So, as we continue to read about the travails and challenges of being Yoseph in the ongoing text of our Parshiot HaShavuah, one just has to wonder – what lessons do we learn here about favoritism and its impact? Yes, Yoseph was Yaakov’s favorite son, continuing a long tradition of parental favoritism in the families of Bereshit; the Jews (we are often taught and proclaim) are G-d’s favorite people, and so goes life! What are we to do about this predicament?
I often teach that if we would all stop screaming at each other within the Jewish community, there are many important lessons we can and certainly should learn from each other. Let’s consider one of the most profound and fundamental teachings of Reconstructionist Judaism for just a moment, understanding that it may be challenging for some of us to do so – and that, my friends, is exactly the point! By ideology, the notion that the Jewish people are chosen as G-d’s favorite is basically rejected in this particular ideological system. As a result of rejection of this belief, references to such a chosen status are removed from the rhythm and content of prayer in this part of our larger Jewish community. Why exactly have our Reconstructionist Jewish friends replaced the Bracha of “who has chosen us from all of the nations” with “bring us closer with [G-d’s] commandments,” to mention one such change?
Now, to be sure, many ritualistically observant and Halachically oriented Jews will bristle at the notion of changing the words of our time-honored Siddur text. However, instead of tsk-tsking, let us wonder for a moment about what exactly the Reconstructionist fathers (and mothers) saw that brought them to this decision. I remember having these discussions with some of the movement’s leaders years ago. These words were removed precisely, according to how it was explained to me, because they conveyed a sense of superiority and selectiveness, which runs counter-intuitive to the Reconstructionist dedication to inclusivity and the love for all Jews and all of mankind. What exactly is wrong with this idea, you may ask or not care to ask. So, I did pose the following question to one of my Reconstructionist Rabbi friends in these discussions so long ago: Could we clarify exactly what the Jews were chosen for and educate the masses regarding the responsibility and role modeling we were to take on; thus clarifying the words asher bachar banu instead of removing them? What then ensued was a rather lengthy conversation in which many others became involved regarding how members of OUR Jewish community take on the notion of chosenness with such a superior air and judge other Jews and members of the human family with such passion and prejudice, it is hard to get back to rooted meanings of chosenness. Much is being written on this very painful phenomenon at this point in time.
This was part of what brought many Reconstructionist Jews to take on the agenda of inclusivity and equality for and of all people as a foundational defining element of their identity. Within this framework, I believe that many Jews across the spectrum, if they (we!) can be objective for just a moment, would not necessarily disagree with this move. That being said, I think it is a justifiable argument to posit that chosenness does not always mean such things as superiority or being “better or more favored” than others, though it is understood that there are many textual and linguistic references that do convey exactly this idea. However, this is NOT the focus of this piece here.
Now, let us return to Yoseph and his position in his family. His father gives his favorite son a special gift, Yoseph reports his strange dreams to all and we are told that he reports back to his father about the behavior of his brothers in the field. This is not exactly the makings of wonderful sibling relationships, to be sure. Do we fault the brothers for their treatment of Yoseph and deceiving their father; or do we look at the favorite son and ask some hard questions about what one can and should do with such a status?
I often say that to blindly (or in very good faith!) justify all of the aberrant or questionable actions of our Avot v’Emahot might be missing the challenge that Ribbonu shel Olam is putting before us in these rich and troubled (as well as troubling) narratives. What if the power of these stories is to teach us what NOT to do as well as what to do? At the end of the Yoseph narrative, one could make the point that he is overcome with the ramifications of his own actions as well as the separation that has occurred for so many years between him and his own family. As one psychologist teaches, rejection or absence of a nuclear family member leaves a hole in one’s heart, shaped with the profile of the family member not in one’s life. How many holes were there in Yoseph’s heart and how comforted must he have been when the rifts were finally resolved on whatever level! Clearly, when speaking of fault there was much to go around. Who in this family behaved honorably concerning this relationship? To be sure, there are some ideas expressed by our commentators regarding this as well, all to be trumped by the notion that Yoseph was fulfilling some divine plan to be in a specific place at a specific time to fulfill a specific mission. If this is the focus, it is easy to look away at how the members of this family treated each other. However, my contention is that this is exactly what we are NOT supposed to do in terms of learning and absorbing the full strength of the lessons these stories come to teach us.
Today, we teach that EVERY CHILD and EVERY PERSON is special with their own talents, perceptions and what they offer. That is to say, EACH AND EVERY PERSON IS CHOSEN for SOME DEED or MISSION. If we could embrace this idea and come to the place where we many not always understand each other or what we are doing and learn to ask questions regarding these misunderstandings instead of hurling insults, perhaps we would be able to heed the teaching of our Reconstructionist friends and look at chosenness differently. Imagine what we could learn about ourselves and others in doing so!
VIVA LA DIFFERENCE!
Monday, December 28, 2009
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
The Good News about Being Part of our Jewish Community is We are Part of a Family… The Bad News About Being Part…
So, you know the one about six, or is it seven, degrees of separation… and we are all connected? I find that in the Jewish community, there’s really no more than 2 ½ degrees of separation, maybe three is a stretch … we really are all part of one huge family. We love each other and we fight with each other; we nurture each other and we destroy each other; we support each other and we hurt each other …. And so it goes. So as we continue to learn and look at these Parshiot of the Dysfunctional Families of Bereshit, we realize that we and our own family constellations fit right in.
In this week’s Parsha, Toldot, we have parental and sibling dissention, parental favoritism, tricking one’s only brother, fighting over family resources, and so on…. Just like in real life. But of course, this is real life, as we understand it. So, why is it that we begin our Torah reading cycle with all of these wonderful examples of complete family discord, including fratricide, sending part of the family off forever, not treating all members of the family equally, and so on? Keep in mind that we haven’t gotten to that idea of given your favorite son a beautiful coat or selling your brother to the Ishmaelites yet. Actually I think one of the most compelling lessons here is that after reminding ourselves of these chapters in our history, we go home and kiss our children and hug our spouses and say, “Hmmm, my family is actually great!” in many cases.
I really do believe that as humans, we are all fallible and have our weaknesses, our preferences, and our challenges. This is certainly true in the family, the most basic of all social units. The Torah is putting a mirror in front of us and asking that we carefully consider how we treat each other and how honorable we are within our family units. What does one parent do when they have information that the other parent does not, for example, about their children?
Consider the following text from Toldot:
כב וַיִּתְרֹֽצֲצ֤וּ הַבָּנִים֙ בְּקִרְבָּ֔הּ וַתֹּ֣אמֶר אִם־כֵּ֔ן לָ֥מָּה זֶּ֖ה אָנֹ֑כִי וַתֵּ֖לֶךְ לִדְר֥שׁ אֶת־יְהוָֹֽה: כג וַיֹּ֨אמֶר יְהֹוָ֜ה לָ֗הּ שְׁנֵ֤י גֹייִם֙ [גוֹיִם֙] בְּבִטְנֵ֔ךְ וּשְׁנֵ֣י לְאֻמִּ֔ים מִמֵּעַ֖יִךְ יִפָּרֵ֑דוּ וּלְאֹם֙ מִלְאֹ֣ם יֶֽאֱמָ֔ץ וְרַ֖ב יַֽעֲבֹ֥ד צָעִֽיר: כד וַיִּמְלְא֥וּ יָמֶ֖יהָ לָלֶ֑דֶת וְהִנֵּ֥ה תוֹמִ֖ם בְּבִטְנָֽהּ:
And the children struggled inside Rivkah and she asked, “If this is to be so, why am I in such a state?” She went to ask G-d what was going on. And G-d said to her, “There are two nations in your belly and two peoples will come from within you; one will be stronger than the other and the older shall serve the younger one. Her days of pregnancy were fulfilled, Rivkah gave birth and here there were twins in her belly. [Bereshit 25: 22 – 24]
There is much written by the commentaries on what is going on here, with this discussion between Rivkah and G-d. After all, the story that is introduced by this text is in serious need of explaining! Of course, as the boys grow, Yaakov and Esau “have their issues” and on two separate occasions, Yaakov does indeed get, dare we say steal or take under questionable circumstances, the right to the family inheritance, so to speak. Not only that, but both Rivkah and Yitzchak are involved in the family drama, in which a very old and blind, so we are told, Yitzchak is tricked and each parent does have their favorite, Yitzchak bonding with he-man Esau and Rivkah preferring the quieter and calmer studious Yaakov. Now the commentaries definitely work overtime to protect Rivkah and Yaakov, claiming that Esau is really this horrible person.
On this one, I will agree with Rabbi David Hartman of the Shalom Hartman Institute in Jerusalem and so many others who say that to make Esau the awful terrible bad guy and Yaakov the innocent angel might really be to miss the point of the story. We are NOT perfect, we are NOT always acting correctly, and G-d knows (no disrespect intended) we do NOT all get along all of the time. But we are all still members of the larger family … as Jews and as human beings.
So, maybe the lesson here is really to note that as Rabbi Jonathan Sacks writes in To Heal a Fractured World, we are here to try to fix and put back in order that which we throw into chaos as a result of our actions. This is the nature of human beings. G-d did not, according to Sacks, create a perfect world, precisely because G-d wants us to be partners with G-d in trying to improve and make the world a better place. When we look at these families, we see real people with real problems and making real attempts to right the real wrongs that ensue. Is not that the stuff of human nature?
So, G-d tells Rivkah what is going to happen. Why does G-d do this? If you think about this, Rivkah is being put in a rather uncomfortable position knowing this information. So, what parent does not understand looking at their children and noticing that one has abilities that the other does not have, that one is more talented, more good-natured and so on? This is in fact the nature of being individuals – we know that as no two snowflakes are alike, to be sure no two people are alike, EVEN identical twins (and this I know to be true from experience as a mother of twins that we believe are genetically identical).
