer than the goat that was sacrificed), he ultimately is thrown off a cliff in a barren land. His existence and his life's meaning ends with his death. He has chosen not to be fuel for God's glory on earth, and so, has missed his chance at immortality.

The everyday sin offering is enough for us generally. It is enough to teach us how to act with positive reinforcement. However, once a year, the nation gets a symbolic lesson demonstrating the spiritual excision of one who chooses not to live the life delineated by God, with negative reinforcement.

Perhaps this can be a lesson to educators. Negative reinforcement has its place, but positive reinforcement must be the way that discipline is mostly accomplished. Incentives and positive messages awaken the nobility in a child's soul, instead of engendering fear and malice.

Great Demographic News (II)

Another report that talks about the Israeli demographic issue in optimistic tones can be read here.

It seems that the Jewish orthodox birthrates guarantee the Jewish majority and will in fact increase it. It will also, by great coincidence, make the Torah more visible in government, as the future, more numerically religious generation votes orthodox people into government.

This reminds me of the Vilna Gaon's statement about the return to Zion. He writes that it may well start with secular Jews. In fact, he held, it will start that way, just as the Second Temple period was ushered in by Darius.

He further writes that this must be, for the redemption to take place. Satan will do his utmost to uproot the seeds of redemption before they have a chance to grasp the land of their fathers firmly. If the movement back to Israel is one with loud overtones of religion, Satan will immediately know to sabatoge those plans. Therefore, the beginning of the settlement will be initiated and controlled by unorthodox, even anti-orthodox, Jews. Satan will say, 'these surely cannot be part of God's great plan of redemption!' He will then leave the fledgeling state alone, focusing his powers on other things. Only when it is too late, and the process of redemption is no longer derailable, will it become clear that those first frontiermen were a cover for the redemption!

May God allow us to see the day when his plan is revealed to the world in all its glory.

Threatening Truth and the Free World

As reported by the Daily Mail, educators are beginning to leave the Holocaust out of their curricula, in fear of anti-Semitic reactions from Muslim students. The Islamic threat that only 30 years ago endangered Israeli society, is now spreading, by virtue of its high birth rate and scathingly fundamentalist voice, and threatens much of the Free World. What is going on?

The Free World has become so egalitarian that it is able to morally equate the terrorist's actions with those of defensive victims. It is able to compare the calculated murder of innocent children with the tragic, accidental deaths of military reactions to those murders. In short, we have lost our ability to distinguish between morally complex situations. And so, it should be no surprise that the world begins to cave in to the squeakiest global wheel, giving in again and again to evil, in an attempt to gain short term peace. However, the blurring of moral distinctions is never cost-free; eventually, evil catches up, and the debatable short-term peace becomes the catalyst for long-term disaster. Evil slowly peels away society's willingness to stand up for truth and justice, and ultimately, the World stands naked, unarmored, at the brink of a battle that is finally too important before which to bow.

As a world, we have allowed the Muslim fundamentalists too much slack. First, we gave their denial of Israel's right to exist credibility, since it is easier to allow terrorists a pulpit than to destroy their ability to make terror. Then, we allowed them to use our media to paint themselves as victims in a global conflict that is their own creation entirely. We have bought their lie that the West is the root of the world's problems. Why? Because it is easier to accept what they say and rail against moderate democratic governments and elected officials, than to go to their countries and demonstrate against their despots, and be tortured to death in a prison by their police. In short, it is easier in the short-term to tip-toe around brutality than to destroy it head on.

Finally, we are willing to remove the Holocaust from our schools rather than engage the inevitable anti-Semitic vitriol from Muslim students. No teacher would be able to effectively discredit or discipline a screaming Muslim child, and so we rather side-step the whole issue. And by doing so, do we pay notice to the fact that it is the very activity of the Holocaust that these Islamists gather their strength to carry out? No! Because, ultimately, the Jews are easier to reason with. They understand the need for classroom decorum. They will nod their heads with age-old patience and shuffle quietly to the crematoria yet again. The Arabs, however, will cause a ruckus. They will verbalize the unspoken truth that we all know is their dream and prayer: that Islam will wipe out all us heretics by the sword in due time. A Free World teacher does not have the tools to deal with this in the classroom. We simply cannot teach these issues if they raise such a furor in school.

I do not fear for the Jewish people. God saw how much the world does when Jews are butchered in 1939. He and we will never forget the atrocities allowed by an apathetic world and a seething, hateful enemy. And so, he gave us Israel, and an army, and bravery, and commanded us to trust no one but Him and ourselves. And although Israel presently does not put its faith in God only, I know it will. We hope that by choice, and yet, if not, by necessity, Jews will return to their Father in Heaven. He has a teleological goal in store for them, and they will rise to the occasion and their legendary glory eventually.

I do, however, fear for the Western World. It fails to see that by giving in to these fundamentalists, it simply pushes the ultimate battle up one more notch. By removing the Holocaust from their textbooks, teachers lead society down a dangerous road, the road of forgetting history, and being bound to repeat it. The new enemy, with its hateful screams and suicide attacks, will destroy a world that has forgotten what it is to fight for justice, morality, and its own right to exist.

The world must wake up before it is too late. It must root out this Muslim threat while it is still at the stage of its teen-hood, full of fury, but controllable. The world must develop a way to act in a way that befits the merciless masses of hate-filled Arabs bent on destruction, and avert catastrophe. May God give us the resolve and courage necessary, for this is already a hard and morally confusing battle, and it will only grow more so.