Back to our story! As this drama continues, we find Yitzchak believing that Yaakov is Esau and yet, maybe not really so much… Note that the text says:
יח וַיָּבֹ֥א אֶל־אָבִ֖יו וַיֹּ֣אמֶר אָבִ֑י וַיֹּ֣אמֶר הִנֶּ֔נִּי מִ֥י אַתָּ֖ה בְּנִֽי: יט וַיֹּ֨אמֶר יַֽעֲקֹ֜ב אֶל־אָבִ֗יו אָֽנֹכִי֙ עֵשָׂ֣ו בְּכֹרֶ֔ךָ עָשִׂ֕יתִי כַּֽאֲשֶׁ֥ר דִּבַּ֖רְתָּ אֵלָ֑י קוּם־נָ֣א שְׁבָ֗ה וְאָכְלָה֙ מִצֵּידִ֔י בַּֽעֲב֖וּר תְּבָֽרֲכַ֥נִּי נַפְשֶֽׁךָ: כ וַיֹּ֤אמֶר יִצְחָק֙ אֶל־בְּנ֔וֹ מַה־זֶּ֛ה מִהַ֥רְתָּ לִמְצֹ֖א בְּנִ֑י וַיֹּ֕אמֶר כִּ֥י הִקְרָ֛ה יְהוָֹ֥ה אֱלֹהֶ֖יךָ לְפָנָֽי: כא וַיֹּ֤אמֶר יִצְחָק֙ אֶֽל־יַֽעֲקֹ֔ב גְּשָׁה־נָּ֥א וַֽאֲמֻֽשְׁךָ֖ בְּנִ֑י הַֽאַתָּ֥ה זֶ֛ה בְּנִ֥י עֵשָׂ֖ו אִם־לֹֽא: כב וַיִּגַּ֧שׁ יַֽעֲקֹ֛ב אֶל־יִצְחָ֥ק אָבִ֖יו וַיְמֻשֵּׁ֑הוּ וַיֹּ֗אמֶר הַקֹּל֙ ק֣וֹל יַֽעֲקֹ֔ב וְהַיָּדַ֖יִם יְדֵ֥י עֵשָֽׂו:
And [Yaakov] came to his father and said, “My Father.” And [Yitzchak] said “Here I am; who are you my son?” Yaakov answers his father, “I am Esau, your first born, I did what you told me to; now get up please and eat from the meet that I have brought and give me the blessing of your soul.” And Yitzchak said to his son “How is it that you have hurried to do all of this, my son?” Yaakov answered “Because the Lord your G-d has allowed this to happen.” Yitzchak said to Yaakov, “Come close to me so I can feel you, my son and tell if you are really Esau of not.” Yaakov approached Yitzchak his father and he felt him and said “The voice is the voice of Yaakov and the hands are the hands of Esau.” [Bereshit 27: 18 – 22]
Now, it is so clear in this narrative before confronting any commentary that Yitzchak is really sensing that something is not quite right. He asks how “Yaakov” was able to do everything he asked so quickly. Of course the answer is Rivkah overheard (or was this part of G-d’s staging?) Yitzchak ask Esau to go and get and prepare for him the food. Then Yitzchak senses that this is not Esau, for the voice belongs to Yaakov. And so the story continues with deception, plotting and a series of mishaps leading all the way to the point when Yaakov supposedly receives the blessing intended for Esau. Was this really the case, or could this be an example of “Man plans, G-d laughs.” There are so many other explanations, including the notion that we each have our mission to fulfill and our purpose – that is we have our part to play in the family to which we belong.
To be sure, exactly what G-d had revealed to Rivkah in the beginning of the Parsha does transpire but not without fall out. Clearly, there are bad feelings that will continue through this generation and into the next ones from this dysfunctional family unit. This too seems all too real to us. We need to paint each other in black (bad and evil) or white (good and pure) tones. But wait…. Is this really the point? Or, alternatively, perhaps the point is as the Gemara teaches, no one person is wholly good or wholly bad. We all have good and bad within us, different perspectives, different goals, different talents, and different ways of playing our journeys on this earth. The question is to what extent can we, as members of this large Jewish family, agree to disagree and come to an understanding that there is room for all of us and the purposes we are each here to fulfill? Once we figure this out, maybe we will find the good news of being part of the family!
In this week’s Parsha, Toldot, we have parental and sibling dissention, parental favoritism, tricking one’s only brother, fighting over family resources, and so on…. Just like in real life. But of course, this is real life, as we understand it. So, why is it that we begin our Torah reading cycle with all of these wonderful examples of complete family discord, including fratricide, sending part of the family off forever, not treating all members of the family equally, and so on? Keep in mind that we haven’t gotten to that idea of given your favorite son a beautiful coat or selling your brother to the Ishmaelites yet. Actually I think one of the most compelling lessons here is that after reminding ourselves of these chapters in our history, we go home and kiss our children and hug our spouses and say, “Hmmm, my family is actually great!” in many cases.
I really do believe that as humans, we are all fallible and have our weaknesses, our preferences, and our challenges. This is certainly true in the family, the most basic of all social units. The Torah is putting a mirror in front of us and asking that we carefully consider how we treat each other and how honorable we are within our family units. What does one parent do when they have information that the other parent does not, for example, about their children?
Consider the following text from Toldot:
כב וַיִּתְרֹֽצֲצ֤וּ הַבָּנִים֙ בְּקִרְבָּ֔הּ וַתֹּ֣אמֶר אִם־כֵּ֔ן לָ֥מָּה זֶּ֖ה אָנֹ֑כִי וַתֵּ֖לֶךְ לִדְר֥שׁ אֶת־יְהוָֹֽה: כג וַיֹּ֨אמֶר יְהֹוָ֜ה לָ֗הּ שְׁנֵ֤י גֹייִם֙ [גוֹיִם֙] בְּבִטְנֵ֔ךְ וּשְׁנֵ֣י לְאֻמִּ֔ים מִמֵּעַ֖יִךְ יִפָּרֵ֑דוּ וּלְאֹם֙ מִלְאֹ֣ם יֶֽאֱמָ֔ץ וְרַ֖ב יַֽעֲבֹ֥ד צָעִֽיר: כד וַיִּמְלְא֥וּ יָמֶ֖יהָ לָלֶ֑דֶת וְהִנֵּ֥ה תוֹמִ֖ם בְּבִטְנָֽהּ:
And the children struggled inside Rivkah and she asked, “If this is to be so, why am I in such a state?” She went to ask G-d what was going on. And G-d said to her, “There are two nations in your belly and two peoples will come from within you; one will be stronger than the other and the older shall serve the younger one. Her days of pregnancy were fulfilled, Rivkah gave birth and here there were twins in her belly. [Bereshit 25: 22 – 24]
There is much written by the commentaries on what is going on here, with this discussion between Rivkah and G-d. After all, the story that is introduced by this text is in serious need of explaining! Of course, as the boys grow, Yaakov and Esau “have their issues” and on two separate occasions, Yaakov does indeed get, dare we say steal or take under questionable circumstances, the right to the family inheritance, so to speak. Not only that, but both Rivkah and Yitzchak are involved in the family drama, in which a very old and blind, so we are told, Yitzchak is tricked and each parent does have their favorite, Yitzchak bonding with he-man Esau and Rivkah preferring the quieter and calmer studious Yaakov. Now the commentaries definitely work overtime to protect Rivkah and Yaakov, claiming that Esau is really this horrible person.
On this one, I will agree with Rabbi David Hartman of the Shalom Hartman Institute in Jerusalem and so many others who say that to make Esau the awful terrible bad guy and Yaakov the innocent angel might really be to miss the point of the story. We are NOT perfect, we are NOT always acting correctly, and G-d knows (no disrespect intended) we do NOT all get along all of the time. But we are all still members of the larger family … as Jews and as human beings.
So, maybe the lesson here is really to note that as Rabbi Jonathan Sacks writes in To Heal a Fractured World, we are here to try to fix and put back in order that which we throw into chaos as a result of our actions. This is the nature of human beings. G-d did not, according to Sacks, create a perfect world, precisely because G-d wants us to be partners with G-d in trying to improve and make the world a better place. When we look at these families, we see real people with real problems and making real attempts to right the real wrongs that ensue. Is not that the stuff of human nature?
So, G-d tells Rivkah what is going to happen. Why does G-d do this? If you think about this, Rivkah is being put in a rather uncomfortable position knowing this information. So, what parent does not understand looking at their children and noticing that one has abilities that the other does not have, that one is more talented, more good-natured and so on? This is in fact the nature of being individuals – we know that as no two snowflakes are alike, to be sure no two people are alike, EVEN identical twins (and this I know to be true from experience as a mother of twins that we believe are genetically identical).
Back to our story! As this drama continues, we find Yitzchak believing that Yaakov is Esau and yet, maybe not really so much… Note that the text says:
יח וַיָּבֹ֥א אֶל־אָבִ֖יו וַיֹּ֣אמֶר אָבִ֑י וַיֹּ֣אמֶר הִנֶּ֔נִּי מִ֥י אַתָּ֖ה בְּנִֽי: יט וַיֹּ֨אמֶר יַֽעֲקֹ֜ב אֶל־אָבִ֗יו אָֽנֹכִי֙ עֵשָׂ֣ו בְּכֹרֶ֔ךָ עָשִׂ֕יתִי כַּֽאֲשֶׁ֥ר דִּבַּ֖רְתָּ אֵלָ֑י קוּם־נָ֣א שְׁבָ֗ה וְאָכְלָה֙ מִצֵּידִ֔י בַּֽעֲב֖וּר תְּבָֽרֲכַ֥נִּי נַפְשֶֽׁךָ: כ וַיֹּ֤אמֶר יִצְחָק֙ אֶל־בְּנ֔וֹ מַה־זֶּ֛ה מִהַ֥רְתָּ לִמְצֹ֖א בְּנִ֑י וַיֹּ֕אמֶר כִּ֥י הִקְרָ֛ה יְהוָֹ֥ה אֱלֹהֶ֖יךָ לְפָנָֽי: כא וַיֹּ֤אמֶר יִצְחָק֙ אֶֽל־יַֽעֲקֹ֔ב גְּשָׁה־נָּ֥א וַֽאֲמֻֽשְׁךָ֖ בְּנִ֑י הַֽאַתָּ֥ה זֶ֛ה בְּנִ֥י עֵשָׂ֖ו אִם־לֹֽא: כב וַיִּגַּ֧שׁ יַֽעֲקֹ֛ב אֶל־יִצְחָ֥ק אָבִ֖יו וַיְמֻשֵּׁ֑הוּ וַיֹּ֗אמֶר הַקֹּל֙ ק֣וֹל יַֽעֲקֹ֔ב וְהַיָּדַ֖יִם יְדֵ֥י עֵשָֽׂו:
And [Yaakov] came to his father and said, “My Father.” And [Yitzchak] said “Here I am; who are you my son?” Yaakov answers his father, “I am Esau, your first born, I did what you told me to; now get up please and eat from the meet that I have brought and give me the blessing of your soul.” And Yitzchak said to his son “How is it that you have hurried to do all of this, my son?” Yaakov answered “Because the Lord your G-d has allowed this to happen.” Yitzchak said to Yaakov, “Come close to me so I can feel you, my son and tell if you are really Esau of not.” Yaakov approached Yitzchak his father and he felt him and said “The voice is the voice of Yaakov and the hands are the hands of Esau.” [Bereshit 27: 18 – 22]
Now, it is so clear in this narrative before confronting any commentary that Yitzchak is really sensing that something is not quite right. He asks how “Yaakov” was able to do everything he asked so quickly. Of course the answer is Rivkah overheard (or was this part of G-d’s staging?) Yitzchak ask Esau to go and get and prepare for him the food. Then Yitzchak senses that this is not Esau, for the voice belongs to Yaakov. And so the story continues with deception, plotting and a series of mishaps leading all the way to the point when Yaakov supposedly receives the blessing intended for Esau. Was this really the case, or could this be an example of “Man plans, G-d laughs.” There are so many other explanations, including the notion that we each have our mission to fulfill and our purpose – that is we have our part to play in the family to which we belong.
To be sure, exactly what G-d had revealed to Rivkah in the beginning of the Parsha does transpire but not without fall out. Clearly, there are bad feelings that will continue through this generation and into the next ones from this dysfunctional family unit. This too seems all too real to us. We need to paint each other in black (bad and evil) or white (good and pure) tones. But wait…. Is this really the point? Or, alternatively, perhaps the point is as the Gemara teaches, no one person is wholly good or wholly bad. We all have good and bad within us, different perspectives, different goals, different talents, and different ways of playing our journeys on this earth. The question is to what extent can we, as members of this large Jewish family, agree to disagree and come to an understanding that there is room for all of us and the purposes we are each here to fulfill? Once we figure this out, maybe we will find the good news of being part of the family!
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Testing, Testing... The Ongoing Lessons of Avraham Aveinu, Part Two
Tzedek Tzedek Tirdof! צדק צדק תרדף
Righteousness, righteousness you shall pursue! With these words, the prophet reminds us through the ages of our existence of what it is that Judaism and Jewish observance is to bring us to in our own lives. Social justice is the way of Jewish living and observance according to many, in spite of what we may too often observe around us. Our family has identified an important Rav of our choosing in Sir Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, the Chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of Great Britain and the Commonwealth, for his consistent emphasis of this very point. He continues to articulate that to be a religious Jew, a Shomer Mitzvot, it is not a question of whether or not one is concerned about the well being of those around him; rather, we are metzuvim, that is commanded, to be so involved. As I have often said, how can I accept the Mitzvah of Shiluach Kan and not show love and concern for my neighbor, notwithstanding those who hold by the notion that we are to send the mother bird from the nest precisely because G-d told us to and not out of any sense of compassion. I prefer to read this teaching as G-d commands us to be compassionate, so that we will not decide not to be so! How can I be so particular about what goes in my mouth in observing the laws of Kashrut and not be as meticulous about what comes out of my mouth in my speech and observe the laws connected to Shmirat HaLashon, guarding my language, in my attempt to build relationships and community while healing the world in a real and tangible manner.
In Rabbi Sacks’ wonderful book, To Heal A Fractured World (United States: Schocken Books, 2005), this is a theme that resonates. He presents the notion that instead of seeing Judaism as a religion of pure obedience and submission to the will of G-d, we as human beings, and specifically as Jews, should take the charge of choosing to act in such a way as to emulate G-d who shows such just behaviors. He quotes one of my favorite texts of Gemara from Sotah 14 a(p. 46), that explains as follows in teaching how we emulate G-d and bring G-d into this world through such actions:
R. Hamma son of R. Haninah said, What does it mean in the Torah when it says “You shall walk after the Lord your G-d? (Devarim 13:5)” How is it possible for a human being to walk after G-d? Doesn’t the Torah say, “The Lord your G-d is a consuming fire? (Devarim 4:24)” Rather, this means, “you should emulate the attributes of the Holy One Blessed is G-d.” Just as G-d clothes the naked, as it says, “And G-d made for Adam and his wife garments of skin and clothed them (Bereshit 3:21)”; you too shall clothe the naked. Just as G-d visits the sick when “G-d appeared to Avram by Elonei Mamre (Bereshit 18:1)”, you too shall visit the sick. Just as G-d comforts the mourners as when “After the death of Avraham, G-d blessed his son Yitzchak (Bereshit 25:11),” so you too shall comfort mourners. Just as the Holy One Blessed be G-d buries the dead as when “G-d buried Moshe in the valley (Devarim 34:6),” you shall also bury your dead.
I have taught this text so many times to so many groups because I believe it captures the most fundamental of underlying principles that motivates G-d to give us a system of mitzvot to structure our lives as well as the most profound reason for us to follow them.
We call Avraham our father, as Avraham Aveinu. Why this appellation? To be sure many reasons are given. I always point to the following text from Bereshit 18: 18 – 19 as the reason, in which G-d makes a promise and gives the reason for the promise.
יח וְאַ֨בְרָהָ֔ם הָי֧וֹ יִֽהְיֶ֛ה לְג֥וֹי גָּד֖וֹל וְעָצ֑וּם וְנִ֨בְרְכוּ־ב֔וֹ כֹּ֖ל גּוֹיֵ֥י הָאָֽרֶץ: יט כִּ֣י יְדַעְתִּ֗יו לְמַ֩עַן֩ אֲשֶׁ֨ר יְצַוֶּ֜ה אֶת־בָּנָ֤יו וְאֶת־בֵּיתוֹ֙ אַֽחֲרָ֔יו וְשָֽׁמְרוּ֙ דֶּ֣רֶךְ יְהֹוָ֔ה לַֽעֲשׂ֥וֹת צְדָקָ֖ה וּמִשְׁפָּ֑ט לְמַ֗עַן הָבִ֤יא יְהוָֹה֙ עַל־אַבְרָהָ֔ם אֵ֥ת אֲשֶׁר־דִּבֶּ֖ר עָלָֽיו:
Avraham will be a great and mighty nation and all of the nations of the earth will be blessed through him. Because it is known that he will command his children and the members of his household after him, and they will guard and observe the ways of G-d, to do deeds of righteousness and justice in order that G-d will fulfill all that G-d has said on behalf of Avraham.
The people that come from Avraham and the generations afterwards, the Jewish people, if you will, earn the blessing that is given to Avraham precisely because they are to follow Avraham’s ways of Tzedakah u’Mishpat, welcoming guests as Avraham did, and doing so many other things as G-d does as indicated above. These are deeds of Social Justice.
Years ago, as a fun diversion, I along with a group of colleagues took a silly scan of our religious beliefs on some computer program. We answered a group of questions about belief in G-d, understandings of the beginnings of our Universe as we know it, ritual observances and practices concerning how we feel about the people around us and social justice. Upon completing this comical survey (which actually was not so bad, as computer surveys go), a group of us who are clearly in the Orthoprax/Orthodox range were identified as 100% Reform Jews. We were fascinated by this phenomenon and compared our answers to those amongst us who were “correctly” identified as Orthodox. What was the difference? It was so clear – those of us who were “liberal” (which I question in and of itself regarding what was the criteria that led to this identity) believed in the rights of others, social justice and our responsibility to be concerned for all of those in the family of humanity. Now, a flip computer program can identify me however it wants; I promise I will not lose sleep over this. The problem is that many people in our own community of Shomrei Mitzvot do so as well. This is what keeps me from getting needed sleep at night.
So, thank you Sir Rabbi Jonathan Sacks for supporting my family and our understanding that aiding prisoners as they come back out into the world after serving their sentences as our daughter Rachie is presently doing in New Orleans is part of our imperative to repair the world and free prisoners as Shomrei Mitzvot. Working to provide medical care to underserved populations as our daughter Talie plans to do even if it means not living where there is a critical mass of observant Jews is because of what she has taken on as a responsibility along with strict observance of Kashrut, Shabbat, Tziniut, and so much else.
We have taught our children to live in the ways of Avraham Aveinu, welcoming all guests into our home and lives, fighting for injustices in poorly equipped societies and so much else. These are the lessons of our father, Avraham and G-d, whom he taught us to serve.
Righteousness, righteousness you shall pursue! With these words, the prophet reminds us through the ages of our existence of what it is that Judaism and Jewish observance is to bring us to in our own lives. Social justice is the way of Jewish living and observance according to many, in spite of what we may too often observe around us. Our family has identified an important Rav of our choosing in Sir Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, the Chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of Great Britain and the Commonwealth, for his consistent emphasis of this very point. He continues to articulate that to be a religious Jew, a Shomer Mitzvot, it is not a question of whether or not one is concerned about the well being of those around him; rather, we are metzuvim, that is commanded, to be so involved. As I have often said, how can I accept the Mitzvah of Shiluach Kan and not show love and concern for my neighbor, notwithstanding those who hold by the notion that we are to send the mother bird from the nest precisely because G-d told us to and not out of any sense of compassion. I prefer to read this teaching as G-d commands us to be compassionate, so that we will not decide not to be so! How can I be so particular about what goes in my mouth in observing the laws of Kashrut and not be as meticulous about what comes out of my mouth in my speech and observe the laws connected to Shmirat HaLashon, guarding my language, in my attempt to build relationships and community while healing the world in a real and tangible manner.
In Rabbi Sacks’ wonderful book, To Heal A Fractured World (United States: Schocken Books, 2005), this is a theme that resonates. He presents the notion that instead of seeing Judaism as a religion of pure obedience and submission to the will of G-d, we as human beings, and specifically as Jews, should take the charge of choosing to act in such a way as to emulate G-d who shows such just behaviors. He quotes one of my favorite texts of Gemara from Sotah 14 a(p. 46), that explains as follows in teaching how we emulate G-d and bring G-d into this world through such actions:
R. Hamma son of R. Haninah said, What does it mean in the Torah when it says “You shall walk after the Lord your G-d? (Devarim 13:5)” How is it possible for a human being to walk after G-d? Doesn’t the Torah say, “The Lord your G-d is a consuming fire? (Devarim 4:24)” Rather, this means, “you should emulate the attributes of the Holy One Blessed is G-d.” Just as G-d clothes the naked, as it says, “And G-d made for Adam and his wife garments of skin and clothed them (Bereshit 3:21)”; you too shall clothe the naked. Just as G-d visits the sick when “G-d appeared to Avram by Elonei Mamre (Bereshit 18:1)”, you too shall visit the sick. Just as G-d comforts the mourners as when “After the death of Avraham, G-d blessed his son Yitzchak (Bereshit 25:11),” so you too shall comfort mourners. Just as the Holy One Blessed be G-d buries the dead as when “G-d buried Moshe in the valley (Devarim 34:6),” you shall also bury your dead.
I have taught this text so many times to so many groups because I believe it captures the most fundamental of underlying principles that motivates G-d to give us a system of mitzvot to structure our lives as well as the most profound reason for us to follow them.
We call Avraham our father, as Avraham Aveinu. Why this appellation? To be sure many reasons are given. I always point to the following text from Bereshit 18: 18 – 19 as the reason, in which G-d makes a promise and gives the reason for the promise.
יח וְאַ֨בְרָהָ֔ם הָי֧וֹ יִֽהְיֶ֛ה לְג֥וֹי גָּד֖וֹל וְעָצ֑וּם וְנִ֨בְרְכוּ־ב֔וֹ כֹּ֖ל גּוֹיֵ֥י הָאָֽרֶץ: יט כִּ֣י יְדַעְתִּ֗יו לְמַ֩עַן֩ אֲשֶׁ֨ר יְצַוֶּ֜ה אֶת־בָּנָ֤יו וְאֶת־בֵּיתוֹ֙ אַֽחֲרָ֔יו וְשָֽׁמְרוּ֙ דֶּ֣רֶךְ יְהֹוָ֔ה לַֽעֲשׂ֥וֹת צְדָקָ֖ה וּמִשְׁפָּ֑ט לְמַ֗עַן הָבִ֤יא יְהוָֹה֙ עַל־אַבְרָהָ֔ם אֵ֥ת אֲשֶׁר־דִּבֶּ֖ר עָלָֽיו:
Avraham will be a great and mighty nation and all of the nations of the earth will be blessed through him. Because it is known that he will command his children and the members of his household after him, and they will guard and observe the ways of G-d, to do deeds of righteousness and justice in order that G-d will fulfill all that G-d has said on behalf of Avraham.
The people that come from Avraham and the generations afterwards, the Jewish people, if you will, earn the blessing that is given to Avraham precisely because they are to follow Avraham’s ways of Tzedakah u’Mishpat, welcoming guests as Avraham did, and doing so many other things as G-d does as indicated above. These are deeds of Social Justice.
Years ago, as a fun diversion, I along with a group of colleagues took a silly scan of our religious beliefs on some computer program. We answered a group of questions about belief in G-d, understandings of the beginnings of our Universe as we know it, ritual observances and practices concerning how we feel about the people around us and social justice. Upon completing this comical survey (which actually was not so bad, as computer surveys go), a group of us who are clearly in the Orthoprax/Orthodox range were identified as 100% Reform Jews. We were fascinated by this phenomenon and compared our answers to those amongst us who were “correctly” identified as Orthodox. What was the difference? It was so clear – those of us who were “liberal” (which I question in and of itself regarding what was the criteria that led to this identity) believed in the rights of others, social justice and our responsibility to be concerned for all of those in the family of humanity. Now, a flip computer program can identify me however it wants; I promise I will not lose sleep over this. The problem is that many people in our own community of Shomrei Mitzvot do so as well. This is what keeps me from getting needed sleep at night.
So, thank you Sir Rabbi Jonathan Sacks for supporting my family and our understanding that aiding prisoners as they come back out into the world after serving their sentences as our daughter Rachie is presently doing in New Orleans is part of our imperative to repair the world and free prisoners as Shomrei Mitzvot. Working to provide medical care to underserved populations as our daughter Talie plans to do even if it means not living where there is a critical mass of observant Jews is because of what she has taken on as a responsibility along with strict observance of Kashrut, Shabbat, Tziniut, and so much else.
We have taught our children to live in the ways of Avraham Aveinu, welcoming all guests into our home and lives, fighting for injustices in poorly equipped societies and so much else. These are the lessons of our father, Avraham and G-d, whom he taught us to serve.
Friday, November 6, 2009
Testing, Testing …. The Ongoing Lessons of Avraham Aveinu, Part One
Years ago, I was home in the middle of the day and watched one of the larger society’s “Gedolei HaDor,” Oprah Winfrey on television. She was engaged in a conversation with Scott Peck (Think Zelig Pliskin’s alter ego as a Protestant!) and told the following story about a recurring dream she had. She talked about how she would be flying close to the ground in these dreams and would fly by young children. As she passed each young child, she would ask “How are you today?” Each of these children responded in turn, “That is the wrong question to ask. You should ask me what I was sent here to teach you today.” I love this story, for the message is so powerful for each of us. We know so many stories, including the many we read in the Torah, Talmud and so many other places. We often worry about the credibility of the details – that is how the story came to be. I often think, as in the vignette above, we should be asking ourselves what the story comes to teach us. Here is the universal and timeless meaning of these stories, not the details of their plausibility but the largess of their lessons!
So it is with the stories and tests of Avraham Aveinu. So many experiences with so many lessons to teach us! Avraham Aveinu clearly has his rightful place in the history of the world as the first monotheist, according to so many. As Jews, we speak of him as our first father. As human beings, there are so many lessons of humanity that Avraham teaches us – it is these lessons that he comes to teach us that are the subject of this writing today and the next one to be posted. Today, we will focus on some of the lessons that Avraham teaches us with regard to family relationships and yielding to the desires and destinies of others.
In Chapter 13, we read of Avraham’s negotiations with Lot when they come with their abundant property and have to determine where they will dwell in the land to which they have come. Quickly enough, we note that there is a conflict, as will naturally happen amongst real people in the real world.
We read as follows in Bereshit 13: 6 – 11 as follows:
ו וְלֹֽא־נָשָׂ֥א אֹתָ֛ם הָאָ֖רֶץ לָשֶׁ֣בֶת יַחְדָּ֑ו כִּֽי־הָיָ֤ה רְכוּשָׁם֙ רָ֔ב וְלֹ֥א יָֽכְל֖וּ לָשֶׁ֥בֶת יַחְדָּֽו: ז וַֽיְהִי־רִ֗יב בֵּ֚ין רֹעֵ֣י מִקְנֵֽה־אַבְרָ֔ם וּבֵ֖ין רֹעֵ֣י מִקְנֵה־ל֑וֹט ...ח וַיֹּ֨אמֶר אַבְרָ֜ם אֶל־ל֗וֹט אַל־נָ֨א תְהִ֤י מְרִיבָה֙ בֵּינִ֣י וּבֵינֶ֔ךָ וּבֵ֥ין רֹעַ֖י וּבֵ֣ין רֹעֶ֑יךָ כִּֽי־אֲנָשִׁ֥ים אַחִ֖ים אֲנָֽחְנוּ: ט הֲלֹ֤א כָל־הָאָ֨רֶץ֙ לְפָנֶ֔יךָ הִפָּ֥רֶד נָ֖א מֵֽעָלָ֑י אִם־הַשְּׂמֹ֣אל וְאֵימִ֔נָה וְאִם־הַיָּמִ֖ין וְאַשְׂמְאִֽילָה: י וַיִּשָּׂא־ל֣וֹט אֶת־עֵינָ֗יו וַיַּרְא֙ אֶת־כָּל־כִּכַּ֣ר הַיַּרְדֵּ֔ן כִּ֥י כֻלָּ֖הּ מַשְׁקֶ֑ה לִפְנֵ֣י ׀ שַׁחֵ֣ת יְהֹוָ֗ה אֶת־סְדֹם֙ וְאֶת־עֲמֹרָ֔ה כְּגַן־יְהוָֹה֙ כְּאֶ֣רֶץ מִצְרַ֔יִם בֹּֽאֲכָ֖ה צֹֽעַר: יא וַיִּבְחַר־ל֣וֹ ל֗וֹט אֵ֚ת כָּל־כִּכַּ֣ר הַיַּרְדֵּ֔ן וַיִּסַּ֥ע ל֖וֹט מִקֶּ֑דֶם וַיִּפָּ֣רְד֔וּ אִ֖ישׁ מֵעַ֥ל אָחִֽיו:
The land could not support the shepherds, flocks and belongings of Lot and Avraham for they both had so much; they were not able to dwell together. There was a quarrel between Avram’s shepherds and Lot’s shepherds…. Avram said to Lot, “Let there be no fighting between our groups as we are related. Is not the whole land before you? Let us separate, if you go to the left, I will go to the right; if you go to the right, I will go to the left.” Lot raised his eyes and saw the Jordan valley; it looked like the garden of G-d, like the land of Mitzrayim. Lot chose for himself all of the plain of Jordan and he went eastward; they separated from each other. (Translations in these postings are inexact and reflect spirit of story for our purposes.)
Notice the nature of the conflict resolution that Avraham uses. He puts the decision to be made in front of Lot in order to preserve whatever he can in the relationship. According to the text, their relationship is clearly not close and does not seem to be amenable to healing, but nonetheless, Avraham does not want to do anything to exacerbate what is probably not a comfortable situation. He acquiesces to what Lot chooses and this is a gift that Avraham gives to Lot. How many of us find that there are opportunities in our own lives to act in such a way? It is difficult to be sure, and while we are not told how Avraham must have felt in this situation, we can probably imagine, one human being to another, one Jew to another, one monotheist to another.
Later in the story of Avraham’s life, we read about his and Sarah’s attempts to have a child and the need for Avraham to have a son to inherit the legacy of his father. An earlier stage of this odyssey is reported in Chapter 15: 1-5:
א אַחַ֣ר ׀ הַדְּבָרִ֣ים הָאֵ֗לֶּה הָיָ֤ה דְבַר־יְהוָֹה֙ אֶל־אַבְרָ֔ם בַּֽמַּֽחֲזֶ֖ה לֵאמֹ֑ר אַל־תִּירָ֣א אַבְרָ֗ם אָֽנֹכִי֙ מָגֵ֣ן לָ֔ךְ שְׂכָֽרְךָ֖ הַרְבֵּ֥ה מְאֹֽד: ב וַיֹּ֣אמֶר אַבְרָ֗ם אֲדֹנָ֤י יֱהוִֹה֙ מַה־תִּתֶּן־לִ֔י וְאָֽנֹכִ֖י הוֹלֵ֣ךְ עֲרִירִ֑י וּבֶן־מֶ֣שֶׁק בֵּיתִ֔י ה֖וּא דַּמֶּ֥שֶׂק אֱלִיעֶֽזֶר: ג וַיֹּ֣אמֶר אַבְרָ֔ם הֵ֣ן לִ֔י לֹ֥א נָתַ֖תָּה זָ֑רַע וְהִנֵּ֥ה בֶן־בֵּיתִ֖י יוֹרֵ֥שׁ אֹתִֽי: ד וְהִנֵּ֨ה דְבַר־יְהוָֹ֤ה אֵלָיו֙ לֵאמֹ֔ר לֹ֥א יִירָֽשְׁךָ֖ זֶ֑ה כִּי־אִם֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר יֵצֵ֣א מִמֵּעֶ֔יךָ ה֖וּא יִֽירָשֶֽׁךָ: ה וַיּוֹצֵ֨א אֹת֜וֹ הַח֗וּצָה וַיֹּ֨אמֶר֙ הַבֶּט־נָ֣א הַשָּׁמַ֔יְמָה וּסְפֹר֙ הַכּ֣וֹכָבִ֔ים אִם־תּוּכַ֖ל לִסְפֹּ֣ר אֹתָ֑ם וַיֹּ֣אמֶר ל֔וֹ כֹּ֥ה יִֽהְיֶ֖ה זַרְעֶֽךָ:
Afterwards, the word of G-d came to Avram in a vision saying, “Don’t be afraid, Avram, I will guard you and your reward will be great. Avram says, “My Lord, what can you give me as I will die without children? I guess my steward will be my heir.” G-d replies, “No, that one will not inherit from you but it will be a child that comes from you who will inherit your legacy.” G-d takes Avram outside and says, “Look at the heavens and count the stars; just as you can’t count them, you will not be able to count all those that come from you.”
At this point, G-d promises Avram (he is not yet Avraham) a great deal! Now as the story unfolds, the words of the promise become more plausible. First Avram has a son, Yishmael through his wife’s handmaid Hagar, and then a son, Yitzchak, through Sarah, his wife. As we know all too well, there is contention in this household (which I suspect we can understand as well – now that’s a blended family!) and Avraham will have to use his skills of negotiation to keep whatever semblance of peace possible in his family. Here again, he will yield to others – To Sarah in decisions she will make regarding Hagar, to his faith in G-d regarding how the members of his family will carry on and certainly in the unfolding of Akedat Yitzchak.
In these instances, Avraham may not come across as the strongest advocate for those for whom we might think he should advocate. Why is that? Many people have a problem with this. I think it goes back to the promise that G-d makes to Avraham and the resulting faith that Avraham will have in G-d that will lead him to an understanding that different people – even those of his household – will have different destinies, some of which may be connected to his life experience and some of which may not. Allow us to imagine the pain that Avram the man must have felt regarding having to say goodbye to a son and his mother, and then to be ready to sacrifice another son, as well as understand the potential ramifications this event may have for his wife and her well being.
Again, the details of what happened may not be as much the point as is the lesson that these things happen and yielding to the destiny and goals of others may sometimes be the best we can do. In drivers’ education, new drivers are taught that when one skids in a car, the natural inclination is to turn the wheel against the skid – to fight it with everything you have. Yet, in reality the safest thing to do is to go in the direction of the skid – to accept it and work through it. This is one of the lessons that Avraham may come to teach us today. And there are others…… to be continued!
So it is with the stories and tests of Avraham Aveinu. So many experiences with so many lessons to teach us! Avraham Aveinu clearly has his rightful place in the history of the world as the first monotheist, according to so many. As Jews, we speak of him as our first father. As human beings, there are so many lessons of humanity that Avraham teaches us – it is these lessons that he comes to teach us that are the subject of this writing today and the next one to be posted. Today, we will focus on some of the lessons that Avraham teaches us with regard to family relationships and yielding to the desires and destinies of others.
In Chapter 13, we read of Avraham’s negotiations with Lot when they come with their abundant property and have to determine where they will dwell in the land to which they have come. Quickly enough, we note that there is a conflict, as will naturally happen amongst real people in the real world.
We read as follows in Bereshit 13: 6 – 11 as follows:
ו וְלֹֽא־נָשָׂ֥א אֹתָ֛ם הָאָ֖רֶץ לָשֶׁ֣בֶת יַחְדָּ֑ו כִּֽי־הָיָ֤ה רְכוּשָׁם֙ רָ֔ב וְלֹ֥א יָֽכְל֖וּ לָשֶׁ֥בֶת יַחְדָּֽו: ז וַֽיְהִי־רִ֗יב בֵּ֚ין רֹעֵ֣י מִקְנֵֽה־אַבְרָ֔ם וּבֵ֖ין רֹעֵ֣י מִקְנֵה־ל֑וֹט ...ח וַיֹּ֨אמֶר אַבְרָ֜ם אֶל־ל֗וֹט אַל־נָ֨א תְהִ֤י מְרִיבָה֙ בֵּינִ֣י וּבֵינֶ֔ךָ וּבֵ֥ין רֹעַ֖י וּבֵ֣ין רֹעֶ֑יךָ כִּֽי־אֲנָשִׁ֥ים אַחִ֖ים אֲנָֽחְנוּ: ט הֲלֹ֤א כָל־הָאָ֨רֶץ֙ לְפָנֶ֔יךָ הִפָּ֥רֶד נָ֖א מֵֽעָלָ֑י אִם־הַשְּׂמֹ֣אל וְאֵימִ֔נָה וְאִם־הַיָּמִ֖ין וְאַשְׂמְאִֽילָה: י וַיִּשָּׂא־ל֣וֹט אֶת־עֵינָ֗יו וַיַּרְא֙ אֶת־כָּל־כִּכַּ֣ר הַיַּרְדֵּ֔ן כִּ֥י כֻלָּ֖הּ מַשְׁקֶ֑ה לִפְנֵ֣י ׀ שַׁחֵ֣ת יְהֹוָ֗ה אֶת־סְדֹם֙ וְאֶת־עֲמֹרָ֔ה כְּגַן־יְהוָֹה֙ כְּאֶ֣רֶץ מִצְרַ֔יִם בֹּֽאֲכָ֖ה צֹֽעַר: יא וַיִּבְחַר־ל֣וֹ ל֗וֹט אֵ֚ת כָּל־כִּכַּ֣ר הַיַּרְדֵּ֔ן וַיִּסַּ֥ע ל֖וֹט מִקֶּ֑דֶם וַיִּפָּ֣רְד֔וּ אִ֖ישׁ מֵעַ֥ל אָחִֽיו:
The land could not support the shepherds, flocks and belongings of Lot and Avraham for they both had so much; they were not able to dwell together. There was a quarrel between Avram’s shepherds and Lot’s shepherds…. Avram said to Lot, “Let there be no fighting between our groups as we are related. Is not the whole land before you? Let us separate, if you go to the left, I will go to the right; if you go to the right, I will go to the left.” Lot raised his eyes and saw the Jordan valley; it looked like the garden of G-d, like the land of Mitzrayim. Lot chose for himself all of the plain of Jordan and he went eastward; they separated from each other. (Translations in these postings are inexact and reflect spirit of story for our purposes.)
Notice the nature of the conflict resolution that Avraham uses. He puts the decision to be made in front of Lot in order to preserve whatever he can in the relationship. According to the text, their relationship is clearly not close and does not seem to be amenable to healing, but nonetheless, Avraham does not want to do anything to exacerbate what is probably not a comfortable situation. He acquiesces to what Lot chooses and this is a gift that Avraham gives to Lot. How many of us find that there are opportunities in our own lives to act in such a way? It is difficult to be sure, and while we are not told how Avraham must have felt in this situation, we can probably imagine, one human being to another, one Jew to another, one monotheist to another.
Later in the story of Avraham’s life, we read about his and Sarah’s attempts to have a child and the need for Avraham to have a son to inherit the legacy of his father. An earlier stage of this odyssey is reported in Chapter 15: 1-5:
א אַחַ֣ר ׀ הַדְּבָרִ֣ים הָאֵ֗לֶּה הָיָ֤ה דְבַר־יְהוָֹה֙ אֶל־אַבְרָ֔ם בַּֽמַּֽחֲזֶ֖ה לֵאמֹ֑ר אַל־תִּירָ֣א אַבְרָ֗ם אָֽנֹכִי֙ מָגֵ֣ן לָ֔ךְ שְׂכָֽרְךָ֖ הַרְבֵּ֥ה מְאֹֽד: ב וַיֹּ֣אמֶר אַבְרָ֗ם אֲדֹנָ֤י יֱהוִֹה֙ מַה־תִּתֶּן־לִ֔י וְאָֽנֹכִ֖י הוֹלֵ֣ךְ עֲרִירִ֑י וּבֶן־מֶ֣שֶׁק בֵּיתִ֔י ה֖וּא דַּמֶּ֥שֶׂק אֱלִיעֶֽזֶר: ג וַיֹּ֣אמֶר אַבְרָ֔ם הֵ֣ן לִ֔י לֹ֥א נָתַ֖תָּה זָ֑רַע וְהִנֵּ֥ה בֶן־בֵּיתִ֖י יוֹרֵ֥שׁ אֹתִֽי: ד וְהִנֵּ֨ה דְבַר־יְהוָֹ֤ה אֵלָיו֙ לֵאמֹ֔ר לֹ֥א יִירָֽשְׁךָ֖ זֶ֑ה כִּי־אִם֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר יֵצֵ֣א מִמֵּעֶ֔יךָ ה֖וּא יִֽירָשֶֽׁךָ: ה וַיּוֹצֵ֨א אֹת֜וֹ הַח֗וּצָה וַיֹּ֨אמֶר֙ הַבֶּט־נָ֣א הַשָּׁמַ֔יְמָה וּסְפֹר֙ הַכּ֣וֹכָבִ֔ים אִם־תּוּכַ֖ל לִסְפֹּ֣ר אֹתָ֑ם וַיֹּ֣אמֶר ל֔וֹ כֹּ֥ה יִֽהְיֶ֖ה זַרְעֶֽךָ:
Afterwards, the word of G-d came to Avram in a vision saying, “Don’t be afraid, Avram, I will guard you and your reward will be great. Avram says, “My Lord, what can you give me as I will die without children? I guess my steward will be my heir.” G-d replies, “No, that one will not inherit from you but it will be a child that comes from you who will inherit your legacy.” G-d takes Avram outside and says, “Look at the heavens and count the stars; just as you can’t count them, you will not be able to count all those that come from you.”
At this point, G-d promises Avram (he is not yet Avraham) a great deal! Now as the story unfolds, the words of the promise become more plausible. First Avram has a son, Yishmael through his wife’s handmaid Hagar, and then a son, Yitzchak, through Sarah, his wife. As we know all too well, there is contention in this household (which I suspect we can understand as well – now that’s a blended family!) and Avraham will have to use his skills of negotiation to keep whatever semblance of peace possible in his family. Here again, he will yield to others – To Sarah in decisions she will make regarding Hagar, to his faith in G-d regarding how the members of his family will carry on and certainly in the unfolding of Akedat Yitzchak.
In these instances, Avraham may not come across as the strongest advocate for those for whom we might think he should advocate. Why is that? Many people have a problem with this. I think it goes back to the promise that G-d makes to Avraham and the resulting faith that Avraham will have in G-d that will lead him to an understanding that different people – even those of his household – will have different destinies, some of which may be connected to his life experience and some of which may not. Allow us to imagine the pain that Avram the man must have felt regarding having to say goodbye to a son and his mother, and then to be ready to sacrifice another son, as well as understand the potential ramifications this event may have for his wife and her well being.
Again, the details of what happened may not be as much the point as is the lesson that these things happen and yielding to the destiny and goals of others may sometimes be the best we can do. In drivers’ education, new drivers are taught that when one skids in a car, the natural inclination is to turn the wheel against the skid – to fight it with everything you have. Yet, in reality the safest thing to do is to go in the direction of the skid – to accept it and work through it. This is one of the lessons that Avraham may come to teach us today. And there are others…… to be continued!
Monday, November 2, 2009
More on Gemara's First Lesson, G-d's Plane, and The Time Traveler's Wife by Audrey Niffenegger
More on Gemara’s First Lesson, G-d’s Plane, and The Time Traveler’s Wife by Audrey Niffenegger
So, how do we speak about G-d’s plane/ realm and G-d’s reality and that of the humanity of which we are part? How do we step outside of chronology when we are trying ever so hard to discern what G-d is, how G-d decides, and the impact of G-d’s actions on us, as part of humanity? This is the impossible stuff of which my Tenth Grade Jewish Studies course at a local Jewish day school is composed. This entry is actually dedicated to all of my wonderful students from this course and others with whom I have journeyed and vexed regarding these issues through the years.
My latest venture into wonderful fictional releases from everyday life and reality has been the reading of The Time Traveler’s Wife by Audrey Niffenegger. I note this fascination with how we speak of reality and experience it if the chronology of time as we know it and depend upon as much as we do on gravity to keep us in this time and space is not a given. That is to say, it is the age old problem of “proving” that such and such happened at a given moment given the records of time we hold. In this book, one of the main characters, a man by the name of Henry DeTamble, is an involuntary time traveler, who pops into places and spaces both in his past and in his future, disappearing and reappearing in his present. Of course, everyone with whom he has contact and thinks of him in real time (that is the given date and numbers on a clock as we collectively experience them) do not understand this aberrant behavior in which he is here one moment, gone the next and then reappears. Further, he has the ability to be in separate places simultaneously as he lives both in real time and time travels.
As I read about his adventures, the frustration of his wife Clare and the few people that were “in the loop” regarding his time travel problems, I could not help traveling a bit myself back to the many classes I have shared with my wonderful tenth graders, trying to figure out the intersection and interfacing of G-d-Time and our Real Time. What if we were to think about our time as within the human plane and of G-d’s time as wholly different? This would definitely remove the need we seem to have to account for every second of G-d’s time, which seems rather presumptuous to me at any rate.
During much of the story, other characters try to reconceptualize their own role and define their part in relationships with Henry and to better understand his reality. In so doing, individuals are forced to reconsider their own understanding of time and choices that they make. That is to say, Henry as an adult pops back to his earlier years and then when he reaches certain stages in real time; he already knows what has happened. For example he appears as an adult to his future wife when she is just a child and then she grows up, has these memories of the man who will be her husband, but he has not experienced them yet. This does not make what has happened any less real to her. People who find themselves in his orbit are constantly wondering if they and their experiences are real and if they are making choices in their lives if Henry, who has popped back from their future, already knows what those choices are.
So, as I read this and better understand the rhythm of what is happening I return to my own musings about how we relate to G-d and how G-d is very real in our lives, even if not physically present. How can this be? Of course, this challenge is far more formidable when speaking about G-d and us, given that it is not the stuff of a fictional tale, but explanations and components of our thinking that we are dedicated to understanding and upon which so much depends. When Moshe Rabbeinu asks how he should explain G-d to others, G-d responds to him “Tell them I was, I am and I will be.” That is to say, G-d is not trapped in chronological time. We use the words omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent when we speak of G-d. What we need to remember is that these words as descriptors function outside of the chronology that speaks of such things as last year, tomorrow or yesterday. While we need these time frames as parameters in which we act, G-d ACTS AND FUNCTIONS outside of them, yet we have ongoing relationships with G-d.
In the beginning of Parshat Lech Lecha, G-d speaks to Avram and tells him to leave all that he knows and understands, in time and space. G-d speaks in the future, explaining to Avram that G-d will show him the land, will make of Avram a great and numerous nation, and so forth. G-d speaks of a future that G-d knows and Avram needs to accept all of this on faith – a much easier concept in a good book of fiction than in a reality that is so fundamental to our faith and belief in G-d and understanding of history. This future-speak is continued through this Parsha and those to come. G-d knows and sees the future and reports it; the person in question must base their faith on its happening upon their relationship to G-d. In Pirke Avot, we read as follows:
הכל צפוי והרשות נתונה
“All is revealed and known to G-d AND permission is given to man to choose”
We are being given the formula for how this works in this short text, and yes, the explanation includes components not in the actual text per se, but is intended to be contextually helpful. So, back to those planes…. G-d functions on a plane in which there is not human linked chronology and not limited by physicality. Humanity on the other hand cannot function without these elements. So, G-d knows within G-d’s context and we decide within ours. We are constantly taking huge leaps of faith as did Avram/Avraham in his life and it is the taking of these leaps that we show and live our faith in G-d. While it is so difficult to imagine a time traveling human being, we also have difficulty thinking of G-d outside of these constraints. Yet, this is exactly what we must do in better understanding our relationship to G-d and G-d’s relationship to us.
So, how do we speak about G-d’s plane/ realm and G-d’s reality and that of the humanity of which we are part? How do we step outside of chronology when we are trying ever so hard to discern what G-d is, how G-d decides, and the impact of G-d’s actions on us, as part of humanity? This is the impossible stuff of which my Tenth Grade Jewish Studies course at a local Jewish day school is composed. This entry is actually dedicated to all of my wonderful students from this course and others with whom I have journeyed and vexed regarding these issues through the years.
My latest venture into wonderful fictional releases from everyday life and reality has been the reading of The Time Traveler’s Wife by Audrey Niffenegger. I note this fascination with how we speak of reality and experience it if the chronology of time as we know it and depend upon as much as we do on gravity to keep us in this time and space is not a given. That is to say, it is the age old problem of “proving” that such and such happened at a given moment given the records of time we hold. In this book, one of the main characters, a man by the name of Henry DeTamble, is an involuntary time traveler, who pops into places and spaces both in his past and in his future, disappearing and reappearing in his present. Of course, everyone with whom he has contact and thinks of him in real time (that is the given date and numbers on a clock as we collectively experience them) do not understand this aberrant behavior in which he is here one moment, gone the next and then reappears. Further, he has the ability to be in separate places simultaneously as he lives both in real time and time travels.
As I read about his adventures, the frustration of his wife Clare and the few people that were “in the loop” regarding his time travel problems, I could not help traveling a bit myself back to the many classes I have shared with my wonderful tenth graders, trying to figure out the intersection and interfacing of G-d-Time and our Real Time. What if we were to think about our time as within the human plane and of G-d’s time as wholly different? This would definitely remove the need we seem to have to account for every second of G-d’s time, which seems rather presumptuous to me at any rate.
During much of the story, other characters try to reconceptualize their own role and define their part in relationships with Henry and to better understand his reality. In so doing, individuals are forced to reconsider their own understanding of time and choices that they make. That is to say, Henry as an adult pops back to his earlier years and then when he reaches certain stages in real time; he already knows what has happened. For example he appears as an adult to his future wife when she is just a child and then she grows up, has these memories of the man who will be her husband, but he has not experienced them yet. This does not make what has happened any less real to her. People who find themselves in his orbit are constantly wondering if they and their experiences are real and if they are making choices in their lives if Henry, who has popped back from their future, already knows what those choices are.
So, as I read this and better understand the rhythm of what is happening I return to my own musings about how we relate to G-d and how G-d is very real in our lives, even if not physically present. How can this be? Of course, this challenge is far more formidable when speaking about G-d and us, given that it is not the stuff of a fictional tale, but explanations and components of our thinking that we are dedicated to understanding and upon which so much depends. When Moshe Rabbeinu asks how he should explain G-d to others, G-d responds to him “Tell them I was, I am and I will be.” That is to say, G-d is not trapped in chronological time. We use the words omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent when we speak of G-d. What we need to remember is that these words as descriptors function outside of the chronology that speaks of such things as last year, tomorrow or yesterday. While we need these time frames as parameters in which we act, G-d ACTS AND FUNCTIONS outside of them, yet we have ongoing relationships with G-d.
In the beginning of Parshat Lech Lecha, G-d speaks to Avram and tells him to leave all that he knows and understands, in time and space. G-d speaks in the future, explaining to Avram that G-d will show him the land, will make of Avram a great and numerous nation, and so forth. G-d speaks of a future that G-d knows and Avram needs to accept all of this on faith – a much easier concept in a good book of fiction than in a reality that is so fundamental to our faith and belief in G-d and understanding of history. This future-speak is continued through this Parsha and those to come. G-d knows and sees the future and reports it; the person in question must base their faith on its happening upon their relationship to G-d. In Pirke Avot, we read as follows:
הכל צפוי והרשות נתונה
“All is revealed and known to G-d AND permission is given to man to choose”
We are being given the formula for how this works in this short text, and yes, the explanation includes components not in the actual text per se, but is intended to be contextually helpful. So, back to those planes…. G-d functions on a plane in which there is not human linked chronology and not limited by physicality. Humanity on the other hand cannot function without these elements. So, G-d knows within G-d’s context and we decide within ours. We are constantly taking huge leaps of faith as did Avram/Avraham in his life and it is the taking of these leaps that we show and live our faith in G-d. While it is so difficult to imagine a time traveling human being, we also have difficulty thinking of G-d outside of these constraints. Yet, this is exactly what we must do in better understanding our relationship to G-d and G-d’s relationship to us.
Friday, September 25, 2009
New Beginnings: New and Old
In a few weeks we will return to the beginning of our Torah, its readings and lessons as we annually do with the celebration of Simchat Torah. I love the notion that in our repeating and involving ourselves in this cycle of reading, we do not just re-read what we already know as “old stuff”, but are challenged to experience it in new and original, even challenging, ways. Where are we this year that is significantly different from where we were in years past, emotionally, professionally, intellectually, personally, and in every other way? What do these time – honored and familiar messages bring to us both in the ways of comfort and challenge as we continue to move through the many paces that make up the collage of the lives we lead?
We begin anew the complete cycle of Torah readings with these words:
א בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית בָּרָ֣א אֱלֹהִ֑ים אֵ֥ת הַשָּׁמַ֖יִם וְאֵ֥ת הָאָֽרֶץ: ב וְהָאָ֗רֶץ הָֽיְתָ֥ה תֹ֨הוּ֙ וָבֹ֔הוּ וְח֖שֶׁךְ עַל־פְּנֵ֣י תְה֑וֹם וְר֣וּחַ אֱלֹהִ֔ים מְרַחֶ֖פֶת עַל־פְּנֵ֥י הַמָּֽיִם: ג וַיֹּ֥אמֶר אֱלֹהִ֖ים יְהִי־א֑וֹר וַֽיְהִי־אֽוֹר:
Bereshit Bara Elokim … – In the beginning, G-d created the Heavens and the Earth. The earth was “tohu v’vohu” (null and void, chaotic, unformed, who knows what?) and darkness was on the face (?) of the void and the spirit/wind of G-d blows (hydroplanes?) upon the face of the waters. And G-d said “let there be light and there was light.”
So, we all have visions of what the words in this brief beginning passage (and the verses to follow) means. We have shared understandings of light, heaven and earth, wind, waters and the like. However, given that this is G-d – language, I think we would do better to come to an understanding that just as words in their very naked being are symbolic representatives of concepts that are so much larger and more varied than their mere mixture of letters can suggest in our world and context, how much more so this must be true when approaching G-d - language.
What would happen if instead of trying to subject these verses and those that follow to the scrutiny of this or that system of proof, we act “as though” we understand it and “accept this on faith.” I have come to learn that faith need not be a dirty word to anyone in any pursuit or philosophical stance. The most rationalistic person I have ever met ultimately must accept some basic truths on faith. After all, what proof do we have today that basic historical, scientific or mathematical truths are just that? Did any of us meet the historical giants from the past? Do we have handwritten, photographic or other proof that so many figures about whom we speak so easily and constantly really existed? It’s like the joke about the coins that were found dated 300 b.c.e.; how do we know with absolute certainty that so many things we take as given actually occurred when and how we say (and are taught) they happened?
So for me, the lesson of these words and returning on a regular basis to this particular telling of the Creation of the World as we know it is that we cannot possibly know exactly what happened, but rather we must continue to grapple with the messages contained. Rather than trying to come to terms with the exact tangible elements that these words mean to us, we would do better to look at the lessons these words convey. Years ago, I was having one of the many manifestations of this conversation with a medical doctor who did not understand how I could believe and have faith in these “stories” or in G-d, clearly the pivotal protagonist of these narratives in so many ways. So, I asked him “So, how do you think everything that is here and allows us to be alive began?” He went on to explain in scientific terms how he thinks the earth and its contents had its beginnings. So, I went further to ask him “Well, what came or happened before that?” Within a short while, he just threw up his hands and said “I don’t know.” At that point I said to him that his unanswered question is where G-d fills in what is missing for me (and so much more). I continued to explain that for me, G-d exists before all that is here and is The One who began the process. As for my needing to absolutely validate G-d’s existence, he quickly realized that he could not prove his version of beginnings any more than I could prove the words of Bereshit. Faith was the difference between his impasse and my understanding that human limits will necessitate such an impasse. Of course, I would argue that in the end, we all have to have some faith in some thing when we say “I don’t know what came before that!”
Theoretically, we could use this notion (and perhaps should) of questioning “what we know with certainty to be true” in so many different venues. We often talk of “loving someone,” for example. What does this mean? There is no tangible loving in the same way that there is reading, swimming or running. We act as though we love by engaging in other actions that are supposed to reflect our love. This is not the same as other words which convey concrete actions and ideas that we can all contextually agree upon. Just because love is not a concrete or tangible representation of the concept it conveys, it is no less real. So it is with believing in G-d. So it is with our reading of Bereshit and attempting to understand the beginning of our world and existence. So, a yom in G-d – language might best be interpreted as “a period of time” (not day) for us, removing the problem of “how long ago exactly did all of this happen?” By not using pronouns which are limited in meaning (i.e. He), we do not create unnecessary problems of understanding in speaking about G-d and G-d’s actions. By realizing that we may not be quite sure of the identity of the adam in Chapter One of Bereshit and relegating it to G-d – language, we do not have to engage in the conflict of what this being was exactly like or when precisely its history began. Simply put, we do not know with certainty what these words mean, even with the voices of many commentators trying to guide us through the quagmire of their potential meanings.
I find the notion very meaningful that G-d language is the stuff of which the beginning of Bereshit is made (thank you, Gerald Schroeder, for this teaching) and that we only come together, humans and G-d, when G-d acts upon the human a bit later in this first portion of the Torah in Chapter Two, verse seven of Bereshit, as follows:
ז וַיִּ֩יצֶר֩ יְהֹוָ֨ה אֱלֹהִ֜ים אֶת־הָֽאָדָ֗ם עָפָר֙ מִן־הָ֣אֲדָמָ֔ה וַיִּפַּ֥ח בְּאַפָּ֖יו נִשְׁמַ֣ת חַיִּ֑ים וַיְהִ֥י הָֽאָדָ֖ם לְנֶ֥פֶשׁ חַיָּֽה:
And G-d created/formed (?) the human being/earth being/adam(?) out of the dust from the earth and G-d breathed into the nose of the human being/earth being the breath of life and this human being/earth being became a living soul.
I know the words and can analyze and convey all types of shades of meaning for them, but once again can not be precise and concise about their exact conveyed meaning. This is still G-d language, but it is at this point, according to Schroeder and others, that G-d brings the human being that G-d has created into G-d’s orbit and partners with this human being/living soul in carrying on in the world/universe that G-d has also created. We must take note that since G-d created this being in G-d’s way, we cannot “prove” this either. Neither can we prove with absolute certainty or agree how this being came into “its” own through the various explanations of science, evolution, or otherwise.
Ultimately, we all have to believe in something in order to explain the basics of our existence and further, we have to take what we believe to be true on faith. This is true as much for scientists, mathematicians, philosophers, and historians as it is for people of faith/religion (not to be necessarily mutually exclusive from the aforementioned groupings).
So, as we move into the beginning of this new year of 5770, perhaps a new challenge (and beginning) we can all take on is to find the faith within ourselves to believe in our understanding of how things happen and G-d’s role in it all, and accept that others will do the same. May we all have new beginnings, and continue to accept new challenges for ourselves and our understandings of all that is!
We begin anew the complete cycle of Torah readings with these words:
א בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית בָּרָ֣א אֱלֹהִ֑ים אֵ֥ת הַשָּׁמַ֖יִם וְאֵ֥ת הָאָֽרֶץ: ב וְהָאָ֗רֶץ הָֽיְתָ֥ה תֹ֨הוּ֙ וָבֹ֔הוּ וְח֖שֶׁךְ עַל־פְּנֵ֣י תְה֑וֹם וְר֣וּחַ אֱלֹהִ֔ים מְרַחֶ֖פֶת עַל־פְּנֵ֥י הַמָּֽיִם: ג וַיֹּ֥אמֶר אֱלֹהִ֖ים יְהִי־א֑וֹר וַֽיְהִי־אֽוֹר:
Bereshit Bara Elokim … – In the beginning, G-d created the Heavens and the Earth. The earth was “tohu v’vohu” (null and void, chaotic, unformed, who knows what?) and darkness was on the face (?) of the void and the spirit/wind of G-d blows (hydroplanes?) upon the face of the waters. And G-d said “let there be light and there was light.”
So, we all have visions of what the words in this brief beginning passage (and the verses to follow) means. We have shared understandings of light, heaven and earth, wind, waters and the like. However, given that this is G-d – language, I think we would do better to come to an understanding that just as words in their very naked being are symbolic representatives of concepts that are so much larger and more varied than their mere mixture of letters can suggest in our world and context, how much more so this must be true when approaching G-d - language.
What would happen if instead of trying to subject these verses and those that follow to the scrutiny of this or that system of proof, we act “as though” we understand it and “accept this on faith.” I have come to learn that faith need not be a dirty word to anyone in any pursuit or philosophical stance. The most rationalistic person I have ever met ultimately must accept some basic truths on faith. After all, what proof do we have today that basic historical, scientific or mathematical truths are just that? Did any of us meet the historical giants from the past? Do we have handwritten, photographic or other proof that so many figures about whom we speak so easily and constantly really existed? It’s like the joke about the coins that were found dated 300 b.c.e.; how do we know with absolute certainty that so many things we take as given actually occurred when and how we say (and are taught) they happened?
So for me, the lesson of these words and returning on a regular basis to this particular telling of the Creation of the World as we know it is that we cannot possibly know exactly what happened, but rather we must continue to grapple with the messages contained. Rather than trying to come to terms with the exact tangible elements that these words mean to us, we would do better to look at the lessons these words convey. Years ago, I was having one of the many manifestations of this conversation with a medical doctor who did not understand how I could believe and have faith in these “stories” or in G-d, clearly the pivotal protagonist of these narratives in so many ways. So, I asked him “So, how do you think everything that is here and allows us to be alive began?” He went on to explain in scientific terms how he thinks the earth and its contents had its beginnings. So, I went further to ask him “Well, what came or happened before that?” Within a short while, he just threw up his hands and said “I don’t know.” At that point I said to him that his unanswered question is where G-d fills in what is missing for me (and so much more). I continued to explain that for me, G-d exists before all that is here and is The One who began the process. As for my needing to absolutely validate G-d’s existence, he quickly realized that he could not prove his version of beginnings any more than I could prove the words of Bereshit. Faith was the difference between his impasse and my understanding that human limits will necessitate such an impasse. Of course, I would argue that in the end, we all have to have some faith in some thing when we say “I don’t know what came before that!”
Theoretically, we could use this notion (and perhaps should) of questioning “what we know with certainty to be true” in so many different venues. We often talk of “loving someone,” for example. What does this mean? There is no tangible loving in the same way that there is reading, swimming or running. We act as though we love by engaging in other actions that are supposed to reflect our love. This is not the same as other words which convey concrete actions and ideas that we can all contextually agree upon. Just because love is not a concrete or tangible representation of the concept it conveys, it is no less real. So it is with believing in G-d. So it is with our reading of Bereshit and attempting to understand the beginning of our world and existence. So, a yom in G-d – language might best be interpreted as “a period of time” (not day) for us, removing the problem of “how long ago exactly did all of this happen?” By not using pronouns which are limited in meaning (i.e. He), we do not create unnecessary problems of understanding in speaking about G-d and G-d’s actions. By realizing that we may not be quite sure of the identity of the adam in Chapter One of Bereshit and relegating it to G-d – language, we do not have to engage in the conflict of what this being was exactly like or when precisely its history began. Simply put, we do not know with certainty what these words mean, even with the voices of many commentators trying to guide us through the quagmire of their potential meanings.
I find the notion very meaningful that G-d language is the stuff of which the beginning of Bereshit is made (thank you, Gerald Schroeder, for this teaching) and that we only come together, humans and G-d, when G-d acts upon the human a bit later in this first portion of the Torah in Chapter Two, verse seven of Bereshit, as follows:
ז וַיִּ֩יצֶר֩ יְהֹוָ֨ה אֱלֹהִ֜ים אֶת־הָֽאָדָ֗ם עָפָר֙ מִן־הָ֣אֲדָמָ֔ה וַיִּפַּ֥ח בְּאַפָּ֖יו נִשְׁמַ֣ת חַיִּ֑ים וַיְהִ֥י הָֽאָדָ֖ם לְנֶ֥פֶשׁ חַיָּֽה:
And G-d created/formed (?) the human being/earth being/adam(?) out of the dust from the earth and G-d breathed into the nose of the human being/earth being the breath of life and this human being/earth being became a living soul.
I know the words and can analyze and convey all types of shades of meaning for them, but once again can not be precise and concise about their exact conveyed meaning. This is still G-d language, but it is at this point, according to Schroeder and others, that G-d brings the human being that G-d has created into G-d’s orbit and partners with this human being/living soul in carrying on in the world/universe that G-d has also created. We must take note that since G-d created this being in G-d’s way, we cannot “prove” this either. Neither can we prove with absolute certainty or agree how this being came into “its” own through the various explanations of science, evolution, or otherwise.
Ultimately, we all have to believe in something in order to explain the basics of our existence and further, we have to take what we believe to be true on faith. This is true as much for scientists, mathematicians, philosophers, and historians as it is for people of faith/religion (not to be necessarily mutually exclusive from the aforementioned groupings).
So, as we move into the beginning of this new year of 5770, perhaps a new challenge (and beginning) we can all take on is to find the faith within ourselves to believe in our understanding of how things happen and G-d’s role in it all, and accept that others will do the same. May we all have new beginnings, and continue to accept new challenges for ourselves and our understandings of all that is!
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
For the misdeed we have committed before you, G-d, by judging
For the misdeed we have committed before you, G-d, by judging
Amongst the many misdeeds we ask G-d to forgive us for during this time and season of repentance, there is one particular line which always strikes me as supremely important and yet is too often glossed over. In the middle of the Vidui, we say these words:
על חטא שחטאנו לפניף בפלילות
For the misdeeds we have done before you, G-d, in judging others.
We are in a penitent mood as we come before G-d as judge of all that we are and what we will be. We cite all of the misdeeds we do as a matter of course – eating incorrectly, not observing the standards of behavior we are to observe, not speaking properly, not sharing our resources with others enough, and so many others. Yet, too often, while we look at ourselves with our hypersensitive sense of accountability as we seriously engage in taking stock of ourselves (Cheshbon HaNefesh), do we truly understand that in holding ourselves accountable to the Judge of all, namely G-d, we are not to judge others?
One of my children, Talie, often cites her favorite teaching as:
דן לכף זכות
Give others the benefit of the doubt.
These familiar words from Pirke Avot remind us to let G-d judge; we do not have to do G-d’s tasks for G-d; in fact we are not to do so. To help each other, to guide as appropriate, to mentor, to teach… all of these deeds are indeed noble, but TO JUDGE is something entirely different.
A thought --- by leaving G-d as Judge of all people, this frees us up to accept each other, practice the many other deeds that we are to do – take care of the poor, build bridges of understanding, feed all who are in need, listen and care for each other, and so much else that the prophets enjoin us to do --- while G-d will judge each person as G-d sees fit.
Nonetheless, I often come across people who still feel that they must assist Ribbonu shel Olam in these matters and find that in the best of circumstances and in giving all of these people the benefit of the doubt as my daughter, Talie would have me do, too many hurt feelings and perceptions of exclusion and inadequacy are projected onto too many well meaning people who may not meet the standards of those who are judging them. This I find so sad. I then comment that I am impatient with those who judge and hurt in such a manner. I often explain that “I am tolerant and accepting of everyone and everything except intolerance and lack of acceptance.” But, of course, my daughter Talie says that this too is intolerant.
So as we approach this season of self reflection with aspirations for improvement, I pray as follows:
על חטא שחטאנו לפניף בפלילות
For the misdeeds we have done before you, G-d, in judging others, (we ask forgiveness).
Maybe if we all take up this banner and I work really hard with my intolerance of intolerance, we will all come closer to being the people that G-d wants us to strive to be.
May all of you be inscribed for a happy and healthy year ---
לשנה טובה תכתבו ותחתמו
Amongst the many misdeeds we ask G-d to forgive us for during this time and season of repentance, there is one particular line which always strikes me as supremely important and yet is too often glossed over. In the middle of the Vidui, we say these words:
על חטא שחטאנו לפניף בפלילות
For the misdeeds we have done before you, G-d, in judging others.
We are in a penitent mood as we come before G-d as judge of all that we are and what we will be. We cite all of the misdeeds we do as a matter of course – eating incorrectly, not observing the standards of behavior we are to observe, not speaking properly, not sharing our resources with others enough, and so many others. Yet, too often, while we look at ourselves with our hypersensitive sense of accountability as we seriously engage in taking stock of ourselves (Cheshbon HaNefesh), do we truly understand that in holding ourselves accountable to the Judge of all, namely G-d, we are not to judge others?
One of my children, Talie, often cites her favorite teaching as:
דן לכף זכות
Give others the benefit of the doubt.
These familiar words from Pirke Avot remind us to let G-d judge; we do not have to do G-d’s tasks for G-d; in fact we are not to do so. To help each other, to guide as appropriate, to mentor, to teach… all of these deeds are indeed noble, but TO JUDGE is something entirely different.
A thought --- by leaving G-d as Judge of all people, this frees us up to accept each other, practice the many other deeds that we are to do – take care of the poor, build bridges of understanding, feed all who are in need, listen and care for each other, and so much else that the prophets enjoin us to do --- while G-d will judge each person as G-d sees fit.
Nonetheless, I often come across people who still feel that they must assist Ribbonu shel Olam in these matters and find that in the best of circumstances and in giving all of these people the benefit of the doubt as my daughter, Talie would have me do, too many hurt feelings and perceptions of exclusion and inadequacy are projected onto too many well meaning people who may not meet the standards of those who are judging them. This I find so sad. I then comment that I am impatient with those who judge and hurt in such a manner. I often explain that “I am tolerant and accepting of everyone and everything except intolerance and lack of acceptance.” But, of course, my daughter Talie says that this too is intolerant.
So as we approach this season of self reflection with aspirations for improvement, I pray as follows:
על חטא שחטאנו לפניף בפלילות
For the misdeeds we have done before you, G-d, in judging others, (we ask forgiveness).
Maybe if we all take up this banner and I work really hard with my intolerance of intolerance, we will all come closer to being the people that G-d wants us to strive to be.
May all of you be inscribed for a happy and healthy year ---
לשנה טובה תכתבו ותחתמו
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)